Inflation. Everyone’s discussing it these days, at least on X.

Is it bad? Is it fine? Are our perceptions skewed by virtue of living in 2026 which makes accurate evaluation of prices in 1996 impossible?

Going to McDonald’s was an occasion back then. There weren’t 35 different kinds of IPAs in the grocery store. Arugula didn’t exist until sometime around 2009.

It’s hard to know. Different people have different ideas on all of this and it’s hard to say one is more right than another. Sometimes there are multiple right answers.

Socialism starter

Matt Walsh wrote:

Grocery prices are insane. They’re still rising. Addressing this problem should be the number one priority of every elected leader. End the stupid foreign wars and focus on this issue. It’s one of the main reasons socialists are gaining power.

He’s not wrong. Grocery prices are higher than I ever remember. Most families I know are acutely aware of the situation. When you’re feeding growing kids, you can’t skimp the way you skimped when you were 21. You can’t feed them junk because it’s cheaper; you have to feed them nutritiously, and so you end up feeling those higher prices pretty sharply.

Burrito-nomics

Jeremy Kauffman wrote:

“So far as I can tell, it’s simply not true that food has gotten more expensive in real dollars in the United States. Why are people so convinced this is true? What’s the evidence?”

Below his post he shared a graph detailing the fact that grocery prices have only risen in nominal terms, not real terms, essentially saying prices are higher but so are wages.

In response to claims of $20 burritos being prohibitively expensive for young people, Kauffman detailed the hard numbers for feeding burritos to a family of eight with ingredients from Wal-Mart. The total price was $18.38

Kauffman isn’t wrong either. Although my wife handles the food in our house, I do know we buy our groceries from Meijer, Aldi, and Walmart. I know there are absolutely affordable prices to be found if you don’t buy your ingredients at Whole Foods and you make your food at home rather than going out. A gallon of milk from our local Walmart is $3.17; a gallon of milk from the nearby Whole Foods is $6.69.

To his point about prices rising nominally but not in real terms, I’m not an economist or a statistician, so I don’t know all the ins and outs of how these numbers are calculated, but I do know we tend to really notice in passionate and negative terms when the prices swell at the store but we don’t really notice or account for our paycheck swelling in our bank account. It’s a sad fact that we tend to focus on the bad more than the good.

Passion for premium

Lomez wrote:

Short answer is that post-boomers became accustomed to premium/boutique brands. These things do, in fact, cost a lot more than generics. No seed oils. All organic. Cage free. Etc. Etc. My family spends a lot more on groceries in *real* dollars than my parents did because, like just about everyone posting online about this, we over-extend and buy the$20 dollar bottle of nice Vermont maple syrup and $8 fancy French butter and do this across the board for almost every category [choose your own indulgence/health fixation]. I know we’re not alone in this. I’ve seen your pantries.

The longer answer is that other categories of spending have gone significantly up — housing, childcare, insurance — and so there’s less slack in the average person’s budget. Grocery prices might be flat as a general matter, but the belt can still feel — and actually be — a lot tighter.

He is certainly correct, and like most other very correct answers to complex questions, the people don’t want to hear it.

In the 1990s, before the foodie revolution, our parents fed us very plain food. We rarely went out to eat, and it was a big event when we did. There were no cans of sparkling water. We never had pop in the fridge. We didn’t even really stop at fast food when traveling; we packed sandwiches in a cooler full of half-melted ice bags at the bottom.

Going to McDonald’s was an occasion back then. There weren’t 35 different kinds of IPAs in the grocery store. Arugula didn’t exist until sometime around 2009. The children of 2026 have no experience with the iceberg lettuce salad of 1996 — you know the one, with bland white crispy lettuce, large tomatoes that aren’t even close to ripe, and three fat cucumber slices.

Our kids eat guacamole, sushi, organic eggs, copious amounts of raspberries with Greek yogurt in the morning, and a bunch of other stuff I didn’t even encounter until I was in my 20s.

RELATED: Greetings from my favorite vacation spot; it’s closer and cheaper than you may think

H. Armstrong Roberts/ClassicStock/Getty Images

Fancy feasts

It’s a fascinating story about class and taste. How even though our society is, in many ways, more classless and lowbrow than ever, many people are eating food that really only very wealthy and very health-conscious individuals ate back in 1996, and that fact plays some role in how we perceive prices.

The thing about shifting expectations after the foodie revolution is that it doesn’t feel like any of those things that were fancy and expensive in 1996 are elite in 2026. Fresh guacamole is now the Kraft American cheese single, and now no one would eat the Kraft American cheese single, and this skews our perception.

Of course, it goes without saying that someone does eat the Kraft American cheese single. Millions of people do, just like we did. Actually, in fact, we didn’t eat the Kraft American single at the Root house in 1996 because they were considered kind of fancy and more expensive than buying a block of cheese and cutting it yourself.

Reality bites

The truth about inflation is that whether it’s real bad, pretty normal, or the end of the world as we know it, we can’t do anything about it. You, dear reader, have no way to meaningfully change the global financial system or the American economic situation at this time. These things are too big for an individual citizen to have any control over. You can’t make the prices lower, you can’t stop the bleeding, you can’t do anything other than buy what you need to buy while doing your best to stay within your budget.

We humans have a terrible tendency to focus very heavily on things we can’t really change. I don’t know why it is, but it is. Is it because we are naturally malcontent? Or is it because we are whiners with no strength? Or maybe we are masochists? Obsessing endlessly about something you view as terrible and painful when you have no way to change it seems like a form of masochism, doesn’t it?

Whatever it is, it isn’t good. We can’t focus all our energy or emotional firepower on being angry about inflation. Maybe we should be angry; maybe we shouldn’t be angry. I don’t know. But I do know that all we can do is acknowledge the reality of the world as it is, whether it be good or bad, and do our best to adapt to the current situation, live the best life we can in the meantime, and hope for the best.

That’s how it was in 1996 and how it is in 2026.

​Budget, Economists, Family, Food, Grocery prices, Inflation, Lifestyle, Prices, Reality, Walmart, Socialism, Dsa, The root of the matter 

President Donald Trump announced on July 30 that his Board of Peace had “reached a HISTORIC agreement” in Gaza that would bring an end to a conflict that has claimed well over 70,000 lives.

While the president characterized his proposed resolution as a major win for the Palestinian people and for Israel alike, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is evidently of a different mind.

‘President Trump will be very, very disappointed.’

Netanyahu — whom Trump has rebuked repeatedly in recent months for undermining his initiatives in the region — rejected the Board of Peace’s 15-point peace plan on Sunday, telling his cabinet that some of its terms are unacceptable.

Peace proposal

The peace plan released by Trump’s Board of Peace, which would be undertaken in stages, requires, among other things, that:

Israel, Hamas, and “other Palestinian factions” suspend military operations in Gaza;Hamas and other factions in Gaza agree not only that all civilian governance and security functions in Gaza will be taken over by the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, but that the committee can carry out its responsibilities independently;the NCAG will oversee the disarmament process;Gaza will be “governed according to the principle of One Authority, One Law, One Weapon”;Israeli forces — who presently occupy more than half of Gaza — will execute a phased withdrawal from Gaza; andthe International Stabilization Force will separate Israeli forces from NCAG-controlled areas during the withdrawal.

“This agreement is a critical step towards Gaza finally being governed by a new Palestinian government that will work closely with the Board of Peace to help the Palestinian people,” Trump said in a statement. “At the same time, Israel will have the security it deserves, with Gaza no longer used as a base for terror attacks.”

RELATED: It’s the economy, stupid — again

Khan Yunis in the southern Gazan Strip on July 31, 2026. Bashar Taleb/AFP/Getty Images.

“The threat that emerged from Gaza on October 7 will NOT be allowed to rebuild!” continued the president. “Under this agreement, Gaza will finally be in the hands of a new Palestinian government that serves its PEOPLE.”

After announcing the deal, which Hamas accepted through Egyptian mediators, Trump told reporters that “Israel is very happy.”

While the Israeli security cabinet initially approved of having the International Stabilization Force enter Gaza to aid in the disarmament of Hamas and the transition, top officials called on Netanyahu to reject the plan, reported the Times of Israel.

Rejection

Netanyahu, who facing both a tough re-election battle and an ongoing corruption trial, told his cabinet on Sunday, “Israel rejects the 15-point document.”

“The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed,” continued Netanyahu. “And when I say Hamas must be disarmed, I mean the heavy weapons, the less-heavy weapons, all weapons. And we are talking about genuine disarmament, not a fictitious one.”

The Israeli leader — whose nation is the “largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II” — noted that his government has raised its reservations over the peace deal with Washington.

“They have ideas,” said Netanyahu, apparently referring to the Americans behind the peace deal. “Some of them are acceptable to us and some are unacceptable to us, and we know how to stand up to these things. We have proven this in the past, and we are proving it today as well. In addition, the IDF will continue to thwart threats against our forces and against our citizens.”

The White House did not immediately respond to Blaze News’ request for comment.

While flatly rejecting Trump’s peace plan, Netanyahu nevertheless spoke warmly of the American president.

“I have great appreciation for President Trump,” said the foreign leader. “He is a great friend of ours in the White House. I greatly appreciate the historic partnership with the United States against Iran’s attempts to acquire nuclear weapons. And I want to emphasize again: With an agreement or without an agreement, as long as I am prime minister, Iran will not possess nuclear weapons.”

“Unlike all those who preach to us, we are doing what needs to be done for Israel’s security, and we can and know how to stand our ground even against our very best friends when necessary,” added Netanyahu.

In addition to rejecting the peace deal, Netanyahu rejected the possibility of a Palestinian state in Gaza.

The prime minister’s remarks were welcomed by various Israeli officials, including finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, the leader of the Religious Zionist Party.

“We went to war with a central goal: the destruction of Hamas,” said Smotrich, in a statement reported by the Times of Israel. “The (military) cannot withdraw even a millimeter from the Gaza Strip. The Gaza Strip cannot begin any process of reconstruction before the complete dismantling and demobilization of Hamas and the Gaza Strip.”

Hamas, on the other hand, remains supportive of Trump’s plan and has asked Washington to pressure Israel to get on board.

According to an X.com translation of the original Arabic, Basem Naim, a member of Hamas’ politburo, stated on Sunday, “We are committed to the roadmap reached with the representatives of the Peace Council in Cairo just days ago, and our agreement, despite all the challenges, reflected a commitment to the interests of our Palestinian people.”

“We expect the mediators and the American guarantor to press Netanyahu and his government to compel him to adhere to the roadmap and not obstruct the path for internal political and electoral reasons,” added Naim.

After Trump first announced the deal, a U.S. official told the Washington Post, “We’re not asking Israel to do anything other than agree to the 20-point plan that they agreed to initially, and so we’re very confident they will adhere to it. If they don’t, obviously, President Trump will be very, very disappointed.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Benjamin netanyau, Donald trump, Gaza, Israel, Peace plan, War, Politics 

Actor Jon Bernthal is defending pit bulls from what he calls “racism” — but that doesn’t alleviate concerns about the breed potentially being a legitimate safety issue.

During an appearance on “The Howard Stern Show,” Bernthal compared the stigma surrounding pit bulls to human discrimination, arguing that it’s wrong to judge the breed out of fear.

“He said the widespread fear of pit bulls is ‘dog racism,’ and he said it was compared to judging people on their race or sexual orientation,” Stu comments.

Bernthal has pit bulls himself and has called them “honest.”

“So, apparently they’re giving him factual statements and sticking to their beliefs,” Stu laughs.

The actor also claimed that a pit bull is just as likely to bite as any other dog.

“Look, I think it’s wise to be a little bit skeptical of pit bulls, and I like all dogs. Personally, I know a lot of people that have pit bulls, and I like them, but you know, I think that you should discriminate a little bit,” Dave says.

“So, I don’t know what that says about me, but it’s probably a good idea to be wary,” he adds.

“There does seem to be a more likely terrible outcome when it comes to pit bulls. But still, it’s probably a small percentage of the dogs, right?” Stu asks.

“Not all pit bulls, they’re not all going to be the same, but they were bred for violence initially, I believe, for fighting,” Dave says.

“And sometimes the dog will protect itself against you, the owner,” he adds.

Want more from Stu and Dave?

To enjoy more of Stu and Dave’s lethal blend of wit, humor, and insightful commentary subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Dave landau, Howard stern show, Jon bernthal, Stu burguiere, Blazetv show, Pit bulls, Racism 

A Texas pastor who previously served as director of vocations for the Diocese of Dallas and now sees over 9,500 people show up every Sunday at his church in Coppell recently discussed the need for men to assume leadership roles, the challenges they will invariably face, and two challenges fathers should take on today.

Fr. Edwin Leonard noted on the episode of “The Catholic Gentleman” podcast published on Thursday that when he took on the role of pastor of St. Ann Catholic Church during the pandemic, he observed that “everyone had been separated from their church community” long enough for some men to have “gotten used to the loneliness.”

‘He also knew that you would be reading that Gospel.’

Gospel and grill

To combat this pervasive sense of alienation, strengthen the community, and “more purposely target the hearts of men” so that like King David “they could be men after God’s heart,” the parish under Fr. Leonard began holding an annual men’s summit.

“We just got a bunch of guys together, and we had barbecue. We had some bourbon, some beer, and some cigars, and just like hung out in the courtyard of our church,” the priest said. “And it was about, you know, a 20-minute talk that first year from our key presenter.”

Feeling inspired by the Holy Spirit to go beyond consuming content that filled their bodies and minds, the attendees broke into groups and shared what the Lord was doing in their lives and how that had impacted them.

The parish recognized that this summit and similar initiatives focused on fortifying the hearts and minds of men in the community were not only the way to cultivate Christian leaders but to strengthen the faith of multiple generations.

RELATED: Blaze News investigates: Family or fallout — experts assess the threats now facing the nuclear family

Lambert/Getty Images

Test your mettle

The priest noted, after all, that the likelihood of successful religious transmission is greatly increased when children receive and grow in their faith in the presence of their father.

“The fact that he is leading in some way, shape, or form — it astronomically increases the opportunity and the chances for your children to have their faith,” Fr. Leonard said. “So we said … if we’re going to pour forth effort, we can do anything, we just can’t do everything. Let’s build up some leaders.”

The aim behind the men’s summit evidently became helping men not just serve their community but point in their service “towards the Lord whom they know.”

Over the course of the podcast, Fr. Leonard raised several issues he has observed negatively affecting young men and undercutting their leadership prospects, not least of which is passivity and “delayed adolescence,” which he clarified is the result of a lack of exposure to adversity.

To rectify these problems, he repeatedly advocated for controlled adversity — for engaging with and surmounting challenges of the kind that test mettle and build muscle.

Action items

After discussing the need to be challenged, Fr. Leonard was asked to provide those men listening with at least one challenge that if met could help them become better over the next week and into the more distant future.

The priest instead issued two challenges, the first of which was for fathers to “pray over your children every night. Make a sign of the cross on their forehead like you did at their baptism. Bless them.”

The second challenge Fr. Leonard issued was for men to “practice listening to the Word of God. So you need to read the Word of God — I would suggest reading the Daily Gospel.”

“Read it once and then, you know, ask yourself two questions: What is the Lord trying to say to me? This isn’t like a historical, critical method Bible study where you’re like, ‘What was the original source material? What was God trying to say 2,000 years ago?'” Fr. Leonard said. “God is omniscient, so as He was inspiring this to be read, He had a literal first-century meaning, but He also knew that you would be reading that Gospel reading in 2026.”

“The second question is the real crux of what I want people to do,” he continued. “Think how you can put that scripture verse or what the Lord said to you into action that day.”

The priest added, “The more that you listen to the Word of God, the more that you’re going to be able to hear the Word of God” and emphasized that “the practice of putting it into action bears fruit.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Faith, Religion, Catholic, Coppell, St. ann catholic church, Texas, Fatherhood 

As a modest contribution to the general welfare, I have once again taken on a task that state universities, despite their ever-expanding bureaucracies, seem unable to perform: helping parents and students decipher the course catalog before they accidentally enroll in an ideological boot camp.

This year’s expedition into Arizona State University’s listings produced a familiar discovery.

The challenge is recognizing ideological conformity when it hides beneath academic jargon and historical subject matter.

For fall 2026, ASU offers eight courses with witchcraft, magic, or the occult in the title — and exactly one with Christianity.

Think about that for a moment.

At one of the largest public universities in the country, students can choose from a small festival of courses on witchcraft, while Christianity receives a single titled course.

The predictable defense is already forming: These are history classes. They merely study witchcraft as history; they do not promote it.

If only the syllabus cooperated.

One ASU syllabus from this summer says the course will examine how the identity of the heretic and the witch was constructed against its binary opposite, the “orthodox” Christian. It then turns to “religious Othering,” especially “the female as Other,” and asks students to explain how centuries-old witch persecutions continue to shape their own lives.

A student scrolling through the catalog may think, “Witchcraft? That sounds like an interesting history class.” What the description does not announce plainly is that the course has already selected its moral and political framework before the first reading begins.

Allow me to translate the academic dialect into ordinary English.

The syllabus contains three ingredients that appear with remarkable regularity across what I call the oppression-studies curriculum.

First, orthodox Christianity is cast as the principal villain. The word “orthodox” is not merely descriptive. It identifies the force against which everyone else must be understood. Those troublesome Christians, always insisting that the Word of God is true.

Second, history is organized around a fixed binary of oppressors and oppressed. The key term is “Othering.” Outside the university, the word means little. Inside it, “Othering” functions as a philosophical skeleton key.

RELATED: Warning: This college course may be bad for your brain

Andi Purnomo/Getty Images

Whatever the subject — witchcraft, colonialism, literature, economics, architecture, or even mathematics — the conclusion is expected to fit the same template: One group possesses power, another is marginalized, and scholarship consists of exposing the machinery of oppression.

Questions about whether Christianity is true, whether Christ is who Christians say He is, or whether salvation is real disappear from view. The course’s operating question is not “What is true?” but “Who has power?”

Third, the historical narrative must be applied directly to the present. Medieval Europe is not studied merely to understand medieval Europe. Students must show how the old oppression continues now.

History becomes raw material for a contemporary moral narrative in which Christians are still preventing women from having a little fun — even if that fun occasionally involves necromancy. Dead people need friends too.

Once you learn the pattern, whole sections of the catalog become easier to read.

The subject often matters less than the interpretive framework. Whether a course concerns witchcraft, fairy tales, Shakespeare, climate, coffeehouses, or design, the destination frequently remains the same. Society is assumed to be organized by systems of oppression, and every topic marches toward that conclusion.

That’s precisely why parents and students need help reading college catalogs.

Course descriptions are often written in a dialect that obscures more than it reveals. The average 18-year-old has no reason to know that terms such as “Othering,” “lived experience,” “deconstructing,” “intersectionality,” “hegemonic,” or “dialectic of oppression” may signal not simply a topic but an entire philosophical system.

Learning to recognize those signals is an exercise in intellectual discernment.

At the most elementary level, discernment means making distinctions. Ideas have presuppositions. Professors never merely present facts; every course is organized around assumptions about reality, morality, human nature, and truth.

For Christians, some distinctions remain basic. The Word of God? Yes. Communion with Satan? No. That binary is not about power. It is about truth and goodness, and it should not require four credit hours to sort out.

RELATED: Why do state schools bankroll people who despise the state?

ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

Once students grasp that first level of discernment, they are prepared for the next: watching how quickly the narrative shifts when necessary.

One day, witchcraft is presented as a genuine spiritual tradition unjustly maligned by Christianity. The next, it is described as a social category invented by Christians to oppress women.

Those claims are difficult to reconcile, but reconciliation is beside the point. Both preserve the same moral architecture: Christians remain the oppressors, and everyone else becomes the oppressed.

The hardest courses to identify are not those that openly advertise ideology. Those are easy enough to avoid. The greater challenge is recognizing ideological conformity when it hides beneath academic jargon and historical subject matter.

The sooner students learn to decode that language, the sooner they can decide where to spend their tuition dollars and intellectual energy.

College is expensive enough without paying thousands of dollars to hear that orthodox Christianity is the principal menace of Western civilization — and discovering only after the drop deadline that you accidentally enrolled in Witchcraft 101.

​State universities, Witchcraft, Occult, Christianity, Arizona state university, College, Opinion & analysis 

When it comes to RAM shortages, no tech company is safe. The gaming industry was one of the first to feel the full effects of AI’s supply chain chokehold, but eventually, it extended outward to impact even the world’s most valuable brands, including Apple.

The Cupertino tech giant has been looking for ways to offset low RAM availability and keep the cost of its products down, but its latest solution has lawmakers worried.

RAM from these blacklisted manufacturers is untested for Apple’s needs.

The rest of us should be concerned too.

Apple’s choice could put at risk not only the company and its products, but our national security.

America’s memory failure

Apple may be a multi-trillion-dollar company, but it’s not immune to the RAM crisis. Especially now that so many Apple products are used alongside AI, ample RAM is crucial to delivering a reliable user experience.

Historically, Apple has relied on several partners to supply the RAM for its first-party Apple silicon chips. You may even know some of these companies — Samsung (yes, the prolific Android phone manufacturer), SK Hynix out of South Korea, and Micron (that recently closed its consumer RAM business after 29 years to service Big Tech AI brands). Unfortunately, the growing need for AI data centers has completely devoured available supplies, forcing Apple to look toward other unlikely partners.

Apple is getting desperate for more RAM

So who’s the memory supplier of last resort?

The very source America is ostensibly gobbling up all that memory to beat.

That’s right. China.

Reports say Apple is in talks with Chinese-owned manufacturers to increase RAM availability for its product ecosystem. This alone is enough to raise some red flags, considering that China has a reputation for spying on Americans and stealing from Big Tech.

To make matters even worse, the two China-based brands that Apple is eyeing for RAM — ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT) and Yangtze Memory Technologies Co. (YMTC) — both have sordid pasts. The Pentagon previously declared both brands as companies linked directly to the Chinese military, while YMTC is on the U.S. Entity List, meaning the company is a direct threat to national security.

In other words, Apple is attempting to partner with adversaries of the United States simply to gain access to more RAM, and lawmakers aren’t happy.

Lawmakers don’t want Apple to make a huge mistake

Politicians on both sides of the aisle have taken notice of Apple’s RAM expansion strategy. Sens. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called on Apple to withdraw its attempts to lobby the Trump administration to agree to the purchase of RAM from CXMT and YMTC, citing connections with the Beijing military. They also noted that Apple’s increasing reliance on Chinese manufacturers could harm attempts to bring more manufacturing jobs back to the States. Finally, national security concerns around Chinese RAM could prevent the U.S. government from using Apple products in any official capacity moving forward. Lawmakers have implored Apple to end its pursuit of Chinese RAM by August 21, but no final moves have been made yet.

RELATED: Trump bans Chinese robots — but your robot vacuum may be spying on you already

salihkilic/Getty Images

It goes without saying that Apple is on the cusp of opening its products to unforeseen vulnerabilities or reliability issues. On a basic level, RAM from these blacklisted manufacturers is untested for Apple’s needs, and they may or may not hold up to the same quality as Apple’s current providers. On a national security level, Chinese RAM could make Apple’s products perfect targets for tampering or unforeseen security flaws. Chinese RAM integration could also make Apple susceptible to a U.S. device ban, similar to what we’ve seen with gadgets from Chinese manufacturers like Huawei and ZTE, though this would only happen in extreme cases, given Apple’s value to the U.S. economy, reputation among consumers, and prowess as one of the most innovative technology companies on the planet.

Apple technically doesn’t need the government’s approval to purchase RAM from blacklisted companies, especially if this RAM is only used in products sold outside of the USA, but moving forward with a deal could have serious consequences for the tech giant, its products, and consumers. That said, while Chinese manufacturers may have the RAM that Apple desperately needs, it may not save the company money in the long run as suppliers are poised to charge top dollar to bail Apple out of a jam.

​Tech, Microchips, Apple, China, Ram 

Caitlin Clark has become one of the biggest names in sports, but BlazeTV host Steve Deace argues she now faces a defining moment that could shape her entire legacy. He explains that she cannot afford to remain silent on the debate over the future of women’s sports, arguing that the issue is not only about personal conviction.

“She has an absolute obligation, not just morally, but financially, athletically, to address the issues that Sophie Cunningham is speaking on,” Deace says.

Clark has remained silent on the issue of men in women’s sports, as she most recently refused to comment on fellow WNBA star Sophie Cunningham’s stance that transgender “women” should not be allowed on the same court.

“This is not a matter of opinion, and I don’t even think it’s a matter of conscience. I think it’s a matter of fact that Caitlin Clark has an obligation to address this,” he continues, asking, “What league does Caitlin Clark play in?”

Deace points out that Clark’s league, the WNBA, is specifically called the “Women’s National Basketball Association.”

He also notes that despite her spot as a top women’s athlete, she still wouldn’t beat a much younger all-American male athlete.

“Freshmen going into college this year. How many of them do you think Caitlin Clark could beat one-on-one?” Deace asks co-host Todd Erzen.

“None. None of them,” Erzen replies.

“She couldn’t beat the average high school star athlete. And she’s the greatest, she’s maybe the greatest female athlete in the world alive today … so then it would seem like protecting the integrity of what that word ‘W’ means, would be vitally important to her,” Deace says.

“What would that do to Caitlin Clark’s stock to just watch these guys come in and pretending to be women and just absolutely physically just roll her, just steamroll her on the way to the basket. She could not even get a shot off,” he continues.

“So it seems as if you are profiting off of being a woman, playing in a league whose first word of its branding is ‘women’s’ … then defining what is and is not a woman would be paramount,” he adds.

Want more from Steve Deace?

To enjoy more of Steve’s take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Caitlin clark, Sophie cunningham, Steve deace, Womens sports, Transgender women, Wnba, Blazetv show