Thursday, September 03, 2015


Huckabee wrote that the Supreme Court cannot make law.  I repeat my question of many weeks ago, what is it about this guy (and others in the Republican field) that makes him claim to love America, but hate the things that make us America?  What is it about the Constitution that he did not learn in his Civics class?

I will answer your questions, Reverend Huckabee, you moron.  Ms. Davis is an elected official who swore to an oath that states:

"I, ....., do swear that I will well and truly discharge the duties of the office of .............. County Circuit Court clerk, according to the best of my skill and judgment, making the due entries and records of all orders, judgments, decrees, opinions and proceedings of the court, and carefully filing and preserving in my office all books and papers which come to my possession by virtue of my office; and that I will not knowingly or willingly commit any malfeasance of office, and will faithfully execute the duties of my office without favor, affection or partiality, so help me God."

Those duties apply to all of the citizens of Kentucky, not just the ones who agree with her and her religious beliefs.

The sad part is that she could provide someone in her office to perform this duty as it relates to "gay marriages" without her personal involvement.  It is the office she supervises which issues the marriage licenses.  If she does not believe her office should perform this statutory duty, then resign, but no government office has the right to discriminate, and make no mistake about it the Supreme Court has stated that her actions are discriminatory.

Huckabee, you self-righteous medieval throwback, this country is founded on the rule of law, and the rule of law must prevail.  If you don't understand or believe that, then go back to the pulpit and get out of the body politic.  You are as dangerous to the American way of life as any demagogue we have ever had to tolerate.  (Except maybe Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio or Scott Walker or Bobby Jindal or Ben Carson or ...........)


earl rogers said...

And don't forget the hypocrisy of three-time divorced, four-time married Kim Davis herself, who--as Dan Savage pointed out--has committed the sin of adultery, as defined by her own precious Bible.

Anonymous said...

There goes the Professor again, bloodstream full of Cialis, predictably rattling off a missive against any politician without a [D] next to his name.

But while we are on the topic of enforcing the laws of the United States, Professor, do you think the leading candidates for the Presidential nomination of the Democratic Party should be asked whether they would enforce current immigration law? Would they block, using all legal means, anyone trying to circumvent that law, take measures against companies that benefit, defund so-called safe harbor cities, and legally deport any and all law breakers? As the law requires?

You seem intensely interested that elected officials not pick and choose which laws to enforce.

I have no doubt you are consistent in your demands. Hillary, Bernie and O'Malley will be called names by you, too, should they not promise to rigorously follow these laws.

Anonymous said...

Today, Marco Rubio endorsed Davis' right to refuse to issue marriage licenses, as did Rand Paul, joining Huckabee and Jindal in studious ignorance of the Constitution. Graham, Carson and Fiorina do not support Davis. JEB! and Trump have yet to weigh in. I'm sure there are others still mute in the clown car.

Rumpole said...

Is Huckabee kidding? The Supreme Court passed the Miranda law among others.

Claude Erskine - Browne said...

The President wanted to prioritize what Aliens where deported due to the limited money for deportation in the Budget the Congress passed. President Obama wanted to deport Convicted Foreign Nations First. The Republicans sued because they wanted illegal aliens who were parents of US Citizens deported first, so they sued the President and got a stay. The results are no deportations so Convicted Criminal Aliens are NOT being deported. Does that make sense ?

The Professor said...

Marco Rubio stated that: “We should seek a balance between government’s responsibility to abide by the laws of our republic and allowing people to stand by their religious convictions,” Mr. Rubio said in a statement to The New York Times, his first public remarks on the case.

“While the clerk’s office has a governmental duty to carry out the law,” he added, “there should be a way to protect the religious freedom and conscience rights of individuals working in the office.” There is you idiot, resign. When you take an oath to serve it is not to serve only who chose to serve or agree with, but everyone.

Rand Paul said: "I think it’s absurd to put someone in jail for exercising their religious liberties," She was not put in jail for that you ignoramus. She was put in jail for disobeying a direct court order to perform her statutory duties as an elected official and comply with her oath of office.

2:49 - that same guy who gets a hard-on every time he sees my posts. I will only distinguish your rant with the following:

When these "D's" are asked a question, I will gladly call them out, if what they say shows a lack of understanding, and respect for the Constitution. But I have not heard that yet.

Anonymous said...

If I call out your posts, it's only because I value the blog and feel badly youre using it to screech like a frightened monkey about Republicans.

And yes, I noticed you failed to address my point -- which was that Democrat politicians constantly appeal to a "moral authority" apart from the Constitution when they decline to enforce certain laws, notably immigration laws. But because you agree with them, you don't mind.

Which means if you were to make an honest argument you could say, "It's fine to ignore some laws, just not the ones I really like -- like gay marriage!"

And I'd respect your candor and not hold you accountable for hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

Statement on Arrest of Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis

HOUSTON, Texas – U.S. Sen. Cruz, R-Texas, today released the following statement regarding the arrest of Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis:

“Today, judicial lawlessness crossed into judicial tyranny. Today, for the first time ever, the government arrested a Christian woman for living according to her faith. This is wrong. This is not America.

“I stand with Kim Davis. Unequivocally. I stand with every American that the Obama Administration is trying to force to choose between honoring his or her faith or complying with a lawless court opinion.

“In dissent, Chief Justice Roberts rightly observed that the Court’s marriage opinion has nothing to do with the Constitution. Justice Scalia observed that the Court’s opinion was so contrary to law that state and local officials would choose to defy it.

“For every politician — Democrat and Republican — who is tut-tutting that Davis must resign, they are defending a hypocritical standard. Where is the call for the mayor of San Francisco to resign for creating a sanctuary city — resulting in the murder of American citizens by criminal illegal aliens welcomed by his lawlessness?

“Where is the call for President Obama to resign for ignoring and defying our immigration laws, our welfare reform laws, and even his own Obamacare?

“When the mayor of San Francisco and President Obama resign, then we can talk about Kim Davis.

“Those who are persecuting Kim Davis believe that Christians should not serve in public office. That is the consequence of their position. Or, if Christians do serve in public office, they must disregard their religious faith–or be sent to jail.

“Kim Davis should not be in jail. We are a country founded on Judeo-Christian values, founded by those fleeing religious oppression and seeking a land where we could worship God and live according to our faith, without being imprisoned for doing so.

“I call upon every Believer, every Constitutionalist, every lover of liberty to stand with Kim Davis. Stop the persecution now.”

# # #

Richard Baron said...

I couldn't agree more with today's blog as it relates to the morons seeking the Republican nomination. Each named ninkenpoop (plus Trump) are demagogues who wouldn't know the constitution if it flew up their noses and out their asses. At least I'll sign my name to this response. Anonymous is just being a coward

Anonymous said...

God bless those fundamentalist Christians living in the good old United States of Christ, where it's God's laws that must be obeyed. They should all be deported along with the other illegals.

Anonymous said...

Richard Baron:

Should elected politicians vigorously enforce current immigration laws, fully funding efforts to ensure that all violators are legally deported? Should any elected politician who refuses to do so be forced to resign? Or held in contempt for his refusal?

I will anonymously await your response.

Anonymous said...

The responses to these posts by the National Socialists who now comprise the core of the Republican party should be exhibit one as proof of the intellectual want of what was once a serious political party. The executive branch has the discretion to proritize the execution of many laws, that is why possesion of small amounts of marijuana are not prosecuted in federal court and why Washington and Colorado are permitted to legalize substances that are still illegal in the federal system. A fucking clerk does not have the discretion to deny licenses to people who qualify. The president can prioritize deportations or not and that is not the same thing as denying people documents from the clerks office you idiot. When the Republicans win the White house again one day they can deport everyone and declare war on states where the weed is legal, in the mean time this President can proceed with the discretion he sees fit.

Anonymous said...

I heard that the head of the solid waste department now believes that the collection of garbage is prohibited by scripture and will refuse to do it.

Seth Sklarey said...

I think Clerk Kim Davis is wrong. But what about laws still on the books that nobody will seriously enforce like adultery or the public records law?. How about conspiracy to violate civil rights under color of law through voter suppression?
Prosecutors and cops pick and choose all the time what laws they will and won't enforce. What do you say about that?

The Professor said...

Let's not mix apples and oranges. There is a difference between executive discretion, which does not prejudice anyone's rights, and the duty of a clerk to perform specific administrative functions that are available to the public. The latter has no right to deny those who are entitled to those services to the performance of the administrator on grounds that are clearly discriminatory and violative of someone's constitutional rights. The executive has the right prioritize enforcement actions and, if violating an individual's rights is subject of appropriate judicial action.

But more importantly is the issue that Ms. Davis has chosen to ignore a court order. She appealed that order and lost all the way up the chain. Her legal rights were protected. If she does not feel she can perform the duties, which she elected to perform, under the oath to which she swore (by the way "so help her God") then she must resign or face impeachment and removal under Kentucky law. The federal court simply said she cannot discriminate in the performance of her duties and found that she had. Until she agrees her deputies can and will perform those duties "under her name" then in the lockup she will remain. (Up to 18 months and that is enough time for the legislature to remove her.)

Kissimmee Kid said...

This is all your fault. "Judges don't make law," some wannabe black robed moron says, and we all nod our heads in agreement. Judges do make law, damm good law.

The common law is judge made law. And, because it is made grain by tiny grain, based not on logic, but experience, it is far better than that bullshit those whores in the Legislature put out. You want some examples? Sure:

Self defense. Judge-made common law said, before you kill someone, you have to try and not kill them; you have to retreat. (Being judge-made, it carries with it the exception you don't have to retreat if you can't.) Judge-made law said, "but hey, if you are in your own home, you'd don't have to retreat." Compare this pro-life judge-made law with the evil "stand-your-fucking-ground-you-murdering-asshole" law made my the legislature. Who but a tiny penised gun nut could contend that one ought to try and walk away before killing another human being?

Anonymous said...

Kim Davis is the whore of Babylon. I heard she was a democrat.

Kissimmee Kid said...

Somebody needs to tell Seth Sklarey this blog is for lawyers and other educated people who understand that Prosecutors have discretion, and Clerks do not. Yes, it is a complicated concept, but, this is a blog for people who understand distinctions.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 7:25 is proof that idiots also value this blog. Whenever 7:25 and its ilk rant about liberals and everything wrong with Obama nobody complains that they should not be allowed to say it yet they're constantly trying to gag the professors right to point out political morons and their crazy stupidities regarding legal matters. Simply because the GOP is trotting out crazier and more offensive idiots at this time is not the professors fault. He is not calling them out as Republicans, he is calling them out as idiots.

Anonymous said...

As the chair of the Federal Reserve, I maintain an unshakable religious conviction that usury is a sin. Therefore, I have decided to summarily cease all future loans unless the interest rate is 0.0%

Anonymous said...

Why are liberals so rabidly extreme. If this were a civil rights issue, there would be floods of tears of support as the community stood up to the police and refused to follow their unconstitutional commands. But this lady who believes in what she is saying as opposed to scanning window shops for a new T.V. is worthy only of your sophomoric contempt and teary-eyed patriotism. She is sitting in jail for what she believes in and what folks have believed in for thousands of years. As an independent, I find conservatives to be annoying at times, but "progressives" raise hypocracy to the level of the sublime.
Same sex marriage is now the law of the land, but have a little patience for those who find it morally unacceptable or just aesthetically repulsive. Maybe we will be able to go along with it with the enthusiasm of progressive support for late term abortions. Just give us some time.

Anonymous said...

Wanna debate?? Have an opinion? Come to the REN (A VENUE) tell the bartender your political opinion and get a two-fer on ANY drink in the house including top shelf and champagne cocktails. All weekend long from 5pm to closing.

the REN (A venue) where good friends meet to eat.

Anonymous said...

Was at the REN a venue last night. Bunch of Marlins and Mets were there after the game. Have to say the previous commentator was correct. Jammed. Great food. I had the pork shank. A ginormous hunk of meat cooked for hours if not days and then fried at the end with a cranberry wine reduction and some gluten free angel hair pasta in a garlic mushroom cream sauce.

Anonymous said...

Alan Schuminer - could you please advertise your restaurant somewhere else? Buy some real advertising.