This Is A Timely Read On The Transgender Issue

“When Harry Became Sally” is a thoughtful, sensitive read sounding the alarm on the shortcomings of transgender moment.

The transgender issue is omnipresent today. I’ll confess, I try not to write about this issue as it could alienate people or put my reputation in jeopardy. Expressing even mere disagreement on this issue could incur serious ramifications—something that shouldn’t be the case in the 21st Century. That’s the world we live in today, sadly. However, I wanted to read and review When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Momentby Ryan T. Anderson, Heritage Foundation’s William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow, to show what thoughtful commentary on the issue looks like.

From shows like Lost in Transition to I Am Jazz, popular culture has portrayed transgenderism as commonplace and acceptable. Former Olympian Bryce Jenner—who now goes by Caitlyn Jenner—is perhaps the most noteworthy example of a public figure transitioning from one gender to another. (Defector and traitor Bradley Manning—who now goes by Chelsea Manning—has also traversed a similar path like Jenner.) In fact, if you fail to address someone by their preferred pronoun, it can incur a serious penalty and subsequent ramifications. Voicing any opposition to this or expressing doubts about it, moreover, can cost you your career or reputation. In addition, children who aren’t fully developed are being coerced into this issue without parental consent. It concerns more people than one would think.

If you’re unfamiliar with Ryan’s work and haven’t heard him lecture, you may think his latest work When Harry Became Sally is bigoted, insensitive, and right-wing hatred manifested in a book. Assuming this would be a grave mistake. Critics of the transgender moment like Anderson aren’t imposing their ways when articulating concerns; they are displaying sincerity and compassion for those who struggle with whether they’ve transitioned, contemplated transition, or struggle with their gender identity. I would urge even the most avowed critics of writers like Anderson to set aside their biases and read his book. Like me, you’ll find it to be a thoughtful, nuanced, careful examination into the transgender moment.

Anderson Notes Not All Medical Professionals Share a Consensus That Sex Equals Gender Identity

Throughout the book, Anderson relies on medical, psychological, and biological expertise to demonstrate the debate over whether sex can be equated to gender identity. He notes that the transgender moment came to be realized due to medical practice. He notes that some medical professionals at John Hopkins University advanced the notion that gender is a social construct without any ties to biology.

We have all heard this notion advanced in the media, scientific journals, and other mediums that purport these very ideas. In the last 50 plus years, this has become mainstream and gone unchallenged. However, another individual at JHU, Dr. Paul McHugh—professor of psychiatry—disagreed with the colleague who pushed this notion by urging caution over affirming transgender-affirming treatment and “sex reassignment” surgeries. What McHugh concluded is that enhanced hormones and reconstructive surgery cannot transform a man into a woman or vice versa. Despite his convictions, McHugh wanted to understand if those who transitioned surgically felt any different than before. As Anderson notes in his book, McHugh concluded that “while they surgery may have provided some subjective satisfaction, it brought little real improvement in well-being,” (17).

Medical consensus on transgender-affirming procedures isn’t unanimous, and Anderson highlights this. Does that mean those who question these procedures are heartless? Quite the contrary. Medical professionals like McHugh seem to care about the well-being of their patients.

Anderson Has Thoughtful Consideration for Trans People, But Showcases Detransitioners Who Still Struggle Post-Transition

​Transgender activists are keen on portraying a one-sided, positive view of the process of transitioning, but the stories of those with botched procedures—including individuals who still hold gender fluid perspectives—never gets equal consideration. Medical professionals like McHugh have noted that most surgeries provide momentary comfort, but have done little to improve mental wellness of those struggling with their identity.

Anderson notes a transgender man—born a woman, who exhibited tomboy tendencies—came to regret the procedure since they didn’t get the proper counseling needed beforehand. A 2017 op-ed in UK’s Guardian from this individual said, “I had assumed the problem was in my body. Now I saw that it wasn’t being female that was stopping me from being myself; it was society’s perpetual oppression of women” Once I realised this, I gradually came to the conclusion that I had to detransition.”

Anderson cited other stories of other individuals who similarly struggled with their gender identity who felt rushed into transgender-affirming procedures or surgeries and came to regret it. With each example, the author was thoughtful and careful to showcase what happens when individuals are rushed into transitioning without consultation from medical professionals or getting treatment for overarching mental health attributed to gender dysphoria.

Readers of all political stripes and views on this issue cannot help but feel sympathy for individuals who struggle with their identity. Even more so, readers will feel greater empathy for those who tried surgical means but suffered more in the long run. They deserve our respect—a notion Anderson emphasizes without belittling their dignity. You can disagree with this but still feel concern for them. That’s an important takeaway from the book stressed on various different pages.

Anderson Notes That Individuals Will Exploit Transgenderism to Inflict Harm Onto Women

What I found to be surprising about this book is seeing unified opposition to extending female protections to transgender women —men who identify as women—from radical feminists and Christian conservative women.

That is not to say transgender individuals aren’t entitled to legal protections; they certainly are. But for women, Title IX — which was originally intended to provide equal educational opportunities for women—can be threatened when sex is redefined to mean gender identity, Anderson argues. And he’s not incorrect in this assertion.

Anderson notes, “An amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court on behalf of the Women’s Liberation Front highlights the strange transformation of Title IX into a means to deny privacy, safety, education opportunity, and equality to women…””The idea that women and girls must surrender their rights and protections under Tiel IX—enacted specifically to secure women’s access to education—in order to extend Title IX to cover men claiming to be women is a jaw-dropping act of administrative jujitsu.”” (190-191).

He further explained that WLF joined together with Family Policy Alliance in a joint amicus brief because “both recognize that the reinterpretation of “sex” to mean “gender identity” in Title IX and other anti-discrimination policies marks “a truly fundamental shift in American law and society,”” (191). He notes that this joint amicus brief was filed by these two polar opposite groups because they want to maintain the legal category of “woman” without further diluting it.

Like many others, I assumed this issue to be divided along partisan lines. However, that shouldn’t be presumed given the aforementioned example from Anderson’s book.

When Harry Became Sally is not for the faint of heart, but shouldn’t be ruled out of your reading list. If you want a comprehensive, objective, and thoughtful look into the transgender moment, Ryan T. Anderson’s book is an invaluable read on the subject.

Critics: Keith Urban Song ‘Female’ is Transphobic, Mansplains, and Too Heavy on Biblical References

Last night at the CMA’s, country music singer Keith Urban performed a new song called “Female.”

The singer was inspired to produce and release this song immediately, especially in wake of revelations in Hollywood involving serial creep Harvey Weinstein. Urban was inspired by those speaking out against Weinstein— particularly the females. Urban is married to Academy Award-winning actress and fellow Aussie Nicole Kidman, who has worked closely with Weinstein in the past.

What inspired him to grab onto the song? Him being surrounded by strong women in both his personal and professional life:

“As a husband and a father of two young girls, it affects me in a lot of ways,” Urban told Billboard earlier. “And as a son — my mother is alive. It just speaks to all of the females in my life, particularly. For a guy who grew up with no sisters in a house of boys, it’s incredible how now I’m surrounded by girls. But not only in my house; I employ a huge amount of women in my team. The song just hit me for so many reasons.”

Here’s what he told reporters at the awards ceremony last night:

“When I heard this song, I felt very strong about the spirit in the song,” Urban told Fox News on the red carpet at the 51st Country Music Associated Awards.

“I’m in the middle of making my record but when I heard that song, I just pushed everything to the side,” he told us.

“I said, ‘I really want to record this song right now.”

Take a listen to the song for yourself:

Urban touches upon the various, multifaceted roles women take. As the lyrics note:

“Sister, shoulder, daughter, lover

Healer, broken halo, mother

Nature, fire, suit of armor

Soul survivor, holy water

Secret keeper, fortune teller

Virgin Mary, scarlet letter

technicolor, river wild

Baby girl, woman child/Female.”

I see nothing wrong with this, but many critics assert he’s mansplaining about sexual harassment, is transphobic assigning women with the female gender, and inserting Biblical references.

The Verge thought it was weird for Urban, a practicing Catholic, to reference Adam and Eve in his song “Female”:

When somebody laughs and implies that she asked for it

Just cause she was wearing a skirt

Now is that how it works?

When somebody talks about how it was Adam first

Does that make you second best?

Or did he save the best for last?

There are no annotations on this verse yet, either. I’m not sure what’s stopping people from wading in here. Maybe it’s Keith’s choice to put sexual assault on the same plane as vaguely rude readings of Bible stories? Maybe it’s the insertion of creationism into a song that is otherwise not really about disproved science?

A man who respects women believes they are made in the image of God, but how dare they be told they differ in biology yet play an important role in complementing men? Blasphemous!

One Twitter user suggested Urban keep his mouth shut on women because not all women are females. Huh?

The tweet has since been deleted, but women were rightfully quick to criticize this idiotic tweet.


However, the song was generally well-received:

Of all the musical genres out there, country music is the most transcendent and uplifting out there — even with the bro-country and pop-country that has emerged in recent years. Country music hasn’t become tainted like rap or pop has, so many so-called cultural critics who seek to restructure politics are eager to taint good music too. Leave country music alone!

Urban should be applauded for writing a song about true female empowerment. Strong women are usually supported by strong men. Men must be equally uplifted and should be acknowledged when they condemn piggish behavior by other individuals belonging to the same gender.

I, for one, will play “Female” on a regular basis and hope you do too.

Kindergarten Class Celebrates Child’s Gender ‘Transition’ Without Parent Permission

It seems like every day the whole transgender debate takes yet another weird turn. Every day we hear a new wrinkle in the issue – from the entertainment industry continuing to blur the line between male and female to parents letting their five year olds determine gender identity.

And now a story from California that will blow your mind. At Rockin Academy, a charter school in Northern California, a kindergarten class spent the second-to-last day of school celebrating the “transition” of a child from boy to girl. Life Site News describes the scene:

During the lesson on the second-to-last day before summer break, the teacher read two books, “I am Jazz” and “The Red Crayon,” that purport to explain “transgenderism” to children aged four to eight, Fox40News reported.

“I am Jazz” is particularly explicit, beginning “From the time she was two years old, Jazz knew that she had a girl’s brain in a boy’s body.”

But the “huge bombshell” was that the teacher didn’t just read the books but “essentially put on this more-or-less transition ceremony” for the child, says Keller.

After the teacher introduced the five-year-old student to the class as a boy, he then went into the bathroom and emerged dressed as a girl.

The teacher then reintroduced “her” to the children, explaining “she” was now a “girl” who now had a girl’s name and was to be called that from now on.

Needless to say, some of the kids came home confused and upset. Attorney Jonathan Keller of the California Family Council told Life Site News that parents found themselves answering questions that they didn’t expect to have to address.

“There were several of the little girls that went to their parents and were crying and saying, ‘mommy or daddy, am I going to turn into a boy?’”

And a boy who hadn’t given “gender” a single thought before is now asking his mother if he can dress as a girl for school, added Keller.

Let’s think about the obvious. I’ve known plenty of kids over the years who acted like they were something else. Schools aren’t demanding that the little girl who dresses as a princess be treated as royalty or that the boy who makes truck noises be called F-150. Heck, I wanted to be Luke Skywalker growing up, but my parents didn’t insist that I carry a lightsaber to school or be able to attempt Jedi mind tricks on friends.

American College of Pediatricians President Michelle Cretella even told FOX40, “Having an authority figure teach the myth that a child can be trapped in the wrong body will potentially lead to fear that they aren’t the sex their bodies clearly indicate.”

But there’s more. The school systems insists that parents don’t have to approve whether their kids have to listen to transgender propaganda. The principal of the school sent a letter out to parents days after the event that failed to mention transgenderism or the celebration of the kid’s “transition.” Furthermore, the teacher hadn’t gotten permission to read the books, leading the school system to enact a regulation that teachers approve books that fall outside the curriculum with the district office.

Outraged parents are taking action, through legal channels and other avenues.

A number of families have decided to pull their children from the school, Keller says. Parents are also circulating a petition asking for parental notification before controversial material is brought up in class.

CFC is considering pushing for state legislation to protect parental rights.

“It’s such an egregious case, we’re trying to figure out what can be done, from the legal perspective, the legislative perspective, or at the very least at the local level,” Keller said.

Just when we think that the LGBT lobby can’t get any more brazen, we see things like what went on at Rocklin Academy. Parents, this is why it’s more and more crucial that give our kids a foundation in the truth early on.

Left’s Favorite Pope: It’s ‘Terrible’ for Children To Pick Own Gender

The Left is apparently upset to learn that Pope Francis — whom they’ve taking a liking to whenever he discusses climate change or taxes — suggested it’s “terrible” for children to be taught they can choose their gender.

Catholic Herald obtained the transcript of Pope Francis’ remarks on this very subject when addressing Polish bishops last week.

“Today, children are taught this at school: that everyone can choose their own sex. And why do they teach this? Because the books come from those people and institutions who give money,” he said. “God created man and woman; God created the world like this and we are doing the exact opposite.”

The Pope also suggested gender theory invites the exploitation of human beings and of the natural world, due to what is deemed a “lack of appreciation of humankind’s God-given dignity.”

He said, “It is a global problem: the exploitation of creation and the exploitation of people. We are living at a time when humankind as the image of God is being annihilated.”

Here’s how social media responded:

This is not the first time Pope Francis came out against gender theory. Back in October 2016, he made his position on the issue very clear.

We’ve got to give credit where credit is due. Francis may be a Jesuit with some lefty undertones, but there’s no way he’ll compromise on the Catholic Church’s moral teachings.

h/t Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderson

Transgender Day Camp and the Abandonment of Parental Responsibility

When children are 2-to-5 years old, they’re still learning their environment. They’re developing, learning right and wrong, learning about their bodies, who the important role models are in their lives, and everything that shapes their world. They’re like sponges, soaking up what is provided to them, hopefully by loving, involved parents.

In those early years of childhood development, barring any significant issues in cognitive ability, this is the stage of life where children are learning to regulate their emotions. They’re learning what “No” means, as well as the delay of gratification. That is to say, at this stage, their parents or caregivers should be teaching them the very valuable lessons of not getting whatever they want, whenever they want it. They are very open to learning patience and acceptance of how things are. That’s how they should be taught.

So what happens if a very small child, still unsure about things like biology, nature, and a separation of their fantasy-play life and real life is left to make up their minds about those things by parents who either are too weak to use a firm hand of guidance, or who would rather use their children as show pieces to the world to promote their own liberal credentials?

You get a transgender day camp for kids.

Call it indoctrination.

Rainbow Day Camp is a camp in El Cerrito, California that allows parents to abandon their duty to raise their children in a normal, healthy environment. Instead, they turn them over to a subversive environment, that teaches them that biology does not exist.

They take their children, as young as 4-years old, and plunge them into a world of abnormal sexuality, wrapped in a sunny package of crafts, “Crazy hair day,” and games.

Of course, no one talks about the high incidents of suicide or attempted suicide by transgender individuals, as they struggle with deeper psychological issues, not solved by the cosmetic fix of surgery and hormones. All issues that could be dealt with early, rather than covered up by letting 4-year old children do whatever they want and claim a self-reality that has nothing to do with actual reality.

From the Associated Press:

At check-in each day, campers make a nametag with their pronoun of choice. Some opt for “she” or “he.” Or a combination of “she/he.” Or “they,” or no pronoun at all. Some change their name or pronouns daily, to see what feels right.

The camp in the San Francisco Bay Area city of El Cerrito caters to transgender and “gender fluid” children, ages 4 to 12, making it one of the only camps of its kind in the world open to preschoolers, experts say. Enrollment has tripled to about 60 young campers since it opened three summers ago, with kids coming from as far as Los Angeles, Washington, D.C. – even Africa. Plans are underway to open a branch next summer in Colorado, and the camp has been contacted by parents and organizations in Atlanta, Seattle, Louisiana and elsewhere interested in setting up similar programs.

Gender is not “fluid.” It is set. That’s what needs to be taught to these children. And again, if parents are letting children that young decide if they want to be called “he,” “she,” or “they,” then there is a lack of parenting.

Speaking of a lack of parenting, one mother described her experiences with her little boy, now only 6-years old and going by the name, “Gracie,” this way:

“Once she could talk, I don’t remember a time when she didn’t say, ‘I’m a girl,’” said her mother, Molly Maxwell, who still trips over pronouns but tries to stick to “she.”

“Then it grew in intensity: ‘I’m a sister. I’m a daughter. I’m a princess,’” Maxwell said. “We would argue with her. She was confused. We were confused.”

You were confused? Well, there’s the problem. Small children take their cues directly from their parents, so if you didn’t grasp the importance of setting boundaries for your son, then he’s going to lose it and go off on his own, trying to navigate life with no direction.

A day camp that caters to his confusion won’t keep him healthy. Having parents who care about his well-being in the long term will, and that’s not what’s happening, here.

By the way, where is the little boy’s father in all this?

Gender specialists say the camp’s growth reflects what they are seeing in gender clinics nationwide: increasing numbers of children coming out as transgender at young ages. They credit the rise to greater openness and awareness of LGBT issues and parents tuning in earlier when a child shows signs of gender dysphoria, or distress about their gender.

Correction. This is a case of parents “tuning out.” We don’t let our children in their early developmental stages make these kinds of decisions. They’re not emotionally ready. What do you think you’re doing? You brought this child into the world and then took your hands off?

There is little comprehensive data on young children who identify as transgender, but experts say as the number of young people coming to their clinics increases, the prevailing medical guidance has shifted.

The favored protocol today is known as the “gender affirmative” approach, which focuses on identifying and helping transgender children to “socially transition” – to live as the gender they identify with rather than the one they were born with until they’re old enough to decide on medical options like puberty blockers and later, hormone treatments.

The Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital in Los Angeles, started a decade ago with about 40 patients, now has over 900 people, ages 3 to 25, enrolled in its program, with 150 on its waiting list, said Johanna Olson-Kennedy, the clinic’s medical director.

In other words, start feeding into their dysphoria very young, condition their minds while they’re developing, and then, once they’ve grown in that confusion, say, “See? Here’s proof. This person has been transgender their whole life!”

Another by the way – How much revenue are Olson-Kennedy and medical “professionals” like her raking in by capitalizing on the emotional confusion of these children and their complicit parents, rather than directing them to seek counseling and parenting classes?

If any parent brings a 3-year old child in to begin twisting their minds to believe they’re anything other than what they were born as, then that is child abuse, and they have no business being allowed to harm that child any further. Child Protective Services should be immediately involved.

Alas, that is not the world we live in, at least, not in some parts of the world, or the country. In the liberal strongholds of California, where most of this abuse is being forced on the very young, there is a concerted effort to create an active society of subversives – and by doing so, they assure these children will never quite fit in with the world outside their bubble.

Studies show transgender adults have higher rates of suicide and depression than the general population. A 2016 study by the University of Washington’s TransYouth Project, published in the journal Pediatrics, found trans children who live as their preferred gender and are supported by their parents have the same mental health outcomes as other kids their age.

Since this is a relatively new and grotesque chapter to the liberal playbook, where they now use the very young, their own offspring, as the lab rats in their social justice experimentation, what are the figures on the emotional well-being of these rudderless youth, once they’ve matured?

We won’t know for many years just what damage has been done to these children, and our society because of this sick need to indoctrinate the very young into subversive lifestyles. We can only pray that somewhere along the way, somebody steps up and says, “ENOUGH.”

James 1:14-15 NLT “14 Temptation comes from our own desires, which entice us and drag us away. 15 These desires give birth to sinful actions. And when sin is allowed to grow, it gives birth to death.”

Pray for the little children.

The President Banned Transgender Military Service on Twitter, But Forgot to Tell Military Officials

In Washington, with policy, there is a chain of events that makes things happen.

Donald Trump was too old to enjoy the wonders of School House Rock back in the day, so he may have missed a few things.

One thing that the nation’s defense officials want to make perfectly clear: A tweet is not a policy statement.

In fact, when President Trump sent out a series of tweets, declaring a ban on transgendered service members, it went up like a flare, causing both sides of the political aisle to scramble and either embrace or deny.

For most part, there was a bipartisan wave of denial, because there’s no such policy in place.

Furthermore, those who should be the most in the know about such policy changes were as shocked as everyone else.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff, including chairman General Joseph Dunford, were not aware President Donald Trump planned to tweet a ban on transgender service members, three US defense officials told CNN — the latest indication that top military leaders across all four service branches were blindsided by the President’s announcement.

For now, Dunford has informed service members that there will be “no modifications to the current policy until the President’s direction has been received by the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary has issued implementation guidelines.”

“In the meantime, we will continue to treat all of our personnel with respect,” Dunford wrote in a memo to the military that was obtained by CNN. “As importantly, given the current fight and the challenges we face, we will all remain focused on accomplishing our assigned missions.”

Let me be perfectly clear, here. I completely agree with President Trump that those with diagnosed mental illnesses, such as gender dysphoria, should be kept out of the military. They are emotionally ill-equipped to handle the stressors of combat, which requires they look out for themselves, as well as others in their unit.

That being said, he jumped the gun.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, who said he found out about the president’s tweets just like everybody else, has said that he has received nothing to indicate that the president intends to change policy, regarding transgendered service members.

“We will work through the implementation guidance when we get it and then we’ll move from there,” he added while speaking at the National Press Club.

In the meantime, nothing has changed. LGBT activists can calm down.

The military is currently under a six-month delay in allowing transgendered persons to enlist, as set by Defense Secretary James Mattis. The policy is being reviewed.

A US official told CNN that Mattis was consulted on Trump’s plan to announce a ban, but Sen. John McCain said on Thursday that he was surprised by the announcement.

“I think they realize they made a mistake,” the Arizona Republican said. “I think generally speaking, it’s accepted you consult the secretary of defense before you make a decision that has to do with defending the nation. Mattis was going through a study that they’d done for six months, and he had just extended.”

“I know what Mattis said, that he wanted to complete the study, and he was surprised,” added McCain, who chairs the armed services committee.

And perhaps Trump did consult with Mattis, but consulting with Mattis is not the same as meeting with his “generals” and “military officials,” as he tweeted. It’s hearing from one guy.

One of the heads of the military branches was informed by a staffer of the President’s tweets on transgender policy and had no idea it was coming, an official said.

Adding to the confusion is that Trump’s decision came without a plan in place to implement it.

I honestly don’t believe Trump thinks far enough ahead of any idea to get to the planning stages. I believe he says what he says, with no regards to how it will be done or what the consequences of his words may be, and then leaves it in the lap of others to work out the details.

Too often with this president, however, if the outcome doesn’t match his imagination, he will lash out.

The Pentagon has asked the White House for written guidance on implementing any policy changes they would like to see put in place, and I hope they get it.

Even more, I hope Trump takes advantage of some of the talent he has working for him, in order to craft those changes, in order to avoid the same snares the administration fell into, when implementing the travel ban in January.

Also, please subscribe to our newsletter on the top of this page and like our Facebook Page to continue to receive the latest on the this developing story.

Caitlyn Jenner Considering Senate Run

It seems Donald Trump’s ascendancy to the White House has opened the floodgates of media stars who believe they have a serious shot at statesmanship. On the heels of Kid Rock’s announcement that he wants to run for office in Michigan, Caitlyn Jenner has publicly stated she is seriously mulling a Senate bid in California.

Jenner spoke to John Catsimatidis, who hosts a New York-based radio show, about her future roles in politics and transgender activism.

“I have considered it. I like the political side of it,” Jenner stated to Catsimatidis regarding a Senate run. “The political side of it has always been very intriguing to me. Over the next six months or so, I gotta find out where I can do a better job. Can I do a better job from the outside? Kind of working the perimeter of the political scene, being open to talking to anybody? Or are you better from the inside, and we are in the process of determining that,” she stated.

This isn’t the first time the former Olympic athlete has entertained the idea of getting into politics. She told Don Lemon back in April she would seriously look into it.

If she were to really run (and run in the upcoming election cycle), Jenner would likely face off against Sen. Dianne Feinstein. The incumbent Democrat’s term ends in 2018. However, the 84-year-old senator has not yet decided if she will run for re-election.

While both lifelong Republican stars in their own right, Kid Rock’s possible entrance into Michigan politics would be nothing like Jenner’s. Kid Rock, aka Robert Ritchie, continually praised Trump during the election. He would be running in a state that voted for the president in 2016 – possibly giving him a base of support. Rock’s boisterous, yet unapologetic, lifestyle makes him a bit of a mini-Trump himself and could appeal to Trump voters.

Jenner’s presence in conservative circles is a bit of a paradox. While Democrats have embraced extreme transgender ideology (public funding for sex transitions and belief in unlimited number of genders), most GOP members have been reluctant to do so. Jenner, despite her public adoration for the Second Amendment and the Constitution, would likely struggle to appeal to Republican constituents because of her stature as a trans woman. She voted for Trump and has mostly been supportive of him, but strays on the topic of LGBT rights. Jenner was very critical of the president’s decision to end an Obama-era rule that allowed trans students to use restrooms of their chosen gender.

Adding to all of this – California is toxic territory for GOP candidates.

This may seem like a joke, but Democratic leadership is taking this all very seriously. In an email blast to supporters, Sen. Elizabeth Warren cautioned that Trump was originally thought to be kidding about his presidential ambitions. The Massachusetts liberal implored her followers to take Kid Rock’s announcement with earnestness, and she even linked to a fundraising page for Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow – Rock’s would-be Democrat opponent.

Side note: has anyone been keeping track of the newly created campaign committee to elect Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson? “Run The Rock 2020” was registered by a political consultant in West Virginia who reportedly wants to “Make America Rock Again.”

Pelosi: GOP ‘Should Be Ashamed’ For Not Allowing Taxpayer Money To Fund Sex Changes

The House minority leader is livid at Republicans over public funding for something extremely vital to the American people. Something so crucial – it tears at the very foundation of this country. The fact that the GOP would even consider cutting taxpayer money from this service is proof that they are heartless, soulless monsters.

Nancy Pelosi is mad at the GOP for cutting Department of Defense funding specifically set aside for servicemen and women who want the government to pay for their gender transition surgery.

Missouri GOP Rep. Vicky Hartzler offered an amendment to the House National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment stipulates: “Funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to provide medical treatment (other than mental health treatment) related to gender transition to a person entitled to medical care.” It passed the House Rules Committee and now moves to the House floor.

Transgenders have been allowed to openly serve in the military since last year. The current policy allows them to receive any medical help deemed necessary – including surgery and hormone therapy. The Rand Corporation estimates the annual cost for medical services for transgender military members to be between $2.4 and $8.4 million.

Democrats are livid over Hartzler’s amendment. Pelosi, believing cutting off your manhood is a human right to be publicly subsidized, issued a blithering statement:

“Republicans should be ashamed: instead of protecting the men and women who risk their lives to defend our freedoms, they are fighting to rip away the health care of thousands of brave service members. This cowardly Republican amendment targeting transgender men and women in uniform effectively bans these patriotic Americans from serving their country. This disgusting amendment is unprecedented, unacceptable and undermines our national security.”

Pelosi is not the only liberal angry at the legislation. The co-chair of the LGBT Equality Caucus, Colorado Rep. Jared Polis, tried to block the amendment, but was blocked by the Rules Committee. American Military Partner Association President Ashley Broadway-Mack referred to the amendment as “vile” and a “vicious attack on service members.”

How in the world are our troops going to defeat ISIS if they can’t get the hormone therapy they so vitally need? To be honest, I’m more embarrassed Democrats didn’t address the issue of where gender fluid troops can go to the bathroom while fighting in Tora Bora mountains.

The minority leader continues to demonstrate why she should stay on as the leader of House Democrats. Her presence makes things too easy for the GOP.