When I first caught wind of that whole Benghazi business, I thought Hillary was out of the game.
Obviously, I was wrong. Recently, Time Magazine asked, “Can Anyone Stop Hillary?”
At the moment, it doesn’t look like it. Those bumbling big-business neocons in the Republican Party appear to be incapable of producing an electable candidate. Until his recent troubles, they they were actually floating the morbidly obese governor of the most universally reviled state in the Union as a front runner.
Unless an HIV-positive transsexual CEO with multiple sclerosis un-stones Excalibur, no one can compete with Hillary’s story.
Even as the current favorite, her past and her loss to Obama make her both an underdog and a comeback kid.
But, most importantly, Hillary Clinton is the next big “civil rights” story. Now that Americans have had their Black president, the media will need some big story to get excited about so that 2016 can be another “groundbreaking” and “historic” election. Progressives, after all, want to show “progress.” THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES is a no-brainer. The headlines will write themselves. The fact that she is probably at least as legitimately qualified for the job than any possible contenders will barely even matter. None of the bullshit-policies-she-comes-up-with-so-she’ll-have-something-to-talk-about will matter, and neither will her various campaign promises.
The appeal of Hillary Clinton’s story will make up for the fact that almost no one actually likes her. I have a hard time believing that even hardcore Democrats really like her. Not privately. Not in their hearts. They’ll never love her the way they loved Obama. They’ll never even love her like they loved her husband.
Hillary Clinton is hard to believe even when she’s trying to be sincere. She’s perceptibly shrewd and Machiavellian—like Nixon in lady pants—but also prone to hysterical outbursts of unfiltered bitchiness captured in those haggard harpy headshots.
None of that will stop her from getting elected. Unless there are some big surprises, the media will get the big story it wants, and America will get its FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT.
That’s fine by me. In fact, I want to go on record now as saying that I, for one, look forward to the Hillary Clinton presidency.
President Hillary Clinton won’t use whatever power the President of the United States actually has to make dramatic changes to America’s downward path. She’ll probably ride the red, white and blue toboggan of doom downhill with both feet out, braking for safety—like any careful soccer mom.
Clinton will be less inclined to respond to the complaints of radical feminists than Obama—or even George W. Bush—because she won’t have to. What are they going to do, accuse Hillary Clinton of waging a “War on Women?” She’ll do far less pandering to women than Obama has done to urban Blacks, because she’s actually 100% woman, and won’t need to fake it to make it as “one of the people.”
It also seems likely that President Hillary Clinton will be far less ambitious than Obama was in her attempts to reform the government or change current policies. She’ll remain the pragmatic player she’s always been. She won’t have to navigate the kind of national psychic hangover that weighed down Obama when he failed to work the messianic miracles promised by the priests of his personality cult. No one will have those kinds of expectations for her. It will be enough for her to be THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT.
And that’s a big deal.
It’s a bigger deal than having a Black president.
It’s a bigger deal, because the differences between men and women as individuals and as groups are more significant than any differences between the races.
Men from different tribes are still men.
In many ways, Barack Obama was just some other guy.
The symbolic power of a female leader is tremendous.
Because of human nature, and the natural dynamic between men and women, putting a woman in charge of all of the men in a nation is going to have a dramatic effect on the way that men perceive themselves and their role in the country.
Before he was elected, many White nationalists supported Barack Obama’s presidential campaign because they foresaw that a Black man in the White House would show White men that White men were no longer in charge—that it was no longer “their” country.
Most men I know like to brush aside feminism. Actually, most men I know are barely aware of feminism unless they are taking a college class or dealing with a lot of politically correct women at work. Most masculine “All-American” men, don’t read The Atlantic or the New York Times or Slate. They don’t even know what Feministing or Jezebel are.
The average working class men I come in contact with don’t appreciate the scope of the changes happening in America and throughout most of the First World.
I’m not saying that men don’t perceive the new rules. They know they can’t technically expect to get married and become head of the household and king of the castle. They know that their wives or potential wives can easily leave, take the kids, and siphon a court-ordered paycheck for the better part of eternity. They know that women work, and they may have had a female boss. They know that they can be accused of sexual harassment for behaving the way men have behaved for thousands of years. They know that women aren’t allowed to be excluded from anything, anywhere, at any time. They know that women are being pushed into the trades and the military. They see that the majority of television programming and marketing is no longer aimed at them. They see everything getting rounder and “cuter” and more female-friendly. They see the female sportscasters, but they’re more focused on the sports.
Men know and see all of this, but they continue to proceed “as if.” They continue to proceed “as if” the game has simply become more difficult, but the objectives are basically the same. Average American men nurture a sense that if they play the game right, they can still live a patriarchal lifestyle, and they figure that any man who can’t is a loser, a sucker or both.
I can’t think of a better person to show average American men that it is no longer “a man’s world”—and it is no longer “their” country—than Hillary Rodham Clinton, President of the United States of America.
Other powerful nations have had female rulers. England had its Iron Lady, but the United Kingdom has also had a Queen for most of living memory. America has never had a Queen. Will soldiers be as enthusiastic about serving a female Commander-in-Chief, especially one who has already made it so clear that she’s happy to roll them under the tank? Surely, the Hillary Clinton Presidency will change the way American soldiers see themselves and what remains of one of the few remaining warrior brotherhoods. Fellas can chuckle all they want about female marines who can’t do three pull-ups, but some chick who probably hasn’t attempted a pull-up since the 1970s is about to become a framed reminder of “who run it” at every U.S. military base in the world.
Will the flag-waving patriots be able to muster misty eyes for the National Anthem or a Pledge of Allegiance . . . to a woman?
“One nation, under mom . . .”
Will the Constitution-lovers love the Constitution so much when they realize that the Constitution has delivered them the dishonor of submission to a female ruler?
The New York Times recently admitted that women in “more equal” marriages—marriages where household roles and duties are shared without regard to gender—are less likely to be sexually interested in their husbands. I’ve been having a running discussion with a few friends about how this might relate to an apparent rise in “cuckoldry” themes in pornography. Perhaps these men in “equal” marriages begin to fantasize about seeing another man dominate their wives in a way that they no longer can.
There is a parallel with what has been called “The Secret American Subculture of Putin Worshippers.” American men are no longer proud of their own leaders. Like those emasculated husbands who fantasize about watching other men pile-drive their wives, men see Putin as the kind of swaggering stud who could step forward, put a firm hand on America’s waist, and COMMAND her. Putin is the kind of thoroughly corrupt leader American men could actually be proud of (instead of the thoroughly corrupt leaders they actually have).
“Diversity” and “inclusion” advocates have long argued that groups of people feel disenfranchised when they don’t see “people like them” in leadership positions. By following Obama with Hillary, it will be difficult for White American men to imagine that the country is for “people like them.” Hillary is another mother, another schoolteacher, another human resources manager, another guidance counselor, another therapist, another bossy girlfriend, another woman telling them what to do, want, and buy. The Hillary Clinton Presidency will ensure that American men continue to withdraw from public life as they become increasingly alienated from the American Dream. I look forward to the continued alienation of American men, because I believe that masculinity can only thrive covertly in the United States of America as it exists today. This country must be broken into pieces for there to be any overt resurgence of masculine values or patriarchy. Because there will be no violent revolution against the Progressive Police State, America must be broken spiritually, from the inside out. To effect real change, as I have said elsewhere, American men must become increasingly disenfranchised. They must cut their emotional connection to the idea of the American State and become happy barbarians who ignore progressive American values and make their own rules and valuations. To facilitate this process, America needs the kind of leader who will reinforce the nagging suspicion of American men that the American government is “them”—not “us.”
I think Hillary Clinton is the right woman for that job.
Hillary Clinton will wake up millions more men to the fact that America’s ruling class has stopped even pretending to be interested in the interests of average American men.
President Hillary Clinton will reveal to American men that America is no longer a nation that elevates rugged cowboys and pioneers. That’s the bad, old America. The new America wants its men emasculated, weak, and completely controlled by a corporate-owned state that’s far more concerned with the wants of acquisitive career gals. Who better than Hillary Clinton to put the “nanny” in “nanny state?”
The Hillary Clinton Presidency will drive home the fact that America isn’t “our” country anymore.
We just live here.
More and more men, especially young men, are already coming to this realization on their own. The irreversible transfer of American power to corporations and a handful of elites and their bureaucratic toadies has already happened. The figureheads only matter in the abstract. The talking heads are just talking points —ways to wake up the men who are still asleep.
When I picked up the issue of Time with the “Can Anyone Stop Hillary?” headline, the cashier at Safeway asked me if Hillary Clinton was running for president again.
He was maybe 22.
I told him that I didn’t know.
“Honestly, I’m just buying it so I can write an article making fun of her.”
He nodded. “I don’t think it really matters who wins elections.”
“No, it doesn’t.”
“They’re all the same. I think all of those people get together and have dinner.”
“Yeah, they do.”