I actually laughed out loud!

Several times, too.

DAYUM!!! Remarkable women!

We have MANY excellent role models. So do our daughters.

You're among the luckiest ones.

Twenty-one years. MAN-oh-MAN!

He had a good long life, and a long good life! And you certainly had something to do with it.

So was I. And I started questioning things a few years in, myself.

By the time I was in high school, like the elementary school - all-girl Catholic. Sorry. You just start wondering. And doubting. And looking for other input, more objective input and facts. I, too, stopped going to Mass at about the age you did. For me, the most bothersome thing was how women were held to a subservient role - even as women became more - well - "liberated," as it was described back then. In Roman Catholicism, women were nothing but carriers, brood mares, and an endless supply of donations to support the missions, the Holy Childhood, the school raffles, GOOD GRIEF they shook us down on a DAILY basis!!! I STILL don't see that cavalier attitude toward women evolving into something that even remotely reflects the changing times, lo these many decades later.

I AM NOT a second-class citizen. And I NEVER HAVE BEEN a second-class citizen. And I NEVER WILL BE a second-class citizen.

WHATEVER our President did, the opposition would find fault with it.

I think we should go about OUR mission and what we’ve promised - AND delivered for our country and the voters. We’ve already started fixing the problems and addressing the needs.

Good “ammo” for potential verbal warfare in this link:

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/01/democrats-congress-control-achievements-joe-biden

Or add to his vote totals.

Hoping right along with ya.

A couple more years doesn’t seem like too much to ask.

Yep!

Looks like something's already been done about it.

I’ve just never understood why Iowa always got to go first.

I'd rather see a larger group of those potentially affected by it

than a smaller group of those potentially affected.

And I’ve always wondered why Iowa got to decide, and why we always had to launch from there. Didn’t seem reasonable, or rational, or equitable. Maybe the suggestion elsewhere here - about starting primary season with a cluster of opening states involving a broader voter base, not just one single smaller-population state determining what choices the rest of us get.