Do what scares any judge even thinking of following in his footsteps most - investigate Judge McDonald's "past" at your county courthouse (for messy divorces, paternity suits, "love children," DUIs, drug problems, or tax liens), and then blab your findings all over local talk radio and the Internet!
There is nothing a judge fears more than that his kid will hear about Daddy's dope problem or that his new wife will learn that he beat his last wife from talk radio or from classmates.
Larryflynt the guy.
Scandals of antigun politicians - with how-to guide to "outing!"
The more obvious and direct recourse against the judge is that he was observed, opinion in hand, at the outset of arguments. This would seem to be judicial conduct suitable for review by whatever authority, whether the state's supreme court, a judicial review board, or the bar association. Of course, an appeal will probably prosper on the merits, but this judge needs to pay a price for his truculence and unfairness, and the official, aboveboard route would seem to be the best place to start. Even in states that have appointive judges and life tenure, the bar association can make a stink. In Texas, where judges from JP's up to the state supreme court are elected, the bar association offers ratings by attorneys who have practiced before each judge, and bar-association opinions or ratings of fitness to serve. The people, of course, are the final judges, and so the bar association directs its opinions to us.