Althouse: "Are You Planning A Cake Hoax? These 5 Tips Will Make Sure It’s A Success"

April 19, 2016

"Are You Planning A Cake Hoax? These 5 Tips Will Make Sure It’s A Success"

"#1 Pick A Believable Villain...."

So... not Whole Foods in Austin, Texas... not for an anti-gay cake message. Come on!

35 comments:

Bob said...: Why did he even need to perpetrate a hoax, anyway? All he had to do was go to a Christian bakery and demand that they bake him a gay marriage cake, and then sue if they refused.; 4/19/16, 6:39 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: It's almost comical. There are more racial/sexual/transgendered hoaxes these days, than true racial/sexual/transgendered incidents.; 4/19/16, 6:41 PM
AlbertAnonymous said...: Look at me! Look at me! But don't judge. Bigot!; 4/19/16, 6:55 PM
Fritz said...: A fine of several hundred thousand dollars and loss of career seems appropriate.; 4/19/16, 7:08 PM
n.n said...: To be fair, the "homophobic" narrative retained a useful and profitable life until the circumstances of "homophobic" behavior were traced to their transgender/homosexual and pro-choice origins.; 4/19/16, 7:09 PM
MaxedOutMama said...: Whole Foods filed a countersuit for 100K today in Travis County. They have video showing that the position of the label was different at checkout, plus all the testimony from store employees, plus the different writing, plus the pure improbability of not seeing this in the store.

Since this story was widely publicized, they have a good case. I think they are following the Trump philosophy - never settle. This will scare the next one.; 4/19/16, 7:41 PM
Bob said...: Prediction: will be quietly settled with no news coverage other than a single paragraph buried in the depths of a newspaper.; 4/19/16, 8:06 PM
MadisonMan said...: Is it a tribute to me that I never believed the story for a minute?

I'm not a big Whole Paycheck fan, but I hope they get everything they want in the lawsuit that's been filed.; 4/19/16, 8:07 PM
David Begley said...: Waiting for this obvious hoaxster to be vilified by HuffPo, ACLU, NYT, the Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal et alia.; 4/19/16, 8:20 PM
Fred Drinkwater said...: Bob: this happened in Austin, TX. Bloke would probably have had to Uber 15-20 whole miles out of town in order to find a Christian bakery. Too much work, so he took the lazy route.; 4/19/16, 8:24 PM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: These are the people being driven to distraction by the dog whistles they constantly hear all around them that those fucking conservatives just won't admit to!; 4/19/16, 8:25 PM
Just asking questions (Jaq) said...: This is a law blog. Could someone explain to me why a bakery has to make a cake because it's a public accommodation, but Twitter can ban conservatives because it's a private business?; 4/19/16, 8:26 PM
Howard said...: tim: because the gay can't help it, they are born that way. You returdlickin conservative troglodytes have a choice and you choose ignorance. There is no constitutional (nor a libertarian free-market) protection for stupidity.; 4/19/16, 8:32 PM
Michael K said...: "Twitter can ban conservatives because it's a private business?"

It has something to do with leftist privilege, also known as "I don't care ! Do what I say !"; 4/19/16, 8:36 PM
Birches said...: I'm so glad Whole Foods is going after him. Do it.; 4/19/16, 8:40 PM
Mark said...: Could someone explain to me why a bakery has to make a cake because it's a public accommodation, but Twitter can ban conservatives because it's a private business?

For the same reason that not giving women their own restrooms in the workplace is intolerable discrimination, and women having their own restrooms in the workplace is also intolerable discrimination.; 4/19/16, 8:47 PM
Howard said...: Mike K: Too bad, no conservatives are smart or ambitious enough to be free-market entrepreneurs like the leftist commie bastards you hate at facebook, twitter, apple, etc. Instead, conservatives are happy to push statins and bariatric surgery and the government mandated standard of care.; 4/19/16, 8:55 PM
David said...: I say forgive him. And that goes for you too Whole Foods.; 4/19/16, 9:13 PM
Drago said...: Howard: "tim: because the gay can't help it, they are born that way."

The science is settled!

Oh, so you want to see the science? Very well.

Howard, would you mind providing the evidence for your obviously well-reasoned assertion to these terrible conservative types? I'm sure you have it at your fingertips. For you are a leftist and thus, just because, a lover a "science".

Please don't leave these sad sack conservatives hanging! Just give them the evidence and we can all sit back and laugh at them!

But first, of course, you must provide the evidence. You know, to set up the jokes...; 4/19/16, 10:22 PM
Drago said...: Howard: "Mike K: Too bad, no conservatives are smart or ambitious enough to be free-market entrepreneurs like the leftist commie bastards you hate at facebook, twitter, apple, etc."

It seems like only yesterday that venture capitalist Romney was being blasted by the left for his entrepreneurial escapades.

Ahhhhh, but that was then, and this is now. And for the leftists, history always starts anew each day. The better to avoid the unfortunate consequences of certain policies.

If only we could somehow combine the leftist successes of Detroit policies with Cuban "health care" and Venezuelan availability of goods, what a wonderful world it would be!; 4/19/16, 10:26 PM
Drago said...: New evidence has emerged that GWBush's former Air National Guard commander wrote a memo referencing the disturbing habit of a young Air Force 2LT to run about to random bakeries and leave crude messages on random pastries that were destined to be consumed by practioners of various unorthodox lifestyles.

Most disturbing is that the food coloring used in these diabolical attacks are of a chemical composition not technically invented until 2009.

The discrepancy remains unexplained.; 4/19/16, 10:53 PM
JCC said...: "...Cake Hoax...anti-gay..."

It's not the substance...it's the presentation.

"...returdlickin conservative troglodytes..."

Like fine dining or Howard, only better.; 4/19/16, 10:58 PM
tomaig said...: "
tim: because the gay can't help it, they are born that way.

Mrs DeBlasio, the "First Lady" of NYC, "used to be" a lesbian activist. Now she's married to a man, and they have children.

When the gravy train came rolling along, she dropped that "angry lesbian" schtick and became heterosexual.

How does that work?; 4/20/16, 6:42 AM
damikesc said...: Whole Foods filed a countersuit for 100K today in Travis County. They have video showing that the position of the label was different at checkout, plus all the testimony from store employees, plus the different writing, plus the pure improbability of not seeing this in the store.

Good for them. Stop allowing throwing javelins like this to not require a lot of risk.

This is a law blog. Could someone explain to me why a bakery has to make a cake because it's a public accommodation, but Twitter can ban conservatives because it's a private business?

Reasons. Just as how it's totally not inconsistent for people to refuse to do business with states that allow people to refuse service to people they don't agree with.

tim: because the gay can't help it, they are born that way.

Which would assume a genetic cause.

Which doesn't exist that anybody has found.

But assuming it does get found, how will they handle the inevitable large spike in abortions for gay babies? Because you know it will happen.; 4/20/16, 6:59 AM
whitney said...: Are these things EVER real. We all know the oppressed \ oppressor narrative is the media's favorite so they are delighted when one pops up yet the story always seem to be debunked sooner or later.
Can anyone think of a recent real example of this kinda thing?; 4/20/16, 7:19 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: What might be the cause for suing the lawyer?; 4/20/16, 7:22 AM
damikesc said...: Are these things EVER real.

Closest I've seen is the poop swastika at Missou which, apparently, was real. But that is the only thing I can think of that was real.

What might be the cause for suing the lawyer?

Shouldn't lawyers do more investigation of their own before filing a suit? We need to stop allowing lawfare to be a no-risk proposition.; 4/20/16, 7:27 AM
Larry J said...: tim in vermont said...
These are the people being driven to distraction by the dog whistles they constantly hear all around them that those fucking conservatives just won't admit to!

If you're hearing a lot of dog whistles, chances are you're a dog.; 4/20/16, 9:15 AM
Bill Peschel said...: "This is a law blog. Could someone explain to me why a bakery has to make a cake because it's a public accommodation, but Twitter can ban conservatives because it's a private business?"

Let me treat this as a serious question, because I've been wrestling with this question meself.

1. The U.S. and states ban discrimination against certain protected classes: sex, race, national origin, and now sexual orientation.

2. A person holding political beliefs are not in a protected class.

3. Hence, you can't discriminate (e.g., forbid making a service available publicly) against someone in a protected class, but can for holding political beliefs you don't agree with.

Except believing in gay marriage is kind of a political belief, right? Because you're involving the law.

But, then, I never understood why a bakery would resist selling a cake for a gay wedding. It's not like the bakery is publicly supporting a gay wedding. No one looking at the cake will say, "Oh, that's from Cake Sluts. I never knew they supported gay marriage!"

And it's not like they're being forced to add icing to the cake and implies it's a gay wedding. Wedding cakes are frou-frou, but they usually don't have writing on them.

In fact, there's no reason why the bakery's owners couldn't say, "We hate the idea of gays getting married. We'll bake your cake, but realize there's a lot of negative karma going into it. Do you really want us to make it for them?"

So in the end, I can only conclude the law is funqued up these days. But I suspected that ever since I read Roe vs. Wade in ConLaw.; 4/20/16, 9:44 AM
SweatBee said...: Tim:
The way it was left-splained to me by a Bernie fan when asked why bakers not selling cake is abhorrent but musicians not selling concerts is worthy of praise, being gay is a "legally-protected class" and being conservative is not. In other words, it's not the fundamental principle but the legal technicality that matters.

All you have to do now is to convince a majority of your local governing body that businesses should not discriminate on the basis of political beliefs and then they'll hate Springsteen, too. Allegedly.; 4/20/16, 9:47 AM
Brian said...: Re: "Not Whole Foods in Austin!"

The trouble is that you want to be careful about who you're smearing. Sure, you could pick a Wal-Mart in some outlying area to pull the hoax on, and outsiders would find it more convincing. But then the decorator on the short end of it might be a Mexican guy, or a black woman.

Which would be bad enough, in that the exact hierarchy of victimhood is somewhat fluid and unpredictable. Worse, though, your hoax might inadvertently highlight the fact that Mexican guys and black women who work at Wal-Mart tend, their membership in the Coalition of the Victimized notwithstanding, to actually be somewhat less interested in gay rights than are their comparatively upscale counterparts at Whole Foods.

I mean, can you imagine the embarrassment?; 4/20/16, 11:21 AM
mikee said...: Is there an analog to the Darwin Awards, but where the idiots don't exterminate themselves? Something along the lines of Stupid Criminal Awards, but more in the sense of public self-shaming? If not, this incident is an example of why we need such an award.; 4/20/16, 2:02 PM
Char Char Binks, Esq. said...: @mikee

Most gays win the Darwin Award simply by being gay.; 4/20/16, 3:36 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "This is a law blog. Could someone explain to me why a bakery has to make a cake because it's a public accommodation, but Twitter can ban conservatives because it's a private business?"

-- Because Twitter is better at hiding the reason they're doing the things they're doing.; 4/20/16, 6:57 PM
Matt Sablan said...: A more serious answer: Certain things are protected classes. You can't kick someone out of your store for being a woman, for example. You can kick a woman out of your store for not wearing shoes if you have a sign posted saying no shoes, no service or the like.; 4/20/16, 7:00 PM