Powered by Topple

Not the liberal princess we think she is? Vanity Fair begs, ‘Please, God, stop Chelsea Clinton …’

Powered by Topple

Sure, conservatives are well aware of the fact that, on her own merits and intellect alone, Chelsea Clinton could never come close to obtaining the icon status bestowed upon her by so many on the left by virtue of nothing more than her famous last name.

But Vanity Fair?

That’s right, Vanity Fair’s T.A. Frank has penned a brilliant piece not only exposing Chelsea Clinton as an intellectual lightweight, but as a potentially damaging albatross to Democrats who might like to start winning elections someday.

Frank begins by a litany of revealing Chelsea quotes:

Here are Chelsea’s thoughts on returning to red meat in her diet: “I’m a big believer in listening to my body’s cravings.” On her time in the “fiercely meritocratic” workplace of Wall Street: “I was curious if I could care about [money] on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t.” On her precocity: “They told me that my father had learned to read when he was three. So, of course, I thought I had to too. The first thing I learned to read was the newspaper.”

Frank mentions the fact that one of her former producers at NBC said she “wasn’t used to being interrupted,” and then explains what it’s like to read anything by Chelsea:

What comes across with Chelsea, for lack of a gentler word, is self-regard of an unusual intensity. And the effect is stronger on paper. Unkind as it is to say, reading anything by Chelsea Clinton—tweets, interviews, books—is best compared to taking in spoonfuls of plain oatmeal that, periodically, conceal a toenail clipping.

And then there was the time that Chelsea Clinton supposedly wrote President Reagan when she was five.

And this gem:

https://twitter.com/CounterMoonbat/status/855503113041707010

Frank lists several “brilliant” tweets by Clinton to prove deep thoughts…

“Yes. Yes. Yes. Closing the #wagegap is crucial to a strong economy.” And maybe there’s no sin in absorbing and exuding nothing but respectable Blue State opinion. But it’s another thing to insist on joining each day’s designated outrage bandwagon. Did we need to slap down a curmudgeonly Charlotte Rampling, age 71, for griping about #OscarsSoWhite activists? Yes, and here’s Chelsea: “Outrageous, ignorant & offensive comments from Rampling.” Is gender identity not going to be included on the 2020 census? Here’s Chelsea: “This is outrageous. No one should be invisible in America.” Not that there aren’t breaks for deeper thoughts: “Words without action are … meaningless. Words with inaction are … just words. Words with opposite action is … hypocrisy.”

The Vanity Fair writer concludes his piece by pointing out the revered, cult-like status Chelsea enjoys despite the fact that she’s done nothing to deserve it.

To find fault with the former First Daughter is to invite the wrath of thousands. Love of Chelsea correlates closely with love of Hillary, toward whom her fans have long felt an odd protectiveness, as if she were a stroke survivor regaining the power of speech rather than one of the most influential people in the world. That goes even more for Chelsea, who is often treated less like an independent 37-year-old multi-millionaire and more like the 12-year-old who still deserves to be left alone.

Pointing out the potentially destructive nature of political dynasties, especially if Chelsea becomes some sort of Democratic standard-bearer, Frank writes, “The Democratic Party is surprisingly cohesive these days, thanks to anti-Trump sentiment, so a Jeb-style destruction is unlikely. But never say never. If anyone could make it happen, Chelsea could.”

I say Run Chelsea Run!!

H/T Twitchy

Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of BizPac Review.

Wake up right! Receive our free morning news blast HERE

Scott Morefield

Comments

Latest Articles