The problem with female leaders

The conservative blogosphere highlighted the very real risk that in case Hillary Clinton becomes the next POTUS, she may very well start a war with Russia in order to prove that she is not a pussy. Indeed, her recurring unwarranted provocations and allegations make this a rather plausible assumption. This is particularly ironic, given that one of the strategies Hillary tried to undermine The Donald was to claim that he would be a “dangerous” leader, evoking a picture of a raving lunatic launching nuclear missiles for fun.

Among us guys, I would say that Hillary Clinton is almost universally reviled. The exceptions are, of course, cucks and male feminists who somehow believe that agreeing with the stupid crap liberal women spout will eventually get them laid. There is a good reason for being weary of female leadership. A blog reader, for instance, recently pointed me towards a video in which “The Honourable Chrystia Freeland”, Canada’s current minister of international trade, is fighting tears on camera because the EU didn’t agree to CETA, which was a bullshit deal anyway. Europe should be proud of the resistance of the Wallonians, because otherwise this liberal wet dream that would have fucked the EU royally in the ass would have been ratified. I can understand why Chrystia Freeland would be displeased with the EU turning down CETA, as it is a net-loss for Canada. Yet, just consider the utter insanity of having someone so emotionally unstable speaking in front of the camera. For a leader this is an utter disgrace.

Another example is Sweden’s deputy prime minister Åsa Romson crying on camera in 2015 because Sweden was forced to limit the number of alleged refugees flooding the country. This is a serious what-the-fuck moment. Of course, resources are limited, but this utter hack apparently believed that economics is just a cruel joke of the patriarchy, meaning that a country couldn’t bankrupt itself, no matter how much it spends. I can easily picture that parliament of cucks placating Åsa Romson and other women of their ilk, probably thinking that they would get blow jobs if they only agreed to let yet another 100,000 primarily unskilled, unqualified, yes: useless, illegal immigrants into the country. Sweden was literally on the brink of collapse. Now they bought themselves a few more years, but not much more. If you want to know what would have happened otherwise, look at Germany, which has been rapidly disintegrating over the past 15 months or so.

Both those examples would be humorous if the subject matter wasn’t so serious. We may very well see women ruining entire countries due to their utter incompetence and their inability to control their emotions. If Hillary wins, she will wreck the US worse than Obama did. That dumb broad recently even revealed that US nuclear response time is at least 4 minutes, which was classified information. If I didn’t live on this planet, I would love to see her judgment facing off with Russia (and China). What Angela Merkel is turning Germany into is well-known by now. She is quite apparently living in a parallel universe. On the other hand, though, there are promising female leaders as well, such as Marine LePen in France or Frauke Petry in Germany. That being said, should the Western world survive for a few more centuries, it will be due to strong male leadership. There are glimmers of hope. Donald Trump “draining the swamp” in DC, and building the Trump Wall would be a great start. Afterwards, we would need to purge higher education and media of batshit insane liberal ideas.

What do you think? Let me know in the comments below, but keep the comment policy in mind.
Please support my work with a donation; your contribution is greatly appreciated! If you need further advice, then get my books or arrange a Skype or email consultation.

6 thoughts on “The problem with female leaders

  1. Donald Trump “draining the swamp” in DC would be a great start.

    The promises he revealed shooting for starting on day one are pretty amazing. My favorite ones include

    – The very first will be imposing term limits
    – Banning goverment officials from becoming lobbyists
    – A pay-freeze on all cushy goverment jobs

  2. women are very bad with economics.

    most especially, they believe that because the united states’ GDP is a high number, the money will just never run out, so why shouldn’t the government pay for their tampons and birth control? but then when it comes to resources for men in abusive relationships or a male birth control pill, the money isn’t worth spending.

  3. Hi Aaron, I think you would enjoy the latest episode of “Last Man Standing” starring Tim Allen as The Donald! The episode is called “Trick or Treat”. You can see his hommage here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvJ0XmkWgAEmjhF.jpg.

    You may also be interested in these press releases:
    http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/actor-tim-allen-just-just-a-major-trump-announcement-whoa/
    http://ijr.com/2016/01/514569-tim-allen-has-some-blunt-words-when-it-comes-to-the-smartest-thing-about-donald-trump/
    http://ijr.com/2015/08/384720-tim-allen-claims-going-drill-hillary-politically-charged-qa-session-show/

  4. Equally dismissive (at least it should be) are women who tout political causes.

    A glaring case study (or studies) are female celebrities whoring themselves as a way to get you to vote for Hillary:

    For example:

    Miley Cyrus: http://dailym.ai/2elngcW

    Katy Perry: http://bit.ly/2df4nUM

    and of course post-post-wall Madonna, offering BJ’s for votes:

    http://www.snopes.com/2016/10/19/madonna-promises-blow-jobs-for-hillary-clinton-voters/

    [But apparently, Madonna wasn’t serious. Big surprise, women flip flop or renege on what they say]

  5. Make me miss Golda Meir and Magaret Thatcher.

    Women could obviously become leaders of a country, but only the exceptional ones. The same standard is also applied to men in an ideal world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *