43 RINOS Join Dems’ Political ‘Transgender’ Agenda (UPDATED)

At least 130 Republicans grew a pair.


Last night, I reported on how House leaders allowed Democrats to insert a provision to the Energy-Water Appropriations bill allowing bureaucrats to discriminate against businesses that don’t adhere to the newly-minted national religion of transgenderism. The amendment, from Rep. Sean Maloney (D-NY), would codify Obama’s executive order 13672 making transgenderism the law of the land. Pasted below this article are the names of the 43 Republicans who voted for that amendment, which would have codified language from Obama’s sexual identity executive order into law.*

This morning conservatives struck down the amendment by voting down the underlying Energy-Water spending bill.  As we noted before, the bill to begin with was problematic because it increased spending and continued funding for a number of green energy programs.  Now that this bill would forever lay down the marker that Republicans are okay with making transgenderism a legitimate national religion codified into law, it was incumbent upon conservatives to vote it down.

Thankfully, 130 Republicans bucked party leadership and voted down the bill.  Click here for the list of 106 Republicans who still voted for this bill, which not only increased spending, it mandated Obama’s transgender agenda.  It was enough to defeat the bill because Democrats, who successfully got their message across with the transgender amendment, still opposed the bill.  Evidently, a bill that spends $2.8 billion more on the Department of Energy than the Pelosi-era Congress is not enough for them.

The eternal lesson that should be gleaned from this is that moral clarity matters.  In many respects, this vote is emblematic of the conservative predicament in elections.  It’s not better to vote for the lesser of two evils.  It is better in the long run for the American people to see that one side stands for moral and intellectual clarity.  Having elements of even the “conservative party” legitimize the most extreme, illogical, and licentious agenda of the Left damages our prospects of successfully defeating their agenda in the long term.  Thus, it was better to join with the Democrats and defeat the underlying GOP spending bill than “beat the Democrats” on spending (albeit still spend more than the Pelosi era Congress).

The message to GOP leaders both in legislative and electoral fights is this: if you live by Democrats votes you will die by Democrat votes.  The false choice of the lesser of two evils in terms of legislation or candidates is what has brought us to the brink of cultural and economic Marxism.


Original story:

And they wonder why Donald Trump strikes a chord with angry, fed up Americans.

From The Daily Signal.

On Wednesday night, 43 Republican members of Congress joined the Democrats to vote for Barack Obama’s transgender agenda.

Whereas last week Congress voted to reject this proposal—known as the Maloney amendment—last night they voted to ratify Obama’s 2014 executive order barring federal contractors from what it describes as “discrimination” on the basis of “sexual orientation and gender identity” in their private employment policies.

And, of course, “discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity” can be something as simple as having a bathroom policy based on biological sex, not gender identity, as we learned last week from Obama’s transgender directives. And “discrimination” on the basis of “sexual orientation” can be something as reasonable as an adoption agency preferring married moms and dads for orphans, than other arrangements.

Indeed, in the past few weeks we’ve seen additional examples of what counts as “discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity.”

The New York City Commission on Human Rights issued official legal guidance saying employers can be fined up to $250,000 for not addressing employees by the pronoun of their choice—including pronouns such as “ze” and “hir.” As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh explains, this would require “employers and businesses to prevent [the use of “wrong” pronouns] by co-workers and patrons and not just by themselves or their own employees.”

  • A public school district in Oregon paid a teacher $60,000 because colleagues declined to use the pronoun “they” to describe the teacher. The teacher, Leo Soell, does “not identify as male or female but rather transmasculine and genderqueer, or androgynous.” As Volokh explains: “Soell wants people to call Soell ‘they,’ and submitted a complaint to the school district objecting (in part) that other schoolteachers engaged in ‘harassment’ by, among other things, ‘refusing to call me by my correct name and gender to me or among themselves’ (emphasis added).”
  • The 4th Circuit Court has said a Virginia school district must allow bathroom access based on “gender identity” not biology. The school district created a policy that says bathroom and locker room access is primarily based on biology, while also creating accommodations for transgender students: only biological girls can use the girls’ room, only biological boys can use the boys’ room, and any student can use one of the three single-occupancy bathrooms, which the school created specifically to accommodate transgender students. But the court said this commonsense policy was itself “discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity.”

Congress should not be ratifying Obama’s radical transgender agenda and imposing these outcomes on private employers just because they contract with the government.

All Americans should be free to contract with the government without penalty because of their reasonable beliefs about contentious issues. The federal government should not use government contracting to reshape civil society about controversial issues that have nothing to do with the federal contract at stake.

Obama’s executive order and the Maloney amendment treat conscientious judgments about behavior as if they were invidious acts of discrimination akin to racism or sexism.

But sexual orientation and gender identity are not like race. Indeed , sexual orientation and gender identity are unclear, ambiguous terms. They can refer to voluntary behaviors as well as thoughts and inclinations, and it is reasonable for employers to make distinctions based on actions.

By contrast, “race” and “sex” clearly refer to traits, and in the overwhelming majority of cases, these traits (unlike voluntary behaviors) do not affect fitness for any job.

Congress tried to minimize the damage of the Maloney amendment with two provisions last night. One provision, introduced by Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., amended the Maloney amendment to say that it couldn’t violate the U.S. Constitution. Another provision, the Byrne Amendment, attempted to attach existing religious liberty protections to the bill. Neither adequately protects against the damage of Maloney.

Liberal activist judges will do all they can to ensure that sexual orientation and gender identity policies will trump religious liberty protections.

This is why Congress should not be elevating sexual orientation and gender identity as a protected class garnering special legal privileges.

Here is a list of the 43 Republicans who voted for the amendment:

Justin Amash, Mich.
Susan Brooks, Ind.
Mike Coffman, Colo.
Ryan Costello, Pa.
Carlos Curbelo, Fla.
Rodney Davis, Ill.
Jeff Denham, Calif.
Charlie Dent, Pa.
Mario Diaz-Balart, Fla.
Bob Dold, Ill.
Daniel Donovan, N.Y.
Tom Emmer, Minn.
Michael Fitzpatrick, Pa.
Rodney Frelinghuysen, N.J.
Chris Gibson, N.Y.
Joe Heck, Nev.
Will Hurd, Texas
Darrell Issa, Calif.
David Jolly, Fla.
John Katko, N.Y.
Adam Kinzinger, Ill.
Leonard Lance, N.J.
Frank LoBiondo, N.J.
Tom MacArthur, N.J.
Martha McSally, Ariz.
Pat Meehan, Pa.
Luke Messer, Ind.
Erik Paulsen, Minn.
Bruce Poliquin, Maine
Tom Reed, N.Y.
David Reichert, Wash.
Jim Renacci, Ohio
Tom Rooney, Fla.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Fla.
John Shimkus, Ill.
Elise Stefanik, N.Y.
Fred Upton, Mich.
David Valadao, Calif.
Greg Walden, Ore.
Mimi Walters, Calif.
David Young, Iowa
Todd Young, Ind.
Lee Zeldin, N.Y.


I’ve already contacted my Congressman, Jim Renacci, and told him I would not be voting for his worthless ass anymore.

The hideous nature of making ‘gender identity’ a protected class violates every principle this country was founded on.  It’s part and parcel of their cultural fascism. The DemProgs  politicize and legislate depravity in order to shove it down our throats.   A prime example: the libtards at the Charlotte Observer think little girls should ‘overcome discomfort at the sight of male genitalia in restrooms.’

Guess young girls should also get over the discomfort of being attacked, sexually assaulted, harassed, confronted by peeping Toms, predators, pedophiles, and assorted other perverts.

Here’s an idea:  Let the assholes who voted for that garbage expose their own children to the deranged shitbags who want to use a public restroom that coincides with their  ‘gender identity’, and see how that works out.

They want every sexual dysfunction sanctioned by the rest of the culture.

Count me out.



Related articles:




One response to this post.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: