Read time: 3 minutes

Conservative Radio Host: Kagan, Ginsburg Should Have Been Recused Because They're 'Liberal Jews'

They're all vying for Rush Limbaugh's crown now.

With Rush Limbaugh heading downhill fast in the ratings and revenue categories for right wing hate radio, a slew of new names and personalities is competing for his audience. One of the worst ones is Jan Mickelson, an Iowa radio host most well-known for suggesting immigrants should be 'property of the state.'

Mickelson's show is broadcast on iHeart Radio, that bastion of right-wing hatefulness which has been so instrumental in keeping Rush Limbaugh on the air despite losing millions.

As if to prove he is the Best Hater of Them All, Mickelson is now out with this one, attacking Justices Kagan and Ginsburg for not recusing themselves from the Obergefell case because they're 'liberal Jews.'

JAN MICKELSON: I know this is a story that we were just talking about, is in the background, but I agree with Pastor Demastus. Our culture is in the process of being picked apart by activists who are just fundamentally broken, damaged people. And also by disingenuous judges and disingenuous lawyers. The case to which I refer: Judge Roberts should have required two of the members of the Supreme Court to recuse themselves, Kagan and Ginsburg, because both of them had literally presided over same-gender weddings previous to the ruling. In any other kind of thing, if they-- a vested emotional interest and a vested religious interest in their part, would have caused them to have been required to recuse themselves. If they had a monetary interest in the outcome of a court case, they would have been required to recuse themselves. In this case, they had a religious motivation for moving forward and conducting same-gender marriage: they are both liberal Jews. No, I'm not saying anything bad, this is a correct assessment of their world view.

Why is it if Christians use their religion to resist same-gender marriage -- "Well they're the Taliban, dude" -- well then, why is it that if people with different religions do exactly the same thing, they are exempt from the same criticism? Well, I am not going to exempt them. They are biased, they had legal bias. They should not have been in a position to decide. They should have recused themselves. Roberts should have required it. And if they were both gone, that ruling would not have advanced the hoax of same-gender marriage because they wouldn't have had the votes. It's a totally safe and useless gesture. When his authority meant something, he didn't use it. It was a contrivance and a scam, just like the court shopping down in Kentucky that found a gay rights activist to decide over the lady that eventually got tossed into jail for refusing to issue a bogus marriage license.


↓ Story continues below ↓

Wait a minute. Whatever happened to religious freedom? How does it translate that Supreme Court Justices are somehow unqualified to rule in a simple 14th amendment case if they're Jewish?

This is the cynicism the right wing stokes every day. There's no intellectual honesty in anything they say or do. It's simply a daily twisting of basic principles to fit their situation and keep the angry masses angry.

By the way, have you ever noticed how wingers loathe American Jews who don't agree with them while loving Israel? Figure that one out if you can.

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.