Posted on 03/24/2022 5:12:25 AM PDT by RandFan
During the Wednesday broadcast of Newsmax TV’s “Spicer & Co.,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) rejected Biden Supreme Court nominee Katanji Brown Jackson’s inability to define a woman.
“[M]y main objection has been to her sort of inability to answer even the simplest questions,” he said. “You know, Senator [Marsha] Blackburn asked her a question and said, ‘Can you define a woman?’ Well, if you’re not even willing to answer that question and many of the questions she has been unwilling to answer — if you can’t answer the question, ‘What is a woman?’ or the definition of a woman, how is she going to adjudicate Title IX cases that have to do with women or women in sports? How is she going to adjudicate whether a boy who swims for [the University of Pennsylvania] can all of a sudden switch and pretend to be a girl and swim on the girls’ team?”
“She’s not going to be able to adjudicate any of these things, or perhaps she is telegraphing us that she is going to be able to adjudicate them in such that you can be whatever you feel like you want to be that day, which will lead to a ruination of women’s sports and lead to really chaos in women’s sports and women’s athletics,” Paul continued. “I mean, what kind of bizarre world are we living in now that the woman of the year is really a man that has had some kind of surgery to remove their secondary sexual characteristics. That’s the woman of the year we’re supposed to be celebrating? What about real women? We’re not going to celebrate real women who are doing amazing in our country in every occupation you can imagine?”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
1972: What is a woman? "I am woman, hear me roar ... I am wise ... I am strong ... I am invincible!"
2022: What is a woman? "How should I know? I'm not a biologist."
Someone in the hearings needs to ask her to explain the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.
What a warped nation we live in that a potential Supreme Court member refuses to define something as simple as a woman.
God help us when she gets a case with a moderately difficult decision - and all cases that get to the USSC are difficult.
She can define what a woman is. They’re shoving her on to that court so that we stop defining what a woman is.
Let’s stop being naive. Please.
Did Biden have to consult with a genealogist, a biologist, and a Human Resources specialist before choosing this affirmative action diversity dolt?
It is a mistake that many rookie lawyers make when questioning an opposing witness in a deposition. Don't go through a list of questions like a check list. Ask a question, listen to the answer or non-answer, and follow up. Occasionally you will get a jewel of a response that will lead to much better questions than you would have ever thought to ask. You will not get to ask all of the questions you planned to ask, but will get much more useful information.
I can think of at least dozen follow up questions that I would have wanted to ask after she refused to define "woman." Most of those questions would have lead to follow up questions.
I probably would have started by reading from any any of her judicial opinions in which she used the word "woman" and asked, "What did you mean when you used the word 'woman' in this context?" or read from a federal statute that includes the word "woman" and asked "Do you have any understanding of what the word 'woman' means in this context?"
Obviously, she doesn't want to give a biological definition of a woman, because it would piss off her far left-wing base, and doesn't want to say that a woman is anyone who "identifies" as a woman, because it could cost her at least one democrat vote and her confirmation.
I just pray that Clarence Thomas fully recovers from his current illness and that Brandon's handlers do not get the opportunity to fill any more Supreme Court seats.
Great question. Too bad big media and the political talk show circle jerks won’t report it
‘... I am wise ... I am strong ... I am invincible!”
damn, now I have that horrendous song running through my head; thanx...
The irony is, it's much easier to define sex than race.
She was chosen as a black woman.
We’ve seen how well Biden fills important positions with “women of color”.
His first attempt is an unmitigated disaster. Why break precedent?
True.
Good post.
When she said she can’t define what a woman is because she’s not a biologist, she set herself up for this follow-up question: “Are you saying that biology alone is what determines whether a person is man or woman?”
So simple. Did anyone bother to ask that follow-up?
Instead, they continued with their prepared questions, as if they never thought about how she might answer each question and how they might follow up. They’re just going through the moves, putting on a show, so they can say they tried and be voted back into office the next election so they can continue being career politicians.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.