Here is the introduction to a Sarah Rode column [Note to Todd Epp: Sarah is a female]:
"Feminists are never as militant as they are when promoting peace," said historian Sondra S. Herman. Code Pink offers a prime example as they descend on the Capital to protest victory. Their name mocks Homeland Security alerts which inform law enforcement and citizens of increased terrorist threats. Their website states, "While Bush’s color-coded alerts are based on fear, the Code Pink alert is based on compassion and is a feisty call for women and men to ‘wage peace.’" The tactics employed in their "compassion" and "feistiness" while "waging peace" are more than even Rep. Nancy Pelosi can stomach.
Code Pink women activists are vehemently anti-war and claim to be the mothers, wives and daughters of the troops fighting in Iraq. Favorite tactics from the Code Pink bag of tricks include street theatrics, hunger strikes and staged fainting in Capitol Hill offices, and protests at campaign stops across the country -- basically anything that gains media attention. They point to men as the cause of war and women as the solution. Their stated purpose is to end the "occupation in Iraq," although their goals go beyond that. Their leadership and mission are rooted more in communist ideals than in moral objection to unjust war.
While Code Pink activists condemn President Bush for his "fear-based politics that justify violence," they applaud brutal dictators like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. Three of their top leaders, Cindy Sheehan, Jodie Evans and Medea Benjamin, took a trip to Venezuela last year to meet and socialize with Dictator Chavez. He endorsed their efforts to subvert American authority and denounce the President of the United States as imperialistic. Jodie Evans reported after the meeting, "He called Cindy (Sheehan) ‘Mrs. Hope.’"
And Sarah ends her column with this:
In their efforts to discredit America, Code Pink leader Medea Benjamin and her husband, Kevin Danaher, organize trips for young anti-Americans to build coalitions in countries such as Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Cuba, among others. It is interesting that such radical feminists would see Iranian policies as superior to American policies, particularly when it comes to women. Ironically, Mr. Danaher wrote in 2003 (one month before the Iraq war began), "Without helping citizens around the world achieve real democracy, we will not be safe."
President Bush would agree with that statement, and his policies back it up. He stated in his address to the nation in January 2007, "The changes (troop surge) I have outlined tonight are aimed at ensuring the survival of a young democracy that is fighting for its life in a part of the world of enormous importance to American security."
If radical feminists truly want a secure nation, they should give democracy in Iraq a fighting chance. If feminists actually care about women’s rights, they should applaud the liberation of Iraqi women from Saddam Hussein’s evil regime and their new-found political rights in the fledgling democracy. If feminists really want peace in Iraq, they should support the military in its efforts to create an environment that allows for Iraqis to develop their democracy. If feminists care at all about America, they should stop dishonoring the troops and start acting like real women.
If Todd Epp cares at all about about America, he should start acting like a real man and face the truth.