18 Comments

Saying you are not a biologist and can't define it, implies that the definition is rooted in BIOLOGY, does it not?

Expand full comment

Ketanji Brown Jackson says she doesn't know how to define "woman", saying, "I'm not a biologist". I am also not a biologist, but I can define the word "woman" based on the very real differences in physical appearances and reproductive function which attends the fact that a woman has two X chromosomes in position 26, while a man has an X and a Y chromosome in that position. So too, I suspect, could any person who has taken either a high school biology class or some formal sex education do likewise. The real reason is as you suspect, Erick: She knows that to do so would offend the LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ crowd, specifically the "T" component thereof. There are those who endeavor to expand the definition of "woman" to include biological males, and who would be crushed to have simple biological fact upset their applecart. Judge Jackson would have her woke card summarily pulled were she to state the self-evident truth.

"Leah" Thomas, as much as Judge Jackson and others may contend otherwise, is a MAN. The other swimmers "she" so handily defeated in the recent NCAA swimming championships are in fact WOMEN. See, Judge Jackson, isn't that easy?

Expand full comment

It really helps to know that Joe is just the brainless person the Council of Foreign Relations needs to make us into the ONE WORLD GOV.

Expand full comment

And right on cue, an example of the Crazy Right. Well played

Expand full comment

Just one thing: You advise that "the GOP should stop trying to relitigate 2020 and focus on the Democrats." Many of us disagree with that notion. We should continue to investigate and reveal the ways and means Democrats used to corrupt the 2020 vote. Everything from the suppression of the damning information on Hunter Biden's laptop(s) to the never-ending Russia hoax, to the propagation of thousands of unsupervised drop boxes, unregulated ballot harvesting, and all the rest of it. All of those things surely continue to "focus on the Democrats" without losing sight of the future.

Expand full comment

Thank you Erick. I just wish the party leaders would heed the warning. We need to put up solid conservative candidates. We need to focus on the economy, education, and freedom from excessive regulations. We need to stop candidates who want to stir the waters and create more chaos. But we also need to stop candidates who do not hold to the core principles.

Expand full comment

HOW and by WHOM will this insane ship be turned around? I don't see any human capable of singlehandedly making that difference. Only God....keep praying, America, keep praying.

Expand full comment

We’ve got men who think they’re women…

Swimmin’ women who are men.

It’s a race now to the bottom.

Sinking fast where no one wins.

Meanwhile, up in Babel’s Tower

Icarus goes flyin’ by.

Truth be told is now “Verboten!”

Nonsense now is justified.

Yes, we’re Jabber-walking faster

Into nineteen eighty-four.

Katie, seems to me apparent

It’s too late to bar the door.

Expand full comment

Love your poem!

Expand full comment

While I've always firmly believed that the deep divide in this country is driven by politicians on both sides, there has never been a better time for a candidate with a unifying message to tap into the universal misery most Americans are experiencing, whether Democrat or Republican. I'm not talking "hope-y change-y" platitudes, I'm talking someone with real solutions for gas and food prices, inflation, crime, border enforcement, energy, and global leadership. That message wins at least 75% of the electorate's vote, IMO. And you know what? Executing on those campaign promises would NOT be difficult!

Expand full comment

"A judge who wants to be on the Supreme Court won’t say what a woman is because to do so would offend the progressives." That is certainly one viewpoint, but, the gender identity issue is very likely going to appear before the Supreme Court at some time in the future...maybe sooner, than later. The nominee was obviously too sharp to be drawn into a discussion that could come back to haunt her on the Bench. And that was clearly, IMHO, Senator Blackburn's obvious intent with the question. I realize that everything is - and rightly should be - on the table in these very serious deliberations,; but all too often these self servings of red meat detract from the seriousness of the advise and consent role. Serious times deserve serious people...

Expand full comment

I’m waiting for someone to enter the Special Olympics just to win.

Expand full comment

South Park S8 E2!

Expand full comment

The Republicans need to stop giving the media "meat". They should ask their questions during the hearing pointedly without grandstanding or bringing up how Kavanaugh was treated. Focusing on the past will not have any impact and only gives the press and late night "comedians" material to bash conservatives. As far as the "what is a woman" issue, transgender rights, "biological men" in women's sports etc. I am at a point where this is beyond my comprehension. It is not that I can't comprehend it....I just choose to not waste brain cells and time trying to do so. I can't keep up with the new terminology (cis, birthing people, person with penis etc.) and I refuse to learn it. To learn it means you accept it and I do not. The acceptance of this type of world view is being forced on people in their workplace and in the government agencies. I am lucky that I can retire in a year or so. I then plan to live in a "bubble" with like-minded Christian conservatives and try to escape the insanity.

Expand full comment

"The Republicans need to stop giving the media "meat." TOTALLY agree with you and it's why I strongly disagreed with Ted Cruz's behavior the other day. Ask the question and when she doesn't answer maybe double down ONCE - gently - then let it ride. Your target audience will certainly grasp your point without giving Stephen "I'd like to buy a consonant, Pat" COLBER(t) fodder for his sniveling little pompous-$@#^ audience.

Expand full comment

"Can" is the operative word. And I don't have much confidence in the GOP's ability to temper their proclivity to trip over their own tongues, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Expand full comment

Erick, I implore you to PLEASE temper your expectations of some red wave in the mid-terms. Our "Republican" side ALWAYS seems to find a way to DO WORSE than expected. It may be because of smoke & mirrors media lies, or it may be because people are over confident and sit out the election because they believe in comments like YOURS in this article and on the radio. I'll believe the "dumb masses" of voters have done the right thing, in enough of a majority, after the recounts and lawsuits are over. I pray people show up and vote conservative in enough of a majority that election inconsistencies don't make a difference.

Expand full comment

"As long as Republicans don't out crazy the Democrats"...there's the problem.

With the media so firmly on the side of the Progressives, sooner or later, some Republican is going to say something that is either legitimately crazy (you know who I'm talking about) or can be twisted to make it appear so ("very fine people on both sides", for example)...and they'll release it right before the mid-terms.

Expand full comment