The best thing about my job is attending Senate and House Armed Services hearings. The worst thing about my job is attending Senate and House hearings. On the one hand, the rights we have as Americans to freely observe our government in action should be reason enough for us to daily fall prostrate and thank God above we were born in this country.
On the other hand, there’s all that other stuff we have to put up with precisely because we live in a free country. I’ll delay suspense and get right to the point; Code Pink wrecked my wardrobe, and possibly pinks in general. This epiphany came while I was attending last weeks Senate Armed Services hearing on the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). It happened about half way through the hearing when I noticed a concerned look on the face of a Congressional Cop. Knowing this hearing was the roll out for the QDR I suspected he was keeping an eye out for the crazies. Which, as it turns out, he was.
Curious, I looked to see at whom he looking. Seated on the aisle, visible for the cameras and Senators, was an older woman holding a small pink sign that read, “Defund the Military.” This annoyed me… greatly. As an individual whose spouse, brother, father, father-in-law, grandfather, uncle, and cousins have all proudly served, I bristled at the punk bravado.
Never having seen one of these Code Pink women in real life, I watched her closely. I didn’t know what I was expecting, but I did know this, an angry woman with a lost cause was rife for comedy. I was not going to miss this train wreck.
As she sat there with her arm propped on her leg, supporting the daunting weight of her 81/2 x 11 sheet of paper laden with ink, I wondered to myself, what kind of woman objects to funding selfless individuals who have agreed to die in defense of her right to protest them? She didn’t look evil, and by that I mean there were no noticeable horns or a tail, also she was dressed nicely, no requisite hippy beads or hemp hoodie.
In fact, she had on what I would describe as a very tasteful pink turtleneck…. That looked rather too familiar…. That’s when horror sucker punched with a mean left hook. This deceptively normal looking harpy had on my hot-pink turtleneck sweater! The one I had even considered wearing to this hearing! Peace loving earth mothers my eye; this was an act of war.
Second ONLY to never ask a woman when she’s due, never mess with a woman’s wardrobe.
Now I was really angry. Code Pink, probably by design, had managed to eliminate at least five possible wardrobe options from my already-taxed list of possibilities. As a professional, I am expected to look like one, as a person on a budget, I have to do more with less.
Gee: that sounds kinda familiar. How many times have I heard that from the military men in my family? But that was all abstraction: this is my clothes closet we’re talking about.
So unless I wanted to risk being the object of security scrutiny, as well as inadvertently identifying myself with a fringe bunch of angry women and their cause, pink is dead to me. Which stinks because hearing season has just started and I’ve got about a dozen or so more to attend.
There is a bright side, thank God they didn’t chose lavender, claret, or azure or I’d be totally screwed.
Tired, miffed and now forced to explore wardrobe contingency options, I wanted answers. So I went to their website. Which was only marginally helpful. According to the site, Code Pink was meant to be a play on President Bush’s color-coded Homeland Security threat alerts. Ok, who didn’t know that? What I wanted an answer for was why “pink”? Well, what’s not stated but is clearly implied is that since Code-Pink was originally formed by angry women, for angry, who hate war and think “diplomacy, compassion and a commitment to international law,” are an effective foreign policy — it’s ok to laugh, I did — pink, being the color associated with females, was the logical choice.
That this is the only example of a logical decision since Code Pink’s inception; only serves to prove that even angry women can accidently make sense sometimes.
Absent a coherent answer, I did learn some interesting things. For example, did you know “Women have been the guardians of life — not because we are better or purer or more innately nurturing than men, but because the men have busied themselves making war?” I didn’t.
I wasn’t aware that you could support an ideology that without exception presupposes a violent and hostile enemy will destroy you and all life, as you know it, and also be the guardians of life. The next Code Pink mission-fashion statement is true enough: the angry women of Code Pink aren’t better than men, and it’s because they have busied themselves in wasted effort reconciling a completely incongruous ideology, chiefly, the claim to protect life, while in reality, not actually protecting it.
As a woman, I can attest to this fact, angry women are selectively governed by the rules of logic. Therefore, inconsistency, as likely as not, has no affect on them. The good news is that it also makes the Code Pink whackos’ less effective, because inconsistency negatively affects the rest of us.
The more important question in all this still remains what am I going to wear? Sure I can still wear pink to other events, and I will, but short of wearing a button that says, “Not with the angry women, I just like the color,” pink is out for hearings.
Unless of course there is a greater purpose to be served in all this. Esther saved an entire people from annihilation, perhaps I am meant to save pink from clutches of the liberal sisterhood and restore it to its proper place in the annals of history, a pretty girly color that represents all that is right with femininity. I may have been born for such a time as this.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter