Image 01 Image 03

Democrat Rep. Adam Smith Berates Colleague Who Said ‘Man-Hours’ Instead of ‘Person-Hours’

Democrat Rep. Adam Smith Berates Colleague Who Said ‘Man-Hours’ Instead of ‘Person-Hours’

“We do have women serving in the military.”

This is hilarious. Thanks for catching this, Washington Free Beacon:

Smith, the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, reprimanded Rep. Jim Banks (R., Ind.) for questioning why the U.S. military has wasted more than six million “man-hours” on training soldiers with various Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, which critics such as Banks say promote woke cultural ideologies.

“That would be ‘person-hours,’ not necessarily ‘man-hours,'” Smith said in response to Banks’s comment, eliciting laughter from some in attendance at the committee hearing. “We do have women serving in the military.”

Banks later mocked Smith on Twitter, suggesting that the Democrat is lost within his party’s obsession with woke identity politics.

“At the NDAA markup, I asked how different the Afghanistan withdrawal could have gone if we didn’t waste nearly six million man-hours on DEI training,” Banks wrote. “The lead Democrat’s response? I should have said ‘person-hours.’ You can’t make this up!”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


The Gentle Grizzly | June 21, 2023 at 7:11 pm

Adam Smith needs an attitude adjustment.

The end of the US has entered the “silly phase”. But do hours have fluid pronouns?

The name Adam Smith has suffered terrible degradation since “Wealth of Nations”.

E Howard Hunt | June 21, 2023 at 8:54 pm

This guy needs a good bitch slapping.

How about bro-hours?

JackinSilverSpring | June 21, 2023 at 10:54 pm

Rep. Adam Smith is no Adam Smith. In any event, it’s not man-hours or person-hours; it’s hours worked.

How about – “your district is a shit-hole filled with crime, gangs, drugs and homeless addicts” – hours?

I’m rooting for all of the above- just let me get the house sold before we turn into pillars of salt.

Actually this is great. He said “We do have women serving in the military.” So maybe there’s finally a Democrat who is able to actually define “woman”.

RepublicanRJL | June 22, 2023 at 5:56 am

Kiss the ring of Woke, Rep. Jim Banks (R., Ind.), kiss it and lick it.

Now, go to bed without supper and see how you like it. Take the time to reflect on your insensitivity for the religion of The Absurd.

Congress is inhabited by fools, thieves and the truly dim witted. Winning!

What is the importance of several dozen lives of our American military and in-country allies, when it’s time for woke-language correction?

Suburban Farm Guy | June 22, 2023 at 8:40 am

I hear his book, his personal account of 6 years of debilitating anxiety attacks, is, um, where was I? Basket cases like this petulant hissy-fit thrower in positions of authority over our military. God help us.

What a Doofus!

Halcyon Daze | June 22, 2023 at 10:48 am

Tell Smith women make 83.7% of the money that men do for half the work and watch his head explode.

“Senator, go eat a bag of ****s.”

Also, “Well, if we call it person-hours, then we have to increase the number to allow for the extra time required.”

BierceAmbrose | June 22, 2023 at 2:58 pm

“Sorrry, sorry, sorry. You’re right. So long as we’re not talking about Congress, it’s more properly “Human hours.”, you shallow, manipulative, disengenuous, flesh bot of indeterminate species. (We checked with The Reptillian Alien Overlords, whether you were one of theirs, and they won’t have you. So “shallow…” is the best we’ve got.)”

    My suggestion: When we’re talking about military servicemen, or Americans working to fill out tax and other government forms, the term should be “citizen hours”. OTOH, when we’re talking about government bureaucrats, the term should be “asshole hours”.

Democrat Congresscritter Adam Smith Berates Colleague Who Said ‘Man-Hours’ Instead of ‘Person-Hours’

The Left has become completely ignorant about how any language works.

Back when Uncle Kepha was a teenaged boy in high school, his lady teacher taught pronoun agreement: “If someone has trouble, help him; if people have trouble, help them.” Instead of protesting all over the place about being gelded by gyno-grammar (or whatever), he was a sucker for kindly and encouraging authority (which his lady teacher of the time exemplified), lived, and learned.

He then became something of a linguist, and fond that the masculine grammatical gender does double duty for the ambiguous and neuter in many Indo-European and Semitic languages. Then, he learned Chinese, which does not gender its pronouns in spoken form (and did so in written only after 1919 to supposedly “catch up” with the “progressive” West); yet nobody can accuse traditional Chinese culture of being sexually egalitarian. The lack of gender in the Chinese language is one reason why a beginning Sinophone student of English may say something like, “I admire my mother; he is a hard-working man” (我很佩服我母亲;她是很勤劳的人).

And now, as a teacher, I hear Hispanophone colleagues quietly grumbling about “Latinx”.

As for the honorable [?] gentleman from the great state of Washington, his comment is a little like Pres. Zhou Baideng calling the word “alien” “dehumanizing”. Our POTUS, who supposedly graduated from a reputable law school, has a vocabulary drawn from comic books, and apparently doesn’t know that “alien” simply means an outsider or non-citizen.

We are not only dumbed-down, we are so far dumbed-down that we think a bunch of spatially and temporally provincial ignoramuses are intelligent and somehow “multicultural”.

The Democrats aren’t serious about anything but power