Checkmate, trannies!

Views: 180

Behold the peer-reviewed anti-trans logic of a right wing “journal,” the Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine:

The fact that hermaphrodites have few, if any, problems with transsexualism, when one might expect them to have problems if any group of people would, proves that there is no physiological cause. As a group they prove that once a sex gender role have been assigned, children adjust well and experience few problems. Thus, sexual gender roles are largely learned.

Intersex people don’t hate trans people, ergo all trans experiences are absolutely, in no sense whatsoever, in any way, conditioned by physiological primers.

My god. The logic is unassailable! My life is a lie!

[T]he agreement that I find in this book underscores the validity of biblical ethics, even beyond the explicit statements of Scripture

– Franklin E. Payne, Jr., M.D, one of the peers who “reviewed” the “journal.”

San Antonio: not as mature as their children

Views: 1453
San Antonio adults standing up for their right to discriminate.

For the past month, the adults of San Antonio have been wringing their collective hands in very public displays of “concern” over a city ordinance that would extend equality to *gasp* trans citizens. While the notion of trans/cis equality has set the adult’s tongues awaggin, their children already extend this equality to trans children.

San Antonio ISD has, for some time now, had a trans-inclusive policy in place and you know what’s happened? Nothing. Not a damn thing… other than trans and cis children living side-by-side (and yes, even using the hygiene facilities) as equal citizens. Apparently being as mature as their children is asking way too much from some San Antonio adults. In response to the bigoted hyperbole pushed by the radical right, policymakers have recently added a provision to the proposed “equality” ordinance that will preserve the right of cisgender people to have transgender people jailed for using a restroom.

[soundcloud url=”″ params=”” width=” 100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /] [box]

I feel for the council member’s (CM) aid as she tries to defend the CM’s “compromise” on San Antonio’s LGB(t) equality bill. Acting as a secret shopper, I pose as a well informed Texas-style bigot trying to make sure that the CM doesn’t violate my “right” as a cisgender person to have transgender people arrested for emptying their bladders.

The purpose in my role as a secrete shopper was to reveal the bigotry and cisprivilege inherent in the CM’s “compromise.”


I guess this is what passes for “equality” for some San Antonio adults. While San Antonio kids have no issues with trans/cis equality, the adults are ready to take to the streets if it means an end to trans/cis segregation. I know it’s strange to think that you don’t get to lock your trans neighbors in a cage when they pee, but the folks at GetEquel want you to support the idea that adults need to be at least as mature and rational as their children. I know… The concept is totally wackadoodle, but there you go.

“If you look up the Texas vs Littleton case that might give you the information that you’re looking for… To, um, have gender specific bathrooms that are permanent” – Council member’s aid

The same San Antonio councilwoman who was secretly taped plotting against gay people, was – as it turns out – thinking about how best to use trans people and equivocation to fear monger:

Jeff: You get the most political points by standing up for traditional values with this one. It’s not an economic argument. This isn’t a small government argument. This is a social, cultural argument right here and this is how you… And you’re going to score the biggest points by taking that stand.

James: I agree with that but to play devil’s advocate, you could try to swing the conservative gay vote, who are, they’re conservative in their beliefs but…

CW Chan: No, I don’t think that’s…

James: It would be way fewer points though.

Roger: But if she’s, if you’re in a Republican primary against anyone that you could conceivably be against, they’re also going to be opposed to gay marriage. So that means that anyone who is gay, that’s their only issue.

CW Chan: You know, I voted no when that was put on the Constitution about a marriage should be between a man and woman.

Roger: Yeah.

CW Chan: Okay? And I’m telling you, that’s how… That’s okay if you want… This is my philosophy, guys. Whatever you want to do in your bedroom, that’s none of my business, but do not impose your view on other people, especially become a policy. And I’m, that’s all. Because personally, I think it’s just disgusting just to even think about. All the… definitions…

Jeff: But, but if you are, but if we are going to write something, I suggest it, to score the most points, it be, you know, a pro… It doesn’t have to be anti-gay, but pro-traditional values.

CW Chan: okay, I’m for that, but I don’t want to go against, necessarily… I don’t want to beat up anybody.

Jeff: No, you’re not going to beat up… That’s what I’m saying. It’s not anti-gay, it’s profamily.

Roger: And then the other thing I think you should do..

CW Chan: Maybe what we can do, can we maybe throw some questionable confusions like okay, this transgender… Because this definition is so broad, we don’t want to go into detail, but if you, I look up, I had a… Maybe I say I was not educated on what transgender is about. I look up the, the Wikipedia, whatever, and I’m very surprised how broad the definition can be and it can cause a lot of troubles. What is the, would that, in other words start to have a lot of questions. Would we be discriminating someone if a person go to uhh, uhh, go to a female bathroom?

Roger: Yup.

CW Chan: Because the person that I am…

Jeff: I feel like I’m a woman.

CW Chan: … I feel myself that I’m a woman…

James: That gets down to, umm, what’s on the driver’s license. In some states, you can get, if you have…

Jeff: In the state of Texas, identifies you with what you were born as.

James: By chromosome, right?

Jeff: It’s about what you were born as. By the equipment you have at birth…

CW Chan: Exactly!

And it seems that her plan is going off without a hitch.

San Antonio isn’t the only Texas town with cis/trans equality policies that kids have no problems with. Here in Houston, our trans youth have full access to everything that their cisgender counterparts have access to. Yes, that means restrooms, sports, and changing facilities… And you know what? It’s been that way for years and if you haven’t noticed yet, the doom and gloom the radical right is forever forecasting hasn’t materialized.

No chicken little, the sky isn’t going to fall.

Texas Attorney General wrote to San Antonio mayor urging him to crush equality or risk everyone’s right to religion.

Apparently San Antonio children are far more capable of dealing with trans people than their parents and by gowd, many adults seem to like it that way.

California Trans Bill Freak Out

Views: 2158

Supposedly, as the RadRight narrative goes, the California bill protecting trans kids in school is anarchy and madness. Unsurprisingly, TERFs and H-BSers jumped on that narrative:


You know what?


Here in TEXAS – yes, conservative TEXAS – we’ve had these California-style policies in effect for YEARS. And you know what’s happened? Nothing… Except trans kids got to go to school without having to face institutionalized bigotry.

Yup, from kindergarten to high school, here in Texas towns like Houston, trans kids have been able to transition and be protected on the basis of gender identity for years. Worse (for the nutty narrative on offer by fringe groups), Houston isn’t the only Texas town with these protections on the books. Other Texas towns with these California-style policies are Dallas, Fort Worth, El Paso and San Antonio. Worse still, most Texas universities have similar California-style policies.

Here I am helping to get these policies passed here in Houston, Texas:

While these fringe groups have collectively gotten the vapors over this California law, a lot of Texas towns went further. We’ve even extended gender identity protections to the SCHOOL EMPLOYEES too!

Nutty groups like TERFs, H-BSers and fringe radical right groups have asserted all kinds of hyperbole in the hope that it will scare you into helping them harm trans kids. There’s a reason you’ve never heard any of them clue you in on the fact that these policies have been in effect for years throughout conservative areas of the nation.

Let’s be honest, how likely is it that all of these extremist groups are clueless that California-style policies were already enacted all over the country – for years – before taking to various media outlets to encourage you to help them harm trans kids? Why is it that they never talk about that? What purpose does it serve to pretend that liberal California is the first to enact these policies? What purpose does it serve to not tell you that this isn’t anything new? What purpose does it serve to not tell you that these policies haven’t been the harbingers of doom they claim them to be?

Let’s be clear:

  1. These policies are about the well-being of trans kids in a cis privileged system.
  2. These policies have been in effect for years in even conservative areas.
  3. These policies haven’t produced the hellish urban dystopian future these fringe groups are forever promising looms just over the horizon.

These groups like to pretend that gender identity means something like “how you feel” when you wake up in the morning. Here’s what the FBI says gender identity means:

“A person’s internal sense of being male, female, or a combination of both; that internal sense of a person’s gender may be different from the person’s gender as assigned at birth”

When the term was first popularized, here’s what it meant:

Gender identity is the sense of knowing to which sex one belongs, that is, the awareness ‘I am a male’ or ‘I am a female’. This term gender identity’ will be used in this paper rather than various other terms which have been employed in this regard, such as the term ‘sexual identity’. ‘Sexual identity’ is ambiguous, since it may refer to one’s sexual activities or fantasies, etc. The advantage of the phrase ‘gender identity’ lies in the fact that it clearly refers to one’s self-image as regard to belonging to a specific sex. Thus, of a patient who says: ‘I am not a very masculine man’, it is possible to say that his gender identity is male although he recognizes his lack of so-called masculinity. – International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 1964, v 45, pages 220 – 226

I dunno, but it seems to me that the meaning of gender identity has been fairly consistent over the past HALF CENTURY or so.

Opponents of trans protections often claim that we don’t have exact definitions for gender identity because… Well, who the hell knows what that even means, amiright?


The term is as well defined as other terms used in policy – like, say sex. I could make equally preposterous arguments against any policy containing the term sex because, well… what exactly is sex anyway? Are we talking about genitals and if so, exactly how do we deal with the 1 in 500 intersex births? Are we talking about a binary chromosome set: XX & YY and if so, what does sex mean when dealing with the many other types of chromosomal configurations like XO, XXY, etc? Are we talking about whatever is put on your birth certificate and if so, what does that mean when 1000s of them are changed/corrected year year in America? Are we talking about socialization and if so, why would anyone oppose a trans kid in transitioning at an early age? Are we talking about secondary sex characteristics and if so, what does that mean when we talk about transsexual and/or AIS/PAIS people? If we are talking merely about the way a body functions to facilitate sexual reproduction, what does sex mean for the 1000s of kids born each year without this ability?

Any term we use in any bill or legal argument can be picked apart in this way. These arguments are called equivocation. Who remembers Clinton asking exactly what is is?

Fringe groups like to tout this rhetorical tactic around as if they have something really insightful to say.

What about those dreadful appeals to emotion? You know, those arguments that sound a lot like the following ridiculous appeal to have non-transgender women banned from schools and female hygiene facilities:


Look at the above image.

ALL of these are women born women and they’re dangerous. These non-transgender women are guilty of rape. They’ve even stalked their young victims and raped them at knife point. This is undeniable proof that cisgender women are a danger and for the sake of creating safe places, we need laws on the books that will keep kids safe from cisgender women. It’s not that I hate cisgender women; that’s not the issue. I support rational equality; and besides, this isn’t even an equality issue here… I’m not a bigot. From the evidence presented here, one can only rationally conclude that cisgender women can obviously be dangerous predators. The women in the image are just a small sample of the long, long list of womyn born womyn perverts.

The list goes on and on. Lives were ruined by these cisgender women perverts. This isn’t about the adults. This is about the safety of YOUR family. What would YOU do if one of your kids found themselves alone in the bathroom with a cisgender woman?!?

If you can stand it, read a sample of how disgusting a cisgender women can be:


I’m not saying that all cisgender women are perverts, but I just don’t want to risk the safety of my child around a non-transgender women. Would you risk your child? Of course not.

Did you know that non-transgender women are even organizing to expand their power in influence in society? They even hold annual gatherings to plot their next move. They’re already in the classrooms and the bathrooms picking their next victim. They’ve already used their position as cisgender women teachers to prey upon YOUR children. Again, this is a real issue that the media isn’t covering… and do you know why? It’s not politically correct to go on record as taking a stand against non-transgender women.

America has a long tradition of putting the well-being of children first. Who are you to tell my family that we have to suddenly tear down that tradition? Things have worked just fine and now our nation’s tradition of doing the right thing – the rational thing – is being discarded at the cost of safety, security and well-being.

Let’s cut through all the politically correct BS. Do you really want a cisgender teen or adult hanging out in the bathroom with YOUR child? What about your child’s school shower? Do you really want to take that chance? I know I don’t!!!

I know that you’ve heard media outlets make these very arguments against trans people. These BS appeals to emotion pimp out the actual suffering of very real and horrific violence, debasing the real hardships people have faced by using it in an effort to trick people into harming trans kids:

We’re talking about trans children and their ability to make it through school without dealing with the same institutionalized hate I faced. When you hear bigots try to sway you with equivocation and/or appeals to emotion and tradition, simply ask them:

In what way does gender equality nullify laws prohibiting rape, assault, stalking and/or public indecency/disturbance?  

It always seems to derail their rantings because you know what? It doesn’t.

Watch the Republican Propaganda Machine Turn On Itself

Views: 2207

Recently I’ve seen Republican leaders take a rhetorical sledgehammer to any Republican who dares come off as a non-ideologue extremist.

Not only is the consensus at the Republican Governors’ Convention that President Obama won not because Americans agreed with his positions on raising taxes on the rich or healthcare, but because of Obama’s ground game… Republicans think “the reason he won had nothing to do with issues.”

To throw into high relief just how crazy it’s gotten in the Republican ideology camp, check out this exchange on Fox news between conservative economist (who’s also an actor and was a Nixon speechwriter) and a Fox News anchor who calls his guest a communist for daring to go off the ideological script:


A Racist Republican?!? Say It’s Not True!

Views: 1884

You know the GOP Chair Charlie Webster who thought there was voter fraud because “dozens and dozens of black people” voted? Well, he wants you to know that he’s not a racist:

There’s nothing about me that would be discriminatory. I know black people. I play basketball every Sunday with a black guy. He’s a great friend of mine.

Seriously. He just said that.

Again proving that while not all Republicans are bigots, most bigots are Republican.

I am a PROUD Republican!

Views: 3108

Erm.. I mean, I’m a proud 1950’s era Republican… Which is to say, I’m a modern Democrat

From the 1956 Republican Platform:


[We] establish and maintain a peaceful world and build at home a dynamic prosperity in which every citizen fairly shares. We shall ever build anew, that our children and their children, without distinction because of race, creed or color, may know the blessings of our free land… We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people… We shall continue vigorously to support the United Nations. We hold that the Bill of Rights is the sacred foundation of personal liberty. That men are created equal needs no affirmation, but they must have equality of opportunity and protection of their civil rights under the law.

Continued balancing of the budget, to assure the financial strength of the country which is so vital to the struggle of the free world… and to maintain the purchasing power of a sound dollar, and the value of savings, pensions and insurance.

  • Gradual reduction of the national debt.
  • Then, insofar as consistent with a balanced budget, we pledge to work toward these additional objectives:
    • Further reductions in taxes with particular consideration for low and middle income families.
    • Initiation of a sound policy of tax reductions which will encourage small independent businesses to modernize and progress.
    • Continual study of additional ways to correct inequities in the effect of various taxes.

Small business now is receiving approximately one-third, dollar-wise, of all Defense contracts. We recommend a further review of procurement procedures for all defense departments and agencies with a view to facilitating and extending such participation for the further benefit of Small Business.

We also propose:

  • Additional technical research in problems of development and distribution for the benefit of small business;
  • Legislation to enable closer Federal scrutiny of mergers which have a significant or potential monopolistic connotations;
  • Procedural changes in the antitrust laws to facilitate their enforcement;
  • Simplification of wage reporting by employers for purposes of social security records and income tax withholding;
  • Continuance of the vigorous SEC policies which are providing maximum protection to the investor and maximum opportunity for the financing of small business without costly red tape.

“Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America.”

The Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen’s compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees.

All workers have gained and unions have grown in strength and responsibility, and have increased their membership by 2 millions… Furthermore, the process of free collective bargaining has been strengthened by the insistence of this Administration that labor and management settle their differences at the bargaining table without the intervention of the Government. This policy has brought to our country an unprecedented period of labor-management peace and understanding.

We applaud the effective, unhindered, collective bargaining which brought an early end to the 1956 steel strike, in contrast to the six months’ upheaval, Presidential seizure of the steel industry and ultimate Supreme Court intervention under the last Democrat Administration.

[We] will continue to fight for dynamic and progressive programs which, among other things, will:

  • Stimulate improved job safety of our workers, through assistance to the States, employees and employers;
  • Continue and further perfect its programs of assistance to the millions of workers with special employment problems, such as older workers, handicapped workers, members of minority groups, and migratory workers;
  • Strengthen and improve the Federal-State Employment Service and improve the effectiveness of the unemployment insurance system;
  • Protect by law, the assets of employee welfare and benefit plans so that workers who are the beneficiaries can be assured of their rightful benefits;
  • Assure equal pay for equal work regardless of Sex;
  • Clarify and strengthen the eight-hour laws for the benefit of workers who are subject to federal wage standards on Federal and Federally-assisted construction, and maintain and continue the vigorous administration of the Federal prevailing minimum wage law for public supply contracts;
  • Extend the protection of the Federal minimum wage laws to as many more workers as is possible and practicable;
  • Continue to fight for the elimination of discrimination in employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry or sex;
  • Provide assistance to improve the economic conditions of areas faced with persistent and substantial unemployment;
  • To protect more effectively the rights of labor unions, management, the individual worker, and the public. The protection of the right of workers to organize into unions and to bargain collectively is the firm and permanent policy of the Eisenhower Administration.

The Republican Party believes that the physical, mental, and spiritual well-being of the people is as important as their economic health. It will continue to support this conviction with vigorous action.

The Republican Party will renew its efforts to enact a program based on sound principles of need and designed to encourage increased state and local efforts to build more classrooms.

We have fully resolved to continue our steady gains in man’s unending struggle against disease and disability.

Republican leadership has enlarged Federal assistance for construction of hospitals, emphasizing low-cost care of chronic diseases and the special problems of older persons, and increased Federal aid for medical care of the needy.

We have asked the largest increase in research funds ever sought in one year to intensify attacks on cancer, mental illness, heart disease and other dread diseases.

We demand once again, despite the reluctance of the Democrat 84th Congress, Federal assistance to help build facilities to train more physicians and scientists.

We have encouraged a notable expansion and improvement of voluntary health insurance, and urge that reinsurance and pooling arrangements be authorized to speed this progress.

We have strengthened the Food and Drug Administration, and we have increased the vocational rehabilitation program to enable a larger number of the disabled to return to satisfying activity.

We have supported measures that have made more housing available than ever before in history, reduced urban slums in local-federal partnership, stimulated record home ownership, and authorized additional low-rent public housing.

We initiated the first flood insurance program in history under Government sponsorship in cooperation with private enterprise.

We shall continue to seek extension and perfection of a sound social security system.

We pledge close cooperation with State, local and private agencies to reduce the ghastly toll of fatalities on the Nation’s highways.



A 1950s Republican

The Ike-era Republican party is the party of Obama! If this is what the Republican party looked like today, I’d be a proud Republican… but it’s not. Today’s Republican party is the party of Newt, Rush and Santorum.

Read what the Republican party used to be here.

Forced child labor = Modern Main-street Republicanism

Separatists and Fundamentalists

Views: 7745

As some of you know some Separatists recently colluded in a bid to have the United Nations remove trans protections based upon gender identity and expression. Dana Lane Taylor, Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford happily sent the following letter to the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women:


This letter linked back (note the “xxii” citation) to Taylor’s site wherein she asserts that a number of sick fucks who like to hurt women would be somehow protected/encouraged by trans protections based upon gender identity and/or expression: “When discussing laws that protect gender identity and expression, for public accommodations, it is crucial to use specific language.” She then goes on to warn the reader about the evils of “broad definitions of gender identity and/or expression.” As part of her warning, she lists a number of incidents wherein men (whose unrelated behavior could somehow/some way be tied to back to breaking some sort of gender stereotype) hurt women. For example,  Taylor cites the arrest of a peeping tom who was wearing panties on his head. How is this type of behavior allowed, encourage and/or protected by trans anti-discrimination protections based upon gender identity and/or expression? Conveniently for their argument, Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford never actually gets around to offering an evidence-based explanation.

Were any of these incidents – in any way – protected by trans non-discrimination policy? Nope; but Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford were obviously hoping the UN wouldn’t notice that fact. Did any of the sick fucks get away with abusing someone due to trans protections? Nope; but again, Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford were obviously hoping the UN wouldn’t notice that fact either. Did Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford offer ANY actual evidence to support their premise that trans protections = men abusing women and circumventing existing laws protecting people against abuse and exploitation? Nope; but, Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford were obviously hoping the UN wouldn’t notice that fact either.


Which brings me to the point of this post…


Is their any substantive difference between what Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford did (and continue to do) and what the The Liberty Council (a right-wing fundamentalist Christian organization) has recently been doing?

“This was a man, everyone recognized it’s a man, going into the women’s restroom. Now whether that person has good or ill intentions towards women, no one knows, but the fact of the matter is when you defy common sense and when it says ‘women’s fitting room’ and you allow people other than women in that fitting room, you’re just asking for trouble. This is just an absurd policy, this is the so-called LGBT sexual anarchist agenda gone awry, I mean this is the absurdity to which this agenda goes when you ultimately follow it to its logical conclusion… [women] may be watched by a peeping tom or even worse, sexually assaulted or raped.”

– Liberty Council’s Mat Staver on Crosstalk, discussing the firing of a Macy’s employee who refused to follow company policy on transgender customers.

Would Macy’s trans protections allow someone to circumvent laws protecting people from abuse and exploitation? Nope; but Mat Staver is hoping you wouldn’t notice that. Did the trans woman suffering possible androgen damage physically harm anyone? Nope; Staver is hoping you wouldn’t notice that. Was she caught trying to harm anyone? Nope; Staver is hoping you wouldn’t notice that.  Did Mat Staver offer ANY actual evidence to support his premise that trans protections = men abusing women and circumventing existing laws protecting people against abuse and exploitation? Just like Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford, the answer is, of course, a resounding NO!

Am I the only one who sees the similarity here?

But wait, there’s more! Building on Separatist/Fundamentalist mythos, the Liberty Council’s Faith & Freedom radio program now claims to know of someone (they couldn’t remember his name) who has some sort of job at Macy’s (they couldn’t remember exactly what he did) who absolutely, positively knows of a bunch of women (they didn’t say how many or where all of these incidents occurred) who were assaulted (or maybe it was raped) at Macy’s BECAUSE OF Macy’s trans protections:

Yes, and because – and only because – this unnamed man showed someone at Macy’s what amounts to Taylor’s website, he was fired.

Again… all I have to say to Dana Taylor, Cathy Brennan, Elizabeth Hungerford, Mat Staver, the Liberty Council or the Faith & Freedom show is:

How is the propaganda Taylor, Brennan and Hungerford spread substantively different than any of the following fundamentalist right-wingers when it comes to trans protections based upon gender identity and expression?

(BTW – Google News has nothing on any incident(s) of mass rape/assault at Macy’s.)

Schadenfreude Anyone?

Views: 2415

Who remembers Ed Burwell, attorney at law? Here’s a refresher: Nikki Araguz married  Captain Thomas Araguz, a fire fighter, lived in Wharton, TX, with Thomas’ two sons from a prior marriage. On July 3, 2010, Captain Araguz answered the call to fight a fire at an egg plant in Boling, Texas and went missing for several hours and was found to have perished in the fire. The morning after Thomas’ burial, Nikki learned that two separate lawsuits had been filed by his family in an attempt to take away her benefits as a firefighter’s spouse, though Thomas had specifically named her as beneficiary in one instance by having the marriage declared a her marriage to Thomas a “same-sex marriage” thus void under Texas law.

[box type=”info”] Nikki Araguz Justice Fail[/box]

The ex-wife hired two ethically challenged lawyers, Frank Mann and Edward Burwell. Burwell made it a point to sensationalize the case against Nikki early on and practically never passed up a chance to refer Nikki’s marriage as being a same-sex. Burwell and Mann worked day and night to ensure that Nikki would be declared a man and have her marriage voided. Burwell and Mann did a superb job of playing every transphobic, anti-HIV muck-raking angle in the media.

Burwell and Mann quickly buried the actual legal issue under stories about how evil Nikki was. Then it was all about Nikki eating kittens for breakfast instead of dealing with the fact that Nikki had Texas Legislative law on her side and US 14 amendment Constitutional law on her side because her original certificate of live birth from California asserts that she was born female. Burwell and Mann did a fine job of making it impossible for a small-town Republican judge up for re-election to side with Nikki. Nikki lost her case, she was declared a man, her marriage was declared a same-sex-marriage and was voided and the case is now appealing the verdict to the 13th Circuit Court of Appeals (a Democratic court).


So, here’s where the schadenfreude comes in…


Ed Burwell (who had a number of ethics violations on his record as an attorney to begin with) just received more probation for another ethic violation. On top of this violation, he has yet another case pending against him in Harris County which may very will cause him to lose his license. This will make 3 fairly major ethics violations plus a public rebuke for passing hot checks.


So, just to be sure, I called the State Bar. Here’s the conversation: