● So the Womyn’s March is today and unless you know to look for it, there’s no evidence of it. You know, the danger with withholding your services is that people often find out how little you actually add to the equation. Careful, losers.
● I find it interesting that the two things the left remains obsessed with Trump over are his tax returns and his ties to Russia, neither of which matter to anyone. So much for him creating rape America... rounding up gays... reinstituting slavery... you get the picture. The other thing the left/media is doing now is writing these theoretical articles that are ridiculous. Today’s warned us that “The Air Could Become More Smoggy Under Trump!” The other day it was “What will happen if health insurance becomes unaffordable?!” Uh, when did it become affordable? Basically, they are going issue by issue and speculating that everything could get worse. What a joke.
● With Obama seemingly fleeing from his return to politics, Hillary of all people is now talking about returning. This says a lot about the lack of talent the Democrats have. But seriously, who else is there right now? Jerry Brown? Joe Biden? Pelosi? The Ghost of Tip O'Neal?
● So apparently, Ivanka Trump’s fashion line has reported record sales, increasing 346%. That’s hilarious! So much for the power of the left to boycott. Shame on you Nordstroms. Starbucks, meanwhile, has lost sales since thumbing its nose at Trump over the travel ban.
● Unemployment has fallen to 4.7%. Let’s see if Trump can do what Obama could not do... but every other President could... and get it to 3%!
● Did you notice that Trump re-issued the Horribly Racist Anti-Muslim Executive Order... and no one really seemed to care this time? So what does that make the outrage the first time? Oh yeah... fake.
● The Democrats are trying to copy the GOP’s structure now, which I find interesting. First, wasn’t the GOP this evil chaotic thing always on the verge of civil war? Doesn't that make copying it a bit like recreating the government of Liberia? Even more to the point, the GOP structure has really not been successful. The GOP is a mess. The only things keeping them afloat are (1) their ideology appeals at the state level, (2) gerrymandering in the House, and (3) the unpalatability of the Democrats nationally.
● Finally, back on this Coffee Klatch Day thing. I’m already seeing several article on the left that worry this will backfire. They note that striking is very unpopular in the US and this is a strike. They noted that schools closed in the DC/NoVA/MD area and this is will piss off parents. They worry that nurses might not show up or airlines could be grounded if women don’t show up, all of which “will cause chaos” -- actually, it will cause chaos for a small, but very angry high-profile group of people. They worry that no one really knows why they are doing this either, and that makes the whole thing
Those are good points. I think the bigger problem is this... to be blunt... these women are whining. They are whining that they don’t like their jobs and want more than they are getting. They are whining that their first world lives aren’t fulfilling and that people don’t shower them with respect and attention. And they are taking the day off to whine about it. Those are bad optics. It’s selfish. It’s entitled. It’s out of touch.
It's also a mistake. It will highlight just how little these people actually matter when life doesn't stop or turn to chaos. When people realize, huh, that missing chick didn't really keep our office going, did she?... or they start to ask questions like, why is my kid's teacher out playing around when they schools suck of badly?... that's when people change their minds about your worth, and not in a good way.
In fact, there is no possibility of positive momentum from this. Their numbers will be much smaller than before, so it will feel like a fading movement. Their demands have gotten less clear if anything, so they will feel like a movement devolving. And look for the enduring publicity to be a series of articles about womyn who got fired for attending, making it seem like society had issued its verdict. If you're going to do a show of power... you better have some to show.
32 comments:
A couple additions. Yahoo is using an image of the January 21 anti-Trump rally as their photo for their article about the march today. Why? Could be the lack of turnout today. LINK.
There are more complaints:
1. This protest is for women of privilege who can afford to take the day off, not their poor sisters who struggle to survive in Trump's America.
2. Why ask for womyn to wear red in solidarity when Pink was the color that came to "define the movement organically." Of course, red is ties to the International Women's Day because it was a communist event and it traces its roots to a strike in Petrograd in 1917.
3. Corporate supporters are descending... like Woodstood II.
Like last week's pro-Trump rally this is the sort of crap ordinary people are ignoring. The only thing that makes this different is the heavy participation of teachers, which screws working parents with young kids.
Anthony, Agreed. If anything, this shows that the "public" outrage over Trump has fizzled. All that is left now are the activists and the insiders.
On the teachers, it's limited too to two areas: the DC area and North Carolina for some reason, which is further proof that this isn't something the general public cares about.
Honestly, I was expecting to be one of the few women to go to work today in NYC. Instead the subway was packed just like every other weekday with men & women...going to work...not wearing red.
There were a few wearing red on the street, but very few.
I saw 1 young women (obviously a student who had nothing better to do) who was actually pro-active wearting red and a button proclaiming her strike.
Bev, Out here in flyover country, not a single person seems to be talking about it. This sounds more and more like an inside the beltway event.
Still no photos. Just photos of the January march. Attendance must stink.
Perhaps "A Day Without Women" is turning into "A Rally Without Women" as well?
Okay, this was tweeted by Women's March -
"Women birth half the population and we are half the population!" - Nelini Stamp from the Working Families Party #DayWithoutAWoman
Seriously, this is just stupid...
Bev, I admit that there may be aspects to parenting that I don't know, but uh...
...who "birthed" the other half of the nation? Lizard people?
Okay, this is interesting. Not a word in my various news feeds on the "strike" today. Well, except some womyn were arrested in NYC for blocking traffic. But radio silence otherwise...
I still don't get the P*#$&y hat....I really don't...
Oops, even worse...now even the NYT is trying hard to downplay the lack of importance in lack of participants...
"The strike’s leaders tried to manage expectations from the start. “The object for us isn’t that we hope to shut the whole economy down,” said Linda Sarsour, a co-chairwoman of the event who was arrested. “We see this as an opportunity to introduce women to different tactics of activism. Our goal is not to have the same numbers as the march.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/us/a-day-without-a-woman.html?_r=0
But Bev, This was never about numbers or having a message or anything else. It was just meant to prove a point... of some sore.
As an aside, Yahoo has the most fake photo possible up on their front page. It shows 5 women locking arms... two whites, an Asia, a Muslim in the middle and a black woman -- all thin, young, model-like and dressed stylishly in red. The photo is take from a low angle so you can't see the lack of crowd behind them. See! It was diverse! It was well attended! It was unified in red! It was beautiful and stylish! Stop saying it wasn't!!!
//snickers
This march really was a great exclamation mark to point out that their movement died before the moment it was born.
Critch, The hats are about feeling naughty... it lets them say a word that is otherwise forbidden and walk around with a replica of their genitalia sitting on their heads. It shows the conflict between their puritanical beliefs ("all sex is rape! men are evil! I'm more than my organs!") and their desire not to be repressed sexually anymore.
When will the men begin marching for a Day Without Men? And wearing dick hats? To what end? And....this womyns march was led by 3 felons I heard.
Sounds like the whole thing was a wash... There wasn't any more absences than usual at work yesterday and the few people who knew about it mostly viewed it with contempt. The left just won't stop their tantrums, huh?
- Daniel
When I was in college at SwampEast Missouri State in the mid-70s the gay community on campus declared a "blue jeans support day for gay students...wear jeans if you support us...". Of course, blue jeans were the standard wear of 99% of the student body in those days....interestingly, the Greeks and some other organizations, like my Veterans Club all wore dress clothes...some of the sororities wore formals...it was so much fun. This Women's Day sounds like the same thing...they'll claim that any women who weren't at work were supporting them...
Dang! I thought there was no article yesterday.👅
My wife texted me when she found out it was IWD around 11. Her reaction? "ugh" When she came home, she was livid about some IWD website/pledge her company did. She found it stupid, demeaning, and dishonest. I love her.
Critch, if I were around in the 70s, I'd have still worn my jeans and, if anybody confronted me, I'd have asked, "If you'll take your jeans off for a homo, what does that make you?" 😉
Pretty cynical on their part, tho', picking such a ubiquitous article of clothing. Glad it backfired on them.
Yeah, we also didn't use the word "gay" a lot...
Roger Stone (a Trump advisor at the time) had contact with a Russian intelligence front about the DNC hacks. He indicates advanced knowledge of what was leaked before it was leaked.
Stone's line at the time was our good friend Russia had nothing to do with the hacks and up until the evidence was found he denied the exchanges ever took place.
I would not have thought secret contracts would be necessary given Trump's open embrace of Putin, but secret contacts keep surfacing...
Still not politically problematic for Trump.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/10/roger-stone-trump-confidant-acknowledges-innocuous/
Roger Stone, President Trump’s former campaign advisor, engaged privately last year with a persona involved in hacking the Democratic National Committee, he told The Washington Times Friday, but insisted the conversations were “completely innocuous.”
“It was so perfunctory, brief and banal I had forgotten it,” the political consultant told The Times on Friday with respect to a private Twitter exchange he had with “Guccifer 2.0,” a pseudonymous entity explicitly tied to the DNC hack.
Guccifer 2.0 appeared last summer shortly after it was revealed that the DNC’s computer network had been breached by hackers. The self-described Romanian hacktivist claimed in a June 15 blog post that he had compromised the DNC — not Russian hackers, as experts had indicated — and said he had supplied WikiLeaks with a trove of documents ultimately published by the antisecrecy website the following month.
Mr. Stone wrote an article for Breitbart News on Aug. 5 attributing the DNC breach to Guccifer 2.0, not Russia, and swapped a handful of direct messages with the persona in the weeks that followed, according to copies of the conversations provided to the Times.
Gays were doing the wear jeans in college to show you support us thing as late as the mid-90s. I remember one such day. I wore jeans like I normally did (aside from gym shorts, that was all I owned).
I thought the whole thing was silly. Was anyone going around counting jeans? Maybe things are different now, but back then most college kids were focused on studying, partying and getting laid (not necessarily in that order) rather than micromanaging the lives of others.
Around these parts it would be like having a day to support gun control by wearing camouflage....and then going on the news and pointing out all the folks in camo..who had no idea anything was going on anyway....BTW...we had tornadoes on the ground night before last in our county and 72F, right now it's 32F and snow on the ground, freaky ain't it? A lot like March of 1977 and so many other Marches...
Anthony, this is what Scott Adams refers to as "two movies playing at the same time." Half the people see a series of coordinated, clandestine meetings between Russia surrogates and the Trump campaign. The other half see a handful of innocuous and easily explainable chance encounters by people who move in similar circles. Adams' rule-of-thumb for determining which half is "hallucinating," as he puts it, is to see who has something added to their perception that no one else sees. Secret conspiracies are almost always additive in nature.
The amusing thing about the Roger Stone/ Guccifer 2.0 exchange that's been publicized is how clearly (to me) Stone appears to be giving Guccifer 2.0 the brush off.
The reason Trump suffers no political damage from things his supporters and uncertain bystanders see as innocuous is, why would he?
tryanmax, Adams is really quite savvy. I've been catching more of his political commentary lately and I'm impressed with how thoughtful it is and how unique his perspective is. He doesn't spit out conventional thoughts like the pundits.
Anthony and tryanmax, I haven't followed the Stone thing so I can't say if it's suspicious. What I can say is that I find the assumption the establishment is making to be rather bizarre:
1. Talking to the Russians is illegal.
2. Meeting with a Russian makes you a spy/enemy agent.
3. Advocating anything less than the immediate and complete destruction of Russia with nuclear weapons makes you (a) a Russian sympathizer and (b) dangerous.
Weird.
Keep in mind, these are the same people who loved the reset button and cheered Obama hanging Poland out to dry. These people also apparently all their own secret meeting with the Russians. Someone was actually pointing out all the meetings the Clinton people and the Democrats had with the same Russians and there were bunches.
Critch, I think it's just an attempt to make it seem like they have actual support when they most likely only have a handful of supporters.
Preet Bharara is gone. He forced Sessions to fire him. He sounds like a weird combo of childlike innocence and stubbornness.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/11/us-attorney-bharara-is-fired-after-rejecting-sessions-step-down-request.html
It was previously reported by the Associated Press that Bharara was not complying with Attorney General Jeff Sessions' request to resign along with other prosecutors appointed by former President Barack Obama.
A person with knowledge of U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara's actions said Saturday that he is taking President Donald Trump up on his word that he can remain in his post.
The person said Bharara is remaining in his post after receiving assurances last year from Trump and Sessions that they wanted him to stay on. The person wasn't authorized to comment publicly on the matter and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
BTW, I put up a film article.
I doubt peace in the Mideast will happen in my lifetime.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/03/12/jordan-releases-soldier-who-killed-7-israeli-girls-in-1997.html
Ahmed Daqamseh opened fire on the eighth graders while they were on a class trip to the scenic "Island of Peace" border post, killing seven girls and wounding seven others. A Jordanian court later deemed Daqamseh mentally unstable and sentenced him to life in prison, rather than imposing the death penalty.
Daqamseh arrived before dawn Sunday in his home village of Ibdir in northern Jordan. Amateur video posted online showed him being surrounded by singing and dancing men, some kissing him on the cheek.
Andrew, if you're interested, the screenshot of the Stone/Guccifer interaction showed Guccifer basically saying "notice me" to Stone. Stone replied with a link to his own article saying "please RT" (retweet). Guccifer blasts Stone with a half a dozen more tweets before Stone gives him the brush off, calling Guccifer's remarks "pretty standard."
Andrew,
Call me naïve, but I like to think there is a happy place somewhere between 'Putin is the best!' and nuking Russia :) .
Its not that talking to Russians is illegal or even suspicious, its just that Trump has been so outspoken about his admiration of Putin and so willing to defend him even if it means smearing America that some people are searching for evidence he is a Russian puppet.
Personally I think he is just a Putin fanboy (a common alt right thing). Which isn't to say I rule out some of Trump's people working for the Russians for pay or because its convenient (say, a political hatchet man working with Russian intelligence), but I think Trump is motivated by sincere admiration of Putin, not money or even political convenience.
Post a Comment