• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Today’s American Left Has Become Standard Fascistic Where TRUTH HAS NO MEANING!



The Left has a rather schizophrenic attitude toward protests and demonstrations. Some are wonderful, like the George Floyd riots, which were not, in fact, protests at all. Or like arson and other destruction committed at pro-life facilities. Others are detestable, like the Dutch farmers’ protests, or the French “yellow vests,” or the Canadian truckers. Some protests, too, can only be ignored, like when hundreds of thousands of pro-life citizens show up for their annual march in Washington.

Currently the Left is “demonstrating” against the Supreme Court justices who concurred in the Dobbs decision. A few nights ago, as Scott has noted, left-wingers harassed Justice Brett Kavanaugh and other diners at the Morton’s steak house in D.C. Liberals viewed this effort as a triumph–Kavanaugh reportedly had to exit out a back door–and a pro-Democratic Party organization is now offering cash bounties to anyone who sees a conservative justice out in public in time for a flash mob to assemble.

When asked about such tactics, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was nonplussed. These are peaceful demonstrations, she replied, the very essence of democracy!

Actually, they are manifestations of the totalitarian impulse. One defining feature of a totalitarian regime is that everything is political. There is no such thing as private life. This is what today’s liberals believe. Thus, a conservative politician or, in this case, Supreme Court justice–keep in mind that the same tactics were used against members of the Executive Branch in the Trump administration–is not permitted to go out to dinner, or otherwise appear in public, with his or her family. There is no space for mutual respect, or even tolerance, of citizens with whom the Left disagrees. They must be destroyed, and their lives made miserable. There is nothing “democratic” about this. It is the stuff of Stalinism.

And, of course, all of this discussion takes place in the context of at least one assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh, the same man who was falsely and relentlessly smeared by the Democratic Party during his confirmation hearings. I think the leaders of the Democratic Party are well aware that their over-the-top attacks on conservative justices, and the kinds of harassment we have seen in recent days, are likely to lead to more assassination attempts. I think leaders of the Democratic Party hope that one or more conservative justices will be assassinated while Joe Biden is still (at least nominally) president, so that he can appoint a left-wing successor. I think this is why Attorney General Merrick Garland refuses to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 1507, which bans demonstrations at the homes of judges that attempt to influence their decisions. And I think this is why the Biden administration cheers on the mobs who harass conservatives in public places.

If this assessment seems harsh, ask yourself: what other hypothesis is consistent with the Democrats’ actions?

So, are protests and demonstrations good or bad? I think they are good–that is to say, consistent with our Constitution’s framework of ordered liberty–when they are peaceful (not “mostly peaceful”), when they are conducted in public places with proper permitting, and when they do not explicitly or implicitly threaten anyone. Citizens have a right to assemble peaceably, not to form themselves into mobs. They do not have a right to commit mayhem, to destroy property, or to threaten, menace, or unreasonably inconvenience others. Unfortunately, the “protests” that the Left likes most usually fall in the latter category. Let’s just hope they don’t result in even more catastrophic violence than we have already witnessed.

Harris IS A RATHER STAR LOONY TUNE….Does America Need An Invasion From Mexico?

Too fun to check: Does Harris even *want* to be president?

ED MORRISSEY Jul 10, 2022 at HotAir:

AP Photo/Alexandru Dobre

Well, she clearly did in 2019, even if Kamala Harris went about it incompetently. Having a ringside seat to the job for the past eighteen months may have changed her mind, Andrew Stiles argued in the Washington Free Beacon on Friday. As VP, Harris has tried to avoid holding any portfolio so far, and Stiles concludes that she’s seen the boss’ job and no longer wants it.

Before we address that question, we have to address the question that precedes it. Do Democrats want Harris in the first place? Even among the impressive string of Kamala Word Salads leading up to her response on Dobbs, this answer is jaw-dropping:


Harris thought it was “settled”? Is that why Democrats spent four-plus decades making Roe and then Casey litmus tests for judicial nominees, especially at the appellate level and Supreme Court? There hasn’t been an election cycle since 1980 where Democrats have not made protection and expansion of abortion a front-and-center issue, especially in its fundraising. In 2016 and 2020, Democrats campaigned not on the idea that Roe and Casey had “settled” abortion but to change those “settled” cases to eliminate viability as a legitimate line for restrictions in law. And in all of the 49-plus years of Roe, there have been few years in which states have not made clear through legislation and lawsuits that they considered abortion anything but a “settled” issue.

In fact, that was Justice Samuel Alito’s entire point about the failure of Roe:

The right to abortion does not fall within this category. Until the latter part of the 20th century, such a right was entirely unknown in American law. Indeed, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, three quarters of the States made abortion a crime at all stages of pregnancy. The abortion right is also critically different from any other right that this Court has held to fall within the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection of “liberty.” Roe’s defenders characterize the abortion right as similar to the rights recognized in past decisions involving matters such as intimate sexual relations, contraception, and marriage, but abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged, because it destroys what those decisions called “fetal life” and what the law now before us describes as an “unborn human being.

Stare decisis, the doctrine on which Casey’s controlling opinion was based, does not compel unending adherence to Roe’s abuse of judicial authority. Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.

Harris and the media might want to pretend that Dobbs divided the nation, but that’s what Roe did. It led to fifty years of division and warping of institutions, including the courts. The Left and the media only claim to see Dobbs that way  now because the Left came out on the losing end.

Erick’s correct, however, about the impact that this “oops, our bad” answer will have on Democratic Party activists, especially after Joe Biden’s lame post-Dobbs response. Even if Biden and Harris saw this as “settled” in mid-2021, the fact that the Supreme Court took up this case at all should have alerted them to the unsettled nature of Roe. The oral arguments in December clearly indicated that the court was going to at least rewrite Roe and dump Casey, if not dump it all. The leak at the beginning of May made it very clear that the court would toss both precedents. And yet … Harris and Biden thought it was settled until two weeks ago?

Why would Democrats want to keep any member of this team in charge of anything after this sorry performance?

That brings us to whether they even have to worry about it. Stiles thinks Harris “doesn’t want to be in charge of anything” and is just along for the ride, and makes a pretty good argument. There is, however, an alternate interpretation of his evidence:

At one point, New York Times reporters Jonathan Martin and Alexander Burns recount in the book, Harris corrected Biden during a meeting with leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus. When the president said she would do “a hell of job” handling immigration, Harris immediately chimed in to say that her role would be limited to U.S. relations with the so-called Northern Triangle countries in Central America. During a subsequent visit to Guatemala, the vice president fumbled a question from NBC anchor Lester Holt about why she hadn’t visited the U.S. southern border. “And I haven’t been to Europe,” she cackled.

Days later, Politico published a story headlined, “‘Not a healthy environment’: Kamala Harris’ office rife with dissent,” which detailed the dysfunction in the vice president’s office and was riddled with anonymous quotes from former Harris aides blasting her leadership style. That was around the same time Biden tasked Harris with leading the administration’s effort to promote so-called voting rights. A similar fiasco ensued.

Martin and Burns report that after holding a series of initial meetings with activists, Harris failed to marshal a significant push for voting rights on Capitol Hill. Months after taking the assignment, they note, she had not even spoken about the issue with Sens. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) and Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska), whose votes were crucial to passing legislation in the Senate. …

This attitude is echoed in her response to being asked to handle the response to the Supreme Court’s overturn of Roe v. Wade. She doesn’t want to be “pigeonholed on the issue because of her gender.” OK, then. What, exactly, does she want to be doing? According to Martin and Burns, the vice president’s staff did at one point propose that Harris could oversee “relation with the Nordic countries,” a suggestion that was “rejected” and “privately mocked” by White House aides.

Harris has been notably absent from public leadership throughout her first 17 months on the job. That may not be her choice, however; multiple and ongoing leaks have made it clear that Biden’s staff has kept her away from media, thanks to her series of awful performances, such as the one above. She’s given no indication that she can string a coherent thought together in public, instead routinely stringing dull clichés into repetitive outputs that form the core recipe of Kamala Word Salads.

But, in point of fact, Harris is not in charge of anything  — not because of any demurral but simply out of function. Biden’s in charge and Biden sets the policies, not Harris. Nor has Biden really tasked her to take charge in any real sense. All Biden has done is shifted damaging issues and performance failures to Harris with limited portfolio, which consist entirely of fronting Biden’s ludicrous policies and taking the blame for their inevitable failures. Who would volunteer for that duty, especially now?

If Biden chooses not to run in 2024 — or even if the party makes that choice for him — expect to see Harris injecting herself into any primary discussion. And expect to see Democrats ejecting her quickly right back out of it, perhaps even as quickly as they did in 2019 when they realized what an awful candidate Harris was and still is.

Therefore…America’s Descent Continues!

JULY 10, 2022 BY SCOTT JOHNSON at Power Line:


The New York Post headline reads “Biden’s approval rating craters to 30% after brutal week.” Reading the same poll, RedState’s Nick Arama comments perceptively on the numbers in “Prepare for the Biden Tantrum.”

What more is to be said? The reported poll is one of registered voters. If it were filtered to reflect likely voters, I have to think the results would be slightly worse. On that point, we shall see.

I think that every time Biden makes a public appearance he loses ground. He is visibly infirm. He sounds stupid. How many times can he say “Not a joke” without someone giving him the hook. It’s a joke! If we set the over/under on his faculties, I would put it at 40 percent.

Biden’s themes are unpersuasive. “Putin’s price hike” and “We’re doing all we can” and “We have a plan” and “Happy days are here again” don’t cut it. Even the least among us know better.

The underlying theme that Biden and his spokesmen peddle endlessly is this: “It’s not my fault” (Biden) or “It’s not his fault” (his spokesmen). He refuses to take responsibility or change course. It’s unpresidential and deeply unimpressive.

It is also an irritating theme. We’re not buying it. Everything we see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears and remember from the recent past tells us that we are worse off than we were. We are headed in the wrong direction. It is too soon to rewrite history to support the Democratic narrative, as they always do. The time will come, but it hasn’t come yet.

Finally, Biden’s visible form aptly represents the weakness of his administration. Has there ever been a less impressive crew put in charge of the agencies of the executive branch? Perhaps Michael Barone could come up with one, but he’d have some work to do to persuade us. Again, in connection with Biden’s “not a joke” mantra, they are a joke.

And this doesn’t even get at the dissolution of our border and the covert redistribution of illegal aliens around the country. The border crisis remains a deep secret to everyone but viewers of FOX News. It means Biden might have room to go lower if word somehow gets out.

In Biden World….”why would anyone put his life on the line to serve a country he’s been taught is so fundamentally racist and evil”?

July 9, 2022

Critical Race Theory, transgenderism and ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ are destroying our military

By Tony Lentini at American Thinker:

Military recruitment in the United States is way down at the same time as the Biden administration is driving out so-called “White supremacists” (anybody who voted for Trump or believes in the Constitution), those opposed to taking the COVID vaccine due to religious or health concerns or natural immunity, and people who refuse to use the preferred pronouns of gender activists.  The result of all this is a neutered and divided military increasingly unable to fight and win wars.

Recent polling by the University of Chicago found that two thirds of Republican and independent voters and 51 percent of self-described “very liberal” voters agree that the U.S. government is “corrupt and rigged against everyday people like me.”  Trust in all our institutions is falling, and the military is no exception.

A December 2021 survey by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute determined that Americans’ strong confidence and trust in our military had declined from 70 percent to 45 percent over the previous three years, with 11 percent of that collapse happening just since February 2021, a month after President Biden took office.  The disastrous pullout of American troops from Afghanistan in the summer of 2021, leaving Americans, allies, and more than $7 billion in weapons and equipment behind, also played a part in the steep decline.  Our increasingly “woke” military is losing the hearts and minds of the American people.

Young Americans join the military for a variety of reasons, but patriotism is a common element.  Critical Race Theory (CRT) indoctrination is now required throughout our Armed Forces, including at our military academies.  CRT teaches that our nation is systemically racist and that all White people are essentially evil.  It decries our Founding Fathers, our Constitution, our institutions, our capitalist economy, and our entire way of life as irredeemably bigoted. 

The military’s brothers and sisters in arms fight for one another more than for any other reason.  CRT’s denigration of the White race is itself profoundly bigoted; just read some of their literature and substitute “Black” for every mention of “White,” and you’ll see.  There used to be a saying in the Army that the only race and color in the military was olive drab.  CRT is highly divisive, pitting the races against one another and undermining the teamwork required for success in battle.  It should have no place within our military, yet progressive politicians and bureaucrats at the highest levels are mandating its instruction, and woke generals and admirals are saluting smartly and implementing policies that are damaging unit cohesion and morale.

So, too, are transgenderism and gender-fluidity indoctrination.  Free military health care does not provide for breast augmentation and other cosmetic surgeries.  Under Biden’s direction, the services are now required to accept transgender recruits, and you can bet your bottom dollar — all our dollars, actually — that highly expensive “gender reassignment” surgeries are on the way to a military hospital near you.  Not only do these surgeries cost significant amounts of money, but they also are grueling, with long recovery times, making such patients unfit for duty.

Military leaders already are prodding servicemen to utilize the preferred pronouns of non-binary personnel.  Rest assured: they will be mandatory soon.  A recent news report reveals that the Army already has cautioned soldiers not to complain about having to shower with transgender personnel who have not reconstructed their genitals.

“Respect” officers at our service academies and within the military now conduct indoctrination sessions to pressure troops into embracing and celebrating that which they know to be untrue.  These “Respect” officers are the modern American version of Soviet and Nazi political commissars, who could cost uncareful soldiers and commanders their lives.   Not only do these policies harm recruitment, but they also promote risk-aversity and command hesitancy, the last things you need in a professional fighting force.

Hand in hand with CRT and transgenderism, so-called “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” initiatives also are weakening our military.  Diversity for the sake of diversity is not a sound policy for the military.  Unity is.  Unity of purpose.  Unity of a band of brothers willing to die for one another.  DEI foments politically correct groupthink and produces “pajama boy” soldiers as opposed to “toxically masculine” warriors.  Which do you trust to win wars?  “Equity and inclusion,” as interpreted by the Biden regime, means unequal treatment and advancement based on race or sexual orientation as opposed to merit.  Under the current regime, America’s general officers and admirals are selected for promotion largely on the basis of their wokeness rather than their ability to lead troops, win wars, and protect the homeland.

With global war between the West and a nuclear-armed Russia-China axis a distinct possibility, given the conflict in Ukraine and China’s ambitions toward Taiwan, whom do you trust to lead our nation down the difficult path ahead?  Woke flag officers with lucrative defense industry positions upon retirement (provided they salute, behave, and proselytize on behalf of policies they know to be counterproductive)?  Or straight-talking warriors like Patton and Halsey?

As for the troops, ask yourself this: why would anyone put his life on the line to serve a country he’s been taught is so fundamentally racist and evil?

Tony Lentini is a 1971 West Point graduate who served five years in the U.S. Army, attaining the rank of captain.  After military service, he joined the energy industry, ultimately serving as vice president of public affairs for two independent oil and gas exploration and production companies.

“Japan and its allies were shocked when an assassin killed Shinzo Abe”

RIP Shinzo Abe

Assassinated former prime minister allied with Trump and positioned Japan and the Pacific to resist red China

Christian Whiton at the Daily Caller:

July 8, 2022

I enclose a Daily Caller opinion piece Steve Yates and I wrote about Shinzo Abe, who was assassinated today, and the legacy he leaves behind. I also enclose a hit on Newsmax where Steve elaborates on the man he knew from his time in the White House.

YATES And WHITON: Assassinated Trump-Ally Abe’s Legacy Must Prevail

Japan and its allies were shocked when an assassin killed Shinzo Abe, who previously served as Japan’s longest-tenured prime minister over two nonconsecutive terms.

Abe was a personal friend to one of us, taking decisive action even before his first premiership to align his country closer to the United States after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Over two terms as prime minister, his instinctive pro-Americanism and vision for his own country would gradually but markedly shift Japan from a junior partner in a U.S.-led security alliance to an equal partner fully graduated from its post-World War II purgatory.

Abe was an early advocate of seeing the Chinese Communist Party as the aggressor it is and moving Japan to resist Beijing’s dangerous political, military and economic aspirations even before the United States awoke to the danger. This was no easy feat given Japan’s historical pacifism and China’s economic gravity. In so doing, Abe wrote his name prominently into the history of the Pacific, and on the pro-freedom and pro-security side of that history.

The motives of the assassin and whether he is linked to others are not clear at this early hour. Abe knew his people well enough to grasp that this act of violence will never alter their course of action or determination to preserve their unique culture and country. If anything, the act may gain additional support for the governing party, of which Abe was a part, in parliamentary elections this Sunday.

The response here in America was more varied. The assassin reportedly used a homemade weapon that functioned like a shotgun. President Joe Biden didn’t miss the opportunity to embarrass himself, using the occasion to decry “gun violence,” which is part of the progressive lexicon as the cities they govern collapse in violence. Would Biden have been happier if the assassin had stabbed Abe?

In a similar vein of lefty foolishness, NPR — derided as “Nicaraguan Public Radio” by its skeptics — described Abe in its breaking news as a “divisive arch-conservative.” First of all, it is rancidly inappropriate to attach any such labels to news of assassination. Would they have led with news of the 1948 assassination of Mahatma Gandhi as a “divisive arch-socialist hated in half of his fractured country?” Second of all, the slight is wrong: Abe was a center-right consensus-builder who unified his nation around a transition to an extent unusual in a democracy, which is, by definition, a polity that facilitates disagreement.

What probably bothers Biden and NPR is that Abe was the first major foreign leader to move decisively to cooperate with Donald Trump when he was elected president in 2016. Even before Trump took the oath of office, Abe made an unprecedented trip to New York to see Trump.

What motivated Abe was probably not a love for Trump’s populist rejection of the status quo or fundamentally un-Japanese braggadocio, but a sense that he could work with this man to make his country and America both better off. The outreach was reciprocated, with Trump counting Abe as his closest friend among foreign leaders — a first such instance in either American or Japanese history.

Trump looked around the world at leaders who could help America and, contrary to the foreign policy experts that came before and after his administration, knew that engaging people who could get things done in Asia and the Middle East was more important than hanging around in the salons of self-referential, feckless moochers in Europe. Trump complimented Abe upon receiving the news today: “Few people know what a great man and leader Shinzo Abe was, but history will teach them and be kind.”

As with any transitional leader, Abe’s tenure was imperfect and unfinished. Abe promised a “third arrow” of domestic reform to liberalize and invigorate Japan’s economy that never materialized. Friends of Japan worry about national debt that is even bigger than America’s as a percentage of the economy, high energy costs, rising taxes, and impediments to free markets.

And yet, Japan retains a culture that in many ways is enviable given the explosion of woke self-hatred throughout the English-speaking world, along with our social decay and violence. Abe’s assassination was so shocking in part because this type of violence is extremely rare in Japan.

What should anyone or any country do in the wake of a political leader’s assassination? The only thing we can: continue his struggle. Resist Chinese aggression. Seek peace in the Pacific through strength. Preserve what is best of our cultures. Fight as a happy warrior.

Stephen Yates is a former president of Radio Free Asia and White House deputy national security advisor. Christian Whiton is a former State Department senior advisor in the Trump and Bush administrations.

When Music Could Be Sacred, AND CHURCH HAD MEANING!


July 10, 2022

President Biden and His Admiral Have Boarded a Sinking Ship

By Jay Tucker at American Thinker:

Admiral (not a Navy admiral) “Rachel” Levine is a so-called transgender woman, a pediatrician, and now a U.S. asst. secretary for health.  Levine has joined President Biden and many others in the LGBT campaign to promote “gender-affirming care” for youths.  “There is no argument among medical professionals — pediatricians, pediatric endocrinologists, adolescent medicine physicians, adolescent psychiatrists, psychologists, etc. — about the value and the importance of gender-affirming care[.]”   

Levine’s “no argument” assertions are hogwash for many obvious reasons.  Here are three.

First, the 2012 Report of the American Psychiatric Association Task Force (Report), at 4, emphasized that there is no consensus regarding treatment of children with GID (now called G.D.), because “opinions vary widely among experts” as to treatments.

Second, the 2012 World Professional Association for Transgender Health Standards of Care asserts that social transition for children, which would include use of opposite-sex bathrooms and participation in opposite-sex sports, “is a controversial issue.”

Third, the American College of Pediatricians has concluded: “Ethics alone demands an end to the use of pubertal suppression with GnRH agonists, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgeries in children and adolescents.  The American College of Pediatricians recommends an immediate cessation of these interventions, as well as an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and legislative policies.”

So much for Levine’s nonsense about “no argument.”  Such assertions can be only explained as willful attempts to persuade uninformed vulnerable children and their parents. 

In the same vein, President Biden has climbed on board with the admiral by announcing his social transition proposal that K–12 schools must allow males who claim to be females to access female private spaces, such as showers, bathrooms, and sleeping areas.  In addition, schools must require staff to use false and confusing pronouns when referring to so-called transgender people and must allow male staff to dress as women while on the job.  Specifically claiming reliance upon reasoning of the Supreme Court in the Bostock Title VII employment case, Biden proposes to accomplish his goals by applying Title IX prohibitions of sex discrimination in education also to sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination.

It appears that Biden did not read the Court’s wise warning in the Bostock opinion.  The Court warned that it did not purport to address issues such as use of “sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes or anything else of the kind,” whether under Title VII or any other law.  Nonetheless, Biden has cavalierly declared that the reasoning in Bostock applies to the world of K–12 education under Title IX.

Biden’s proposal (“Proposal”) was issued not only in spite of the Court’s warning, but also in spite of the fact that the DOJ in a January 2021 Memorandum for the Civil Rights Division (Memorandum) determined that reasoning to be defective.  Below is an explanation of just four of the DOJ’s determinations:

  1. In Title IX (unlike in Title VII), Congress expressly provided that “notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this chapter, nothing contained herein shall be construed to prohibit any educational institution receiving funds under this Act, from maintaining separate living facilities for the different sexes.”  The DOJ determined (as to separate bathrooms and locker rooms, etc.): “This provision supports the conclusion that Title IX’s prohibition on sex discrimination does not prohibit different treatment of the sexes where the physiological differences of the sexes are relevant” (Memorandum, p. 15).
  2. The interpretation of a statute in Bostock has no bearing on the proper interpretation of the Constitution, including whether classifications based on sexual orientation or transgender status should be treated as sex-based classifications (or otherwise trigger heightened scrutiny) (Memorandum, p. 22).
  3. “The Civil Rights Division will not lightly assume that Title IX should be interpreted in a way that “would frustrate the purposes” of that law, Gebser v. Lago Vista Indep. Sch. Dist., 524 U.S. 274, 285 (1998). It would frustrate Title IX’s purpose to read its text as prohibiting the single-sex teams that have ensured women equal opportunity in athletics for nearly 50 years. It would likewise frustrate those purposes to read Title IX to prohibit sex-specific facilities that allow men and women privacy from the other sex, particularly given that many boys and girls will be undergoing physiological changes associated with their biological sex at the same time that they are participating in, or attempting to participate in, education programs and activities” (Memorandum, p. 17).
  4. “At a bare minimum, no statute should be read to require or permit giving transgender individuals special — as opposed to equal — treatment. … Bostock does not prevent recipients from adopting sex-specific policies and facilities when the physiological differences of the sexes are relevant, including with respect to living assignments, bathrooms, locker rooms, and competitive sports teams. … Thus, for example, a women’s volleyball team, ice hockey team, weightlifting team, or rugby team may not allow men who identify as women to play on the team if other men are not allowed to, because doing so would discriminate against non-transgender men and in favor of transgender men based on sex, which is unlawful under Bostock” (Memorandum, p. 17).

Parents, children, legislators, judges, and medical professionals are all becoming aware of the material risks and consequences (including irreversibility) of medical interventions such as puberty-blockers, cross-sex hormones, and “sex reassignment” surgery.  Such awareness has caused states (like Arkansas) and medical authorities in sovereign nations (Sweden and Finland) to prohibit or recommend against administration of such treatments for most minors.  Other states (like South Dakota) have enacted prohibitions on participation by males in opposite-sex sports to protect constitutional rights of fairness and other rights.  A teacher sued his school board for compelling him to affirm opposite-sex pronouns in violation of state and federal constitutional and statutory protections.

Studies conclude that men who transition by taking testosterone suppressants can rejuvenate whatever muscle mass, strength, and power they may lose initially through proper training.  A Mayo Clinic doctor has confirmed that from a scientific standpoint, male swimmer “Lia” Thomas absolutely does have a biological edge over teammates and competitors.  A study of endocrinologists, the physicians most likely to care for so-called trans patients, found that “over 80% have never received training on care of transgender patients.”  Further, leaders in “gender” health care are admitting that many gender-care professionals are recklessly violating their own presumed standards of care.  Across the country, parents are suing school boards for overtly and/or secretly grooming children in false and dangerous gender ideology in violation of parental Constitutional rights to control the education and upbringing of their children. 

The time has come for parents, voters, legislators, judges, and the public to aggressively reject both false transgender narratives and unlawful government meddling in health care.