Oh baby! New York Times is losing its mind because Republican women are … having children
This isn’t pregnancy. It’s a political plot.
A full-blown, unhinged conspiracy orchestrated by the MAGA movement to take over the hearts, minds and uteruses of gestating people all over the nation, one bassinet, one burp, one stretch mark at a time.
The New York Times has cracked the code. It’s Pulitzer time, baby!
In an investigation masquerading as a style piece, the Paper of Record published an unglued commentary, researched with the self-seriousness of Watergate, revealing that a whopping three women connected to the White House are preggers.
At the same time!
That Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Katie Miller, the wife of White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller and Second Lady Usha Vance should all be on the nest simultaneously isn’t just a happy mini baby boom. It is — according to the Times — a pernicious “Handmaid’s Tale”-style political plot promoting conservative child-making frenzy in an age of declining birthrates and the collapse of the Democratic Party in middle America.
It’s a cautionary fable, a warning that the dreaded GOP’s steady rate of reproduction amid a Democratic baby drought poses a dire threat to the nation.
According to the Gray Lady (now Gray Female-Identifying Newspaper) Republicans are planning to win support and ever-greater numbers of adherents by growing their own voters. One infant at a time.
It’s all laid out in the piece entitled “The Politics and Power of the Pregnancy Image.”
In it, Times chief fashion critic Vanessa Friedman writes: “That three such prominent women in the MAGA movement were pregnant at pretty much the same time was, indubitably, a coincidence.”
Or maybe not.
“But” — there’s always a “but” — “for an administration that has such an intuitive and strategic understanding of the power of aesthetics that an unspoken dress code in which men outfit themselves in the image of the president has developed, it has also become a telling one,” Friedman froths.
Read more Insane moment Carlsbad bouncer fires taser into man’s face at point-blank range
“Together, the women have created a notably consistent, and somewhat paradigm-shifting, picture of the White House’s family and fertility platform.”
Fertility platform? Silly me. I thought the three lovelies just got themselves knocked up.
The writer also found leftist joy in taking aim at the body-hugging coral dress that the wife of Vice President JD Vance allegedly used to showcase her burgeoning bump as she grows the couple’s fourth child, a boy, due next month. To The Times, it’s not just discount maternity-wear from Old Navy. The clothes represent Mrs. Vance’s sinister method of broadcasting cuddly daddy vibes emanating from her hub ahead of November’s midterm elections.
Friedman writes, I assume with a straight face, that Mrs. Vance’s job as second lady “is also to represent and humanize the vice president.”
“By spotlighting her pregnancy,” Friedman spews, “she is doing exactly that.”
And there we are. To the Times, a bundle of joy isn’t a miniature human, at least when it’s birthed by Republicans. It’s a propaganda tool.
Usha Vance took the hit on her motherhood with a classy smile.
She posted the receipt from her cowl-necked maternity get-up to X, writing “Now that we know the political significance of my $8.75 coral maternity dress from Old Navy, can’t wait to hear what the New York Times has to say about my elastic-waistband pants and compression socks!”
I can’t wait to read the Times’ take on the politics of onesies. And the paper’s answer to this burning question: Breastfeeding — natural nutrition, or infantile indoctrination?
Read more Jose Alvarado returning to Knicks on $14 million contract after declining player option
