The image of a hijab, a symbol of a woman’s submission, being made from an American flag, a symbol of freedom, is ironic at best.
I won’t post pics of the women in their ridiculous vagina costumes, pussy hats, or dressed in stripper gear with the words “not an invitation” written on their bodies, some topless with black electrical tape covering their nipples.
The protests were entertaining sometimes, and vulgar sometimes, but mostly ridiculous. There were has-been or never-been entertainers like Madonna and Judd, cursing or reading silly/vulgar poetry. Blubber boy Michael spoke up, of course, since he never misses an opportunity to appear on camera and drum up sales for his latest ‘documentary’.
Madonna may be facing an uncomfortable interview with the Secret Service, due to her foolish remarks about blowing up the White House. Otherwise, she was her usual self, firing off the “F” bombs. A has-been in search of relevance.
Gloria Steinem made some ridiculous and inaccurate statements about Muslim registry. Of course, no registry of Muslims has ever been proposed, so whaaa?
Yes, there were large crowds. Some were paid, but others attended in good faith, although what they were protesting is a bit of a head scratcher, even to many of them. And they brought their children with them.
Hundreds of “protesters” were asked why they were there, and many of them just didn’t know. Some say they want to “Dump Trump”, and don’t seem to understand that protesting and screaming/cursing won’t achieve that goal.
There was no cohesive reason for their protests. Among the “women’s rights” that the speakers screamed about were homosexual rights, “climate change”, democracy, solidarity with the PLO, hatred of Israel, Black Lives Matter, and the Wall (because no human is illegal, don’t you know.) None of these seem to be “women’s issues.” One sign read, “Angry Women Vote.” And a middle-aged woman carried a sign that simply read, “I am very upset.”
Ostensibly a Women’s March, pro-life women’s groups were NOT welcome. Apparently the right to kill babies is more important than the rights of those babies themselves.
Wretchard T. Cat** said this on Facebook this morning, and I think he’s right:
The sound and fury of the anti-Trump riots hides the fact that the circuses are fundamentally defensive deployments, designed primarily to keep a demoralized base together rather than attract new adherents. They’re not appealing to people on the fence. They’re trying to keep together what they have.
The manic activity isn’t strategy but what they must do for want of it.
Where any new strategy is going to come from is the sleeper problem of the Left. For one it has no clear successor leadership whence such strategies will come. What it currently has is a bunch of political wreckage that performs no useful function other than obstruct a reboot.
The announcement that Barack Obama is going to lead the resistance makes about as much sense as Ed Miliband leading the recovery of the Labor party he destroyed. Yet Obama will assume the mantle because no one can gainsay him, unless one prefers the Clintons, Gores and Pelosi’s who will take up space, like so many twisted girders left over from a structural collapse until rust and decreptitude sweep them away leaving the field clear for a replacement structure.
The conventional wisdom is that Trump has “destabilized” the system. What this ignores, both in Europe and in Washington, is that much of the instability has come from the collapse of the progressive project itself. The situation is so volatile because the old balances are gone. There is a political vacuum in the heart of the West that cannot easily be filled by the debris.
**Wretchard T. Cat is a nom de plume for Richard Fernandez, Belmont Club.
Enough of the serious, now for the ridiculous. Enjoy!