The article is somewhat about McBride in that Lauren Boebert made a scene suggesting that “a man” (McBride) was in the public women’s restroom. Then later retracted her statement saying it was a case of mistaken identity.
But the problem with the whole story is that A) McBride has indicated she would comply with House rules and not use a public, women’s restroom and B) McBride has no reason to use those public restrooms because C) most Members use private, single occupancy restrooms and D) members with personal restrooms in their private offices have offered to let McBride use them.
To tie all this together, Boebert created a farcical situation to get attention. It’s classic rage bait. She can win points with bigots because she’s defending the sanctity of women’s restrooms. Plus progressives get mad at her for being bigoted, which makes bigots happy with her.
The only response to this garbage is to not engage
Sure, I get it.
The article is somewhat about McBride in that Lauren Boebert made a scene suggesting that “a man” (McBride) was in the public women’s restroom. Then later retracted her statement saying it was a case of mistaken identity.
But the problem with the whole story is that A) McBride has indicated she would comply with House rules and not use a public, women’s restroom and B) McBride has no reason to use those public restrooms because C) most Members use private, single occupancy restrooms and D) members with personal restrooms in their private offices have offered to let McBride use them.
To tie all this together, Boebert created a farcical situation to get attention. It’s classic rage bait. She can win points with bigots because she’s defending the sanctity of women’s restrooms. Plus progressives get mad at her for being bigoted, which makes bigots happy with her.
The only response to this garbage is to not engage
Thanks, well put and apologies.