Chelsea Clinton’s quest to be politically fashionable seems never-ending.
In a scattershot manner, Clinton clumsily gloms onto the left-wing talking point of the day, whether it be environmentalism or National Menstruation Day.
Now Chelsea has her sights on school lunches, and as usual, her point-of-view is ridiculous.
Clinton hurled silly insults at Republicans, suggesting they want kids to starve. Twitter did not let her ramblings go unchecked.
From The Daily Wire:
Donald Trump is not the only political personality who could benefit from taking a few breaks from Twitter every now and then. The Heiress to the Throne of Clinton has recently added to her growing list of not charming, not funny, predictably partisan tweets this week by accusing Republicans of wanting to starve school children. The response online was entertaining.
Here’s how Chelsea set up her hyperbolic but predictable accusation:
Research again confirms kids pay more attention in class & better retain what they're taught when they're not hungry https://t.co/USnUyctStI
— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) June 7, 2017
After someone pointed out that it doesn’t seem like we needed a whole bunch of research to conclude what everyone already knows — human beings function better when they are adequately fed, obviously — Clinton hammered home her real point: evil Republicans are against “free” food for our starving children.
Agreed. Sadly, many Republicans continue to argue against free school lunches & breakfasts & against nutritional support for families
— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) June 8, 2017
The response online included the usual hilarity, with several people pointing out that one of the things leaving more kids more hungry than ever before in our schools was Michelle Obama’s terrible lunch program.
So then you opposed @MichelleObama's school lunch program, which perpetually left kids hungry, correct?
— The Mental Recession (@rustyweiss74) June 7, 2017
Others explained that Republicans’ issues with the “free” lunch programs is that they are not free and they end up becoming yet another entitlement that perpetuates dependence on the nanny state:
Because the parents should be able to pitch in and not rely on the school for everything. It becomes an entitlement. You're WAY out of touch
— Nicholas T Charlton (@nick_charlton) June 9, 2017
One person suggested having nonprofits, like the Clinton Foundation, provide the resources for programs to save taxpayer money:
— Mark Kim Marion (@swensonmember) June 7, 2017
Here’s guessing Clinton won’t follow-up on that suggestion.
It’s no accident that Chelsea Clinton’s profile has steadily risen–although artificially–since her mother’s defeat to Donald Trump in the general election.
The Democrats have a relatively weak political bench. The current stars of their party are old, big-government loons like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
Chelsea is very clearly being groomed for a political future. Her name recognition alone affords her political capital. The problem is, she simply doesn’t have the chops.
Not only that, but she seems to have no conviction; her stance is an amalgam of stale talking points.
If Chelsea’s increased public presence is a stalking horse for some political run in the near future, then the public response should send a clear message that people are sick of the Clintons.