Should Women Lose the Right to Vote: Ignoring the facts about Hillary Clinton

If women are so contaminated with collectivist ineptitude as they appear to be around sentiments regarding voting for Hillary Clinton—just because she’s an old hippie lady—then it begins to explain the logic as to why there were fears about their rights to vote in the first place—because they obviously aren’t functioning from the assembly of facts when making decisions. Of course it’s not all women, but as a collective group—they appear to be radically deficient on their ability to make decisions as individual people. That makes them a serious problem toward the maintenance of a Constitutional republic. I say all that because of two things really, Carly Fiorina’s comments about how in a general election Clinton, with all the baggage she has, would beat Donald Trump in a head to head election. Then of course it was the media reaction and obvious blind reference to the century long women’s suffrage movement by completely ignoring the facts of the 11 hour testimony Hillary Clinton gave to the Republican led Benghazi committee during the third week of October 2015—declaring her the winner. Some of these people were either smoking crack cocaine or they were just plain stupid. Here’s why.

The “media” obviously doesn’t have much of an attention span, and they blanked out while watching most of the hearing on Capital Hill. Hillary was caught in a serious lie, it was revealed that after the Benghazi attack which killed four people, including Ambassador Stevens, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew that it was a terrorist attack, yet she knowingly mislead the American people the very next day, and upon meeting with the families of the victims with the false dialogue that the attack was caused by an anti-Islamic parody film. She revealed to people close to her information showing that she directly and knowingly mislead the American people. She abused her position as a public servant as a person of authority.

Recently while at a Bengals football game Adam Jones on a kick-off return signaled a fair catch—sort of half hearted, but he did lay down the signal calling off a Seattle Seahawk swarm that was poised to tackle him immediately. Once he caught the ball and defenders pulled off, he ran anyway for a large gain. The referees called the play back and gave Jones a penalty. The crowd around me erupted into anger feeling that the call was bogus and that the referees were being unfair. Yet I was sitting right there—I saw the same thing everyone else did, and even though I was rooting for the Bengals to win the game, which they eventually did, it was clear to me that Jones signaled a fair catch, then when he was caught he actually got into the face of the referees and argued his case against the call. The stadium erupted into further anger at the “bad call” and the Bengals sideline had to contain Jones to keep him from getting ejected—because he at this point had pulled off his helmet as if he was going to throw it. The NFL could have really come down on him but they didn’t. Within a few minutes play was reset, the Bengals scored a touchdown anyway, and everyone forgot about the Jones penalty as they were caught up in the elation of an overtime victory. But I thought about that call as I watched the media cover Hillary Clinton after her testimony. The media, like the Cincinnati Bengals fans, were clearly ignoring facts so that they could maintain the illusion of their personal success—and women as a collective group show that they are willing to do the same—which is detrimental to their cause as a legitimate voting bloc that encompasses half our population.

Hillary lied and she got caught doing it. That was the story of the Benghazi hearings and most everyone missed it, except for some conservative oriented outlets. Everyone else clearly didn’t want to look at the facts for what was presented; they had “collective amnesia,” males and females alike. They were just like the Bengals fans who refused to see that Adam Jones had called a fair catch, yet advanced the football anyway—and was penalized for it. Women as a voting bloc are notoriously guilty of that trait and Hillary seems to think that her dominance of various progressive voting mechanisms will be enough for her to win the presidency. Meanwhile, Republicans were lackluster when there was blood in the water as they patted at Hillary Clinton like a kitten with a ball of yarn—except that yarn was a poisonous snake—and they got bit a few times. Rather than attack Clinton the way she deserved, they listened to all the K-Street types who were afraid of a committee of Republican men cornering a defenseless woman over her job incompetency and looking like the bad guys to the voting public. Because the female voting bloc is a sensitive lot who vote not with logic most of the time, but emotion—and Republicans who are usually overly analytical find the topic like Kryptonite. They are paralyzed by it which is why Hillary requested a public hearing instead of a private one. She wanted to appear as the helpless victim to the public, not the incompetent loser that she really is.

So then comes the question of a head to head matchup with Donald Trump who has proven that he’ll do and say anything to win anything. He’s not a traditional Republican by any means and he has more media contacts that will stand by his bed and listen to everything he says than Hillary. There is no way he loses to Hillary Clinton. He will rub her into the ground and smear her to no end in a head to head election. He will take her record and her faults and expose them every time he opens his mouth. He’s not afraid of the women voters because he knows that many of them are just looking for a strong opinion, which he’s happy to provide. Trump because of his self-confidence is the best weapon that Republicans have in dividing the women vote from those blindingly adhering to progressive unification and those who actually do think for themselves but have not yet been given the opportunity to back anybody they actually like. Hillary lied and Trump will beat her to the end of time with the facts because he knows what leverage that is on a faulty candidate.

Much of what has been said about Hillary and a potential matchup with Donald Trump is media fantasies to protect their ideological investment into making a “first female president” with the power of persuasion. Its more of a collective ego satisfying exercise for them to declare Hillary a winner in all categories—in spite of the evidence—than it is of any reality presented. That reality says that Trump would destroy Hillary the way that no other Republican has yet and that Hillary is a confirmed liar who has likely committed serious perjury—just as her husband had. There is no way to hide from the facts of the matter—all it takes is someone who can present the case without fear of how voting blocs work or what political pundits might do with information presented in a way not favorable to Republicans.

I don’t think its time to take the right to vote away from women just because they tend to be collectively stupid—based on their polling, history, and ensuing trends. But it is time to break them up with the type of candidates who know how—such as someone like Trump. Its time for Republicans to stop being afraid of a bunch of girls and to keep their actions in the light of honor, and justice regardless of the sex. Its time for Republicans to truly liberate women the way they did with blacks during the Civil War—by standing up for what’s right, and to break up the collective unification of a voting bloc intent to maintain evil by hiding it behind women’s suffrage. Women who wanted the right to vote and to head the own destinies certainly didn’t do it by leaving behind the abusive drunk who beat her nightly and refused to let her drive a car because the man was afraid she might cheat on him. That woman jumped from those male abusers into the arms of even worse abusers—people like Hillary Clinton who openly lie, cheat, and steal to further her own intentions. The only difference is that Hillary hides her malice behind collective identity so that through radicalized behavior her vile acts of evil are hidden from scrutiny and the ramifications of poor opinions. Republicans need to truly free women from the abuse they are seeing conducted against them by progressive Democrats. And Donald Trump is the man to do it.

I say that women should be allowed to vote, but that Republicans need to truly free them into thinking for themselves instead of a bunch of Hillary Clinton supporters who put as much thought into being President of the United States as they do into purchasing a new purse. Is that derogatory toward women? Hey, I might have been the only person in that stadium besides the refs who thought Adam Jones called a fair catch. Well, I was right. I may be one of the few who will say what I have about women’s voting rights—democratic majorities cannot take a fact and make it into the shape of their desires. When women show that they are willing to think for themselves—as a group—I’ll respect that right a whole lot more. Hillary assumes that the female voting bloc will forgive her sins of stupidity. That assumption alone indicates a major failure of our election system and the philosophy backing it.

Rich “Cliffhanger” Hoffman


Listen to The Blaze Radio Network by CLICKING HERE.

4 thoughts on “Should Women Lose the Right to Vote: Ignoring the facts about Hillary Clinton

  1. The fundamental problem is that far too many women are no longer in families. They get pregnant and deliver a child or multiple children out of wedlock. Who is their savior? Certainly not the man with whom they had sex but the welfare state bought and paid for by the taxpayer. Until this dynamic of personal immorality is stopped, these women will continue with a process that demands socialism as their savior. At this point, there is nothing on the horizon that will stop this abuse and thus the nation remains at risk.


  2. How can anyone respect a woman who stayed married to a man who made a fool of her for many years? Any self-respecting woman would have dumped him. She prostituted herself for political advantage. How honorable is that?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.