The former Massachusetts governor was expected to win because polls throughout the week placed him well ahead of his competitors. In 2008, Romney won the caucus by taking 51 percent of the vote.

The win gives Romney extra momentum from his win in Florida last week after he lost the previous contest in South Carolina to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Jimmy LaSalvia, executive director of the gay conservative group GOProud, said Romney’s win in the Silver State shows the candidate has viability across the country.

“Gov. Romney has now won in the North, South, and West,” LaSalvia said. “Tonight is yet another indicator that he will be the Republican nominee.”

LaSalvia, who’s endorsed Romney, said the continuing wins for Romney demonstrate Gingrich — who’s had one win and four losses — should drop out of the race now.

“It’s clearly the end of the road for Gingrich,” LaSalvia said. “If he can’t win the home state of his biggest supporter, where can he win?”

Las Vegas casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson gave $10 million to Newt’s Super PAC, which has aired ads against Romney criticizing the candidate for his practices while running Bain Capital.

Nevada awards its delegates proportionately based on the vote percentages won by each candidate. The 28 delegates allotted to the state will be distributed among the different contenders, but Romney will receive the lion’s share for winning the caucuses.

One Democratic LGBT advocate based in Nevada pounced on Romney for his policy positions despite the candidate’s win.

Laura Martin, spokesperson for the Stonewall Democratic Club of Southern Nevada, said Romney may have won over Republicans in the state, but his positions that aren’t in line with Nevada’s population as a whole.

“Mitt Romney’s anti-job, anti-housing, anti-immigrant agenda coupled with his inability to connect with real people spells trouble for him in November,” Martin said. “And by clinging to the GOP’s failed economic principles of the past — the same anti-government anti-tax principles that have caused Nevada to have the highest foreclosure and unemployment rates in the country — Mitt Romney and the Republican Party has made themselves a risky bet very few Nevadans are willing to take.”

The next contests in Republican primary will take place on Tuesday in three states: Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri. The caucus in Maine started on Saturday and will continue until Feb. 11.

The two bills codify prohibitions against discrimination in public accommodations and housing respectively.

SB331 protects against discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of gender identity or expression, and SB368 adds sexual orientation and gender identity or expression to Nevada’s housing anti-discrimination law.

The bills were approved in the Nevada Assembly on May 23, and in the Senate on April 25.

A third bill passed in the Nevada legislature was signed by Sandoval last week -- AB211 expanded the state’s workplace discrimination laws to cover gender identity or expression. A fourth bill that would have added transgender people to hate crime protections died in the Senate in April.

“We thank Governor Sandoval, once again, for standing up for all Nevadans,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “No one should have to live in fear of being discriminated against in housing or public accommodations simple because of who they are. With the signing of this legislation, Nevada takes another significant step towards full equality for Nevadans and visitors to the Silver State.”

Nevada becomes the 14th U.S. state, along with the District of Columbia, to provide protections based on gender identity or expression.

A ceremonial signing of the bills is scheduled for Friday.

Brian Sandoval

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval on Tuesday signed into law a bill that prohibits workplace discrimination against transgender people.

The bill, AB211, adds gender expression and identity to state employment law, which already prohibits employers from singling out job candidates based on race, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes, and is one of three bills approved in the state legislature this session that expand protections for transgender people.

The bill -- approved in the state Assembly on May 17, and in the state Senate on April 18 -- enables the Nevada Equal Rights Commission to investigate acts of employment discrimination against transgendered people.

Nevada becomes the 14th U.S. state, along with the District of Columbia, to provide protections based on gender identity or expression.

Two additional transgender protections bills were approved in the Nevada Assembly on Monday. Both incorporate gender identity and expression into the state's non-discrimination law, one specific to housing, and the other to public accommodations.

Sandoval (R) is expected to sign both bills in the coming days.

The bill was approved in the state Senate on April 18, and now goes to Gov. Brian Sandoval for consideration.

If signed into law, Nevada would become the 14th U.S. state, along with the District of Columbia, to provide protections based on gender identity or expression.

State law already prohibits employers from singling out job candidates based on race, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes. But transgender people told lawmakers that they are left out of those categories and suffer higher unemployment than the general population.

Two additional transgender protections bills are still making their way through the Nevada Legislature.

On April 25, the state Senate approved SB331, which would prohibits discrimination against gays and transsexuals in places of public accommodation including hotels, motels and restaurants; and SB368, which would prohibit discrimination in housing and other real property transactions.

Both bills are awaiting action in the Assembly.

It was a startling account as rendered by HotelChatter.Com blogger Julia Buckley, complete with what is supposed to be the document given to Stephanie informing her that she could no longer come on the property without risking arrest for trespassing.

That the Cosmo seemed to acknowledge the incident by issuing successive press statements helped lend credence, as does the fact that Buckley writes for a blog owned by Conde Nast.

And yet, something was off. It's dead of night, nobody around and here's this dramatic reaction from a security staff that was on their toes to address something even though there was nobody there to complain. It all seemed so . . . disproportionate.

So I dug. And you'll never believe what I found. And after I found it, I interviewed Stephanie. Hang on tight, folks.

Buckley writes a private blog, too, called BitchinVegas.com. And on January 20, 2011, she had an item that was eerily similar. In fact, it's shocking.

Under a headline, "The Hard Rock Needs Work On Its LGBT Outreach Program," there's this account:

I have taken an extreme dislike to [The Hard Rock] since I had my friend Stephanie visiting from New York the week before last. Stephanie is trans. Last time she was in Vegas (April 2010), she went to the Hard Rock and, in the course of an evening, used the ladies’ bathroom. At 4 a.m., in an almost deserted casino.

On that occasion, upon coming out of the bathroom, she was greeted by an entire SWAT team, with bulletproof vests and dogs, asking her to leave the premises.

This visit, she was looking for a late night place to drink having been clubbing in the area, and, not being one to prejudge a place on one visit, she went back to the Hard Rock (I hadn’t had time to brief her on how the Rumor across the road is way way better). She got drinking with a group of fellow New Yorkers at the bar. And then, at 6am, she needed the bathroom. In her words:

"Finding the Unisex restroom occupied (or locked) I ventured again into the ladies restroom. At this time I was literally one of possibly 10 patrons in the entire Hard Rock establishment spending money at 6am.

Much to my surprise, waiting patiently outside the ladies restroom on my exit was a gentleman who wanted to view my ID to determine my gender. Upon determining the obvious, which he had already apparently determined by security camera, he read me the riot act for using the ladies restroom.

This was unbelievably humiliating for me. Like, don’t they have ANYTHING better to do. The only way I could possibly be more discrete is to be wearing a cloak of invisibility.

In my entire transition I have rarely been driven to tears such that I shed in the taxi that night."

Wow, right? The same person had not one but two nearly identical experiences at the same place, the first time involving DOGS and BULLETPROOF VESTS, before the Cosmo moment. Just to remind you, here's what Buckley wrote about Stephanie's alleged Cosmo experience, which would be the third situation for Stephanie in one year:

She sits down at the Vesper Bar, in the lobby of the hotel, and orders drinks. Her drinks are good, the barman is pleasant, all is well. And then, at 4am, she realizes she needs the bathroom.

She goes, as is her wont, to the women’s restroom, just across from the bar. It’s empty, as you’d expect at 4am on a Monday. Not a single person in there. She powders her nose and exits the restroom, only to be met by two security guards who immediately say “Come with us” and start marching her out of the hotel. As they walk her, they demand to see her ID (to establish her legal gender). It’s in her purse, and she fumbles for it as she’s being forcibly marched through the lobby of the hotel. As she fumbles, one of the men tells her to hurry up. She is scared, and starts apologizing, saying she’s not trying to cause trouble, but it’s hard to walk and look for her ID at the same time.

They march her outside the hotel (the bathroom is near the main entrance) and she finds her ID. One of the guards checks it, establishes that her legal gender is male, and pulls out a yellow form from his pocket and starts writing in her details to the blank spaces. As he does so, he says, “Are you working?” Way to add insult to injury.

There's a lot going on here, so stay with me.

First, let's assume all of this is true. It's a stretch and I don't believe that, but hold that thought. How is it possible that Buckley didn't reference or mention the alleged Hard Rock incident in her Cosmo post on Wednesday? As a journalist, that's what we do; we put things in context, we reference back to similar incidents or a person's history. Especially on the Internet.

Ahh, the Internet. It's a tricky little thing, isn't it? Buckley pursued the Cosmo, apparently for a few days, and got this initial response:

We regret that any guest may have had an unfortunate experience at The Cosmopolitan. All guests are welcome to experience the city's newest luxury resort. Our guests' safety, comfort and enjoyment always remains our top priority. The resort contains numerous public restroom facilities that guests can use at their discretion as well as numerous private family restrooms throughout. Additionally, The Cosmopolitan is a TAG approved resort.

It seemed inadequate, but read it again from the point of view of a PR staff that doesn't think anything actually happened. Then it's cagey and cautious, but with good reason. Except it didn't do the trick because Buckley's post went viral and threatened to tar the Cosmo's reputation. So, to quiet the storm, they put this one out:

The Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas is committed to maintaining a community that recognizes and values the inherent dignity of every person, by fostering sensitivity, understanding and mutual respect of our guests and employees. We sincerely regret any misunderstanding or inappropriate actions that any member of our staff may have taken. And to ensure increased sensitivity within this area, the organization will focus on continued training and on-going awareness initiatives. In addition, we apologize to the individual guest and welcome her back to the resort anytime. Again, we would like to apologize to the LGBT community and anyone concerned and hope to demonstrate our firm dedication to fair and unbiased treatment of all.

Again, imagine if the Cosmo folks know that this is a bunch of malarkey but also know that saying so is impossible because every Vegas resort is extremely strict about not discussing specific guest situations. But we all know how Vegas handles its boo-boos, by offering free rooms and meals and stuff. This apparent apology just says "the individual guest" is welcome back. It's vague; every word is chosen with great care.

So I spoke to Stephanie by phone today. When I asked Buckley to help me do so on Wednesday, I was sympathetic and interested in hearing more. I was not yet gripped by suspicion. But then yesterday we arranged a call, which took place this morning. She recounted the Cosmo drama pretty much as Buckley rendered it. Then there was this:

Friess: Has this ever happened to you before?

STOP THE TAPE! Scroll up and see what Stephanie told Buckley in January 2011 about the alleged incidents at the Hard Rock in January 2011 and April 2010. There were SWAT TEAMS and DOGS the first time! She was read "the riot act" the second time! Casual conversations with "whatever security guard?" Huh?

"In my entire transition I have rarely been driven to tears such that I shed in the taxi that night."

But hey, no biggie!

I confronted Stephanie shortly thereafter. How is it that she's had three virtually identical situations -- drinking, dead of night, goes to tinkle, emerges to goons? It strains believability, and I told her. And she said:

No. Not really. She said she had had "friendly, casual conversations" on the prior incidents -- SWAT teams, dogs and the riot act are not what most people would consider "friendly, casual conversations."

Meanwhile, earlier in the discussion, we had this exchange:

Friess: So these instances have happened before in other places around the country or in Las Vegas or what?

And yet, later on I wanted Stephanie to explain to me why she would return to the Hard Rock after she had encountered SWAT teams (!).

STOP THE TAPE! We just went from happening seldom and primarily in Vegas to happening "dozens of times" -- everywhere. We'll get back to that in a moment.

As the interview became more contentious, this happened:

Friess: I don’t believe you, is what I’m telling you. I don’t believe these incidents happened in such an uncannily similar way that Julia nor you mentioned the earlier ones in the current account. It doesn’t add up.

AHA! Ding Ding Ding! That's a smart thing to say. Why? Because, as Stephanie and Julia both must know, the security officers at these establishments CAN'T VALIDATE THE FACTS. It's against their policy, as referenced earlier.

Stephanie could say absolutely anything she wanted about something that happened, she can wave some blurry expulsion paper and claim any sort of treatment and the resorts WOULD NEVER REPLY TO IT DIRECTLY. Well, unless there was an illicit accusation that the resort had broken the law; then maybe they'd be able to.

The Cosmo, of course, declined to discuss the matter with me beyond their statements. I've got calls out to the Hard Rock but thus far I've heard nothing back. Odds are it'll stay that way.

Stephanie also suggested that if I knew transgender people as I claimed to, I'd understand better. Except that I do. I was a finalist this year for a GLAAD Media Award for my 7,000-word cover story in the Los Angeles Weekly on the suicide of a transgender L.A. Times sports writer Christine Daniels. I know loads of trans people and totally get the whole thing.

I called up one of my best sources, Amy LaCoe. She was Daniels' best friend and is an out trans woman in L.A. preparing for her surgery this summer. I recounted the circumstances as Buckley had written them, explained that this one trans woman claimed to have been confronted three times in the dead of night when there was nobody even around to complain but also nobody to witness it.

It didn't pass LaCoe's smell test, either. I asked if she'd ever been confronted by security over restroom use or heard of such a thing happening:

I’ve known 80 or 90 trans women since I came out in the past five years, and I’ve never heard anything like this. And I wasn't passing well when I first started out. I’ve even carried on conversations in the restroom with other women. It sounds like a situation that’s a little more than a trans woman going to the bathroom. There’s a missing element here. It sounds fishy to me.

You must understand bathroom use is a huge issue for trans people. It's something that's discussed a lot. Stephanie says this has happened to her DOZENS OF TIMES and yet Amy hasn't ever heard of it happening once to any of the DOZENS of trans women she knows. Also, Stephanie initially said it was a relatively rare occurrence and primarily in Las Vegas.

By the way, here is how Stephanie described her appearance to me:

So this happens dozens of times to someone who isn't even that obviously trans? And security is alert to the point of bringing SWAT dogs to confront her at a time of day when nobody's even around to be offended or complain? Surely Stephanie needs to relieve herself during the day, too, when there's lots of people around. But, no, this only happened at the least likely time.

Now, I don't know what's really going on here. I can't figure out the angle.

Did Stephanie actually get expelled from the Cosmo? Is Stephanie even a real trans person? Is she doing something else to draw security attention to herself? Why did Buckley not evaluate the inconsistencies in these stories? Why didn't she reference the earlier situations in her post on Wednesday?

It's baffling, and I told her so:

Friess: I don’t know. That is a great question. That is the one thing that bothers me the most. I don’t get it.

Maybe this was a gambit for a freebie? A misguided attempt to raise awareness of a serious and important issue? A plea for attention? Stephanie said she declined a request by a GLAAD spokesperson to appear on TV this week and she told me this:

Finally, we agree on something.

The guest, identified as a "pre-op" transgender named Stephanie, said upon leaving the women’s room she was escorted from the resort by security guards, told she was trespassing, and that she would be arrested if she didn't leave. She said she was photographed and told she was banned from ever returning to the hotel.

Since the blog was posted, commenters have flooded the Cosmopolitan’s Facebook page with complaints on the reported incident.

In a statement Wednesday afternoon, Cosmopolitan officials said they regretted the incident and would "welcome her back to the resort anytime."

“The Cosmopolitan of Las Vegas is committed to maintaining a community that recognizes and values the inherent dignity of every person, by fostering sensitivity, understanding and mutual respect of our guests and employees," said to the statement.

"We sincerely regret any misunderstanding or inappropriate actions that any member of our staff may have taken. And to ensure increased sensitivity within this area, the organization will focus on continued training and on-going awareness initiatives.

"In addition, we apologize to the individual guest and welcome her back to the resort anytime. Again, we would like to apologize to the LGBT community and anyone concerned and hope to demonstrate our firm dedication to fair and unbiased treatment of all.”

But Stephanie says that had it been their original response, it would have seemed more sincere. She calls the hotel’s apology, nothing more than disaster control, according to the Las Vegas Weekly.

“The simple fact is that the Cosmopolitan chose not to issue any sort of meaningful reply until such time as there was a huge up swell of anti-Cosmopolitan commentary across the entire social media landscape, until there was almost universal vilification of their behavior, until they received a call from GLAAD, and until they received a call from Community Marketing to revoke their TAG Approval rating, and calls from who knows how many media organizations requesting comment," she said.

The hotel notes that it is a TAG ("Travel Alternatives Group") approved report -- to obtain that designation, the property is supposed to be LGBT friendly.

Sen. David Parks (D-Las Vegas), sponsor of all three measures, said he wasn't surprised the 10-11 vote went against the hate crimes bill, reported the Nevada Appeal.

Parks said the law already includes race, color, religion, national origin, disability and sexual orientation in the definition of hate crimes.

“Protecting our transgender citizens harms no one,” he said.

The other two measures, however, were approved: SB331 prohibits discrimination against gays and transsexuals in places of public accommodation including hotels, motels and restaurants, and SB368 prohibits discrimination in housing and other real property transactions.

Both measures now go to the Assembly for consideration.

The bill, approved Monday by a vote of 29-13, now goes to the Senate for consideration.

The Nevada Appeal reports:

Democratic lawmakers, with limited Republican support, approved the bill to add “gender identity or expression” to a list of characteristics employers may not discriminate against.

“Voting for this bill is voting against discrimination,” said Las Vegas Democratic Assemblyman Paul Aizley, who sponsored the legislation.

State law already prohibits employers from singling out job candidates based on race, religion, sexual orientation and other attributes. But transgender people told lawmakers that they are left out of those categories and suffer higher unemployment than the general population.

The state Senate is also expected to vote later this week on that bill that would add transgender people to the list of groups protected by hate crime laws.

A similar bill protecting transgender people from workplace discrimination was also passed Monday in Hawaii.

Angle

The document provides a window into Angle's social and moral views, which would place her among Congress' most conservative members at a time of ongoing culture wars over gay rights, abortion and the boundaries between religion and government.

Among her positions, outlined in answers to 36 yes-or-no questions, Angle would oppose making sexual orientation a protected minority in civil rights laws.

Read Angle's complete questionnaire here (PDF).

Angle is the Republican nominee for the United States Senate seat in Nevada held by the current Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.

She supports a federal marriage amendment to ban same-sex marriage, and believes that single-income households are the best way to raise a family.

In a June 2010 radio interview, Angle who opposes abortion including in cases of rape or incest, stated that she had counseled young girls in "very at risk, difficult pregnancies" to consider other alternatives, by which they had been able to make "a lemon situation into lemonade."

Men may now join the ranks of Nevada’s brothel prostitutes, after a unanimous decision Friday to amend the state’s health codes in order for men to legally work as prostitutes, reports the Las Vegas Sun.

Men were previously barred in Nevada from the oldest profession because codes specified that prostitutes must undergo “cervical” testing for sexually transmitted diseases, which ruled out men.

But the Nevada State Board of Health agreed unanimously to add language to health codes so male sex workers could be tested for infectious diseases.

Bobbi Davis, owner of the Shady Lady Ranch, a small brothel near Beatty, made the first-ever request to have urethral exams included in the health guidelines. That allows male sex workers to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases.

Davis wants to add male prostitutes to her stable of sex workers, and said the men could start working at her five-bed brothel starting in the new year. The male prostitutes will decide for themselves whether to accept male or female clients, or both.

Long time lobbyist for the Nevada Brothel Owners Association, and former Assemblies of God Minister, George Flint, compared this change to the “Pearl Harbor” of the sex industry.

Flint says he's concerned that male prostitutes will ruin the relatively clean record Nevada brothels have had with the transmission of HIV from prostitutes to clients.

Nevada is the only U.S. state to allow some legal prostitution; in most of its rural counties brothels are legalized but heavily regulated. Prostitution is illegal in Las Vegas (and in Clark County which contains its metropolitan area), and is also illegal outside the licensed brothels.

In El Paso, city council members approved the measure in a 7 to 1 vote on Tuesday. Councilman Carl Robinson voted against the measure, saying it would violate the state's ban on gay marriage.

The action created a stir in the Texas city, with dozens of citizens coming forward to condemn the city's actions during the public comments portion of city council meetings, saying they opposed the measure on religious grounds. (Pictured, protesters outside El Paso city hall earlier this month.)

Councilwoman Susie Byrd scorned one citizen when he attempted to compare being gay to pedophilia, “One of the gentleman compared homosexuality to pedophilia, and that is just false, and I am absolutely not going to stand for that, ” she said.

Last month, the city came under fire from LGBT rights groups across the country when two men refused to leave a Mexican restaurant because they were kissing. Police officers took no action and told the men they could be cited for their "unlawful behavior." The police department called the threat of citation as a rookie mistake.

In Reno this week, the council voted to extend benefits to domestic partners of city employees who are registered under the state's new domestic partnership law, which takes effect October 1.

Reno is the first municipality in Nevada to offer its employees who are registered as domestic partners the same health benefits as people who are married.

Earlier this week, the Nevada secretary of state’s office began accepting domestic partner applications from both gay and straight couples in a month-long pre-registration period to accelerate the process when the new law takes effect.

Secretary of State Ross Miller announced the month-long pre-registration period last week, saying it will help accelerate the process when the law becomes effective October 1.

The law was approved by the 2009 Legislature over the veto of Gov. Jim Gibbons. It extends rights similar to those held by married couple, including community property and debt and the right to seek financial support after a breakup. The law does not require employers to provide insurance coverage to partners of employees.

To be eligible, couples must be older than 18, not be related by blood, share a common residence at least part-time, not be married to or in a partnership with anyone else and declare that they are in an "intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring."