Pastor Who Stuck Us With “Under God” In the Pledge, Dead at 97

Rev. George M. Docherty, the pastor credited with turning the Pledge of Allegiance into a violation of the Constitution, has died at age 97.

He was born in Glasgow, Scotland, and was unfamiliar with the pledge until he heard it recited by his 7-year-old son, Garth.

“I didn’t know that the Pledge of Allegiance was, and he recited it, ‘one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all,’” he recalled in an interview with The Associated Press in 2004. “I came from Scotland, where we said ‘God save our gracious queen,”God save our gracious king.’ Here was the Pledge of Allegiance, and God wasn’t in it at all.”

There was little effect from that initial sermon, but he delivered it again on Feb. 7, 1954, after learning that President Dwight Eisenhower would be at the church.

The next day, Rep. Charles G. Oakman, R-Mich., introduced a bill to add the phrase “under God” to the pledge, and a companion bill was introduced in the Senate. Eisenhower signed the law on Flag Day that year. (source)

The next time some jackass tells you “It has always been that way,” remind them of this: Adding “Under God” to the Pledge wasn’t even an American’s idea. It came from a foreign pastor who was accustomed to blessing a foreign king.

I’m a native-born American who has never bowed to a foreign king. I think that my New Pledge idea should have more horsepower than some Scottish monarchist.

Hat Tip to Drew Curtis’ Fark.com

God Hates Kentucky

My name is Tom Riner, and I approve of wiping one's ass with the Constitution

As if we didn’t know that “homeland security” was a complete crock of shit, Kentucky State Rep, Tom Riner (a Democrat) hijacked the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security as a vehicle for promotion of superstition.

Under state law, God is Kentucky’s first line of defense against terrorism. The 2006 law organizing the state Office of Homeland Security lists its initial duty as “stressing the dependence on Almighty God as being vital to the security of the Commonwealth.” Specifically, Homeland Security is ordered to publicize God’s benevolent protection in its reports, and it must post a plaque at the entrance to the state Emergency Operations Center with an 88-word statement that begins, “The safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon Almighty God.”

State Rep. Tom Riner, a Southern Baptist minister, tucked the God provision into Homeland Security legislation as a floor amendment that lawmakers overwhelmingly approved two years ago. As amended, Homeland Security’s religious duties now come before all else, including its distribution of millions of dollars in federal grants and its analysis of possible threats. … There is no reference to God in Homeland Security’s current mission statement or on its Web site, which displeases Riner. “We certainly expect it to be there, of course,” Riner said. (source)

If there was a God, the mere fact that there are enough morons alive that Riner could be voted into office would be proof that God hates the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Hat Tip to Rogier van Bakel

Apple Bullying Wiki Site Over Piss-Poor DMCA Claims

Manufactured in China, and learning valuable lessons in freedom by manufacturing osmosis

As an avid Apple user, sometimes I just want to punch somebody over at Cupertino in the balls. First, I love their nomenclature for their brutal DRM scheme — Fairplay. It seems to just shout “hey stupid consumer! Restricting how you can use media you PAY for is just fair play!” Fuck you, Apple.

The latest Apple initiative to irk my ire is a cease-and-desist notice sent to wiki hosting site Bluwiki, ordering them to take down wikis related to Itunes hash files. Apple’s problem is that these wikis contained information about hash files encapsulated in itunes.db, an iTunes file that has information about the user’s music library.

To make a long story short, Apple likes Ipods to be managed only with iTunes software, so that the sheep fill their Ipods with music purchased through Itunes and not with music leeched from the intertubes. Thus, they restrict access to your music library database (not the files, but only the index) through a hashfile that periodically gets changed in iTunes revisions. After a couple of days, internet users figure out the hashfile and update the third-party applications that allow users to access their ipod’s music library. Apple got their panties in a twist and fired off a cease-and-desist letter. Bluwiki, like little bitches, immediately complied with the cease-and-desist fearing litigation with Apple.

The EFF (aka my heroes) caught wind and, as the kids would say, are hella pissed.

Where’s the “technology, product, service, device or device”?

The DMCA provides that:
No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that … is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner….

The information posted on the wiki appeared to be text, along with some illustrative code. Nothing that I saw on the pages I was able to review would appear to constitute a “technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof.” In fact, the authors had apparently not yet succeeded in their reverse engineering efforts and were simply discussing Apple’s code obfuscation techniques. If Apple is suggesting that the DMCA reaches people merely talking about technical protection measures, then they’ve got a serious First Amendment problem.

Translation: Apple — go get your fucking shinebox.

WWJD? No, not THAT ‘J’

Rev. Gabriel Salguero shows us that you can be a devout Christian (in fact, a Reverend) and still be completely patriotic. He comes down on the side of the Establishment Clause when it comes to prayer-filled presidential proclamations.

The issue of Presidential proclamations concerning prayer is for many an issue of the separation of church and state. My question here — WWJD? — is not simply what would Jesus do? But also what would Jefferson or Jackson do?

Although the phrase “separation of church and state” is not in the U.S. Constitution it was used by Jefferson in his attempt to wrestle with religious liberty and the First Amendment of the Constitution. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Jefferson upon being elected, writes to a group of Baptists, “…[R]eligion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, that he owes to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, ….. thus building a seperation between Church & State.” (source)

Rev. Salguero tells us Jefferson, Jackson, and Jesus, would likely all agree.

WWJD? What would Jefferson and Jackson do? They would leave it to those in the faith spheres to call for prayer? WWJD? What would Jesus do? He would invite and model and leave the rest to individual choice or conscience. (source)

Of course, Chuck Norris doesn’t agree. I bet that Chuck Norris could kick Rev. Salguero’s ass, but that doesn’t make him right.

Lori Drew is Guilty — AND SO ARE YOU!

A twisted adult, Lori Drew, creates a MySpace page. She creates a fake profile of an adolescent boy, strikes up a friendship with a young girl, Megan Mier. Ms. Drew, breaks that Megan’s fragile heart, and the girl commits suicide.

And much of America called for Lori Drew’s head.

There was a moral wrong here. Fucking with someone’s heart just for the sick pleasure of it, especially a teenage girl’s heart, is just wrong. However, every moral wrong does not come along with a legal cause of action. In this case, prosecutors were damned and determined to prosecute Lori Drew, they did, and they won.

The problem is, they used a statute that didn’t fit the crime — and in the process, they made a criminal out of every single person who has ever used the internet. The government used 18 U.S.C. § 1030, the computer fraud and abuse act, to prosecute Ms. Drew. 18 U.S.C. § 1030 is a wonderful example of well-considered legislation. It makes unauthorized hacking a criminal offense, and it provides for private causes of action for the same offenses.

The government’s theory was that since Ms. Drew accessed MySpace without adhering to MySpace’s terms of service, then she made an unauthorized entry into MySpace’s servers.

As Sam Bayard at the Citizen Media Law Project reports:

Judge Wu has not yet ruled on Drew’s motions to dismiss the indictment for failure to state an offense and for judgment of acquittal based on lack of evidence of intent, either of which could result in the complete dismissal of all charges against Drew. This is where the important legal precedent will be set, because the court will finally have to decide whether or not violating a website’s terms of use is a federal criminal offense and, if so, whether someone can commit that crime without even reading the relevant terms of use.

Sam is exactly right. But, Scott Greenfield puts it in terms that we should all be able to understand. He compares 18 U.S.C. § 1030 to the ubiquitous “speed trap” — and the fact that now Section 1030 can be used to turn every privately-owned website into a vehicle for the government to go after someone it disapproves of.

The fear that the government will not take up arms against pseudononymous users is silly. They aren’t gunning for short guys who fill out their profile saying they stand 6 foot 4, or women who chop a few years off their age. The problem is that this is a speed trap, available for the government to pull out of its bag when it needs to “get” someone.

Under the current verdict in the Drew case, the internet is replete with misdemeanants. People provide less that 100% accurate information in filling out their profiles all the time. All the time. This makes many, even a majority perhaps, of Americans criminals. It’s bad when a law is interpreted in such a way that most people are criminals.

Since it’s unlikely that the government has any intention of trolling the profiles of MySpace users in search of inaccuracy, and lacks the federal courtrooms or jail beds necessary to deal with it, most of us need not fear the Lori Drew application. But do something that the government really doesn’t like, or do something that raises cackles elsewhere because there’s no ready law available to make you pay, and you’ll find yourself in this speed trap.

Nobody ever realizes that they’re in trouble for doing what everybody does until they see the lights flashing behind them and hear the chirp of the siren. By then, it’s too late. (source)

Sheep often say “if you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear from the government.” Nice try. I only know two people who have read MY terms of service, yet you are probably reading this posting without having done so. You just very well may be violating Section 1030. If you post a comment to this post that offends the wrong prosecutor, then you’ve done enough to be indicted for unauthorized access in order to further a tortious act.

I find it strange that Judge Wu has not ruled on the motions to dismiss before turning this case over to the jury. The jury clearly voted with their emotions instead of with their brains — which isn’t surprising. Lori Drew is a douchebag. She should be run out of every town where she tries to live, she should be pelted with shit everywhere, she should be shamed and pursued to the point that she has to change her name and move to a foreign country.

But that doesn’t mean that our laws should be turned on people that they never intended to punish. If Ms. Drew’s conviction stands, we have all lost our freedom. We have come to a point where you can barely step out of your home or sit at a keyboard without violating one of the thousands of overlapping laws, passed by idiots, enforced by idiots, that bring about idiotic results. We don’t need overzealous prosecutors filling in the tiny cracks of interlocking laws to make the web of laws a complete lid over all of us.

Give Thanks – Texas DA reveals evidence against Cheney

Not that I want to get all Discipline and Punish with y’all but I can’t help celebrating!

Penal Industry - Image by Eric Drooker

You know that guy who’s been performing satanic rituals in the basement of the Naval Observatory?

I could not help but ponder my previous post about Death Row Inmates in Texas as I read about Cheney’s indictments for “Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity” relating to The Vanguard Group’s holdings and relationships with private prison companies.

Raw Story reports:

Cheney’s stake in the Vanguard Group, which holds interests in the private prison companies that run the detention centers, was cited in the indictment. Cheney is accused of a conflict of interest and “at least misdemeanor assaults” on detainees through his ownership interest.

KRGV Texas reports:

District Attorney Juan Guerra says he went through Cheney’s financial records and the prison companies’ financial records and found the connection. The three top prison companies Guerra researched were Corrections Corporation of America, GEO Group and Cornell. Those three have the Vanguard Group in common, which is an investment company that puts money into all three prison companies.

“We knew Vanguard was the key,” said Guerra.

Guerra showed us the Vice President’s financial disclosure from last year and it shows he owned shares in the Vanguard Group. Guerra estimates Cheney has $85 million invested in Vanguard and in turn, into the prison companies.

Need more mandatory sentencing for drug crimes?

Just give Dick some of your first born’s blood and he’ll take good care of you.

I’m sure that the private prison lobby has delivered a few extra virgins to the observatory over the years.

Where Would Jesus Park?

The town of Leon, Iowa banned parking on one of its main avenues in 2005. However, the ordinance contained an exception “for “persons attending services and activities held at the church or churches located on N.W. Church Street.””

The ACLU stepped in and filed a lawsuit against the town. The ACLU and the town recently settled the case, with the town agreeing that nobody could park on the street, christian, atheist, or otherwise. See ACLU, city settle lawsuit over parking in Leon.

We would have preferred that the city allow parking on weekends and evenings,” said Randall Wilson, the ACLU of Iowa legal director. “But our clients are pleased to no longer be singled out as the only residents not able to park on the street in front of their own home due to religious distinctions.” (source)

Freedom From Religion Foundation Will Sue Rancho Cucamonga

A crybaby veto got this billboard taken down. A lawsuit aims to make the city of Rancho Cucamonga pay for its part in censoring the message.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation has taken its billboard battle to the courts. Complaint here. (For background on the story, see Imagine No Religion: Imagine No Marketplace of Ideas).

A billboard with the message “Imagine No Religion” by the Freedom From Religion Foundation was taken down by sign company General Outdoor less than a week after it went up. The move came after the city told the sign company it received 90 calls of complaint against the sign.

Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-president of the organization that bills itself as an association of atheists and agnostics, said a complaint might be filed today.

“Government censorship is a big deal,” Gaylor said. “What the city did was officious.”

City Hall has denied any role in the matter, claiming it has never controlled or regulated the content of private billboards.

“The whole notion that the city is involved is absolutely not true,” said City Manager Jack Lam on Monday.

Last Thursday, Redevelopment Director Linda Daniels said a member of her staff had informed the sign company about the 90 complaints the city received regarding the billboard.

“We contacted the sign company and asked if there was a way to get it removed,” Daniels told the Daily Bulletin.

On Friday, Daniels denied making the comment. (source)

Tennessee State Bans Juicy Campus

Responding to a parent’s complaint, Tennessee State University has blocked juicycampus.com from the university’s internet access servers. (source)

Attorney David Hudson of Nashville’s First Amendment Center had some issues with the decision:

“[TSU] is a public university, which is a governmental actor. Generally there are pretty high thresholds when government officials make content-based and viewpoint-based restrictions on speech. It certainly raises some First Amendment questions…. Students would definitely have standing.” (source)

Vanderbilt University had its own soul-searching experience with Juicy Campus. A Vandy student was the victim of a sexual assault, and someone posted a comment on Juicy Campus that the victim “deserved it.”

But despite the post, Vanderbilt chose not to block the site. “There were some on campus who wanted us to block the website, but the decision was made not to do that for freedom of speech and First Amendment rights,” says Beth Fortune, Vanderbilt’s interim vice chancellor for public affairs. “Our goal was just not to bring attention to the JuicyCampus site. We trust our students to make their best judgments on what they read and what they write.” The comment is still posted. (source)

Tennessee State’s action should come as a warning sign. Back in the 1990s, liberal academia thought that the First Amendment ended when someone got their feelings hurt. The First Amendment does not have a “crybaby exception.” When a university, especially one that is government-funded, decides that it will censor some sites, but not others, because of perceived offense from a thin-skinned crybaby, that university is not being governed responsibly. Vanderbilt got it right — treat its students like adults, and they will make adult choices (and suffer adult consequences). Tennessee State is only preparing its students to be bleating sheep in a nanny state.

Note: The article quotes one of our favorite sister-blogs, Popehat!

You Are Only Young Once — But You Can Be Immature For A Lifetime

Prof. XXX: The Early Years

In honor of all things old and over trafficked, the Satyriconistas are pleased to bring you this, our 1000th post – which fittingly comes on the most esteemed day of all: Marc “Professor XXX” Randazza’s 21st…er, 29th…echem, 32nd…eek… 39th BIRTHDAY!

Baby Makes Three

As many of you know, Marc has a lot to celebrate this year. In what is rumored to be one of the great “gotchas” of all time, he convinced an otherwise lovely and sane woman to marry him. Not one to settle for anything less than a complete coup, he also got her to procreate, bringing us the lovely Natalia. Loud-mouth punk come loud-mouth husband, father, lawyer, teacher – it seems you have arrived.

Fierce and... nearly 40!

So, on this auspicious day, we offer you our best birthday wishes, given with love and the knowledge that in the shadow of your many accomplishments to date, you are and will always be, older than us.

And remember, in the words of the late Charles Schulz, with whom you share this birthday, “once you’re over the hill you begin to pick up speed.”

Thank YOU, Sarah Palin!

Hilarious

Perfuming America

Special Guest Author
Tatiana von Tauber

by Tatiana von Tauber

Sarah Palin rocked my world. I have never have been so heavily involved in politics or so embarrassed to have a vagina. When I listen to Palin speak and perform, I think of Ms. Teen South Carolina. My brain screeches to a halt and my jaw drops. I want to stick a finger in my ear and wiggle out the wax – just in case I didn’t hear right. I can’t comprehend Palin’s rhetoric because she doesn’t know anything runs after her own tail, diverts to only what she knows (not what I want to hear) and then she catches me off guard with those “you betcha” winks.

I cringed when little Sarah confidently announced a Republican win was God’s “perfect will for this nation” and in his hands. Unsurprising of course, we haven’t heard a word of praise to God for his truly amazing vision that brought us a liberal black man. Instead of surrendering to the will of God and accepting his mysterious ways, Palin began to entertain name calling: “those guys [her critics] are jerks“. Her continued media bashing is unappreciative of her lucky fortune and her professionalism doesn’t sit a centimeter below her fancy wardrobe.

Palin is a world-class celebrity wannabe whose guest appearance at the local turkey slaughterhouse highlights her common status as a moose hunting feminist ditz, whose arrogance slaps those who believed in her fresh feminist appeal. Even Camille Paglia gave her a chance when stating Palin exuded “a combination of male and female qualities never seen before” as a mother with good looks, a sharp shooting moose hunter and an accomplished career woman all while balancing family; a real Frontier go-getter who possesses kiss my ass confidence. Shame her intelligence centers froze in Alaska.

Though Hillary Clinton may be a ball buster, far from pretty and low in likability, she has a real track record, exposed a sensitive side and genuine compassion for America’s future. Though feminism and politics armored Clinton with a tough exterior, she doesn’t need to charm her audience to gain popularity. Hillary Clinton may be a classic feminist bitch but considering the alternative, which do we really prefer: a ditz needing a geography lesson or bitch needing charm school?

A world-class celebrity wannabe with *some* redeeming qualities. However, 'the winks can stay at the local bar.'

Personally, I’d like to see the new generation of young women create a synthesized version of Hillary Clinton’s experience, diplomacy, compassion and knowledge with Sarah Palin’s spunk, motherhood balance and beauty/sex appeal. The winks can stay at the local bar. Obviously the world was knocked over by the fem-charm Palin exhibited. It was as though she perfumed America into a hypnotic trance with her sexiness and as such, is it slightly possible that femininity itself needs a fresh perspective in a new era of feminism? Could Palin have had one thing right?

I found Palin’s confident sex appeal endearing simply because I disbelieve that a feminist can’t be sensually appealing, pretty or feminine and I challenge the old myth that femininity is a weakness. It’s possible to nurture both the womanly and intellectual qualities women have and find a balance between the two. It seems femininity alone made half the country dismiss the need of a brain. Imagine if Sarah had one.

Maybe it’s time to recreate the new feminist into a sensual, intelligent, sex-positive, open-minded and male acceptant woman. Femininity has incredible power if intellect and a decent level of diplomacy accompany it and it’s an aspect of a woman’s identity that’s been suppressed to prove women can do more than cook, clean and care for babies. If change is abound, let’s think about how to evolve feminism.

If smarter in international relations and political knowledge while toning down winking and “betcha” language, a female can be one hot momma and be president. Why the hell not? The September 2008 issue of Bazaar Magazine’s photo spread, the “American Dream”with Tyra Banks playing “first lady” is fabulous and a representation of true, hard core feminine elegance. The photos ooze class, style, sensuality and intelligence and if I were to visualize a synthesis of Hillary and Sarah, pigment aside, Bazaar’s photo spread shows us what a modern feminist might look like in the White House, First Lady or President.

“God’s will” wasn’t to change America Sarah’s way but to show us that feminine qualities are acceptable, endearing and nothing to be ashamed of. Perhaps we need it back in the feminist arena. However, in confidently revealing the too often hidden feminine identity, one might wish not to exchange intelligence and common sense for it. Hint, hint, little Sarah.

Then again, maybe “God’s will” was to embarrass the hell out of our Alaskan moose hunter for her uncompassionate, over-confident, judgmental, egotist, career hungry, do-it-my-way-or-no-way being. In that case, God did well. Aren’t we glad?

Tatiana von Tauber is an artist and photographer, writer and blogger whose life is centered on exploring and understanding the philosophy of love, sexuality and eroticism and its influences on society and consciousness, growth and existential freedom and all things feminine through various artistic and creative forms.

Well, Well, Well, We aren’t all sheep after all

USA Today reports:

A passenger focus group conducted for TSA by New York City business consulting firm Blue Lime found that “unquestioning compliance has diminished.”

Rogier Van Bakel Nobody’s Business”>thinks this is a good thing:

The contingent of fed-up airline passengers who verbally challenge dumb, wasteful TSA security measures does not include those who (like me) merely engage in quiet bristling, teeth-grinding, eye-rolling, and dagger-staring. Maybe it’s time for all of us to speak up.

I concur with Rogier. You don’t need to refuse to comply, but even flunkies get it when you resist — even just a little bit. See also TSA Security Theater Proven Useless, TSA Declares Victory Anyhow

The Thanksgiving Edition Blog LooT!

W00t! W00t! Zac's Blog L00t!

Editorial and Comment by Zac Papantoniou

Hot Chicks with Douchebags Lawsuits

QuizLawreports that three (3) Jersey girls have sued the creator of the website (and author of the equally awesome book by the same name) Hot Chicks with Douchebags over the inclusion of photos of them with men who meet the strictest standards of douchiness (“see here for a prime hot chick with douchebag” example), on both the website and in the related book… Wait, when did Jersey get hot chicks?! Read more here

Props to Seth at QuizLaw

Seattle Trademark Lawyer Explains Why Dead-Elvis Made More Than You Did Last Year

Michael Atkins, over at this post on Seattle Trademark Lawyer, comments on the “Forbes List of Top-Earning Dead Celebrities for 2008” and why dead-Elvis can still kick your paychecks’ ass.

Props to Michael Atkins at Seattle Trademark Lawyer

Memo: The Journeys in Overland Park, Kansas, Should Probably Hire Smarter Non-Racist Employees

Jon Katz, at the Underdog Blog wrote this post about one Journeys (the shoe retailer) customer who probably won’t be coming back for the awesome “After Thanksgiving Day” sales…

Why you ask? Because when the customer returned a pair of shoes, his return receipt, displayed a racial epithet instead of his name under the portion of the receipt for listing customer info.

More on the story at the Underdog Blog, props to Jon Katz

Does Obesity Confer Additional Rights To Larger Airplane Passengers?

Scott H. Greenfield at Simple Justice takes a thought provoking look at a legal issue, the highest court in Canada refused to hear.

Props to Scott H. Greenfield at Simple Justice

A Fellow “Blawg Review” Hosting Partner Will Be Hosting #188 Next Week!

Eric Turkewitz at the New York Personal Injury Law Blog will be hosting the Blawg Review next week.

We here at the Legal Satyricon wanted to show Eric some love, encourage our readers to check out his post on the upcoming blawgalishisness and remind the LS faithful that the Legal Satyricon will be hosting the Blawg Review the week of Dec. 15 in honor of Bill of Rights Day!

Props to Eric Turkewitz at the New York Personal Injury Law Blog

Rejoice!

Ann Coulter’s jaw has been wired shut! (source)