“Chelsea Clinton’s spinach pancakes spark a national debate — where do you stand on the issue,” People magazine wrote on Wednesday.
I didn’t realize a national debate about pancakes had been sparked. Apparently, Ms. Clinton posted a picture on Twitter Tuesday night of green pancakes she made for her daughter for dinner, and some people were skeptical of the ingredient.
I don’t care. She’s not a chef, nor a health-food aficionado, so I’m not sure how it was newsworthy.
But People magazine is not alone in its wall-to-wall Clinton coverage.
You can rarely go a day anymore without reading or hearing about some Chelsea Clinton news.
Neonaster counted at least 70 Chelsea Clinton-focused tweets and stories sent from The Hill since January.
Every single one of her tweets seems to garner a story.
“Ben Carson’s comments on slavery draw a swift rebuke from ex-president’s daughter,” the Washington Examiner wrote of one of Ms. Clinton’s online missives.
“Chelsea Clinton’s Twitter account has lately been getting saltier,” The Washington Post reported, and the Mercury News poised the question: “Is Chelsea Clinton Donald Trump’s most formidable Twitter foe?”
Quick answer: No.
But she abounds.
The New York Times did a story on the books Ms. Clinton reads and recommends, and she penned an op-ed earlier this month in BBC on America’s opioid epidemic, even though she’s not a doctor, an addict, or a health care expert.
But she is Chelsea Clinton!
She works as vice chair of the Clinton Foundation — that her mommy and daddy founded — and sits on the nonprofits’ board. Before that, she earned $600,000 a year at NBC News — despite no training as a journalist — just to sit on its staff.
She gives paid speeches and tours. She lives in an $11 million New York City penthouse. She attends the winter ball celebrating The School of American Ballet and serves on its board.
Who really cares?
The New York Post has speculated, after her mom’s loss, Ms. Clinton is being groomed to run for Congress. The New York Daily News has suggested if Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand runs for president in 2020, Ms. Clinton may look to fill her seat.
Perhaps the media attention is a way to keep Ms. Clinton relevant — a token to the Clinton family that the mainstream press so lovingly adores.
Having Ms. Clinton in the media also helps former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former President Bill Clinton wield power within the Democratic Party. They may be out of office, but they’re not out of power. They’re a dynasty after all.
Michael Sainato, at the Observer, wrote that Ms. Clinton is using her fame to exploit the progressive resistance to President Trump, all with the end goal of elevating herself politically, and to block out any up-and-comer.
“Any resistance to Trump offered from the Clintons — whether it’s from Bill, Hillary, or Chelsea — is not resistance at all. Rather, it’s the Democratic establishment’s attempt to oppose Trump while they reaffirm their power and subvert reform within the party,” Mr. Sainato wrote. “As long as a Clinton ‘resists’ on behalf of the Democratic Party, there is little to no opportunity for newcomers on the left to emerge.
“Chelsea Clinton’s manufactured role as a resistance spokesperson allows the ‘resistance’ to Trump to remain in the control of the Democratic establishment and prevents progressives from reforming the Democratic Party to fight on behalf of working and middle class Americans,” Mr. Sainato concluded.
It could all be stopped if the media didn’t engage. If it didn’t cover.
I’m begging the mainstream media — until Ms. Clinton announces her run for office, or actually does something significant (not associated with her parents or as a political stunt), please leave Chelsea Clinton alone.
Most of us don’t care what she has to say. And if we do, we can follow her on Twitter.
Copyright © 2017 The Washington Times, LLC.