Ivanka Launches Missiles. Journalists: “Shut up, Chelsea!”
The biggest problem in the world right now is … Chelsea Clinton? Some journalists are on a rampage against her for daring to tweet aloud about things like maternity leave and Earth Day.
Strangely, some of these journalists ignore Ivanka Trump’s influence in the White House, blatant conflicts of interests, ethical issues, and making money off her role in the White House. I guess these guys let that slide because they think she’s hot.
These critics believe that Chelsea’s outspokenness about anything, even when it’s positive, is damaging the country. And her words damage the progressive brand irreparably. They want to kill this “destructive” Clinton name, which the entire country “hates.” Hm. Makes sense. Chelsea should never say anything in a nation where in their presidential elections both of her parents got the most votes.
Her disparagers especially fear that Chelsea is gearing up to run for office, even though she assures them daily that she isn’t. Even if she eventually did run, Chelsea’s Congressional District would include New York’s Upper East Side or where her parents live in Chappaqua, New York. Of course, Chelsea should never take her “poisonous” name and run in Manhattan or Upper Westchester where her mother gets non-stop standing ovations. I’m sorry to disappoint, but women named Clinton are not despised in these places. It’s not like Chelsea would be running in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania or Akron, Ohio.
People often say that the Clintons only appeal to the “liberal elite.” Well, Manhattan and New York’s northern suburb — there’s your liberal elite. Yes, Chelsea, just try to get votes from those duplex-dwelling latte drinkers!
Perhaps Jerry Nadler will retire and she could move to his district in Manhattan’s West Side. Can you imagine how damaging and rejected Chelsea would be in neighborhoods like Tribeca, the West Village, and the Upper West Side? That district even boasts the bordering neighborhoods of Chelsea and Clinton. How could they not vote for her? I would not say the same thing if those two locales were named “Wisconsin” and “voter” or “Bernie” and “bro.” I can see that both of those would be a problem. But I don’t see angry mobs greeting her on Riverside Drive.
Still, these progressives cannot tolerate her talking much less running. A big reason for this, I have learned, is that they are appalled by dynastic politics, which they believe is destructive for democracy. Don’t they realize that would include the Roosevelts? If only the FDR and the New Deal did not happen, the nation would be much better off. After all, he and Theodore Roosevelt were fifth cousins, and Theodore was even Eleanor’s uncle, which means that Franklin and Eleanor themselves were related. That’s like a dynasty cubed.
But I am wrong, I guess. Dynastic politics is the ruin of this country. Damn you, John and John Quincy Adams. I’m not sure why the “Clinton dynasty’ thing continues to make people enraged, especially when it’s probably over, and especially when these same people are not railing as much about the Trumps running the country like a Russian oligarchy.
What’s more, some families just gravitate toward politics. And yes, they do have a leg up when their relatives are already known and thus, have a brand name. But this is not unusual in any field. People all around the world often go into the same professions as their family. “You’re taking over your mother’s medical office? That’s dynastic pediatrics!” How about all those businesses which are called “[blank] and Sons? Or take the Lower East Sides famous Russ and Daughters. The country is being corrupted by that smoked salmon and white fish dynasty.
Just like the feelings about Hillary, this hatred of Chelsea is crazily out of proportion to any offense. Let’s revise that: It’s more out-of-proportion, considering Chelsea’s only “crimes” include things like announcing her outrage about rising anti-Semitism online. Considering the vitriol directed at Chelsea, I shudder thinking of the day when her young daughter Charlotte goes on Twitter. She’ll be pounded with: “Charlotte needs to shut up! Someone stop her from posting about Frozen!” “Is she now talking publicly about Paw Patrol? That’s it. I will now write another Charlotte Clinton Mezvinsky-bashing essay for Vanity Fair.”
What is driving this mad hatred for women named Clinton? What’s behind a disgust so great that they are taking it to the next generation? I suspect that deep down these single-minded Clinton-hating folks feel guilty that they didn’t fight more to stop Trump when Hillary was the only barrier against him. And they will take it out on Chelsea and her tweets forever.
