Rule number one in politics: Never make fun of a candidate’s wardrobe unless their name is Sarah Palin.
But can we seriously talk about Hillary Clinton’s $12,000 patio rug she mistook for a “jacket” — this… thing… which appears to have been designed by Giorgio Armani’s cat looking for a new place to scratch? It’s a fabric and fit that is as spectacularly hideous as it is pricey.
It’s the kind of thing you’d never wear when lecturing on income inequality, unless your last name is Clinton and aren’t concerned with being consistent. What Hillary did was expert-level trolling, especially coming from a woman who has made well over $100 million just for opening her mouth. (But good for her, right? After all, she did pull herself up from nothing after she and Bill left the White House dead broke!)
That’s right! Just for pointing out the obvious, that makes you sexist now. But do you know what isn’t sexist? Ridiculing Sarah Palin’s wardrobe, which if you’ll remember, was media fodder for weeks back when she was John McCain’s running mate for vice president.
Back then, there wasn’t a leftist news station or commentator on television that wasn’t deriding the former Alaskan governor for spending too much on clothing. But never, ever, was there one peep about it being sexist.
That’s because the Left controls the language and can change meanings whenever it’s convenient for them.
So, take heed, America. Leave Hillary and her pantsuits alone! Who are we to knock her Kim Jong Un-inspired tyranny jackets? Bill obviously loves them, so why can’t we?
Speaking of walking carpets: