Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
Liz

Ivanka Trump, Chelsea Clinton Tear Into Media For Coverage Of Malia

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Liz

Ivanka Trump, Chelsea Clinton Tear Into Media For Coverage Of Malia Obama

 

Washington Examiner

by Naomi Lim

Nov 24, 2017, 2:08 PM

 

[Too short to excerpt]

 

Ivanka Trump and Chelsea Clinton lashed out at the media Friday, united in their distaste for recent press coverage of Malia Obama.

 

"Malia Obama should be allowed the same privacy as her school aged peers. She is a young adult and private citizen, and should be OFF limits," current first daughter Ivanka Trump wrote on Twitter Friday.

 

Ivanka Trump

@IvankaTrump

 

Malia Obama should be allowed the same privacy as her school aged peers. She is a young adult and private citizen, and should be OFF limits.

12:17 PM - Nov 24, 2017

Clinton, the only child of former President Bill Clinton and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, implored news organizations to "be better."

Chelsea Clinton

@ChelseaClinton

 

Malia Obama’s private life, as a young woman, a college student, a private citizen, should not be your clickbait. Be better.

12:55 PM - Nov 24, 2017

Obama, 19, made tabloid headlines twice in the past week.

 

On Friday, a video went viral of a young woman resembling former President Barack Obama's eldest daughter blowing smoke rings.

 

Earlier, the Harvard University freshman was photographed kissing a fellow Crimson fan at a tailgate prior to a football game against Yale University.

 

This is not the first time Chelsea Clinton has leapt to the defense of first children.

 

She previously upbraided the Daily Caller for an opinion piece it published in August chastising President Trump's youngest son Barron Trump for the way he dressed.

 

"Malia Obama’s private life, as a young woman, a college student, a private citizen, should not be your clickbait. Be better," she tweeted.

 

Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wag-a-Muffin (D)

I believe children of famous people (politicians, actors/actresses/ people of note) should be off limits to the press. HOWEVER, I do have a question. Was it "the press" or was it social media?

 

I have read "tacky" social media statements about famous people's children and I have read news articles about famous people's children. And there is a difference.

 

If a fellow student posts a photo of Agnes Famousdaddy doing something stupid. It's not the media attacking Agnes. But if that photo gets shared by Salon/Huffington Post/Conservatives4moralgovernment/ABC/CNN/etc then it is wrong. No matter what side Agnes Famousdaddy's father represents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big Dave

Ivanka Trump, Chelsea Clinton Tear Into Media For Coverage Of Malia Obama

 

Washington Examiner

by Naomi Lim

Nov 24, 2017, 2:08 PM

 

[Too short to excerpt]

 

Ivanka Trump and Chelsea Clinton lashed out at the media Friday, united in their distaste for recent press coverage of Malia Obama.

 

"Malia Obama should be allowed the same privacy as her school aged peers. She is a young adult and private citizen, and should be OFF limits," current first daughter Ivanka Trump wrote on Twitter Friday.

 

 

Clinton, the only child of former President Bill Clinton and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, implored news organizations to "be better."

 

Obama, 19, made tabloid headlines twice in the past week.

 

On Friday, a video went viral of a young woman resembling former President Barack Obama's eldest daughter blowing smoke rings.

 

Earlier, the Harvard University freshman was photographed kissing a fellow Crimson fan at a tailgate prior to a football game against Yale University.

 

This is not the first time Chelsea Clinton has leapt to the defense of first children.

 

She previously upbraided the Daily Caller for an opinion piece it published in August chastising President Trump's youngest son Barron Trump for the way he dressed.

 

"Malia Obama’s private life, as a young woman, a college student, a private citizen, should not be your clickbait. Be better," she tweeted.

 

Link

 

She's not a child anymore. The press didn't hold back when the Bush girls went to college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

A 19 year old smoked and kissed a boy? Shocking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Censport
Clinton, the only child of former President Bill Clinton and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, implored news organizations to "be better."

Clinton, the only child of former President Bill Clinton Webb Hubbell and 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, implored news organizations to "be better."

 

 

Fixed. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lyndsey

A 19 year old smoked and kissed a boy? Shocking.

 

What was shocking was how black activist responded to a "black" girl kissing a "white" boy. She apparently has gotten a lot of grief from the very racist black activist community. Guess they forget her fathers parentage.

 

Not a fan of the Obama's however I agree... I think the children even as young adults should be left out of press coverage unless they do something criminal, run for office or make political statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

MIXED opinions:

 

She's a "Celebrity", not from her own right but from parent's, and the photo's were in "public"; I could argue that there are no "legal" grounds to "privacy".

 

STILL, THOUGH, let it go. Just out of "decency".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pict

Well, since she's been caught smoking weed just like daddy, and she's an adult. Your behavior deems your worth in the news.

 

Live with it, choom sista.

Edited by pict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight

I believe children of famous people (politicians, actors/actresses/ people of note) should be off limits to the press. HOWEVER, I do have a question. Was it "the press" or was it social media?

 

I have read "tacky" social media statements about famous people's children and I have read news articles about famous people's children. And there is a difference.

 

If a fellow student posts a photo of Agnes Famousdaddy doing something stupid. It's not the media attacking Agnes. But if that photo gets shared by Salon/Huffington Post/Conservatives4moralgovernment/ABC/CNN/etc then it is wrong. No matter what side Agnes Famousdaddy's father represents.

 

 

100% agree with you with the caveat that Agnes Famousdaddy is not a public figure. For instance, Ivanka and Chelsea are both quasi-public (at least) or public figures in their own right. And I don’t believe either are “off limits” from a press stand-point if what they are doing is “newsworthy”. A minor child/teen is NEVER a public figure - even if they are the current “greatest singer ever” - in my opinion. I don’t believe Malia Obama is a public figure. She is only famous because of who her dad is. She isn’t out in the public making a name for herself, so the professsional media should leave her alone. Social media “should” leave her alone, but it won’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hieronymous

A 19 year old smoked and kissed a boy? Shocking.

I was expecting something a little more serious too, like trying to buy meth off of Badger in ABQ yo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wag-a-Muffin (D)

100% agree with you with the caveat that Agnes Famousdaddy is not a public figure. For instance, Ivanka and Chelsea are both quasi-public (at least) or public figures in their own right. And I don’t believe either are “off limits” from a press stand-point if what they are doing is “newsworthy”. A minor child/teen is NEVER a public figure - even if they are the current “greatest singer ever” - in my opinion. I don’t believe Malia Obama is a public figure. She is only famous because of who her dad is. She isn’t out in the public making a name for herself, so the professsional media should leave her alone. Social media “should” leave her alone, but it won’t.

Thanks. I should have included the fact that Agnes Famousdaddy is a minor. When she's an adult the deal is off and so should be the gloves. But while she's a child her life shouldn't be covered or commented on by the press.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental

I believe children of famous people (politicians, actors/actresses/ people of note) should be off limits to the press. HOWEVER, I do have a question. Was it "the press" or was it social media?

 

I have read "tacky" social media statements about famous people's children and I have read news articles about famous people's children. And there is a difference.

 

If a fellow student posts a photo of Agnes Famousdaddy doing something stupid. It's not the media attacking Agnes. But if that photo gets shared by Salon/Huffington Post/Conservatives4moralgovernment/ABC/CNN/etc then it is wrong. No matter what side Agnes Famousdaddy's father represents.

 

Unless they do something stupid, then they are as free game as anyone else.

 

A 19 year old smoked and kissed a boy? Shocking.

 

Was it a 40 year old man she was kissing?

 

Oh and if he's over 18 he's an adult, just as she is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

I believe children of famous people (politicians, actors/actresses/ people of note) should be off limits to the press. HOWEVER, I do have a question. Was it "the press" or was it social media?

 

I have read "tacky" social media statements about famous people's children and I have read news articles about famous people's children. And there is a difference.

 

If a fellow student posts a photo of Agnes Famousdaddy doing something stupid. It's not the media attacking Agnes. But if that photo gets shared by Salon/Huffington Post/Conservatives4moralgovernment/ABC/CNN/etc then it is wrong. No matter what side Agnes Famousdaddy's father represents.

Malia Obama needs to become more aware of her surroundings and with the people she thinks are her friends. I hardly ever see the younger Obama. Hopefully big sis will show her what not to do. These are the sort of things that make it an advantage being the baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

Malia Obama needs to become more aware of her surroundings and with the people she thinks are her friends. I hardly ever see the younger Obama. Hopefully big sis will show her what not to do. These are the sort of things that make it an advantage being the baby.

 

:yeahthat:

 

Yeah, that, sort of. Malia has a "circumstance" thrust upon her. She'll either run with it or shrink from it. It is what it is.

 

I could suggest TWO possible role models, depending on one's political stance: Julie Nixon and Amy Carter.

 

Me? I cast my lot with the Nixons rather than Carters. I ESPECIALLY like a 2017 response from Julie and Tricia:

 

A Letter from Tricia Nixon Cox and Julie Nixon Eisenhower

September 28, 2017

 

{I will, against board rule, post an entirety rather than an 'excerpt' because, for one, it's 'Public domain', and for two, whaddaya gonna do to me ANYWAY????. And for three, It NEEDS to be read in entirety.}

 

Dear Friends,

 

With the the airing of Ken Burns’ 10-part series, “The Vietnam War” drawing to a close, we want to share with you some of our thoughts about our father’s Vietnam policies and strategies that the episodes covering his presidency misrepresented. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who served in the Nixon White House, once memorably observed, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.” And that applies even to Ken Burns. So here are some facts.

 

It is not true that Richard Nixon torpedoed what some have maintained was a serious chance for peace announced by President Johnson in the closing days of the 1968 campaign. As William Bundy, a senior State Department official in the Johnson administration, later admitted, there was “no great chance for peace” in November 1968.

 

In fact, LBJ’s October 31st bombshell announcement gave North Vietnam a major military advantage. And before Johnson left office, the negotiations, that South Vietnam joined, succeeded only in reaching agreement about the shape of the conference table. Johnson’s “October Surprise,” just five days before the election, did, however, provide some voters with the false hope of peace, nearly swinging the election to LBJ’s vice president, Hubert Humphrey.

 

It is not true that President Nixon continued the war for his own political benefit. In fact, there’s no doubt that an immediate withdrawal of our 540,000 troops in Vietnam on the day he took office would have served his immediate political interests. But it also would have dishonored our commitment to the freedom of South Vietnam for which 37,563 Americans had already died. Furthermore, it would have devalued America’s credibility to friend and foe alike, with dire diplomatic and military consequences for Asia and the world.

 

It is not true that President Nixon widened the war. In fact, North Vietnam’s active military exploitation of Laos and Cambodia had widened the war years earlier. Our father’s bold and entirely justified actions to disrupt the enemy’s ability to wage war against our troops saved countless American lives. So, too, did the 60-day incursion into Cambodia our father ordered on April 30, 1970. This mission destroyed massive amounts of the enemy’s military supplies and disrupted the military sanctuaries that the Communists had been exploiting to kill American and South Vietnamese troops.

 

Ken Burns incorrectly maintains that President Nixon was, like presidents Kennedy and Johnson, responsible for the war. But it was JFK and LBJ who got us into the war; Richard Nixon got us out. Our father believed, however, that a hasty retreat from Vietnam would have led to a perilous American retreat from the world. Among those who agreed were Dwight Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, and a majority of the American people.

 

In 12 televised “Addresses to the Nation” on Vietnam in his first term, Richard Nixon explained to the American people his plan for ending the war. He won the support of the “Silent Majority” of Americans; did what he said he would do; and never lost their support for his policy.

 

The Nixon “Vietnamization” strategy gave South Vietnam a chance to defend itself against Soviet and Chinese-backed Communist aggression. It also confirmed America’s bipartisan commitment, dating to the Truman administration, to resist Communist expansionism. His willingness to take strong action affirmed that America would keep its word, making possible his historic opening to China and ultimately leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

Our father agonized over the war-driven divisions in our country. He understood that the anti-war passions were rooted in frustration with the war’s duration. But he also knew that their dissent made his goal of a lasting peace more difficult to achieve. It saddened him that so many clashed in America’s streets and on college campuses, and it angered him that some treated our troops returning home from the battlefield as pariahs.

 

President Nixon wound down America’s involvement in Vietnam to give the people of South Vietnam the chance to live in freedom. To suggest that he strung out the war is flatly wrong. To say that the reason for the war was wrong disparages the honorable service of those who fought in Vietnam, America’s most difficult war. And each of these false contentions dismisses the will of the American people, who re-elected our father with an historic 49-state majority over an opponent who vehemently opposed our father’s Vietnam strategy.

 

In 1973, as America’s role in the war ended and our prisoners of war came home, Richard Nixon’s vision of a wider, transformative peace was taking hold, a peace that ensured a generation of peace for the American people even as the world’s political order underwent enormous change.

 

These are the facts. Perhaps if Ken Burns had himself visited the Nixon Library he might have learned the real history of Vietnam during the Nixon years. Unfortunately, he did not. Fortunately, however, the tens of thousands who come to Yorba Linda – or follow the Richard Nixon Foundation on the web or through social media – will find that the truth resides there for all to see and learn from. And for that fact we are grateful to all those who support the Richard Nixon Foundation in its mission to promote the legacy of our father, the 37th President of the United States.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Tricia NIxon Cox (1)

 

Tricia Nixon Cox

 

Julie Nixon Eisenhower (1)

 

Julie Nixon Eisenhower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tea Party Hooligan

I didn't here anyone sticking up for the Bush girls, when they went to college. In fact, the media was more than happy to share every salacious detail they could on them. Then, the leftists would spout their own indignation about their behavior (as though the left has any morals). Sucks when it's aimed at one of your own, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...