The peanut gallery of the House Chamber was in disarray during President Trump’s State of the Union address. The crowd of senators, representatives and their guests featured a bloc of Democrat women senators and congressional members dressed in white, with “ERA” (Equal Rights Amendment) buttons on many of their blouses. The Women in White were widely reported on in the mainstream press, such as Time Magazine, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Fortune, The Washington Post, and for the rest of the mainstream media the narrative was much the same.
That narrative was that the wearing of white was in commemoration of the passage of the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution, which prohibited states and the federal government from denying the right to vote to US citizens based on their sex.
As an anniversary celebration, this does make sense since the Amendment was added 100 years ago. But what does not make sense then, is why only Democrat women seem to have done this. The New York Times gushed in its puff piece about how so many women in white gave the women’s message “critical mass”, but became vague when not noting clearly if any of the 13 Republican women in the House wore white, and no reference to any lady Senators and what they wore.
However, in keeping with tradition, the Times treated former model and now First Lady Melania Trump’s exquisite fashion tastes in a desultory manner:
[The women in white] made for a powerful contrast with the tightly belted quasi-military black skirt suit of Ivanka Trump and the sharply buttoned-up black Burberry trench dress with big silver buttons worn by Melania Trump, the first lady, who also wore black leather gloves, a reported nod to decorum that seemed vaguely sinister. (Not to mention the section in the president’s speech about the danger lurking at the border, with its dire overtones.) Or with the camouflaging beards that both Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, have sprouted.
(It really is difficult to determine if the Gray Lady is interested in reporting news anymore. At least the author managed to hit the Trump family, the Republican conservative agenda and Ted Cruz in three sentences… but we disgress.)
It appears that all the coverage on this matter focused on the Democrat House members, with their present darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez managing to capture some news lines with her stone-faced countenance during the entire speech, even as her colleagues sometimes responded positively to the President’s points.
The right of women to vote is nothing new. It is 100 years old. The ability of women to serve their country in government is also nothing new. It is good that they are there. But why, again, were the women really wearing white?
The closest remark we found in the mainstream reporting was that the women were trying to make a point against the President’s handling of affairs regarding women’s “issues.”
Well, what issues are those?
- The right to equal pay for equal work: As a political haymaker, this one is pretty reliable. A wage gap does exist between what women and men make for the same work. However, the reason the gap exists is usually misrepresented as misogyny rather than a part of an overall poor set of labor policies. Maternity leave alone creates a large absence and hence, a drop in pay during that time in America.However, President Trump did address this in a way that was actually bigger and better than just equalizing wages (which may have actually already happened): He proposed an unprecedented (in the US) six weeks of paid leave for both new mothers AND fathers.The US media will spin this for a while without realizing that this sort of thing does exist elsewhere, and that as generous as it seems to Americans, it is still actually much lower than the one to three years leave that is standard across much of Europe for mothers. Americans generally do not know this, and the gradual elimination of even paid vacation time in corporations naturally is an issue causing a break in pay rates at the time of childbirth.The upshot of this issue is that at present it is a political hot-button that has very little real change available to it under present American law, and that law is unconcerned with sex discrimination; it is concerned with labor and capitalism.
- The ending of sex-based discrimination between women and men: With regard to types of work, while there may be some residual gallantry among men to restrict women from serving in the battlefields, they do occasionally do so. Past that, the notion that a woman cannot do a job as well as a man is largely passé, though again, there is the sense of protectiveness that men may have to want to prevent women from putting themselves in danger.To the feminist, this is an outrage, but it is a natural instinct that is God-given. The thing that is gone is the notion that women are somehow “less” than men. So this issue is effectively nonexistent as well.
- Voting and leadership in government: This is obviously moot. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the Democrat Presidential nominee. She lost because she ran a condescending campaign and because Donald Trump actually had an attractive platform of policy changes.Now, the new rising stars in American politics include three women and one man: Kamala Harris, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, Tulsi Gabbard and Howard Schultz. There is no resistance of any kind to the women based on their sex. Their policy positions are looked at squarely by their supporters and detractors for what they are. So again, there is no discrimination.
So with the implied message of the Women in White being “resistance to President Trump”, what are they resisting?
This clip shows exactly what they are resisting.
Watching this clip shows the insanity that grips the Democrat Party’s platform and leadership. The Women in White sat stone faced as President Trump outlined the wish to ban forever late-term abortion.
That willful abortion of a baby at any point in pregnancy is killing, infanticide, and even murder of the innocent, is always true. However, those people who are not inclined to accept this as a truth that is revealed through Christianity and other ancient religious teachings can successfully “hide” from themselves the fact that they are destroying a human being when they do this, as long as the pregnancy is early enough. In America, this has been the usual focus of the debate, since abortion was declared legal in the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case.
But late term abortion, that being in the final three months of pregnancy, when an baby born in this period is more likely than not to be perfectly viable and able to live, to destroy the child at this point it becomes more and more clear that this is murder.
Finally, at the point of labor and birth, and even after birth, as Virginia Governor Northam and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo affirmed, that the baby, a 100 percent real infant and human being, may be killed at the parent’s request, though it be born alive and well, is a true outrage.
All these women in white sat. Silent.
There are not words strong enough to write in response to this. Only perhaps this quote:
A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not. (Jeremiah 21:15 KJV)
It is very significant to note that the voice speaking out for life was not first from those to whom God has given the ability to nurture and care like men cannot. Any woman who is a mother knows this, and any father also knows it – how a woman knows the baby’s need just by the sound of its voice, how she knows in a crowd of crying infants exactly which one is hers…
The Women in White were rebelling against their very nature. The distortion of feminism and radical leftism was never seen so clearly as it was this moment.
And the Women in White sat to express their opposition to the call for Life and Love. Their actions revealed them as representatives of nothing less than the culture of Death.