IDEA BEHIND IT
A diverse country requires a diverse president – that seems to be the idea behind trying to promote the first female president of color for the White House position. Diverse communities and previously disenfranchised women want someone who looks like them to be president presumably because she understands them and connects with them better than when the presidency belonged exclusively to white males, with one notable exception of President Barack O. The assumption is that the first female president of color will make the lives of diverse communities and women better, expand their rights, and reflect the changed ethnic makeup of the U.S. There is another assumption that since the first diverse female president is a Democrat and belongs to previously economically disadvantaged groups, she will be able to help redistribute income and resources from the “privileged” groups such as businesspeople and white men to communities of color and women.
ISSUES OF RACE
The first Jamaican black and South Indian president is expected to understand the needs of and connect better with minority populations of the U.S. that make up 42% of the population and will soon become the majority. Let’s examine if that is true. VP K.H. was raised by a Jamaican Marxist economy professor and an Indian health scientist researching cancer. Neither of her parents was raised within the American black community or belonged to American black neighborhood culture. VP K.H. grew up in the Midwest and later built her career in California but never lived within the borders of an American black community, even though she attended the historically black Howard College. It could be argued that due to her education with black intelligentsia at Howard historically black college, K.H. had familiarized herself with the issues experienced by the black community in the U.S. This doesn’t mean, however, that either her parents or her own background culturally qualify her as a true African American Black person who is 100% black and was raised under American black community cultural influence.
Aside from her questionable association with the American Black community, she could argue that she belongs to the American South Indian community, and that could be more likely since her mother influenced her culturally the most. As to the Jamaican community, her father didn’t really participate much in her life after her parents divorced and it’s not clear what cultural influence the Jamaican community had on K.H. Most importantly, K.H.’s ethnic and cultural background separates her completely from Native American, American Latino communities, and from American East Asian communities – she has absolutely nothing in common with them. There is no “generalized” group of diverse minorities in the U.S. that can somehow be treated as one group of people with one particular unified set of priorities and therefore can be represented by any person who belongs to any minority group! The interests of the Asian American community may be very different from the interests of the Black community and interests of the Cuban Latino community may be absolutely different from the interests of the Guatemalan indigenous community so lumping them all together as one “minorities” group that can be represented by one “minority” politician like K.H. is absurd and unworkable. If K.H. gives an important position in her administration to a black official, it means that position is not going to be given to an Asian, or Native American or Latino or white person! She will have to pick and choose and minorities will be squabbling over each position. So far her administration has openly favored black individuals for all the important government positions at the expense of all others, so how can she in the future represent all other minorities if she only favors one of them? K.H. policies will be designed to help her own minority at the expense of all others, so she cannot represent the interests of non-black; non-South-Indian minorities! V.P.K.H. has nothing in common with the Guatemalan indigenous community, nothing in common with the Mexican American community, nothing in common with the American East Asian community, nothing in common with the Persian community, and therefore cannot claim that she is in a better position to represent them than any white competitor of hers! V.P. K.H. might argue that what she has in common with other minorities is the discrimination by American Whites against all minorities but coming from her it is absolutely NOT credible because neither she personally nor her parents experienced that discrimination! Her parents belonged to the American middle class and have had successful careers in the world of Academia, and her being promoted from one affirmative action government position to another to finally become a VP demonstrates her privileged status. Anyone would love to be “discriminated against” in such a way! So, K.H. can hardly be relevant to most of the American minorities either ethnically or culturally – K.H.’s status as the first potential president of color is NOT ONLY QUESTIONABLE, BUT HIGHLY DECEPTIVE given her irrelevance to the experiences of Latino, Asian, and even Black communities in the U.S. Furthermore, K.H.’s background as the child of parents growing up under British colonial rule and a beneficiary and advocate of affirmative action (K.H. was against the repeal of affirmative action in California) makes K.H. a very vindictive enemy to the white community of the U.S. K.H. As a result, K.H. could turn out to be a lot more divisive than either her failed boss, or her main competitor for the presidency – K.H. will be perceived on a mission to destroy white America, not having any white blood whatsoever and coming from a family of anti-white activists. K.H. might argue that her husband is white and if she really hated white people so much she would not have married him. This argument doesn’t hold any water because her husband belongs to the far left progressive movement that spreads hatred against white people and despises whiteness even more than K.H. herself.
ISSUES OF GENDER
While there are serious doubts about K.H.’s relevance to American minorities, there is no argument about her being an actual biological woman – even those opposing her are not alleging that she is not a female. If she becomes president she will indeed be the first real female president of the U.S. The question is: Is this really so important what the gender of our president is? K.H.’s team will say that males have dominated U.S. politics since its creation and it’s time to give a fair chance to a woman to be in charge of our great country. From the standpoint of basic fairness this may seem reasonable – why should all the presidents always be selected from the same group of people? However, when we examine this issue more carefully, we will see that those demonized white males have made America the most successful and most powerful country in the world, in other words, they did a pretty good job and demonstrated they have the talents for it. Female presidency has never been tested in the U.S. Female leadership in other government positions has had mixed results: if you look at Democrat females in charge what you see is mostly dysfunctional cities run by black females (Baltimore, Lightfoot‘s Chicago, London Breed’s San Francisco, Karen Bass Los Angeles etc); you see dysfunctional vice presidency of K.H. herself (failed to handle the border, failed to handle international crises, failed to manage her own office properly her employees quitting in droves, failed to stop illegal immigration or crime while being CA attorney general). You also see evil leadership of Pelosi – manipulative and disruptive to the country sabotage of Republican administration, dirty political games, rude behavior towards sitting Republican president, firing of a Democrat president etc, party over country kind of an attitude… K.H. debate performance K.H. had a “good debate night” attacking her opponent by masterfully repeating the headlines of her party’s media describing why K.H.‘s Republican opponent is unfit for office, incompetent, evil, chaotic, weird etc. But when asked if the lives of Americans got better under her watch, she purposely changed the topic. She kept saying she has a good plan for the future, but didn’t really explain what it was. She engaged in populist rhetoric promising to give $50,000 to new businesses and child credit etc, but never said where this money was going to come from! And smart people could guess that this money will come from our pockets, not from “big, bad” corporations that incidentally donated hundreds of millions to her campaign. She didn’t mention that if she does raise taxes on businesses (big and small) as we would expect from Democrats they will pass it all on to consumers! This will cause prices to go up again despite prices hitting the ceiling already after constant price hikes in the past 3.5 years. IF K.H. goes after companies for “price gouging” as she threatened – her efforts will fail because the government is not allowed to set prices by constitution and these types of measures will not survive court challenges and will not get the majority support in Congress. K.H.‘s handlers would not need another debate they are asking for if she did so well as the Regime media are saying she did. They NEED this new debate for something! They say her opponent D.T. got humiliated during the debate and is scared to do another one – but somehow his polling numbers didn’t go down after the debate and K.H.’s didn’t go up either. Also, independent voters watching K.H. “prosecuting” her opponent didn’t hear anything new – they’ve heard it all before from the mainstream media. What they wanted to learn is who K.H. is and all they saw is someone who can smoothly and expressively repeat mainstream media headlines trashing her opponent. Beyond that, they saw some childish sarcastic gestures and smiles that were more appropriate for some kitchen or restaurant gossiper, than for a potential president. K.H. experienced genuine but childish joy when she felt like she “got” her opponent. Is that a serious person who can be trusted with running this country? She was also very low on substance and evasive when it comes to her record as part of the administration that was so incompetent and ineffective that her own party fired her boss leaving her like a deer in the headlights with the Herculean task to prove that she can do the job in a matter of 2.5 months! A party that strongly supported her boss suddenly fired him and now they are just as vigorously trying to build up her image while previously ignoring her out of fear that she’d say or do something embarrassing… With this type of bad experience with Democrat female leadership, one might become skeptical of the competency and abilities of K.H. to handle presidency. Is it really worth it to hire an incompetent female with limited vision, questionable intellectual capabilities and potential age-related mood swings for the most important job in the country solely based on her gender just to get even with males? Who will really benefit from incompetent and potentially disastrous K.H. leadership other than the administrative state? If K.H. couldn’t handle most basic tasks given to her in the past 3.5 years, why should she or her party be trusted to fix the problems they themselves singlehandedly created?
CONCLUSION
Wouldn’t it be more sensible for the population to choose a president based on their proposed policies and their experience and competency rather than based on their race or gender? If someone incompetent is selected solely based on race and gender, they will fail and will drag the country into an abyss with them! If the most competent and experienced person who didn’t discredit themselves by being a part of the self-serving administrative state are chosen, such a person will apply their business skills and merit-based experience to do the best possible job for the American people.
Leave A Comment