Saturday, October 31, 2009

Jeff Miller: opposes House health care bill but hasn't read it

I'm not sure whether it's because he won't read it or can't read it, but U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Land That Time Forgot) has managed yet again to make me wonder how he got elected to Congress in the first place. He hasn't read the House Democrats' proposed health care reform bill, but he still knows he doesn't like it:

The bill, crafted by House Democratic leaders, would provide insurance by 2019 to 36 million Americans who are currently uninsured, though the details, are, of course, numerous.

The bill contains about 400,000 words — more than double the words in the New Testament.

"I haven't started reading it yet," Miller said. "And anyone who says they've read it and know what's in it is not being 100 percent truthful."

Still, Miller said that what he knows of the legislation disturbs him. He said the bill, which was lauded by President Barack Obama, will raise taxes, cost jobs and cut Medicare.
Look, I know it's a huge, complex bill. Health care reform is a huge, complex problem. But Congressman Know-It-All here hasn't even begun to read the bill, and yet he opposes it because it "will raise taxes, cost jobs and cut Medicare." Do you have any proof of that, Rep. Miller? I mean, in the bill itself ... because if you're going to take it apart, you should rely on more than merely your blind hatred of President Obama to back up your claims.

I'm not saying Rep. Miller is going to support the bill once he reads it (if he ever does). In fact, I'm quite certain he'd oppose it even if he knew it backwards and forwards. (And, incidentally, Jeff, how the hell do you know that anyone who says they read and understood the bill is lying? What a pretentious ass ...) But what I am saying is that it would be nice if certain members of Congress would take a little time to become acquainted with a piece of legislation before attacking it.

I know -- in the case of Jeff Miller, that's asking way, way too much.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, September 28, 2009

Blast Off! Radio PRIMETIME tonight, 7:00 pm EDT: The ongoing battle against stupidity

I don't know whether it's the fact that we have a Scary Black Man in the White House or merely the complicity of the right-wing gasbags in the mainstream corporate media or something else altogether, but there seems to be an inordinate amount of stupid in America today ... and, predictably, the vast majority of it is coming from Republicans. Whether it's the ignorant ramblings of U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Dumbfuckistan), the neo-Confederate idiocy of GOP state legislators Carey Baker and Scott Plakon, or the astonishing lack of knowledge displayed by U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-You Kidding Me?), there's just a lot of morons out there, and unfortunately many of them have been elected to office by even dumber people.

Now you may be asking yourself, "Who is this blogger ... this DFH blogger at that! ... to be telling members of Congress and the Florida Legislature that they are dumb?" Well, that would be a legitimate question, but by any objective measure of intellect, these "rightards," who rely more on rhetoric and "talking points" than sense, clearly are on the lower end of the intelligence spectrum -- anyone can see that, including some other Republicans. So, we'll be discussing the increase in imbecility on tonight's special PRIMETIME edition of Blast Off! Radio, and I invite your input and participation.

It's quite easy to be a part of the show -- here's how:

SPECIAL TIME: 7:00 pm Eastern TONIGHT
Call in number: (646) 716-7543

It's long past time to take the country back from the stupid. And we're going to get it started on Blast Off! Radio tonight -- please make plans to join me for this very special episode. And don't forget to bring your wrath for the moronic and delusional among us ...

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 12 — Judge chickens out, gives school personnel carte blanche to lead prayers

What a fucking joke. There might as well not even have been a preliminary injunction, let alone a consent decree.

About an hour and a half ago, U.S. District Court Judge Casey Rodgers let Pace High School principal Frank Lay and athletic director Robert Freeman off the hook, ruling that they didn't violate the judge's own preliminary injunction when they led a prayer at a school luncheon last January. I haven't read the decision yet, but based on the Pensacola News Journal's article reporting the not-guilty verdict, Judge Rodgers apparently rested her decision on the fact that Lay and Freeman didn't intend to violate the court order ... that their prayer was spontaneous or, as Lay put it, "out of reflex."

This outrageous ruling understandably delighted the crazed whackjob Christianists who had gathered around the courthouse today to protest the upholding of the U.S. Constitution ... or what I had predicted would be the upholding of the Constitution. Instead, they got what they wanted: meek submission by the supposedly-separate-from-the-church United States government before the "power of Almighty God." Well, congratulations to all you religious extremists -- you'll have all weekend to thump the shit out of your Bibles and herald the arrival of the Christianist theocracy you've so desperately desired for so long.

I predict that this decision is going to do nothing but encourage violations of the consent decree (PDF) now in force (which succeeded the injunction). Now if, say, a teacher or administrator leads a prayer at a meal or a game or even in class, they can just say it was "out of reflex." Oops! I prayed spontaneously -- sorry! It's a get-out-of-jail-and-into-church-free card, and it's a totally embarrassing ruling for Judge Rodgers and, ultimately, for the Constitution. I'm amazed that Judge Rodgers evidently felt she had to pander to the Christianists -- I mean, I understand why Jeff Miller panders, but the judge's job is for life. You don't have to face these whackjob voters, Judge! I mean, how the fuck do you accidentally pray?!

Here's the bottom line, as I see it: there is nothing in the consent decree with regard to intent when a prayer is given. The decree reads: "School officials are permanently enjoined from promoting, advancing, endorsing, participating in, or causing Prayers during or in conjunction with School Events for any school" ... "School officials shall neither offer nor participate in a Prayer" ... "School officials shall not include Prayer ... during or in conjunction with a School Event" ... you get the idea. "Shall not include" or "shall [not] offer" doesn't say "shall not intentionally include." You do it, you're in violation, intentional or not. PERIOD. But that apparently is not what Judge Rodgers decided today.* And now the Christianists have more ammunition (pun intended) when they try to attack the constitutionality of the consent decree -- a step they've already said they plan to take.

So, go ahead, Christianists -- lead your prayers, thump your Bibles, and hang up your crosses in public school ... just remember that you have to do it "out of reflex" (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). Oh, and again, congratulations on your success in turning Pace (public) High School into Pace Christian High School. It's a shame that the non-Christian students in Pace -- and yes, there are some -- will have to attend school in an environment where their Constitutional right to avoid the establishment of religion is not just trampled upon, but completely ignored. And thus the Christian church and the state grow even less separated.

UPDATE (8:32 pm 9/17/09): Happy Constitution Day. Funny how it was born and died on the same date.

* I admit that I am making an assumption here, namely, that the injunction Lay and Freeman were acquitted of violating had the same or substantially the same language as the consent decree; that is, that intent was not addressed. I believe this is a reasonable assumption, though, as there would be no reason I can think of to state something like "shall not intentionally offer prayer" in the injunction but then leave "intentionally" out of the consent decree.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 11 — Trial

As I write this, the criminal contempt trial of Pace High School principal Frank Lay and athletic director Robert Freeman is taking place in federal district court in downtown Pensacola. I went down there this morning to try to get into the courtroom, but as Miss July suggested, I should have gotten there much earlier. (Yes, MJ, I should have listened to you ...) I wasn't able to get in, but it was interesting enough being outside for a short time, eavesdropping on conversations and observing the protestors across the street. Also, I did some livetweeting while I was there.

When I first arrived, I struck up a brief conversation with Benjamin Stevenson, the ACLU attorney who handled the Michelle Winkler case, also a Pace school prayer case, last month. I thanked him for what he and his colleagues were doing and added that it must be difficult in a community like Pensacola to work to defend the Constitution. Had I known at the time who he was, I certainly would have asked him to compare the Winkler case to the Lay/Freeman case; as I understand it, Winkler was not held in contempt because her actions took place at a private event, outside school hours and off school grounds. On the other hand, Lay and Freeman prayed at a luncheon during school hours at the high school (despite U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller's outrageous lies suggesting the opposite), and so I suspect the outcome will be different on that basis alone. Moreover, according to the Pensacola News Journal, the attorneys for the ACLU and for Lay and Freeman have stipulated that the constitutionality of the temporary injunction the men are accused of violating is not to be at issue; therefore, the only issue today is whether or not Lay and Freeman actually violated the order ... and that seems to be pretty clear.

Nevertheless, one attorney who spoke to the group awaiting entry -- to tell us the courtroom was completely full -- indicated that the trial was likely to stretch into the evening. If it goes on until tomorrow -- which would surprise me, since I don't see what really is in controversy from a legal standpoint -- I may try again to attend ... and get there earlier than I did today. Stay tuned.

Again, specific observations from the morning are available on my Twitter feed if you'd like to see them. Meanwhile, here are some pictures from this morning's protest (click for larger versions and captions):

Protestors are gathered outside fed courthouse in Pensacola. ... on Twitpic Hundreds turned out in rain in Pensacola to express hate for ... on Twitpic Someone should tell these protestors "Under God" wasn't added... on Twitpic Protestors wield umbrellas, ignorance at #schoolprayer protes... on Twitpic

UPDATE (9/17/09 11:20 am): Almost forgot to note the almost inconceivable irony of this trial taking place on Constitution Day. Too bad the Christianists apparently have forgotten what the Constitution is ... if they ever knew at all.

UPDATE (9/17/09 11:43 am): I meant to add that there were dozens of students, mostly from Pace High School but presumably others as well, in attendance today. More than likely, they skipped school, as one girl says she did, although I can see parents excusing their kids from school for something like this. I also understand that at least one child as young as sixth grade was missing school today to attend the protest.

I guess being at the protest was more important than school -- which is just sad.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Too stupid to breathe: Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Dumbfuckistan)

The stupid is strong with this one.

Sometimes I wonder how U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Chumuckla ... that's right, Chumuckla) got elected to Congress in the first place. Then I remember who elected him ... what his district looks like. And suddenly I get it.

You see, one can keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool. But yesterday, Jeff Miller got up on the floor of the House of Representatives and removed all doubt with regard to himself. And believe it or not, his fellow whackjob Christianists in Congress, the "Prayer Caucus," actually put the speech up on YouTube so the whole world could enjoy the lunacy:


Pandering is one thing, but making a complete travesty of fact and logic in order to do so, well, that takes special talent ... a talent Jeff Miller obviously has in copious amounts. You don't suppose the fact that Frank Lay and Robert Freeman are going to trial today had anything to do with Miller's epic oratory yesterday, do you?

Anyway, I'm going to have to give you the transcript of the speech, so you can get the full effect (italicized emphasis in original; boldface emphasis is mine):

Mr. Speaker, there is trouble brewing in the small community of Pace, Fla., a community of less than 8,000 people just south of my hometown, and full of hard-working Americans, where I believe that a federal judge has gone well outside the bounds of the Constitution to declare that prayer offered among adults is illegal. That's right: the judicial branch is once again trying to act like the legislative branch, and in doing so is hindering the First Amendment rights of Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I'm not a lawyer -- this is not a courtroom -- but as a member of Congress, I swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me, God. That's what I intend to do.

The facts of the case in Does v. School Board of Santa Rosa County are clear. The federal district court, without a hearing, issued an injunction preventing any school employee from promoting or facilitating prayer at any school-sponsored event. That action alone tramples upon the First Amendment rights of a specific group of people, denying them the equal protection that's provided under the very Constitution that we believe in.

The same federal district court has now gone on to prohibit all employees from engaging in prayer or religious activities. The same court now thinks that Pace High School principal Frank Lay and athletic director Robert Freeman violated this injunction at a private event, with zero student participation. That the court would somehow consider this action to be criminal behavior [is un]conscionable. However, Frank Lay and Robert Freeman now face criminal contempt charges for praying before a meal that was to be shared. All of this despite the fact that the Supreme Court itself has found that the Free Speech Clause protects private religious speech. The Supreme Court has further gone to find that not all religious speech that occurs in public schools or at a school-sponsored event is attributable to the government.

As lawmakers, we cannot sit idly by and let this happen. As members of Congress, we must act to uphold the Constitution. And as Americans, we must fight to ensure that our rights to freedom of religion and freedom of speech are not taken away.

America is a nation of principles. We can sit here all night and argue about whether we are a nation of Judeo-Christian principles or of secular principles. But the fact is that our Constitution protects all Americans, and a court has no place deciding that some Americans do not warrant those protections. The Founding Fathers would be appalled, and I certainly am as well. I yield back ...
Now, it's tempting to take apart Rep. Pander's Miller's speech point-by-point, but anyone with half a brain can do that. Still, for the benefit of the wingnuts who lack that half-brain, a few pertinent points:
  • If you're not a lawyer, then don't argue the law, dumbass. You "believe" the court went beyond the bounds of the Constitution? Do you believe in Santa Claus, too? You'd be just as credible if you do.

  • No one makes the judicial branch act more like a legislative branch than some of the wingnuts on the U.S. Supreme Court, like Justice Antonin Scalia, who are notorious judicial activists. Bush v. Gore, anyone?

  • The Constitution doesn't exist to protect the rights of the majority, Rep. Miller, but of the minority. No one's rights are being "trampled" by being forbidden to conduct organized prayer at a school-sponsored event; rather, the rights of non-Christians to not be subjected to such prayer ought to be the paramount concern. You should have learned that in civics class, congressman. Aren't you smarter than a fifth grader?

  • A private event, with no students present? According to the complaint originally filed, the congressman is just flat-out wrong here:

    During a school-day luncheon on Wednesday, January 28, 2009, at the Dedication of the new Field House at Pace High School, Defendant Principal Frank Lay asked Robert Earl Freeman, Pace High Athletic Director, to offer a prayer to bless the food. See Ex. 86-02 at 1-4 (“In a traditional manner [Mr. Lay] asked Athletic Director, Robert Freeman to bless the food for the adults in attendance. Respectfully he responded to [Mr. Lay’s] request.” Id. at 1. “Principal Frank Lay asked [Mr. Freeman] to give thanks for our lunch, which [Mr. Freeman] did.” Id. at 2. “[Mr. Lay] asked Robert Freeman to ask a blessing on the food. [Mr. Lay] shared that [he is], and [was] at the date of this incident, aware of the court injunction and aware that this type of action is not permissible under the injunction.” Id. at p. 3.).

    Upon Mr. Lay’s request, Mr. Freeman offered a prayer at the event. Pace High students and faculty and community members were present at the Dedication of the new Field House. In response to Mr. Lay asking Mr. Freeman to pray and Mr. Freeman praying at a school event on Jan. 28, 2009, Defendant Superintendent instructed Mr. Lay and Mr. Freeman to “avoid this type of action as it not permitted or [sic] as per the attached injunction.” Ex. 86-02 at 3-4. Although the actions of Mr. Lay and Mr. Freeman appear to be in violation of the court’s preliminary injunction, Defendant Superintendent nevertheless ends his “reprimand” by thanking them “for [their] leadership at Pace High School.” Id.
    Seems pretty clear to me that the event was not private and students were there, unless Rep. Miller astonishingly has access to evidence that shows otherwise. I can't imagine the plaintiffs would have included it in their complaint if it weren't true, since it's so easy to prove or disprove objectively. Besides, even if students were not present, the luncheon still would be a "school-sponsored event," not a private one as he alleges, and this obviously is not "private religious speech" as Rep. Miller suggests. Again, Jeff: not lawyer? Don't argue law.

  • It should go without saying that courts decide all the time that some Americans don't warrant certain protections. Time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech are just one basic example of how courts and the law restrain constitutional rights. I shouldn't expect Jeff Miller to know this but, as a member of Congress, it sure would be nice if he did.

  • Finally (for the purposes of this post), the Founding Fathers would be delighted, not appalled, that their wishes had been carried out. For starters, read Jefferson's Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, a significant source for the First Amendment, which spells out precisely why people should be free from having a particular set of religious beliefs imposed on them. Bottom line: this isn't a freedom-of-speech issue, and the only part of the First Amendment implicated here is the Establishment Clause, which the court is trying to uphold.
Sure, I'm a lawyer, but it took me all of five minutes to find most of this stuff on the Internet. You'd think a freakin' member of Congress could do it pretty easily, too. But, apparently that's not the case for my very own congresscritter, Jeff Miller, who clearly and painfully is too stupid to breathe.

UPDATE (9/17/09 11:17 am): I see someone from Reston, Va., near D.C., just stopped by to read this post, having found it on something called "ReputationConnect.com." You don't suppose Jeff is checking to see what people think of him, do you?

Ah, never mind ... I'm not even sure he knows how to pull stuff through the intertubes, because if he did, he could have debunked his whole speech in minutes, even before he delivered it.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Pace: the final frontier, chapter 10 — Taking it to the streets ... and Congress

On the eve of the bench trial to determine whether Pace (Fla.) High School principal Frank Lay and athletic director Robert Freeman should be held in criminal contempt for violating a federal injunction against organized prayer in their public school*, some of the biggest idiots on the planet are weighing in with their support (predictably) of the two educators. Unfortunately, those particular idiots all happen to be members of the U.S. Congress.

U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller and a group of federal lawmakers have pledged their support for Pace High School Principal Frank Lay and the school's athletic director, Robert Freeman, as they face federal criminal contempt charges on Thursday.

Miller, R-Chumuckla, along with U.S. Reps. J. Randy Forbes, R-Va., and Mike McIntyre, D-N.C., wrote Lay and Freeman on behalf of the 54-member Congressional Prayer Caucus.

"Please know that we are standing with you in prayer and support as you face your trial on Thursday because of offering a prayer," the letter reads.

Miller said Tuesday that 29 members of Congress, some of them members of the Congressional Prayer Caucus, had signed the letter of support.

The letter ends: "The tradition of offering prayer in America has become so interwoven into our nation's spiritual history that to charge someone criminally for engaging in such an innocent practice would astonish the men who founded this country on religious liberty."
Obviously, these members of Congress openly support violations of the U.S. Constitution, which clearly and unequivocally forbids religious activity of the type in which Lay and Freeman engaged -- specifically, a Christian prayer at a public school event.

But, as with all of the whackjob Christianists who have expressed their support over time for these two men who obviously hate America and its freedoms, these members of Congress are missing the point altogether.

Once again (I sound like a broken record): THE CHARGES ARE NOT FOR PRAYING!! Rather, the charges are for violating a court order prohibiting organized prayer in public school, an activity which itself would "astonish the men who founded this country." It is not a restriction of religious liberty -- rather, it is a protection of religious liberty in that it keeps non-Christians from having to endure Christian prayers being forced upon them! Why is this so difficult to comprehend, especially for members of Congress?

Later in the article, two of the congressional signatories to the letter supporting violations of the Constitution throw up a strawman, further bolstering the conclusion that they have no clue what they're talking about:

Miller, whose congressional district includes Pace, called the consent decree too broad.

"To think that a person can be held in criminal contempt for asking someone to say a prayer, it really concerns me and many members of Congress," he said.

Forbes formed the Prayer Caucus in 2005 with the intent to "recognize the vital role that prayer by individuals of all faiths has played in uniting us as a people," according to the group's Web site.

Forbes, an attorney who has been member of Congress since 2001, on Tuesday called the consent decree "unconstitutional."

"I think that's a dangerous road to go down in this country," he said.
What concerns me is the willingness of these members of Congress to ignore settled American law! Look, there are at least three salient points here:
  1. To Rep. Forbes: Lay and Freeman are not being charged with violations of the consent decree, but rather with violating a temporary restraining order that preceded the consent decree. Maybe you should pay better attention, Rep. Forbes, Mr. Attorney.

  2. If the consent decree (which is, as already established, irrelevant to the charges against Lay and Freeman) is unconstitutional, then maybe the Santa Rosa County School District shouldn't have signed it. But they did, and they now are bound by it, subject only to a court order overturning it ... which hasn't happened yet and most likely won't.

  3. Finally, no matter what you may think of the consent decree or of the charges against Lay and Freeman, the ultimate point is that Santa Rosa County school personnel systematically and intentionally have ignored the First Amendment (which expressly prohibits any "establishment of religion" by governmental entities) for years. It's just that it took them a while to get caught.
It's a shame that so many people are using this issue as an opportunity for political grandstanding and hand-wringing over the loss of values and morals in America -- since there's nothing of the kind going on here at all. At the risk of redundancy, I'll remind those in Pace and elsewhere that prayer in public school is fine, so long as it's private and not organized or led by school officials. Seriously, you people are dense.

Wait, did I say "dense?" Perhaps that's too lenient, considering this billboard that appears prominently on U.S. 90 eastbound, heading into Pace from Pensacola:

Talk about misstating an issue ... how can you "return" something that never was there (at least not legally) in the first place?!? This sign, like its ubiquitous yard sign cousins proclaiming "IN GOD WE TRUST: Pray For Our Schools," is just another means to divert attention from the real issue here: the endemic violations of the U.S. Constitution and Lay and Freeman's intentional defiance of a federal court order. (And you can bet I won't be patronizing Advanced Dental Concepts anytime soon. If they want to go back to the Dark Ages in our schools, what kind of dental hygiene are they practicing, anyway?)

Tomorrow's contempt trial should be very interesting indeed. Stay tuned.

* Further background on the case is here, if you're new to the story or need a refresher. Please scroll past this post at the link to view previous entries.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, February 15, 2009

Today's Daily Schadenfreude: Rep. Jeff Miller

Really, this should have been Friday's Daily Schadenfreude, but I just didn't get to it until today. But the schadenfreude still works, as I turn my attentions to America's Taint™ for the first time in this series. And the recipient of the award today is (not surprisingly) a GOP lawmaker with an extraordinarily short memory.

Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Fla.), from the bustling Santa Rosa County metropolis of Chumuckla (about 20 miles north of Pensacola), opened up a rather musty bottle of whine late last week regarding President Obama's economic stimulus package.

"We have seen nothing, have heard nothing," said [Miller], who had yet to see the bill's text as of late Thursday. "From the very beginning, they have shut the minority party out of the debate, and they continue to do things behind closed doors and will all night."
Okay, first of all, Jeff, suck on this: they didn't need your fucking vote. How's it taste, pal?

Secondly, you know, it really doesn't look very flattering for you when you stamp your widdle feet and cry about how you in the minority have been "shut out of the debate," after you and your buddies on the right (by which I mean wrong) side of the aisle spent a good decade and a half shutting Democrats out of, well, pretty much everything. See, our system provides that the majority party generally can get its way on most anything, especially when it's a pretty large majority as it is now. You benefited from that before, remember?

Your side lost, Jeff. You don't get a seat at the table anymore -- and if you get to express your opinion at all, well, be grateful for it. That's how it works. Surely you recall what it was like when your side was in charge? Well, you failed miserably. And now you have to deal with that.

But while you lick your wounds and clutch your pearls about those mean, nasty Democrats in the majority, you at least have the salve of this award, because, Congressman Miller, today's Blast Off! Daily Schadenfreude is for you!

Labels: , , , , ,