Posted on 03/23/2021 10:49:32 AM PDT by ScubaDiver
Every statewide partisan officeholder in South Dakota is a Republican. The GOP controls the state House 62-8 and the Senate 32-3 — the largest majorities ever. Yet they can't seem to ban castration of minors or prevent men in female sports as part of the loony transgender agenda. What gives? They are plagued by the same business lobby preventing every other GOP supermajority state from protecting its historic cultural conservatism.
the headline only crowd.
“But for those who see only black and white and can’t see the details Gov. Noem highlighted, yeah.”
The thing was that the bill BARELY made it to her - a bill that conservative governors everywhere dream of having land on their desks. All she had to do was sign it and she would have been in the TOP TIER for 2024, REGARDLESS of how the courts, Amazon, the Chamber of Commerce, and the Final Four reacted. Maybe her war chest would have suffered for signing it, but with the entire base siding with her, she wouldn’t have needed the money.
That’s why I’m thinking that she just doesn’t want to run in 2024...perhaps run later, but not in 2024.
It’s the opposite. She wants to run in 2024, thinks her gender/looks will garner the benefit of the doubt from voters and does not want to be a target of left this early. Much easier to punt and not have a big fight while waiting for other events to overtake this issue. It’s RINO Chamber of Commerce 101. They all do it.
Your absolutist polemic against Noem differs substantially from the opinions of those who listened to her reasonable explanation on Tucker’s show, posted above.
Interesting theory...keep the spotlight off of herself for as long as possible, and then hope we all forget this flub.
You’re not discussing the issue of the NCAA impact on her state.
She did but you’re not. That’s ok but she asked for a revision.
Your absolutist polemic against Noem differs substantially from the opinions of those who listened to her reasonable explanation on Tucker’s show, posted above.
The ACLU, woke Amazon and the LGBYTQ crowd agree. Ask yourself why you are standing with them on this issue.
“You’re not discussing the issue of the NCAA impact on her state. She did but you’re not. That’s ok but she asked for a revision.”
Not much to discuss, the simple question is whether the NCAA should be SETTING POLICY in SD, or the voters (who strongly supported this measure). She chose the NCAA. Her base will remember this decision.
I listened to her last night. I believe she was actually talking.....
She has been consulting with lawyers and professors 🙄
The NCAA seems to terrify her....instead of telling them to bring it on! She whimpered 😖
Not sure who got to her, but she definitely is cowering in fear of whatever the threat was. Pity
This episode confirms Noem is a Nikki Haley type standard issue RINO. Disappointing after her 2020 campaign season rise. Clearly, she won’t be Trump’s VP if he runs in 2024.
“The ACLU, woke Amazon and the LGBYTQ crowd agree. Ask yourself why you are standing with them on this issue.”
Thanks, didn’t know she was also answering to the ACLU. Not sure how that will sell to the base either.
They were to some extent, talking past each other. She finally explained what she was talking about with the legal challenges at the end of the interview. It sounded not so much like she was blowing smoke, as much as she needed a longer time, and still had to address shifting points.
Disagree. Her “reasonable explanation” is that she’s afraid of retaliation from the NCAA and Amazon.com, so she’s caving. Yes, I know, “sending it back for revisions that will pass legal scrutiny.” Got it. If you believe that’s actually going to happen and she’s going to sign a revised bill in the near future, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Don’t kid yourself. This is kick the can down the road and hope it doesn’t roll back.
“Not much to discuss, the simple question is whether the NCAA should be SETTING POLICY in SD, or the voters (who strongly supported this measure). She chose the NCAA. Her base will remember this decision.”
Odd way of inverting the problem. She’s trying to protect her state from discrimination by the NCAA.
The revisions she’s doing will handle it.
“If you believe that’s actually going to happen and she’s going to sign a revised bill in the near future, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.”
Oh, she certainly WILL sign a revised bill - it’s just that her Special Interest masters will only allow it if has no teeth, as they prefer to not have to fight it in the courts.
Right, you heard her respond to Tucker’s calling her names, but you do not appear to have read her actual letter to the legislature. Pick your battles. The Enemy is trying to stampede her into bad legislation.
From her letter:
For example, Section 2 of House Bill 1217 requires a student athlete to verify, each year, that the student “is not taking and has not taken, during the preceding twelve months, any performance enhancing drugs, including anabolic steroids.”
Presumably, this requirement was included to address a student taking these drugs as a part of a gender transition, but House Bill 1217 is not limited in this way. Rather, if a male student athlete failed to make the football team, and later learned that another student on the team was taking steroids without disclosing it, the student who didn’t make the team would be entitled to sue both the school and the steroid-using student for damages.
In addition, Section 2 creates an unworkable administrative burden on schools, who under its terms must collect verification forms from every student athlete, every year, as to age, biological sex, and use of performance-enhancing drugs; and furthermore must monitor these disclosures throughout the year so that if “reasonable cause” is found of a false or misleading form, the school can take action to avoid civil liability.
You can read her whole letter here.
“She’s trying to protect her state from discrimination by the NCAA.”
LOL! That’s a good one! What if the NCAA DEMANDS that she double the sales tax, or threaten to leave? How about a live-birth protection bill they don’t like? Maybe they object to the lack of solar panels in her state?
Where does it end, giving into blackmail?
History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes.
Zactly
People are not hearing why it was a failure and doomed for a veto
I’m with Kristy 2024
“Presumably, this requirement was included to address a student taking these drugs as a part of a gender transition, but House Bill 1217 is not limited in this way. Rather, if a male student athlete failed to make the football team, and later learned that another student on the team was taking steroids without disclosing it, the student who didn’t make the team would be entitled to sue both the school and the steroid-using student for damages.”
“In addition, Section 2 creates an unworkable administrative burden on schools, who under its terms must collect verification forms from every student athlete, every year, as to age, biological sex, and use of performance-enhancing drugs; and furthermore must monitor these disclosures throughout the year so that if “reasonable cause” is found of a false or misleading form, the school can take action to avoid civil liability.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.