Winning: What Caitlyn Jenner means for the Republican Party

posted at 8:01 am on June 2, 2015 by Amanda Muñoz

So long, Bruce. Cue Caitlyn Jenner.

AP covered this yesterday, and we fall, generally, into the same category. I’m of the mindset that Caitlyn’s choice was a personal decision – a struggle and a conversation that a family had to deal with, just like the millions of other issues families face every day. No harm, no foul.

What’s remarkable to me is not that the ultra-masculine Bruce Jenner has become quite the stunning Vanity Fair cover model, but that she had to live so long in the dark. It was refreshing to see the way in which she was overwhelmingly welcomed into this world – with support, plenty of love and a borderline humorless joke by comparatively less-famous House Democrat.

While I truly believe this story didn’t originate for political purposes, there are plenty of valuable lessons to be gained. Lesson number one being that conservatives are all shapes and sizes, and the movement is changing (for the better) whether or not the party keeps pace – or even realizes it, for that matter.

Second, a narrative of empowerment is, in fact, more appealing to the masses than that of victimhood.

Despite faux outrage from “supporters” on the left who said Bruce’s former life was a tragedy due to superficial and intolerant societal suppression, Bruce never played the victim. Caitlyn’s appearance was the culmination of a life-long sense of dedication to family, loyalty, victory and pride – core tenets of a conservative spirit.

During his interview with Diane Sawyer, then-Bruce revealed that he made a choice to try and hide his true feelings in order to protect his family and loved ones. He joked that God gave him this particular challenge, just like He gives everyone his or her own set of obstacles:

“God’s looking down, making little Bruce … he says ‘Okay, what are gonna do with this one. Make him a smart kid, very determined … and then when he’s just finishing he says, ‘Let’s wait a second.’

“God looks down and chuckles a little bit and says, ‘Hey, let’s give him the soul of a female.’ ”

Empowerment through adversity proved a winning ticket here; and while I can’t pretend to understand what she went through, I do believe God gives you only what you can handle. That common ground, to me – and probably many other conservatives – is more important than the clothes (or lack thereof) someone has on their back.

With the momentum from this announcement and affiliation, Catilyn inadvertently gave the Republican Party something it desperately needs more of – “street cred,” simply put, an understanding sense of humanity. 

If the party overall was to warm up to these “differences” and use them as a broader tool to crush problems (not people) that really matter – like insurmountable national and student debt, ever-increasing national security threats and domestic encroachments on Constitutional liberties – Democrats would stand no chance. 

So, I say, live your fabulous life, Caitlyn Jenner, and let your conservative flag fly. What you stand for and what you believe in depend on it.

Who knows? With a twitter world record like that, she’s already got what it takes to be the next U.S. President.

Update: Fixed “tenets.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

What Caitlyn Jenner means for the Republican Party

Absolutely nothing.

xblade on June 2, 2015 at 8:18 PM

I used to be a liberal. To me, being a conservative is taking initiative and being able to do what you want without harming others. And that last part isn’t always a requirement. Being able to think outside the liberal box is one of the things I’ve valued the most ever since. So I applaud Jenner.

A lot of people on here who are critical of Jenner sound EXACTLY like the liberals I wanted no part of anymore. Damn if I go back to that.

MrX on June 2, 2015 at 7:10 PM

I have no problem whatsoever with what he wants to do in his free time with his money anymore than I have an issue with Lizard Boy splitting his tongue and modifying his body. In reality, it doesn’t make Bruce a woman anymore than Lizard Boy a lizard, so I don’t care. I have a problem with normalizing his eccentric choices, redefining gender, changing text books, and marginalizing/criminalizing those with a different viewpoint. This is happening. Have you not been paying attention lately?

Bee on June 2, 2015 at 8:24 PM

LOL, After Amanda Munoz’s post was tweaked by Rush Limbaugh this morning, she tried to suck up to Ed Morrissey on Twitter.

Amanda Muñoz [email protected] 3h3 hours ago
Thoughtful, intelligent writer? Check. Amazing photographer? Check. @EdMorrissey’s the whole package: http://bit.ly/1AJQ0AD #SynodMemories

Ed Morrissey [email protected] 3h3 hours ago
@AmandaAMunoz Thanks, Amanda!

Based on that exchange, I’d guess that Ed is doing the hiring of the new HA writer. Ed, if that guess is true, here are some suggestions for you…

Mark Steyn
Pamela Geller
Stacy McCain
John Hayward

sauldalinsky on June 2, 2015 at 8:27 PM

Based on that exchange, I’d guess that Ed is doing the hiring of the new HA writer. Ed, if that guess is true, here are some suggestions for you…

Mark Steyn
Pamela Geller
Stacy McCain
John Hayward

sauldalinsky on June 2, 2015 at 8:27 PM

Hayward got his start as “Doctor Zero” in the HotAir green room. Based on the quality of his writings, he didn’t last long there IYKWIM.

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM

I have no problem whatsoever with what he wants to do in his free time with his money anymore than I have an issue with Lizard Boy splitting his tongue and modifying his body. In reality, it doesn’t make Bruce a woman anymore than Lizard Boy a lizard, so I don’t care. I have a problem with normalizing his eccentric choices, redefining gender, changing text books, and marginalizing/criminalizing those with a different viewpoint. This is happening. Have you not been paying attention lately?

Bee on June 2, 2015 at 8:24 PM

Based on that exchange, I’d guess that Ed is doing the hiring of the new HA writer.

sauldalinsky on June 2, 2015 at 8:27 PM

I’d like to see former Green Room writer “Bee” hired.

Fallon on June 2, 2015 at 8:32 PM

A philosophy of government? Excuse me? So government then must supersede the individual in your world, I suppose.

Cleombrotus on June 2, 2015 at 3:14 PM

Why would you suppose such a thing?

Conservatism is a philosophy of government because it’s about public policy choices and the proper role of government in the society – small and limited.

It isn’t a lifestyle. There’s no conservative position on this issue; and Jenner can be just as conservative as some other person who’s morally opposed to Jenner’s decision.

This isn’t that hard to understand.

joana on June 2, 2015 at 8:33 PM

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 8:30 PM

Hey now, there were some decent contributors back then! ;)
But I agree, Doc Zero was incredible.

Bee on June 2, 2015 at 8:33 PM

I’d like to see former Green Room writer “Bee” hired.

Fallon on June 2, 2015 at 8:32 PM

Aww! That’s really sweet, thank you. I haven’t written in awhile as things got more hectic with my kids, but I’ve been considering jumping back in.

Bee on June 2, 2015 at 8:36 PM

Amanda has been kissing up to the boss lately. …

Hashtag barf.

bluegill on June 2, 2015 at 5:39 PM

*snort*

Alien on June 2, 2015 at 8:36 PM

I have a problem with normalizing his eccentric choices, redefining gender, changing text books, and marginalizing/criminalizing those with a different viewpoint. This is happening. Have you not been paying attention lately?

Bee on June 2, 2015 at 8:24 PM

That’s only a problem if the government is involved.

Either to promote those changes on how society views these issues or to stop them.

Change is inevitable -as Edmund Burke put it, “a state without the means of change is without the means of its conservation”- and as long as it comes from the civil society and not the law, it isn’t antithetical to conservatism.

joana on June 2, 2015 at 8:38 PM

That’s only a problem if the government is involved.

Either to promote those changes on how society views these issues or to stop them.

Change is inevitable -as Edmund Burke put it, “a state without the means of change is without the means of its conservation”- and as long as it comes from the civil society and not the law, it isn’t antithetical to conservatism.

joana on June 2, 2015 at 8:38 PM

Not only do you have no idea what you’re in for, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. Civil society rejected the idea of gay marriage repeatedly. Every time it was put to a vote. Every. Time. Now we should fight against it because it’s enshrined, not even in law, but in court cases?

Jeebus H. Christ you are thick

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 8:44 PM

Um, Amanda, if you think the road to success for conservatives and the nation in general is paved with transvestites, then I have to believe you’re a Democrat plant. I mean WTF, yo?

Dick Richard on June 2, 2015 at 8:46 PM

Um, Amanda, if you think the road to success for conservatives and the nation in general is paved with transvestites, then I have to believe you’re a Democrat plant. I mean WTF, yo?

Dick Richard on June 2, 2015 at 8:46 PM

Don’t be so sure, Dick. Seen from a different angle, one might just say that those of us who have been crowing there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two major parties have been right all along.

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 8:47 PM

Not only do you have no idea what you’re in for, but you have no idea what you’re talking about. Civil society rejected the idea of gay marriage repeatedly. Every time it was put to a vote. Every. Time. Now we should fight against it because it’s enshrined, not even in law, but in court cases?

Jeebus H. Christ you are thick

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 8:44 PM

Civil society doesn’t equate the democratic will – but I suppose these distinctions are a bit too sophisticated for people like you.

Second, you’re factually wrong. Almost all same-sex marriage referendums were about constitutional bans on it and, off the top of my head, proposals to ban gay marriage were defeated in Minnesota and Arizona. Also, gay-marriage was established in Maine through referendum in 2012 (as far as I know, the only initiative of this kind). When you’re so wrong about basic facts like this, I’m not sure you’re competent to express an opinion about the issues. “Every. Time.”. You can’t make up these people.

Third, I don’t think there’s any evidence that civil society has a problem with gay-marriage. The issue in those initiatives was always the state sanctioning of same-sex marriages, not their legality.

And that is an important distinction. For change to come from society, the state should simply be out of it. And it never was because of all the existing laws regulating marriage. The properly conservative course of action would have been, and still is, to remove those laws.

If after that society becomes more or less accepting of gay marriage – then that is change coming from the civil society.

Of course, lots of opponents of gay marriages want the government involved to give a special privilege to the type of domestic partnerships they deem morally acceptable -hence all those referendums to create constitutional bans on the state sanctioning of gay marriages- and lots of proponents of gay-marriages want the government involved in order to propel the social acceptance of that type of domestic partnerships. To me, they deserve each other. And no side is more or less conservative than the other.

joana on June 2, 2015 at 9:05 PM

Civil society doesn’t equate the democratic will – but I suppose these distinctions are a bit too sophisticated for people like you.

Second, you’re factually wrong. Almost all same-sex marriage referendums were about constitutional bans on it and, off the top of my head, proposals to ban gay marriage were defeated in Minnesota and Arizona. Also, gay-marriage was established in Maine through referendum in 2012 (as far as I know, the only initiative of this kind). When you’re so wrong about basic facts like this, I’m not sure you’re competent to express an opinion about the issues. “Every. Time.”. You can’t make up these people.

Third, I don’t think there’s any evidence that civil society has a problem with gay-marriage. The issue in those initiatives was always the state sanctioning of same-sex marriages, not their legality.

And that is an important distinction. For change to come from society, the state should simply be out of it. And it never was because of all the existing laws regulating marriage. The properly conservative course of action would have been, and still is, to remove those laws.

If after that society becomes more or less accepting of gay marriage – then that is change coming from the civil society.

Of course, lots of opponents of gay marriages want the government involved to give a special privilege to the type of domestic partnerships they deem morally acceptable -hence all those referendums to create constitutional bans on the state sanctioning of gay marriages- and lots of proponents of gay-marriages want the government involved in order to propel the social acceptance of that type of domestic partnerships. To me, they deserve each other. And no side is more or less conservative than the other.

joana on June 2, 2015 at 9:05 PM

You seem absolutely hellbent on determining not only your own beliefs, but just what constitutes conservatism itself.

GFY.

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM

I feel sorry for his youngest kids.

Kendall and Kylie I think their names are? They’re beyond feeling sorry for. They’ve jumped feet first into the publicity wh0re lifestyle and have had tons of plastic surgery, relish having a gaggle of photographers chase them as they leave their house, and if rumors are to be believed one has already been pregnant by a rapper about 10 years her senior and has already gotten rid of it. And all before 18!
I’ll try to drum up some sympathy…….ugh……..just can’t do it.

Marcus on June 2, 2015 at 9:44 AM

According to some, Kendall and Kylie Jenner ought to become tomorrow’s conservative icons. Amanda Munoz might tell us that baby-killing and sex with underaged teens are merely respectable aspects of lifestyles we should “warm up” to.

So, I say, live your fabulous life, Caitlyn Jenner, and let your conservative flag fly. What you stand for and what you believe in depend on it.

Who knows? With a twitter world record like that, she’s already got what it takes to be the next U.S. President.

Pro-amnesty liberal Amanda Munoz

And just wait till Miss Munoz sees how many Twitter followers the Jenner girls have; in no time Munoz will be calling for them to run for president!

bluegill on June 2, 2015 at 9:37 PM

Mark Steyn
Pamela Geller
Robert Stacy McCain
John Hayward

sauldalinsky on June 2, 2015 at 8:27 PM

And my personal nomination: INC, especially on subject matter such this post.

wolfsDad on June 2, 2015 at 9:54 PM

And my personal nomination: INC, especially on subject matter such this post.
wolfsDad on June 2, 2015 at 9:54 PM

INC is first-rate.

I would also add “There Goes the Neighborhood” to the list.

bluegill on June 2, 2015 at 9:56 PM

Mark Steyn
Pamela Geller
Robert Stacy McCain
John Hayward

sauldalinsky on June 2, 2015 at 8:27 PM

All of the above.

TheMadHessian on June 2, 2015 at 10:06 PM

Am I to understand that having Jenner as a proponent of the Republican party is cool?

Cindy Munford on June 2, 2015 at 11:29 PM

Am I to understand that having Jenner as a proponent of the Republican party is cool?

Cindy Munford on June 2, 2015 at 11:29 PM

It is if you’re a leftist (of either party).

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 11:55 PM

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 11:55 PM

I hope none of his kids have groped anyone.

Cindy Munford on June 2, 2015 at 11:57 PM

gryphon202 on June 2, 2015 at 11:55 PM

Or it moves to the South.

Cindy Munford on June 2, 2015 at 11:58 PM

wolfsDad,

Hey, thank you! Your good opinion means a lot.

INC on June 3, 2015 at 1:39 AM

B9,

Even before I saw your comment I wanted to find out who Amanda is. In 2012, The Hill named her one of its 50 most beautiful people on Capitol Hill, and there’s a very brief bio on the page. She’s from CA, but her school and major aren’t listed. In July 2012 she was 24 years old, and it appears that she came to D.C. straight out of college. In 2009 she interned at Homeland Security, then with Rep. Kevin McCarthy, and in 2012 she was press assistant to Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Calif.). Now she’s with Town Hall.

I’m trying to decide what to say without being overly critical, but being a D.C. millennial does not equal being a solid conservative blogger with some depth and savvy and ability to analyze and write.

INC on June 3, 2015 at 1:55 AM

I just looked at Ed’s post. What a contrast with the shallowness of this post.

…We’re celebrating the end of natural and objective truth, and turning dysfunction into virtue on the basis of celebrity.

…Western society has become unmoored from objective truth in favor of anything goes, and I don’t think the end game looks terribly promising — especially with the parallel tyranny of the Tolerance Police punishing any dissent along the way.

And from Jazz:

You may feel like a member of the opposite gender, but reality imposes itself at times, often harshly. And gender is not, in my opinion, a flexible option. Messing around with it takes us down a rather dark path.

INC on June 3, 2015 at 2:24 AM

INC on June 3, 2015 at 1:55 AM

A public profile posted by Amanda Munoz lists her as having graduated from UC Santa Barbara in 2010 with a BA in political science.

It seems she was an intern (or staffer?) for pro-amnesty liberal Republican Kevin McCarthy after that. How wonderful that she was named “one of the most beautiful people” on Capitol Hill by The Hill.

I have looked at some of her other articles, and I don’t see any special writing talent. Just seems like cliche-filled posts supporting the party establishment position.

I don’t see why Townhall or Hot Air deemed her worthy to publish. Seems there are far better, actual conservative and talented writers out there to choose from. If her name was Smith, not Munoz, would she still have been published here? Who knows. But I guess the sites will do what they want and hire the writers they want.

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 2:42 AM

Ms. Muzoz, please shut the hell up.

That’s just what we need, another psuedo “conservative” trying to rationalize acceptance of the latest and greatest depravity to come down the pike, of course, celebrated by the Left. If we could only accept all this as Republicans, maybe we could get three or four more votes by perverts of one flavor or another. We can add that to our winning strategy of “we Republicans are socialist too! Guys? Hey, we’ll give you free stuff too! Just not as much.”

So what’s next on the Agenda? Warming up the feel-good stories about underage love yet? Pedophiles are the next and greatest thing! British journals are writing out how pedophilia should be normalized. Hey Slate ran a piece on screwing horses a few months ago. That would be great too (bonus, the horse liked it)! I’m sure we can find a bible verse that can be used to rationalize anything, try “love” – that will work. You can justify anything with “love”, huh Ed?

Oh well, the NRO is going in the toilet as well, and HA was never the quality, so go figure.

John_G on June 3, 2015 at 3:08 AM

It’s really outrageous and sad that society is now exploiting people with identity disorders under the auspices of compassion and acceptance.
crrr6 on June 2, 2015 at 8:28 AM

Well said. And it’s especially pathetic how some are giddy about cynically using the media hoopla around Jenner’s transgenderism as an opportunity to recruit Bruce Jenner as a Republican spokesman. It’s ludicrous.

Wow, lots of complaints from the peanut gallery today. My two cents. HotAir® should hirer this nice lady if they really are looking for some good reads that are pertinent to the Conservative Libertarian views many of us share.
Bmore on June 2, 2015 at 10:30 AM

Why do you always kiss up to terrible writers like Amanda Munoz and Noah Rothman on here? The criticisms of this laughable Munoz article have been on-point and worthwhile. You always call people who criticize dumb articles on here members of the “peanut gallery.”

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 3:58 AM

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 2:42 AM

Thanks for the info. I’ve no idea what goes on at Town Hall, as AM’s degree and background as a PR person aren’t those of a writer.

*****

Walt Heyer at Public Discourse offers a sobering perspective of the reality of the transgender world.

I Was a Transgender Woman is his own story.

“Sex Change” Surgery: What Bruce Jenner, Diane Sawyer, and You Should Know provides the background.

The dark and troubling history of the contemporary transgender movement, with its enthusiastic approval of gender-reassignment surgery, has left a trail of misery in its wake….

The transgender movement began as the brainchild of three men who shared a common bond: all three were pedophilia activists….

It is intellectually dishonest to ignore the facts that surgery never has been a medically necessary procedure for treating gender dysphoria and that taking cross-gender hormones can be harmful. Modern transgender activists, the descendants of Kinsey, Benjamin, and John Money, keep alive the practice of medically unnecessary gender-change surgery by controlling the flow of published information and by squelching research and personal stories that tell of the regret, unhappiness, and suicide experienced by those who undergo such surgery. Negative outcomes are only acknowledged as a way to blame society for its transphobia….

IMHO the blithe chirruping tone of AM’s post is reprehensible and utterly irresponsible. Bruce Jenner is a man with deep problems and cheering him on is not an act of compassion.

If the party overall was to warm up to these “differences” and use them as a broader tool to crush problems (not people)…

Warming up to perversion doesn’t give an “understanding sense of humanity” and it certainly doesn’t provide a tool to crush the problems of debt, national security, and bipartisan power grabs.

INC on June 3, 2015 at 5:17 AM

If her name was Smith, not Munoz, would she still have been published here? Who knows.
bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 2:42 AM

Oh, ha ha ha. Go back and read my first post, Amanda Munoz, saying that your name alone would “have you on thin ice” with our permanent she-bigot in residence here. (But don’t call her that) And gee, named one of the Most Beautiful in DC. Oh Dear, like MKH she is going to hound you as superfluous and useless – but she will do it over and over and over so the numbers go up :-)

Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 5:52 AM

VIDEO: Amanda Munoz holds forth on the goal of Republicans – http://youtu.be/AtxyXCBCrrE

Skip to 6:19

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:04 AM

LOL, Oh Amanda – people do not like to hear from … Republicans such as yourself here. And with your last name, you’re already on thin ice with bluegill.
Marcus on June 2, 2015 at 8:18 AM

Oh, ha ha ha. Go back and read my first post, Amanda Munoz, saying that your name alone would “have you on thin ice” with our permanent she-bigot in residence here. (But don’t call her that) And gee, named one of the Most Beautiful in DC.
Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 5:52 AM

Marcus, you have a long history of attacking illegal alien amnesty opponents as “racist.” It’s shameful and straight out of the leftist playbook. I thought you had stopped that practice out of embarrassment, but here you are again. I understand that you have previously indicated in posts on this site that you’re an older gentleman of a particular sexual orientation, so maybe the subject matter in this thread and reading people’s reactions to it has gotten you in an especially antagonistic and sour mood? I don’t know.

That’s why you get shameful attempts to group people together as “people of color” (aka anything but white); that is, the idea is to pit non-whites against whites. But skin color shouldn’t matter.
bluegill on April 14, 2015 at 2:45 PM

KlanGirl.

Marcus on April 14, 2015 at 2:48 PM

Race-baiting liberals like Marcus are out to smear proponents of immigration law enforcement as “nativist” and “racist.” The “racist!” smears are a way to try to intimidate people who support immigration law enforcement and oppose illegal alien amnesty:

Yeah yeah yeah, and [Rubio] goes to CPAC and gets a standing ovation. And next year he’ll be at CPAC and get a standing ovation. And the bigmouths will still be a-whinin’ cause they hate them Mexichuns.
Marcus on April 13, 2015 at 1:31 PM

Funny how they don’t mention where the actual racism exists…among La Raza operatives and their allies.

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:25 AM

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:25 AM

She-bigot. And every time Amanda Munoz posts here your equivalent of verbal diarrhea will eventually boil down to “and your last name is Munoz! With a “~” yet!”

Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 6:34 AM

She-bigot. And every time Amanda Munoz posts here your equivalent of verbal diarrhea will eventually boil down to “and your last name is Munoz! With a “~” yet!”
Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 6:34 AM

Liberals like you always do the same thing in response to opinions they don’t like: scream “racist bigot!”

I hope future articles from Amanda Munoz are better than this one, since this one was pretty shallow and embarrassing.

If someone’s posts are bad, then they are bad, regardless of the race of the person who wrote them. Take your comments (such as the comments showing interest in the dealings of a famous nearly teenage male singer or the ones attacking amnesty opponents) on this site, Marcus. Your comments are hateful, dishonest, uninformed and juvenile. We are able to conclude that you probably aren’t the brightest bulb on the tree, and we can do so without knowing or caring about your race.

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:48 AM

such as the comments showing interest in the dealings of a famous nearly teenage male singer

That’s just the way you roll, isn’t it. Psycho-bigot.

Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 6:52 AM

Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 6:52 AM

Your sexual orientation is your business. That’s not the issue I or anyone else here (that I’ve seen) has with your comments. The issue is your disgusting tendency to employ leftist tactics to try to smear those who believe in immigration law enforcement or who disagree with articles such as the one above.

Now, is it true that in the past I’ve been a little creeped out by some of your comments referencing much young males cited in various news stories posted on this site? Perhaps, but I won’t go there.

Anyway, moving on. We’ll just have to see how long this ridiculous Jenner media frenzy lasts. Nearly all the coverage so far has been fawning over the guy.

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 7:02 AM

Oh anotherBlue, you’re cracking up. Oh, HotAir should hire YOU as a permanent columnist! LOL. Isn’t that what you always say (said, until it was pointed out it was so obvious)

Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 7:05 AM

You know darn well you’ll never be hired unless you can get a “~” somewhere above “bluegill”. :-)

Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 7:09 AM

VIDEO: Amanda Munoz holds forth on the goal of Republicans – http://youtu.be/AtxyXCBCrrE

Skip to 6:19

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:04 AM

Well, that was painful to watch…

Bee on June 3, 2015 at 8:12 AM

And my personal nomination: INC, especially on subject matter such this post.

wolfsDad on June 2, 2015 at 9:54 PM

Agree. Bring back the Green Room for some of the previous and current writers. I’d click on it daily. Just sayin’…

Hi wolfsDad!!!

Fallon on June 3, 2015 at 8:24 AM

VIDEO: Amanda Munoz holds forth on the goal of Republicans – http://youtu.be/AtxyXCBCrrE

Skip to 6:19

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:04 AM

Well, that was painful to watch…

Bee on June 3, 2015 at 8:12 AM

My goal as a constitutionalist is to restore national allegiance to the constitution it was founded on. But then again Ms. Munoz, I can only speak for myself. The Republican Party clearly does not speak for me.

gryphon202 on June 3, 2015 at 8:28 AM

Lolz!

Bmore on June 3, 2015 at 8:38 AM

VIDEO: Amanda Munoz holds forth on the goal of Republicans – http://youtu.be/AtxyXCBCrrE

Skip to 6:19

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:04 AM

This is what happens when being some upper-manager’s niece/nephew and knowing how to create a Twatter account become bonafide qualifications for occupation.

(see also: Marie Harf)

Jedditelol on June 3, 2015 at 9:22 AM

VIDEO: Amanda Munoz holds forth on the goal of Republicans – http://youtu.be/AtxyXCBCrrE

Skip to 6:19

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 6:04 AM

This is what happens when being some upper-manager’s niece/nephew and knowing how to create a Twatter account become bonafide qualifications for occupation.

(see also: Marie Harf)

Jedditelol on June 3, 2015 at 9:23 AM

Well, Amanda, it was nice while it lasted.

K. Hobbit on June 3, 2015 at 9:48 AM

B9,
I’m trying to decide what to say without being overly critical, but being a D.C. millennial does not equal being a solid conservative blogger with some depth and savvy and ability to analyze and write.

INC on June 3, 2015 at 1:55 AM

We can agree on that, INC.

Munoz, refers to Bruce as a conservative…I haven’t been following this much-because I really don’t care. I find other issues much more pressing. (Some that HA is purposely ignoring)
At any rate, in his interview..he said he was a Repub…so? So is Jeb, McCain,Collins and so on. Did I miss where he says he is Conservative and his views? If I did..my bad.
If he is, great-but I don’t see how that changes the party.
What does it mean for the party that B9 has con views? Nada, I ain’t famous. If I were Cher’s daughter, I’d make the headlines. :)

bazil9 on June 3, 2015 at 9:52 AM

And gee, named one of the Most Beautiful in DC.
Marcus on June 3, 2015 at 5:52 AM

Don’t think she’ll be winning “best speller in DC” anytime soon.

Redstone on June 3, 2015 at 9:54 AM

In all seriousness, is there a reason this website can’t hire a hardcore Tea Partier to balance out the RINO-ism around here? Just one? Instead of a California millennial Republican who worked for freaking Kevin McCarthy?

K. Hobbit on June 3, 2015 at 9:56 AM

In all seriousness, is there a reason this website can’t hire a hardcore Tea Partier to balance out the RINO-ism around here? Just one? Instead of a California millennial Republican who worked for freaking Kevin McCarthy?

K. Hobbit on June 3, 2015 at 9:56 AM

Because TownHall would never hire somebody like that. The more known conservative voices feature on TownHall — they do not need TownHall. TownHall needs them for the hits.

Then we have the quisling JV/intern/nepotism team that TownHall foists on HotGas — they need TownHall to have a platform, and will produce the content TownHall wants.

Jedditelol on June 3, 2015 at 10:24 AM

This blog is over. I expect Allahpundit won’t stick around much longer; he only posts once or twice a day as it is.

Missy on June 3, 2015 at 10:44 AM

Steyn so fine

Schadenfreude on June 3, 2015 at 1:11 PM

I feel a little bad now about criticizing Amanda Munoz so harshly, but at the same time I have to think that if you’re putting your work out there, you need to be ready to get feedback… and not all of it will be positive.

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 4:51 PM

Absolutely no self awareness what so ever.

Bmore on June 3, 2015 at 4:59 PM

I’m of the mindset that Caitlyn’s choice was a personal decision – a struggle and a conversation that a family had to deal with, just like the millions of other issues families face every day. No harm, no foul.

posted at 8:01 am on June 2, 2015 by Amanda Muñoz

.
Uh … no, Amanda…

Anyone born fully male, will retain the male DNA within all of the individual cells that make up his body.

Anyone born fully female, will retain the female DNA within all of the individual cells that make up her body.

Hormonal supplements will not change anything, on the DNA level.

The “feelings/perceptions” of what he/she thinks he/she really ought to be, are always going to play second fiddle to the DNA.

If Bruce/Caitlyn were to accidently (no, I am NOT wishing this upon him/her) be burned beyond recognition, a DNA test is always going to identify him/her as a male.

listens2glenn on June 3, 2015 at 6:47 PM

Fallon on June 3, 2015 at 8:24 AM

Hey, thanks!

…If I were Cher’s daughter, I’d make the headlines. :)

bazil9 on June 3, 2015 at 9:52 AM

You’ve got too much sense to seek that kind of notoriety.

Oh, wow. Poor Chastity. I’m old enough to remember when she was this cute little girl with blonde curls who would make an appearance at the end of the Sonny and Cher show. I’ve been convinced since forever that growing up in Cher’s household scarred her deeply and brought about her problems.

bluegill on June 3, 2015 at 4:51 PM

I did to an extent last night, but not today. Cheering the upending of sex on should be rebuked.

INC on June 3, 2015 at 6:55 PM

INC on June 3, 2015 at 6:55 PM

I was just joking,INC. I am extremely private.

I remember nothing about them..your close to my mom’s age.
Cher’s a real kook, I’m sure that has played into things with her daughter.

bazil9 on June 3, 2015 at 7:55 PM

Stupidest reasoning I have ever read on this site. We just got rid of Noah Rothman. You’re hopefully next.

leftnomore on June 3, 2015 at 9:18 PM

Hot Gas has long ago crossed over into the “me too” realm of politics.

Bleed_thelizard on June 4, 2015 at 8:20 AM

To be honest, I’m finding it difficult to care about this man… uh… woman… person… incident. I know that Jenner was once a famous athlete and quite the roll model for young (and now devastated) young men everywhere. But after years in the limelight, a relationship with the Kardashians (which might in and of itself be cause for a psychiatric evaluation) and more than enough money to pay for ethically questionable doctors to change him into anything from an elephant to a Bactrian camel, I have to wonder about all those poor boys everywhere who have “a female soul in a man’s body”. They will never have the fame, money, or psychosis to have this procedure done. His Jenner courageous? I suppose. There’s a guy… I mean girl… who definitely has balls.

Oh. Wait…

eyesights on June 4, 2015 at 11:35 AM