Home > Uncategorized > Why Hillary Clinton Deserved to Lose

Why Hillary Clinton Deserved to Lose

by Gopal Raj Kumar

Malaysia Outlook (November 14 2016)

The silence of Hillary Clinton’s hand maidens in Southeast Asia is deafening in the wake of her resounding and unequivocal trouncing at the hands of Donald Trump.

Just in case one needs reminding, Donald Trump (“The Donald”) was the successful presidential candidate in the recent US presidential election.

The reality of that election result is something Hillary Clinton simply cannot come to terms with.

She is after all not invincible.

The extra wide margin she expected just for being a woman was rejected by the masses in preference of merit.

The outcome was simply too painful for her [to] bear.

Hillary’s cowardly conduct in withdrawing and failing to meet her constituents in the aftermath of her defeat, waiting instead till the next day when she delivered her bitter concession speech, many say was insincere and as affected as her election campaign itself.

It was an insult to all Americans.

Not so much one might say to her many followers, the vast majority being women in the nineteen to forty age group whose character she reflected in many ways.

Here is one reason which reference to that demographic is hard to disagree with.

Many of the younger voters like the protestors in the aftermath of Hillary’s defeat are like all of us when we were in that same age group – anti-establishment, irresponsible and did not vote.

Other reasons stem from the fact that Generationz X, Y and Millennials especially the women in these categories have a sense of entitlement, especially where they are white, or middle class and “educated”.

The remainder of that class does not fit into the elitism of those fortunate enough to belong to that social pedigree.

The elites speak in the stock phrases adopting the vocabulary of college educated women distinguishing them from the rest.

A classic class divide and amongst these are Korean, Indian (subcontinents like Huma Abedin), Chinese, imports or immigrants who temporarily shed their cultural backgrounds just to be accepted and to belong.

When Women are Women and Why When They are Not?

Inspite of all the rhetoric and pious condescension when it comes to describing “women” in the west, it is always the Caucasian English speaking Judeo Christian variety that matters.

The rest are mere tokens whether they are able to identify that slur or not.

It is why feminism has not reached the masses.

In Hillary’s hollow concession speech there was not even a brief mention in passing of pioneering women leaders.

Sirimov Bandarnaike the first female leader of any country anywhere prime minister of Sri Lanka.

Indira Gandhi the second female prime minister and prime minster of the world’s largest democracy did not warrant a mention.

Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan or Sheik Hasina of Bangladesh (the later two of course being Muslim and choosing to wear their Islamic credentials on their sleeve would not have qualified in an Islamophobic country as the US even in Hillary Clinton’s circles).

Huma Abedin of course is different for a variety of reasons.

I cringed at the number of Indian middle class women as American citizens defending a Hillary who kept referring to a glass ceiling in which she made 18,000,000 cracks the last time she tried.

For crying out loud these Asian prime ministers, all women broke that glass ceiling decades ago.

And in case Hillary and her little brown slaves have not come to terms with it, Mao once said that women (not white or Chinese women) hold up half the sky.

A quote western “feminists” never hesitate to avail themselves of when in need.

As for Hillary Clinton’s experience in public service, regime change and through it bloodshed stands out as her most prominent contribution to humanity over the past decade.

From the other end of her mouth Hillary preached “rights”, equality for women and democratic values.

Analysing The Donald’s Remarks

The chants of racism, misogyny and hate in reference to Donald Trump, needs to be examined in closer context in order to demolish these myths once and for all.

Donald Trump did indeed say he would like to stop Muslims coming to the US during the election campaign.

But what most people fail to have noticed and the way the media reported it was the statement in the fullness of the sentence in which it was made.

Trump said, “we do not know what or who ISIS is. And till we do we must halt all migration of Muslims here. Our government does not know who they are.”

The US in any event continues with the practice of “rendering”.

This is the illegal practice of kidnapping Muslims wherever they are to be found on the suspicion they were a threat to US interests.

The list of Muslims barred from entering the US is far greater than any other religious group.

That’s not a Trump initiative.

The largest group of people profiled in the US by the US is Muslims.

Hillary did nothing as secretary of state to abate or stop that practice.

Trump’s is a threat.

Her failure to stop the practice is part of her experience and qualification to rule.

Again she was soundly rejected by American voters.

As to deporting Mexican gangs, it is a widely held sentiment amongst a majority of Americans that these gangs need to be dealt with in an effective manner.

It would be according to a Trump aide, also apply to Chinese, Vietnamese and other Indo-Chinese gangs like the triads.

As to the wall Trump has threatened to build, it is already built.

It began even before George Bush I and II and continued during Bill Clinton’s time as president, spilling over into Barack Obama’s presidency.

The media made it into a race issue and Trump specific.

Going to the misogyny accusation, the Americans are such hypocrites.

That includes Michelle Obama who said she did not want Trump’s language reaching her children.

Her children are in that group of between fifteen to 35 who by a majority of 76% in the US in a published survey said they wanted most to be like Kim Kharadashian (sex tape hero), Millie Cyrus the singer famous for inviting her audience to touch her “there”, and Madonna who masturbates on stage as part of her act.

The Khobragade Affair – Selective Women Rights

For Hillary Clinton’s camp to be so precious about race and women it is astonishing how they stood silently by whilst the young Indian diplomat and mother of two, Devani Khobragde, was two years ago “cavity searched” (another name for digital rape) in New York after being handcuffed and roughed into the back of a police car at her children’s school.

Her crime: An Indian maid in her household (with a record of lodging similar and false complaints before) had complained of being underpaid by Khobragade.

The ignominious degrading treatment dished out to the young Khobragade drew a deafening silence in the Hillary Democratic camp even though it occurred under an Obama administration when Hillary was secretary of state.

Now when is a woman and when is she not?

Rigging the System

As for the slur that Trump would not recognise the election results because the system is rigged, Hillary ear bashed the world with her sanctimonious constitution abiding responses only to fall flat on the issue when she lost.

Seizing the very same Trump allegation to support her failure, Hillary through her supporters now wants to attack weaknesses in the electoral system for its flaws.

As a lawyer her complaint is hollow and embarrassing shallow. Trump was right.

But Hillary driven by hubris and conceit was seemingly “invincible” and could even fight a “rigged system”.

So she thought.

Women of Courage and the Principles of Fairness

What’s noticeable in all of this is the same rhetoric and platitudes Hillary’s hand maidens in Malaysia employ to destabilse government.

Suddenly they realise that the primary vote really means little at the end of the day.

With so little knowledge of the system they want to change.

It is no wonder the Ambigas and their sermons have fallen on deaf ears in spite of the generous funding received from the Hillary linked foundations.

Women of courage indeed but without knowledge.

Hillary’s campaign raised over US$900,000,000 from over 3,000,000 donors.

What a bad investment from people with even poorer judgments.

Donald Trump may make a bad president.

But he can’t be any worse than a lying bunch of women who cry foul when they lose fair and square.

With that kind of money they could have fed and educated a very large number of women in a number of more deserving countries around the world.

And that could have been Hillary’s greatest contribution to women.

But women of colour don’t really matter even to women of colour like the Asians in the US and Asia who support Hillary.

Hillary and her supporters of women have set women’s opportunities to equality back by 100 years.

If it is equality she sought in this presidential election she would have been a little more inclusive.

It was revenge.

And that revenge breeds the hatred that prevailed during her campaign sufficient to deny her the dignity of the office she pursued.

Hillary may indeed be more experienced.

But her experiences are in failure, greed, dishonesty and revenge.

By the looks of it, it ain’t over yet by a long shot. Hell hath no fury …


Categories: Uncategorized
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: