Everyone Except Hillary is Racist and Sexist
By Daniel Greenfield
SultanKnish.Blogspot.com
If a state doesn’t vote for Hillary Clinton, it’s
racist.
That’s
the label that poor New Hampshire, the state just
too white to appreciate the virtues of a white woman
with dyed blonde hair who occasionally puts on a bad
fake southern accent and switches from loving the
Yankees to hating them, was stuck with after turning
her down.
Sensing trouble up the road in Nevada, Clintonworld
tried to accuse Nevada, a state with a sizable
Latino population, of also being too white for
Hillary. Then once Nevada voted the right way, its
was suddenly just right enough.
Ex-Salon boss Joan Walsh suggested that Hillary
Clinton was losing white voters because of
second-hand racism from her time working for Obama.
She’s losing men because they’re sexist and she’s
losing women because, according to Gloria Steinem,
they’re going ”where the boys are”. It won’t be long
before the handful of black people who vote for
Bernie Sanders are accused of “acting white”.
Hillary Clinton has turned into Tonya Harding; an
obnoxious criminal who can’t stop making excuses,
while towing around Bill Clinton as her Jeff
Gillooly to kneecap her opponents with awkward
attacks. After trying and failing to run on
experience, the only thing she’s running on now is
identity politics. And her campaign has tapped into
the most repugnant and obnoxious politically correct
smears.
If you don’t vote for Hillary Clinton, you’re a
racist. If you’re a woman who doesn’t vote for her,
you’re going to hell. If you ask her about her
illegal email server or her speaking fees, you’re
sexist.
Senator Shaheen, a Clinton proxy, claimed that
questions about the huge pile of speaking fees paid
to the Clintons by special interests and even
foreign governments were sexist because, “How many
men who are running for president have been asked
about the speaking fees they’ve taken?”
The Clintons pulled in $153 million in speaking
fees. Nobody in this election is anywhere close.
If criticizing Hillary Clinton for taking millions
of dollars from special interests is sexist, there
is no such thing as a legitimate non-sexist
criticism of her. And that’s the whole ridiculously
cynical idea.
Any and every criticism of Hillary Clinton is racist
or sexist. Clinton supporters now shout sexism or
racism first and ask questions later. Salon’s Amanda
Marcotte accused a female Hillary Clinton supporter
of being a “male Clinton hater” who has “issues with
women” because of an unflattering painting. That
type of casual smear has become the engine of a
desperate and paranoid political identity campaign.
Hillary Clinton wanted to run on experience, but by
her second primary her campaign was frantically
rolling out a victimhood narrative about mean Bernie
Bros who, according to accused rapist Bill Clinton,
had been really mean to Joan Walsh by pointing out
that her daughter works for the Clintons. According
to Walsh, accusing her daughter of getting the job
based on family connections is “stunningly sexist”.
Someone might want to tell former NBC correspondent
Chelsea Clinton who was being paid $600,000 a year
to interview the GEICO gecko for reasons having
nothing to do with her last name.
Some might want to argue that Bill Clinton sexually
assaulting vulnerable women was “stunningly sexist”
or that Hillary Clinton accusing a 12-year-old girl
who was raped and beaten into a coma of being a liar
was “stunningly sexist”. But to the privileged
leftist elite, accusing them of getting their kids
jobs working for their political allies or asking
about their special interest speaking fees is
“stunningly sexist”.
Interfering with Hillary Clinton’s sense of
political entitlement is also “stunning sexist”
since her political career is based on little more
than nepotism. Chelsea made a mere $600K on her NBC
gig. Hillary Clinton got paid more than that for
three Wall Street speeches. She’s running for the
highest office in the country based on an
undistinguished career in the Senate, a disastrous
term in the State Department and her last name.
Without that last name, she could never have moved
to New York and gotten a Senate seat for the asking
or become the presumptive presidential candidate in
two elections.
What was truly “stunningly sexist” was the rash of
privileged progressives mocking Senator Joni Ernst
for speaking about growing up so poor that she had
to wear bags over her feet and then going on to
become a lieutenant colonel in the Iowa Army
National Guard, while pretending that Hillary
Clinton marrying well is a feminist accomplishment
that everyone must respect or be charged with
sexism.
Tom Harkin endorsed Hillary Clinton in exchange for
a “stunningly sexist” job for his daughter.
Meanwhile he mocked Ernst as Taylor Swift. That was
actual real life sexism. Hillary and her backers
keep claiming that she is the victim of a double
standard. But she is really the beneficiary of one.
The reduction of the Clinton campaign to claims of
victimhood is once again evidence of that. Hillary
Clinton has cried sexism in every competitive
election she has ever been in despite having a track
record of destroying the lives of other women. And
the media continues to promote her baseless claims
of victimhood allowing her campaign to claim that
any criticism of her subjects her to a double
standard.
Hillary Clinton has managed to create a double
standard for double standards.
Noticing, as Bob Woodward did, that there is
“something unrelaxed about the way she is
communicating” is sexist. Accused pedophile Lena
Dunham contends that calling Hillary Clinton
“inaccessible” is sexist. Someone should have told
that to the reporters that the Clinton campaign
lassoed off behind its moving rope line.
You can’t criticize Hillary Clinton’s speaking style
or her speaking fees. She lost New Hampshire because
it’s racist. Any other states she loses, is racist
too.
According to Hillary Clinton, she can’t be a member
of the establishment, despite being a member of the
establishment, because she is “a woman running to be
the first woman president”. (As opposed to a man or
a cleverly disguised robot running to be the first
woman president.) That debate response captured the
fundamental cynicism of Hillary’s establishment
campaign wrapping its wealth and power in the rags
and chains of victimhood. And it’s a cynicism that
pervades the left whose billionaires are always
funding populist campaigns against the 1 percent and
someone else’s wealth.
Hillary Clinton is the most powerful and the most
admired woman in America who claims that everything
is unfair and that everyone is prejudiced against
her. The country is in the throes of the final term
of a man who thinks the same way and abuses others
with that self-serving justification. Hillary and
Obama always have excuses for why they are the
victims and everything is someone else’s fault. Can
the country really afford eight more years of the
same thing?