Melania Trump as Marie Antoinette

The Hollywood left and its acolytes having played the old-white-man card and laid an egg, they’re trying the Marie Antoinette card. They will only deepen their misery.

They are attacking our Republic’s lovely and gracious First Lady for improving the White House tennis courts. This is supposed to make them look more better than her and, presumably, win votes for a party reduced to a choice between a sleazy pol and an unreconstructed old stalinoid to lead them into the presidential campaign.

As of now it appears their strategy is based on the equivalent of “you could run a monkey against this guy and beat him,” but in their heart of hearts they must suspect this is bravaggaccio squared. So they pick on the weaker sex, another consequence of trying to obliterate gender in the name of diversity.

The pretext is that the First Lady has taken the lead in improving the storied White House tennis courts. She recently advertised the fact that the project — supported by private donations, not your tax dollars — is advancing. You can bet your last tennis ball that if she did notadvertise the fact, a congressperson from a bicoastal district would demand hearings and an investigation into why the secrecy and what the graft.

Absent that, they call her “tone deaf” and “insensitive” and some kind of “Marie Antoinette” for talking about making the White House grounds more better in the midst of a national (and global) health emergency and a natural disaster in Tennessee.

The White House tennis courts are pretty small potatoes compared to the luxuries the federals at all levels enjoy — at your expense, taxpayer! — such as the basketball and workout gyms for the bicoastals in Congress (and others). Why should the taxpayers be subsidizing these sloths with sauna rooms and steam baths and weight lifting equipment? Why don’t they get their own? Why don’t they pass a bill saying all this stuff and all future allocations should go to the kids of Washington, D.C. who don’t have them?

The Washington, D.C. metropolitan area is wealthy, but its poverty rate is higher than the national average and the extent of inequality between the rich and the poor is one of the widest in the country.

Rather than complain about the First Lady making White House improvements with private funds — every First Lady since Abigail Adams has made improvements in the White House, by the way — they might consider what they can do for the kids of Washington, one in four by reputable measurements, who do not enjoy the advantages their own kids have. For, make no mistake, these are one percenters who find in Melania Trump an outlet for their rage.

In the early 1950s a group of tennis-playing friends who lived near Rock Creek Park got the idea of inviting dead-end kids to the courts some of them had built in their backyards, to learn the sport and build character.

Keep ’em on the court and out of court, they quipped.

They were accomplished and well-off, but they realized soon enough their idea could end up costing, so they created a foundation — the Washington Tennis Foundation. It was guided for many years by Arthur Ashe, later by his friend Willis Thomas, Jr.

The small charity that grew out of Rock Creek Park to become an important Washington institution, has inspired similar endeavors. Venus and Serena Williams sponsor a Tennis and Learning Center in Anacostia.

A fine organization for many years has used private initiative and dollars to improve and maintain a charming park at the edge of Georgetown. Known as Friends of Rose Park, it cares not only for the local courts but also for the adjacent little league baseball field and the outdoor basketball court, as well as the adjacent nature walks and kiddie playground.

Similarly, a new organization, Tennis at Fort Lincoln Park, has taken up some for the demand for tennis instruction on the east side of the city that the Tennis and Education Foundation, for all its accomplishments, cannot fill (it has a waiting list.)

Tennis is just one way that community-minded citizens make a difference. It was quite fitting for Michelle Obama, when she was First Lady, to salute the foundation and encourage kids to play tennis, by extension any sport. It was fitting for Laura Bush to promote reading, or Lady Bird Johnson to lead a keep-America-beautiful campaign.

The idea of expanding and improving the White House Tennis courts, which have not changed much since Theodore Roosevelt lived in the White House, is, if nothing else, a nod to such civic initiatives. What can possibly be wrong with it?

What in the world is wrong with a First Lady using her inevitable fame, call it celebrity if you want, to inspire by example? Saying — as certain Hollywood types do — with an indignation that drips of malice, hypocrisy, and much besides — that because there was a tornado the other day in Tennessee and the world is cringing from a communist-caused viral epidemic, we should stop doing good things? Mrs. Trump’s had an apt and characteristically low-key response to the envious, “Why doncha just do something good for your community?” Instead, she implied, of venting your spleen on me.

What will it do for hurricane victims or public health preparations to stop improving the White House grounds — at, to repeat, private expense. On the contrary, this is a way, however small, of saying life goes on, and it goes on as well as it does in our country because private citizens care for their communities and match their money to their caring.

But because of a bizarre derangement syndrome, nothing the president does, and by extension nothing anyone in his family does, can gain approval in certain quarters; on the contrary, his and their motives must be impugned, reviled, and despised.

One cannot help but be reminded of another famously beautiful woman who happened to be, also, an immigrant who married a powerful man. This was the Hapsburg princess Marie Antoinette, whose parents gave her in marriage — at 15 — to the Dauphin of France, soon to be Louis XVI. Though popular at first, the young Queen within a few years found herself pulled into the inferno of the French Revolution, and was targeted by the monsters who led France — and the modern world — down its destructive path.

Obviously our century is not the 18th, and our Republic is not the Old Regime, but it is striking how hate-mongering elites resemble one another across centuries and societies. In their zeal to destroy the monarchy and to concentrate power into their hands, the Revolution’s radicals turned on Marie Antoinette as a representative of the alleged wickedness they were going to replace with a Republic of Virtue. It got ugly, then it turned to murder.

We are not there, obviously, though the White House tennis improvement project has evoked comparisons between Melania and Marie Antoinette by haters who most likely could not tell you the evil their mental and ideological predecessors did to the immigrant Queen.

However, apart from their manifest hatred of beautiful immigrants, there is something very sick abroad when their response to a First Lady’s support for a healthy all-American sport is to hound and insult her. That she should answer the envious and the malcontents with her customary grace will, of course, only fuel their rage. In their own way, though not as drastically, they will end up, as did the French revolutionaries, consuming their own.

Source: The American Spectator

Leave a Reply