Sources Close to Kumala: The White House Would Be Defending Kumala More if She Were a White Man!!!!

She's calling Biden a racist again, and as the 50 year olds pretending to be 15 year olds on Twitter say, I am here for it.

Sources close to Vice President Kamala Harris have a new explanation for her extreme unpopularity: The Biden administration only defends white men.

Staffers and allies of Harris believe her disastrous first year as vice president is in large part due to racial discrimination from President Joe Biden and his office, a new CNN report claims. One former aide to Harris noted the "specific energy that the White House brings to defend a white man, knowing that Kamala Harris has spent almost a year taking lots of the hits that the West Wing didn't want to take themselves." That white man, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, faced criticism for taking months off the job in order to care for his newborns without informing the public, only for Biden press secretary Jen Psaki to call his decision an example of how he is a "role model" for Americans.

Harris faces "constant" "racism" from "Republicans and right-wing media," according to CNN (which declined to cite any specific examples), over the handling of her wide-ranging portfolio, which includes solving the "root causes" of the border crisis, the future of national security in space, dramatically reforming voting rights, accelerating the rate of COVID-19 vaccinations, pushing for more unionization in the labor force, and closing the "digital divide." Her lack of progress in virtually all of these areas is well documented, although CNN's sources contend that is because her "staff has repeatedly failed her" and that Biden has not "adequately prepared or positioned" her for success.

Last time Kumala called Biden a racist, she later laughed it off, saying "It was a debate! It was a debate!"

I believe this means she thinks that lying is a normal and acceptable tactic in a debate, as bluffing is a normal and acceptable tactic in poker.

So we are now not in a debate. Does this mean her current charge of racism is For Real? Or will she later say, "It was just an attempt to Reframe the Narrative! It was just an attempt to Reframe the Narrative!"

Kumala sucks. But she's advanced to a position where she's confronted by problems she can't suck her way out of. Per the Peter Principle, she has been promoted to her level of incompetence, and there are no higher-ranking peters she can latch on to to disguise her incompetence any longer.

I fumed about this yesterday -- the constant shriek from leftwing identity-politics-deranged women and minorities that, despite being Stronk and Empowered and Being Twice as Good But Getting Half the Pay and Recognition, that if they don't succeed on their own merits, it's because White Men weren't eager enough to Hand-Hold them while doing their jobs and Make Them Succeed.

Or "position them for success," as Kumala's defender says.

Below, what I wrote yesterday, in a post that got a bit stomped by the trail. It's mostly about a very #Based Boyscast podcast about eternally-complaining women.

This is very much a complaint rooted in feminist grievance -- if a woman isn't succeeding, it's because men aren't playing Daddy Do-Right to her and hand-holding her through a job she was appointed to for diversity points to make sure she succeeds (but doing so invisibly so that she succeeds "On Her Own").

That's in my mind because of this discussion in the Boyscast of feminist whine-merchants complaining that the world of NFTs -- digital art -- is being gatekept from women precisely because there are no gatekeepers at all, and thus no figures of authority to pass our Diversity Slots or offer up Charity Funding.

The article points out that only 5% of the people in NFT are women -- but at a recent NFT convention, 20% of the speakers were women.

That proves that where there are gatekeepers, the gatekeepers work to significantly overrepresent women and artificially increase their presence.

So the real complaint is that there aren't enough gatekeepers holding open the gates for women and even simply carrying them over the threshhold.

When these endlessly-aggrieved whining losers complain they're being "kept out" of an industry or even a hobby (such as hiking or birdwatching!), what they really mean is that White Men aren't actively begging them to join and cooing "You can do it! You go girl! YASS KWEEN SLAY!" and hand-holding them and mentoring them and basically acting like their Daddies, patiently teaching them and instructing them and even supporting them financially, despite being strangers with no emotional or filial or sexual investment in them whatsoever.

Sorry for the tangent. The whole podcast is kind of about that. Near the end of the show they discuss an article about "investment advice" from Elle Magazine's "ElleVest" vertical. Instead of providing women with actual advice about investment from an actual woman who invests money, Elle... hired another low-level Grievance Studies blogger to complain about the anti-woman hostility of the language of investment, complaining that terms like "bull," "alpha, "pump-and-dump" were toxically masculine.

Yes, that's what's going to get women to be investment self-starters: more whining about trivial language-policing micro-bothers.

Hey, I've got a weird idea -- maybe if women were encouraged by other women to actually take an interest in these things instead of being encouraged to waste their time with stupid low-IQ blogbait, more women would enter these fields.

Maybe the primary gatekeepers keeping women out of these fields and hobbies are... other women.

posted by Ace at 03:31 PM

| Access Comments