O, Sweet Saint Of San Andreas

19 Replies to “O, Sweet Saint Of San Andreas”

1. Why is the bill only applicable to stores with more than 500 employees? What does the number of employees have to do with their efforts to gender confuse everyone?

   I mean I completely disagree with the entire bill, but if you are going to ban something, why not everywhere? Am I missing something?

   1. Maybe it’s because the larger employers have more money to waste of doing all these BS changes. How thoughtful. This is typical of the far left socialist loonies who want to regulate everything for the greater good of people-kind.

   2. Simple anti-corporate agendas.

   3. Money. When they fine the big companies they can take it.

   4. To reduce the number of “clients” to regulate and to collect larger non-compliance penalties.

2. Silicon Valley, hell, the whole state deserves an EMP. They obviously need to focus on important and positive concepts rather than continually enacting various forms of coercive nihilism.

   1. ah John.
      ya gotta spell it out to the leftoids concentrating on their tablets and apps.
      an EMP would do wonders for the state however.
      is their whole legislature on acid or sumptin????
      aint technology wunnerful !!!

3. We need another wall, with a moat, full of sharks with frikkin’ laser beams.

   After Bernie and his ilk take over we will all be wearing burlap sacks anyway – so it won’t make any difference.

   1. Don’t you mean we’ll be wearing Mao Suits, complete with the stylin cap.

      https://forgottenfilmcast.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/volunteers-4.png?w=700

4. Just wait until they take steps to balance their books. No, seriously. I am serious here.

5. I have a very easy solution…build a 35 foot wall around California… then fill it with water…problem solved…Steve O

   1. The rest of the US should just kick California out of the Union, like a reverse WEXIT.

      Then wall and landmine fields.

6. For the sake of gender equity, it would be fair that clothing and shoe stores carry the same number on women’s and men’s items. If the stores can’t find enough men’s items they would be required to reduce the number of women’s item. For the same principles of socioeconomic equity there should be no luxury items. No Louis Vuitton, no bummers, only plain stuff. Everything should be same price. Equity and fairness you know. /sarc

7. But people are still free to boycott them, no?
   Or will the next law say that you have to spend your money where government tells you?

8. I truly believe we shall see the BIG ONE. That TRULY massive Earthquake that takes Baja, the Entire Left Coast of Californica, Oregon, Washington, VYR Island and possibly some of the lower MAOLand too…all the way the to Queen Charlottes.

   It is overdue is it not…??
   Tidewater – Beachfront for Albertans

   There has to be an END to all this INSANITY of SJW GENDER Conversion LeftWing FemiNazi Climate appeasing Bullshit….right.??
   please tell me it’s true..??
   I so wanna BELIEVE..!!

   1. is there a gofundme to make this happen??

9. Women who shop in my clothing size and style … aren’t very attractive. No, those may be “athletic” men sizes and cuts … but that doesn’t translate into a female “athletes” body. Well … maybe some softball catchers :()

10. Why stop at clothes, lets mix up everything in the store.

    In Walmart: “Excuse me, where can I find BBQ sauce?” – Colleague:” In aisle 7 next to the soap powder, just to the right of eggs and fishing tackle” (or more likely “I don’t know”).

11. Only for kids clothes?

    So Victoria’s Secret won’t be sued for not having room in the teddies for the testicles? In. Every. Single. Set.