All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 22, 2016 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
17:41
Vote Hillary's Vag 2016
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I think the question on every Linux reader's lips is, do you consider yourself a feminist?
Yes, absolutely.
You know, I'm always a little bit puzzled when any woman of whatever age, but particularly a young woman, says something like, and you've heard it, something like, well, I believe in equal rights, but I'm not a feminist.
Well, a feminist is by definition someone who believes in equal rights.
I'm hoping that people will not be afraid to say, that doesn't mean you hate men.
It doesn't mean that you want to separate out the world so that you're not, you know, part of ordinary life.
That's not what it means at all.
It just means that we believe women have the same rights as men, politically, culturally, socially, economically.
That's what it means.
Okay, that's not so much a belief as it is an observation about the legal condition of women in the modern West.
But, okay, so why should your average American vote for Hillary Clinton?
I mean, what's she going to do for them?
Well, I did a bit of Googling and found out that apparently, Hillary Clinton, if you can believe it, is a woman.
And that is a perfectly valid, not to mention smart, political decision.
Thank God there's some kind of explanation as to why her being a woman is actually an important political decision, because otherwise, it sounds like I'm voting for Hillary's musty old vagina.
Throughout the primary season, I often found myself having to defend my choice to support Clinton.
I cycled through what were the most common justifications at the time.
Clinton would be ready on day one.
Oh yeah, that's something to really worry about.
Obama was just like, well, I just don't know what to do here.
Obama hadn't proven himself yet.
Well, he probably hadn't.
The most common reason I cited, which was also happened to be what Clinton herself was saying, but looking back, the real reason I was voting for Clinton was something I was ashamed and discouraged from admitting.
I voted for Clinton because she was a woman.
Okay, well, I can see why you'd be ashamed.
Not because there's anything wrong with women, of course, but because that's an arbitrary characteristic.
It's not something that Hillary Clinton chose.
It's not something she had to accomplish.
It's not something she earned.
It's something that she was born with.
It would be like voting for her because she has blue eyes or a terrifying smile.
The thing is, you've got to make sure they're not the wrong kind of woman.
I mean, if, like they say here, Hillary was running under the Republican ticket, I would never vote for her.
Like many other Americans, party trumps almost every other consideration when it comes to making a voting decision.
Well, that really does explain the state of American politics, doesn't it?
However, when the choice is among Democrats in a presidential election, the woman candidate will get my vote.
Honestly, I mean, who cares about her policies?
Tell me about her dusty Vijay.
Many Americans might lambast the idea of voting for a candidate based on descriptive characteristics like gender.
Well, not just Americans, but yeah.
We should vote for candidates based on their policy positions.
We should extensively research each candidate, pay attention to the media, listen to what the candidates are saying, and then make a choice based on the information we've collected over the course of the campaign, right?
Well, I mean, that's how democracy is supposed to work.
But, okay, you go and say the model of the rational calculator who collects and digests a wealth of information about each candidate for making a well-informed, thoughtful choice, may be the ideal model of decision-making in democracy, but it is far from reality.
I see, right, okay, I see.
Because everyone else isn't doing any kind of rational calculation about the candidate they're going to vote for, you shouldn't either.
In fact, you should be like, well, okay, why don't I just feel down between my legs?
Oh, that's squidgy, not a bit dry, but hey, that's just like Hillary Clinton.
You know what?
I think I've just figured out who I'm going to vote for.
I wonder if she's got boobs as well.
So based on the fact that most Americans do not base their decisions on rational, informed calculations, but rely on cues, voting for Clinton because she's a woman seems to be a good reason to vote for a candidate as any.
You fucking sheep.
That's not a good reason to vote for a candidate.
Everyone else has got a bad reason to vote for their candidates.
And you're like, well, maybe I'll just choose a bad reason as well.
Everyone else is doing it.
So at the end of the day, I'm voting for Hillary Clinton.
Because she's a woman.
And because of what that means.
What does that mean?
It means she's got double X crimsons.
What of it?
I'm not ashamed of it, and I hope that others aren't either this time.
Because not only is it a valid reason, it's a good reason to vote for a candidate.
So I'm voting for Clinton because she's a woman, and because of what that means, she will do as a president.
That's a bit deterministic, isn't it?
But on top of that, I guess I'm voting for her because she makes me feel hopeful.
And to me, that's as good a reason as any.
There we go.
You're voting based on your feelings.
You've got no idea about any of her policies.
You haven't mentioned a single one.
But she makes you feel hopeful and she has the same kind of genitals as you.
I guess we should get a man, I mean, a mangina's opinion.
Yes, you should vote for Hillary just because she's a woman.
So apparently voting women diminishes Clinton's accomplishments and reduces her to, well, a symbol.
Which it absolutely does.
You're not voting for her based on anything she has done.
For who she is.
You're voting for what she is.
But this argument ignores the fact that the trials of being a woman in the US actually do count as good training for the presidency.
Honestly, what kind of lunatic actually thinks that every woman in America is qualified to be the president of their country based on the fact that they are a woman in America?
Listen to this though.
This is the most telling part about the whole thing.
Women's perceptions and values have never been represented by the person behind the desk at the Oval Office.
I mean that sentence in itself.
As if women have different perceptions and values to men.
Women have different values to men.
They don't value peace, prosperity, happiness.
They value something else.
Our author, of course, means feminist perceptions and values have never been represented by the person behind the desk in the Oval Office.
Which makes far more sense.
I mean it goes without saying that legendary feminist lunatic Jessica Valenti thinks it's just fine to care about gender on the ballot.
I mean only in a sexist society would women be told that caring about representation at the highest levels of government is wrong.
Yeah nice Kafka trap, but I hate to tell you this Jessica.
But every politician from your state that actually has an influence on what's going on represents you whether you voted for them or not.
There is nothing wrong or foolish in thinking about candidates' gender in the election.
It is politically savvy to vote for your interests.
I never vote for a man just on the basis that he's a man.
It is smart to think about the long game for women's rights.
And for those of us with our bodies literally on the line, it's wise to cast a vote that you would believe would be the most likely to ensure that women won't be forced into pregnancy, arrested for having miscarriages, really arrested for having miscarriages, or any of the other horrifying consequences that anti-abortion Republican leadership would surely pursue.
I'm reliably informed your last teacher retired her to the subcontinent.
This time tomorrow, she'll be squatting over a dung fire in some godforsaken Gundarati village, hoping like hell that gundas from central government don't come bursting into her overcrowded mud hut and compulsory sterilizer.
For some people, even weighing gender heavily in their political decision-making still won't mean a vote for Clinton.
But if it does, their vote should be respected as a well-informed one.
Alright, whatever, gone.
Dismissing those who want to take gender into account is turning your back on the basic democratic principle that people have the rights to be politically represented.
Yeah, but what happens when it's a Republican woman who is in favour of rolling back abortion rights?
You can be like, well, I mean, I disagree with everything she's doing.
But Vaj!
So is it sexist to vote for Hillary Clinton because she's a woman?
Not according to Ben Donahauer, Hillary DNC Delegate 08 and former campaign staffer.
In his unbiased opinion, the answer's no.
Are there a lot of women who will vote for Hillary Clinton just because she's a woman?
Well, according to Ben Donahauer again, the answer is yes.
And let's not forget that there is going to be many a college student, presumably a gender studies major, who is also going to vote for Hillary based on the fact that she's a woman.
But do you know who's not going to be voting for Hillary because she's a woman?
And I tell you, you're really going to like this.
You're never going to see this coming.
Lena fucking Dunham.
Can you believe it?
Apparently, nothing gets her angrier than when someone implies she's voting for Hillary Clinton because she's female.
I mean, I assume that it was because Hillary Clinton's giving her loads of money to be the face of her campaign, but I mean, it's not because she's female.
Lena goes on to prove that she is exactly as soulless as she appears to be and says that she supports Clinton because of her policies, her track record, and because of her beliefs, which, my god, I mean, she's quite willing to use a paedophile as the face of her campaign.
So, I mean, what kind of person would support Hillary Clinton?
Other than a paedophile.
The question is, of course, which crazy lunatic ideologue do I believe?
And I'm going to go with my gut and go with the disgusting pedophile who looks like she's from the Adams family when she says, look, judge on policy, don't judge on gender.
So I went and found an article by someone who is advocating for the same thing and also can tell me some of her policies so I could judge based on them.
So the policies are as follows.
Hillary wants to make college affordable.
Well, I guess that's good.
She knows the ropes.
Okay, well, that's brilliant.
She's a career politician.
I'd expect her to.
Hillary spent her life promoting women's rights, you know, except when she wasn't.
She supports gun control, common sense gun control, which is great.
And she's pro-equal rights for all Americans, except for when she wasn't.
Now the thing is, I have to go to a lot of right-wing sources to find information about Hillary Clinton's lies.
It's very difficult to find a left-wing source that's prepared to talk about the lies that Hillary Clinton tells.
She does indeed tell some whoppers, like when she claims she landed in Bosnia under sniper fire, despite the fact there was video of the event, which obviously didn't show any sniper fire, and there's loads, I'm not going to go into them all.
I'm not going to go into all the scandals.
Compare that to Senator Clinton's account.
I remember landing under sniper fire.
There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars.
Now that is what happened.
Fucking wrecked.
Jesus Christ, Hillary.
But the thing is, it's not even the constant lies and scandals that really put me off Hillary Clinton.
I mean, every politician has got some skeletons in their closet, I'm sure.
And it's not even that her husband is some kind of notorious sex pest.
At least, if you listen to the constant allegations he is laid under, to the point where he's actually in the same position as Bill fucking Cosby.
I'm guessing that there are enough vested interests in Bill Clinton and his wife to cover up these related scandals.
I mean, if I was a social justice warrior, I'd be like, yeah, white privilege, but I don't think it's that.
I think that it's really to do with money and connections.
I mean, there is talk of the Clinton Foundation effectively being a money laundering scheme for foreign governments, presumably for them to be able to buy influence over any future Clinton administrations.
But to be honest with you, I'm not an expert on this subject and I haven't spent a long time researching it.
So I'm just going to assume this is all right-wing propaganda.
None of it's true.
No, my problem with Hillary Clinton are actually the people who are backing her campaigns.
If we look at the 2003 to 2008 campaign, just look at those.
Citigroup Inc, Goldman Sachs, Time Warner, JP Morgan Chase.
It's like a list of people who you wouldn't want to see backing a political candidate in a healthy democracy.
And I know you're thinking, well, hey, look, there are no oil companies.
And you're right, they're not.
They're all backing Jeb Bush.
Here's a 2016 campaign.
Now, don't be fooled.
You're probably thinking, well, a lot of these identities don't recognize or sound good like DreamWorks.
I've heard of them.
I like their products.
Sure you do.
And I'm sure you like eating food, but that doesn't mean a candidate sponsored by Monsanto is your candidate.
So you've got big investors like Sabin Capital Group, Barbara Lee Family Foundation, Soros Fund Management, Fair Share Action, which incidentally receives money from George Soros.
It's interesting how it's a lot of hedge fund billionaire partnerships or foundations.
I mean, look at Paloma Partners LLC.
It's a holding company that provides security brokerage, investment and management consultancy services.
I mean, do you really think they're going to give a fuck about feminist issues?
Of course not.
But they did donate a million dollars to Hillary Clinton's campaign.
What about the top donor, Sabin Capital Group?
$2 million donation.
They're a private equity firm specializing in growth, equity, and recapitalization investments.
The firm seeks to invest in media, pay TV operators, free-to-air television, content creation, broadband, new internet media, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
It seeks to invest globally with folks on Thailand, South Korea, and Asia.
And do you think these people give a fuck about feminist issues?
Honestly, you delusional narcissists are actually suggesting that we vote for a woman who has for her career been funded largely by private equity firms, stock traders, and investment banks.
That makes you useful fucking idiots.
There is not a doubt in my mind that Hillary Clinton is the creature of these people.
You know, a few years ago, there was an investment trader who was being interviewed by the BBC.
And for some reason, he decided to let them have both barrels.
Just tell them the unvarnished truth about his opinion and his profession.
The chap really didn't seem like a bad guy, but he definitely had a very warped sense of priorities.
And I honestly think that it's going to be people like this guy, probably far less scrupulous than this guy, that Hillary Clinton is ultimately going to be answering to.
It's going to crash and it's going to fall pretty hard because markets are ruled right now by fear.
Investors and the big money, the smart money, I'm talking about the big funds, the hedge funds, the institutions, they don't buy this rescue plan.
They basically know the market is toast.
They know the stock market is finished.
The Euro, as far as they're concerned, they don't really care.
They're moving their money away to safer assets like treasury bonds, 30-year bonds, and the US dollar.
So it's not going to work.
We keep hearing that whatever the politicians are suggesting, and admittedly it's all been rather woolly so far, isn't right.
Can you pin down exactly what would keep investors happy, make them feel more confident?
That's a tough one.
Personally, it doesn't matter.
I'm a trader.
I don't really care about that kind of stuff.
I go with what if I see an opportunity to make money, I go with that.
So for most traders, it's not about, we don't really care that much how they're going to fix the economy, how they're going to fix the whole situation.
Our job is to make money from it.
And personally, I've been dreaming of this only for three years.
I had a confession, which is I go to bed every night.
I dream of another recession.
I dream of another moment like this.
Why?
Because people don't seem to maybe remember, but the 30s depression, the depression in the 30s, wasn't just about a market crash.
There were some people who were prepared to make money from that crash.
And I think anybody can do that.
It isn't just for some people in the elite.
Anybody can actually make money.
It's an opportunity.
When a market crashes, when the Euro and the big stock markets crash, if you know what to do, if you have the right plan to set up, you can make a lot of money from this.
For example, hedging strategies is one.
Then investing in bonds, treasury bonds, that sort of stuff.
If you could see the people around me, jaws have collectively dropped at what you've just said.
I mean, we appreciate your candor.
However, it doesn't help the rest of us, does it, or the rest of the Eurozone?
I would say this.
Listen, I would say this to everybody who's watching this.
This economic crisis is like a cancer.
If you just wait and wait thinking this is going to go away, just like a cancer, it's going to grow and it's going to be too late.
What I would say to everybody is get prepared.
This is not a time right now to wish for thinking the government is going to sort things out.
The governments don't rule the world.
Goldman Sachs rules the world.
Goldman Sachs does not care about this rescue package.
Neither does the big funds.
So actually, I would actually tell people, I want to help people.
People can make money from this.
It isn't just traders.
What they need to do is learn about how to make money from a downward market.
The first thing people should do is protect their assets, protect what they have.
Because in less than 12 months, my prediction is the savings of millions of people is going to vanish.
▲
Export Selection