Patterico's Pontifications

5/9/2016

The Constitutional Vanguard Has Launched

Filed under: Constitutional Vanguard,General — Patterico @ 6:30 am

The first email for the newsletter “The Constitutional Vanguard” went out this morning at 6 a.m. Pacific, to some 340 subscribers. It’s little more than an introductory message, setting forth where we are. It’s the first step on what I hope will be a long and interesting journey.

I hope all readers will consider joining. It’s been wonderful to read the emails I have received so far, in particular because I am meeting long-time lurkers I never knew were out there. It’s easy to think of the blog as reaching only the people who comment, but an exercise like this is a great reminder that there are many more people out there who are fully engaged, but simply don’t want to comment, for whatever reason.

My current conception for the list is to give people resources and ideas to spread intellectual support for the Constitution, liberty, and the free market. I already have letters planned about our mission statement, and about Mike Lee’s book The Lost Constitution, which provides a prescient blueprint for dealing with the dire situation we now face.

Along the way, we’ll probably discuss strategy, strengthen our ties to one another on social media, and hopefully have a little fun. As Larry Elder used to say on his radio show: we’ve got a country to save.

If you want to join, please note that I have created an automated sign-up form for the list. If you’re interested in joining, please use that signup form, available here.

79 Responses to “The Constitutional Vanguard Has Launched”

  1. “We face coming generations, indoctrinated in the public-school and university systems, who seek radical, destructive revolution and dissolution of our national sovereignty.
    Reversing their gains begins with leadership that unapologetically declares that our American story is a good one, that our people’s sacrifices for freedom, for others, and for principle make our story different and worth cultivating anew. Any pundits who claim there is little difference between Trump and Clinton are wholly removed from what is occurring in America’s universities and schools, the tenor of what is happening in the protest movements, and the destructive aims of the left. Trump is the Nominee, What Now?”

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/05/trump-is-the-nominee-what-now-legal-insurrection-authors-debate/

    Colonel Haiku (1ebff3)

  2. I was delighted to turn on my computer while having my morning coffee to see the Constitutional Vanguard message from Patterico. I clicked directly to it and created a file to store it and future communications. Yes, Trump is the nominee but we still need to make our message known to our Fellow Americans and Trump himself. Send him and his campaign daily Tweets showing our concerns and hoping he will address them. Let’s get on Trumps radar, his campaigns radar, the medias radar and maybe even get Patterico on a couple talk radio shows.

    t is urgent that we not allow further erosion of our Constitution either through ignorance by Trump or by design by Hillary and her minions. Then we must rebuild it. But first things first. I’m happy to be on board. Thank you Patterico.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (734193)

  3. I liked what you wrote, Patterico. Thank you.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  4. There are a lot of differences between Trump and Hillary, and the balance favors Hillary. Trumpkns just think that they’ll be the favorite concubines in the harem, so for them Trump is better.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. Yes, you are a liberal, nk. Enjoy the swill.

    Colonel Haiku (1ebff3)

  6. Yes, you are a liberal, nk. Enjoy the swill.

    Uh-uh. It’s the Trumpkins who are scrabbling for their place in the trough. The “liberals” are holding their noses. Trump should make that his campaign slogan: Welfare For Whites!

    But that would be honest. And honesty and Trumpkins do not go together. Up is down. Black is white. Trump is fit to be President.

    nk (dbc370)

  7. 1) get up
    2) see my brother off to Kansas
    3) open my email and find Pat’s first message

    This is turning out to be an OK morning already.

    Bill H (971e5f)

  8. Happy to be a long time lurker! Even happier to have received that newsletter this morning!

    Burnside (8fa39f)

  9. “strengthen our ties to one another on social media”

    Uh, no. Don’t do social media.

    Rusty Bill (ad1f26)

  10. Constitutional vangyard, like subjecting the Rhodes those show to legitimate review, sniffle.

    narciso (1b4366)

  11. The counselor is a-ok with criminal behavior, with disregard for national security, with the trail of victims left in the wake of the Hillary Clinton Criminal Cabal.

    Colonel Haiku (1ebff3)

  12. Trump’s lawyers say spousal rape isn’t criminal behavior.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  13. Allowing Haiku to remain on a preposterously ironic high horse re: Hillary Clinton.

    How does complete ignorance of the nuclear triad factor into “disregard for national security”? Or four bankruptcies into a “trail of victims”?

    Sad!

    Leviticus (efada1)

  14. Hillary Clinton has decades worth of baggage and all it will take is a candidate who’s willing to play hardball against the criminal harridan.

    Colonel Haiku (1ebff3)

  15. 12.Trump’s lawyers say spousal rape isn’t criminal behavior.

    What would you expect them to say, Leviticus? This just in: Lawyers Lie!

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (734193)

  16. Until into the 1990s, “not his wife” was an element of the crime of rape in most states. A man could not rape-rape his wife.

    nk (dbc370)

  17. when obama slashed the army to 194o levels, where was this vanguard, pray tell,

    narciso (732bc0)

  18. “Until into the 1990s, “not his wife” was an element of the crime of rape in most states. A man could not rape-rape his wife.”

    – nk

    I know. But I would like to see Haiku argue that forcing sex on one’s wife isn’t “criminal behavior,” since he’s trying to differentiate Trump and Clinton.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  19. constitutional oversight, snorfle,

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2590794/

    people make up all sorts of carp in divorce pleadings, this is why they are sealed,

    narciso (732bc0)

  20. Since GMail seems to have kept your newsletter out of my Inbox, and put it in some unknown category of e-mail, which I don’t see, and I can only get it by searching for patterico, and their instructions don’t tell me how to deSelect mail and get my complete Inbox back – it just tells me to do it – is it OK to subscribe at more than one e-mail address? Or would that throw off your count of subscribers?

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  21. I wish the Constitutional Vanguard well, although I’m not part of it, the goals of limited government, liberty, and free markets are dear to my heart. The reason I’m hesitant to join CV (it they’d have me) is because I’m not yet persuaded it’s hidden agenda isn’t a Stop Trump movement flying false colors.

    As the smoke clears I’ll be more confident in my assessment, but for now I’m keeping my powder dry.

    ropelight (67d9d7)

  22. Patterico: I want to hear your ideas for what comes next

    Where do you want to hear them?

    There was actually a good idea mentioend by Bret Stephens of the Wall Street Journal.

    Kristol’s main purpose, of course, wasn’t to complain about Amtrak. It was to signal that his idea of a Nevertrump third-party challenge isn’t just idle chatter, it’s purposeful chatter. The three men he tried to phone—Ben Sasse, the junior senator from Nebraska; Tom Coburn, a former senator from Oklahoma; and Mitt Romney, who needs no introduction—have all been mentioned as possible Nevertrump candidates. (So has Rick Perry, the former Texas governor, who last week reluctantly endorsed Donald Trump.)

    Hey, maybe he can get all of them to run! Put Sasse on the ballot in Nebraska, Coburn in Oklahoma, Romney in Massachusetts, Michigan and Utah—and plug in other candidates as needed to maximize the Nevertrump appeal in particular states. John Kasich could run in Ohio, Jeb Bush in Florida and so forth.

    OK, that’s a ridiculous idea, but it’s not as ridiculous as it sounds. It would obviate the problem of recruiting a candidate willing to spend an arduous six months on a quixotic national campaign. True, such a strategy would preclude the possibility of an electoral-college majority, but that’s not a realistic goal even with a single candidate.

    The objective instead would be to win as many states as possible and deny either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton an Electoral College majority. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, that would throw the election to the House, which would choose the president from among the top three finishers—presumably Trump, Mrs. Clinton and one of the Nevertrump candidates.

    To be sure, it sounds a lot like Romney’s March plan for strategic Nevertrump voting in the primaries, or like the April Cruz-Kasich entente. But maybe the third time would be the charm.

    It’s an excellent idea.

    In fact, that’s *exactly* what the Whig Party did in 1836.

    They did not succeed in throwing the election for President into the House of Representatives, but the election for Vice President was thrown into the Senate (by 1 vote – the Democratic Vice Presidential candidate, Richard Mentor Johnson, got exactly 50% of the Electoral vote) as a result of aa Democratic split. William Smith got 23 Electoral votes, apparently all from Virginia. According to Wikipedia, Virginia’s Electors refused to accept Richard Mentor Johnson as the Democratic vice presidential candidate.

    It doesn’t give the reason in two different articles. But I have this:

    Smith, while a Senator from South Carolina in 1820 at the time of the passage of the Missouri Compromise, was one of the first to argue that slavery was a positive good, while Johnson had a black mistress, who, for practical purposes, was his wife.

    Smith had meanwhile moved to Louisiana and then Alabama, where he was elected to the Alabama House August 1, 1836. he wa snot picked for Vice President, but President Andrew Jackson nominated him to the Supreme Court on March 3, 1837, and he was confirmed by the Senate , 23–18, after Martin Van Buren’s inauguration, but he refused to take his seat. He was 74 years old at the time.

    Jackson actually filled, or attempted to fill, two U.S. Supreme Court seats on March 3, 1837.

    There must be a riveting historical story here about the Election of 1836.

    This only works if the candidate(s) can carry some blue and purple states. Or maybe throw them to Trump while Trump loses some red states.

    I think you need a candidate in Texas – and maybe the Texas Republican Party could secede from the GOP. Hillary Clinton might indeed get less than the normal Democratic vote because of ethical issues.

    As a reminder, only one person can get into the House, so Sasse just running in Nebraska wouldn’t make too much sense. There’d have to be real shot at each of them making the cut.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  23. ropelight (67d9d7) — 5/9/2016 @ 2:15 pm

    I’m not yet persuaded it’s hidden agenda isn’t a Stop Trump movement flying false colors.

    I think it’s a Stop both Trump and Hillary movement, and I don’t think it can be anything else, and it’s not a hidden agenda.

    It started from this:

    http://patterico.com/2016/05/04/what-is-to-be-done posted on the day after the Indiana primary.
    (May 4, 2016)

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  24. coochienelly wants a predatory bathroom tranny plank in the R platform

    this party is a joke

    happyfeet (831175)

  25. As the smoke clears I’ll be more confident in my assessment, but for now I’m keeping my powder dry.
    ropelight (67d9d7)

    Is that like: Gee, General Washington I’d love to join ya but I wanna wait to see how Yorktown goes?

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (734193)

  26. principles are more important then candidates, in so far as the latter adhere to the former.

    narciso (732bc0)

  27. Since Trump is for YUUUUUUUGE Government, any Small Government operation will, by definition, expend much energy trying to Stop Trump.

    Since Trump is for dismantling Constitutional protections preventing the Government and people like Trump from silencing others and otherwise taking away the rights of others, any Constitution-First operation will, by definition, expend energy trying to Stop Trump.

    Since ropelight has busily gouged his own eyes out and pierced his own eardrums, he is unable to see or hear what is plainly obvious. Because he’s too busy worshiping his god, Donald Trump, the antithesis of Constitutional Governance.

    John Hitchcock (18adbf)

  28. #23 ropeliar,

    When have you ever kept your powder dry?
    Yesterday you were trashing John Hitchcock for being a Christian.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  29. this idea that christians are monolithic and homogeneous is as silly as to assert that republicans are monolithic and homogeneous

    it’s identity politics of the most base and puerile sort

    that’s why I abjure it

    happyfeet (831175)

  30. I tried to abjure it but it tasted bad so I spit it out.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (734193)

  31. Well for one thing we could call and support those who are in office that are standing against Trump or at least not all in for him. It would be nice to see someone remain firm when under attack by Trump. Ryan comes to mind. Why roll over and give Trump control of the convention? At least stay in and get a platform with conservative principles. I know Trump won’t follow the platform but perhaps it will save a few down stream folks.

    Marci (1cb271)

  32. Rope, Trump is the poster child for “false colors.”

    Steve Malynn (1d7837)

  33. gotta luv those bama conservatives.

    mg (31009b)

  34. Be careful who you get in bed with. Here’s an excerpt from Michael Sainato’s 5/9/16 article in The Observer

    Wealthy Cruz Donor Pours Millions Into Clinton Campaign

    Renaissance Technologies, a hedge fund founded by billionaire James Simons, donated over $13 million to Sen. Ted Cruz’s failed presidential campaign. For a guy who’s supposed to be pretty smart with his money, the ROI on that one has got to sting. Nevertheless, now that Mr. Cruz is out of the race, Mr. Simons has begun pouring millions of dollars into Hillary Clinton‘s campaign, with Renaissance Technologies donating over $2 million to Ms. Clinton so far this election cycle. Euclidean Capital—also owned by Mr. Simons—has given the Clinton campaign over $7 million in contributions, and such figures are likely to increase as Ms. Clinton slowly transitions her attention from Democratic Primary opponent Bernie Sanders to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump…

    ropelight (67d9d7)

  35. Ropelight, you’ve been promoting a huge Clinton donor for months.

    Trump would be a tyrant. His scamming our veterans, promotion of violence and riots, and his statements about communist stomping on dissenting protests, prove he must not be president.

    Hillary would be a terrible and corrupt president, but the nation would persist and corruption would be the province of the left instead of this ridiculous version of the right Trump has co-opted.

    Beating Trump will take money and work, and the vast majority of Americans will rise to the occasion. It’s going to be an historic election. I hope some third option presents itself to me where I don’t have to pick between these two, but I don’t blame anyone who has decided Hillary is the most conservative candidate who can win, because right now she amazingly is.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  36. #28, Hoagie, no, it’s like Gee, General Arnold I won’t join you till you explain why you want to surrender West Point to the British.

    #31, Chicken Sh*t, wrong again, as usual. I was trashing Halfwit Hitchcock of being un-Christian. He, like you, makes up phony accusations. I called him out and he ran away like the two-faced coward he is. Like you. Both of you ought to wear dresses.

    ropelight (67d9d7)

  37. ah dustin, as illustrated above, we’ve had a tyrant waging wars without congressional supervision, issuing edicts, securing secret agreements through subterfuge and propaganda, and the number of figures, who have said nee are few and far between,

    narciso (732bc0)

  38. what difference does it make, right,

    http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/election/2016/05/09/military-times-survey-donald-trump-beats-hillary-clinton/84132402/

    you have already settled for red queen,

    narciso (732bc0)

  39. I believe that we have until June 6 to send the full $2,700 individual amount to Hillary so it can be allocated to the primary; and then we can send the second $2,700 for the general election; this way we can be sure that the full $5,400 will be spent this election season against Trump.

    In case you did not know, contributions you made to Cruz, or any other candidate, do not affect the maximum you can contribute to Hillary. You can send her $2,700 and $2,700.

    But double-check that June 6 date, in case it’s earlier.

    nk (dbc370)

  40. the reality of a unleashed north korea, thanks wendy sherman,

    ttp://www.wsj.com/articles/japan-and-south-korea-may-soon-go-nuclear-1462738914

    narciso (732bc0)

  41. ropelight,

    Did you forget that Trump said businessmen give money to everyone because that’s how business and politics works? Or is that only for Trump and there are different rules for Cruz supporters? I i think we all know the truthful answer to my second question.

    DRJ (15874d)

  42. so what is renaissance technologies getting out of it, we know one pays the danegeld, bill gates found that lesson out the hard wat,

    narciso (732bc0)

  43. Yes, we all know that the Trumpkins excuse all the conduct they claim to abhor, when Trump does it.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  44. DRJ, I didn’t forget, you’ve made the point so many times. Yes, in order to do business it’s often necessary to encourage elected public officials to give your project a fair hearing. Campaign contributions are a legal way to make sure office holders return your phone calls.

    And, no, there aren’t different rules for Cruz supporters. And, there’s a big difference between handing out a few hundred bucks and throwing millions first at one candidate and then at the woman who turned her back on brave Americans and left then to die in Benghazi. What person of sound mind and good conscience would support such a vile animal for the presidency?

    ropelight (67d9d7)

  45. ah dustin, as illustrated above, we’ve had a tyrant waging wars without congressional supervision, issuing edicts, securing secret agreements through subterfuge and propaganda, and the number of figures, who have said nee are few and far between,

    narciso (732bc0) — 5/9/2016 @ 5:21 pm

    I have criticized Obama right with you for many years.

    Tyrant is a great term for abuses of power and corruption. Lois Lerner’s stuff, the fast and furious stuff, the poisonous foreign policy from Nobel prize to the Iran deal. Whatever on earth they did to get Justice Roberts’s vote. The list is long.

    But calling Obama a tyrant is actually hyperbole. The party of opposition won many governorships and legislative positions, and criticism of Obama has occurred with repercussions being adverse treatment by the IRS and twitter, rather than gulags and Tienamen Square massacres.

    What would Trump do, if he were the most powerful man in the free world, and his disasters were harshly criticized? Would he expand upon the abuses the current administration has engaged in? Obviously he would. How far would he go? I think as far as he could, with not enough thought for where that leads.

    Suddenly, tyrant is not hyperbole, in this country. So I’m not going to vote for him.

    Dustin (2a8be7)

  46. #39 ropeliar,

    Again, there you go again calling me expletives. What a shocka! (LOL)
    Yesterday, you clearly called John Hitchcock a “Bible-thumping fundamentalist half-wit.”
    That sounds like the kind of language Bill Maher would use. It’s a pejorative—it’s not a synonym for being “un-Christian” as you just claimed. (LOL)

    But now that you’ve been challenged on it, you attempted to roll it back. Unsuccessfully, of course. And naturally, you had to imply that John Hitchcock and I wear dresses.
    (Roll of the eyes.)

    By the way, the hedge fund billionaire who contributed to Cruz is merely covering all his bases because he believes Hillary’s going to win, just as The Mr Donald allegedly did when he was contributing to tons of Democrats in recent years. Apparently it’s permissible in your book when it’s your father figure The Mr Donald doing the contributing to Hillary, but when it’s some guy by the name of James Simons whom none of us has even heard of, then you want to brawl about it. Or bawl. (LOL)

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  47. well that’s a self fulfilling prophesy, like the fools who contributed the fidel, like the bacardi, the ones who gave to chavez, who empowered volodya, you hand him the sword he or she will cut you with it,

    narciso (732bc0)

  48. actually it is not, during the last government shutdown he took possession of the waterways, closed off the monuments, they haven’t had need to fire buckshot at protesters, shall we revisit that section of southern oregon, or the bundy ranch siege, how about basseley’s fate,

    narciso (732bc0)

  49. blessed pee-stank – please, if it is your will, please to save us from the tyrant

    this is why we can’t have nice things

    happyfeet (831175)

  50. how about the fourth amendment assault on journalists, they seem to have a rhianna/chris brown fixation, the more they are humiliated, the more they grovel,

    narciso (732bc0)

  51. Since GMail seems to have kept your newsletter out of my Inbox, and put it in some unknown category of e-mail, which I don’t see, and I can only get it by searching for patterico, and their instructions don’t tell me how to deSelect mail and get my complete Inbox back – it just tells me to do it – is it OK to subscribe at more than one e-mail address? Or would that throw off your count of subscribers?

    That is so odd. Sure, go ahead, use whatever address you like.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  52. The truth that Hitchcock is a Bible-thumping fundamentalist half-wit.

    ropelight (67d9d7)

  53. Probably has a job, too.

    nk (dbc370)

  54. he drivers the trucks

    what are soon to be automated by tesla robots from space/scandinavia

    it is truly an age of wonders

    happyfeet (831175)

  55. I have reservations, but I’m not willing to conclude a certain candidate is Damien Thorn, or
    Senator McComb,

    narciso (732bc0)

  56. In 1968, they told us we’d be living on the Moon by now. Don’t believe them; it’s how they get research grants that they spend on comely lab assistants that they’re too socially awkward to talk to.

    nk (dbc370)

  57. It never ceases to amaze me how the Trumpkins will wail and cry about actions taken by others, while ignoring or apologizing for the same behavior by their version of Obama.

    JD (2e3880)

  58. Paul Singer just says no. Trump supporters better start signing up for second mortgages to help their poor boy out cuz the smart money really does know when to fold ’em.

    Rick Ballard (44b7ba)

  59. Sammy Finkelman,

    Gmail put the email in the Promotions category. I selected the email, right clicked, and selected Move to – Primary and it moved into the regular Inbox.

    I don’t know if the next email will automatically go there though.

    TheNaBr (787359)

  60. kneel before red queen, it’s not as if she has a record of ruin across several continent, oh wait, she does,

    http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/09/hillary-clintons-list-anti-trump-conservatives/

    narciso (732bc0)

  61. Promotions. Hmm.

    Grrr.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  62. I wonder if it’s a function of having entered so many emails by hand, rather than through the sign-up form which requires a confirmation email (which you have to hunt for if it’s in spam or some other folder).

    Not a problem going forward, but annoying (if that’s the issue) given all the ones I did do by hand.

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  63. If anyone else thinks they should have received an email but did not, let me know!

    Patterico (86c8ed)

  64. My mind can’t wrap around too many things at the moment,

    I’m still hoping and praying that out of the ash-heap will arise a candidate who can win a plurality over Trump and HRC,

    if the person arises, I think it will largely be through a constellation of circumstances unplanned and unexpected,
    for example,
    I know nothing of this governor from NC,
    except he is a Republican and that he thinks women should be allowed to expect that there is not a person with a non-female anatomy next to them in the bathroom or locker room,
    and that he is taking a stand against the federal government.

    Now, while the media and the feds want to frame it as denying transgender rights,
    I am sure that well over 50% of voting Americans wish all the best to transgender people,
    but do not want their daughter having to shower next to one in the locker room after girls basketball practice,
    and they will resent the heck out of the feds for wanting to force the issue,
    and anyone aligning with the current administration to do so.

    I know I run the risk of over-harping on this subject,
    but it seems like the kind of thing that a little bit of common sense ought to prevail,
    and if it doesn’t
    we are in a worse mess than we thought.

    I hope this is a bridge too far for the left.
    SS-marriage was a bridge too far in 2004 and helped reelect an unpopular GWB, I am sure of it
    you even had voting drives among the Amish in Ohio and elsewhere.

    I am sure this fellow from NC did not wake up one morning and say to himself,
    “Self, i think I will attract the ire and wrath of all of the media and the fed govt on myself today.”
    And I am sure the AG didn’t say, “Hey, I think I will make a culture-war hero at the Alamo today”.

    Let’s pray and see what happens with this and other things.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  65. “Regardless of who you’ll support this coming November, please try to be condescending and assume the worst of everyone you disagree with!”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  66. hey we got that down pat,

    narciso (732bc0)

  67. “Regardless of who you’ll support this coming November, please try to be condescending and assume the worst of everyone you disagree with!”

    Heh! That’s a pretty condescending assumption you’re making there, don’t you think, Governor Kasich?

    nk (dbc370)

  68. That does pretty much nail him, doesn’t it.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  69. ropelight 47:

    What person of sound mind and good conscience would support such a vile animal for the presidency?

    Good point.

    Trump did.

    DRJ (15874d)

  70. That’s quite an article, DRJ. Four checks for HRC in 2008.

    Of course, Trump supporters will explain that…that…that….is different.

    Actually, it’s quite typical of person who really has no set of principles, other than enriching himself.

    Simon Jester (c5ab4f)

  71. But it’s going to be an interesting exchange on that subject in a coming debate, don’t you think?

    I mean, HRC can present all the check stubs and everything.

    Simon Jester (c5ab4f)

  72. What person of sound mind and good conscience would support such a vile animal for the presidency?

    The same sort of person who would support a crook like Edwin Edwards for the governorship of Louisiana. In other words, every decent person.

    Milhouse (87c499)

  73. I am sure this fellow from NC did not wake up one morning and say to himself,
    “Self, i think I will attract the ire and wrath of all of the media and the fed govt on myself today.”

    Indeed he did not. In fact the NC legislature and governor would have been very happy never to have dealt with this issue at all, had the Charlotte city council not forced their hand. Contrary to what happyfeet will tell you, it is the Charlotte people who stuck their busybody noses into everyone’s business, by forcing all businesses in the city to have what would effectively be unisex restrooms. The legislature had no real choice but to restore restroom owners’ right to set their own policy according to what they perceive as their best interests.

    Having done so, the state also had to make a policy fo for toilets it owns, and it made the sensible policy that state-owned restrooms should be used by people according to their legal sex. If the law says that someone is male, then how can a state facility make some other determination?

    Milhouse (87c499)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5938 secs.