Second Lady, Usha Vance is pregnant. Very pregnant, as a matter of fact. Right on cue, The New York Times takes this opportunity not to celebrate pregnant women but to weaponize maternity fashion.

From The Gray Lady:

If the bare-chested, muscled mixed martial arts fighters of the U.F.C. match that President Trump hosted on Flag Day were the poster guys for MAGA’s image of masculinity, then the pregnant women of Trump world are one half of their feminine counterparts. Along with the sheath-clad, lip-filled, pageant-haired Mar-a-Lago set, they offer an image of idealized womanhood that gives literal shape to the pronatalist movement.”-Vanessa Friedman, The New York Times

Now, if we look at Usha Vance, I would not call her “sheath-clad” or “lip filled”. She is absolutely adorable and I mean that in the most flattering sense. Friedman of the NYT cannot help herself, however, to suggest that Usha Vance, Katie Miller and Karoline Leavitt, all “MAGA wives”, all got pregnant as a coordinated effort to show ‘Murica that being a pregnant tradwife is cool. How dare Katie Miller post her pregnant belly for all to see on X, with the proclamation that “feminism is having babies”!

In honor of Mother’s Day, a reminder that peak feminism is having babies. The most radical thing a woman can do is embrace her biological destiny.”-Katie Miller

Here, the liberals thought the “most radical thing” a woman can do is to reject her own biological destiny by either murdering the life inside. Or ensuring that none of her parts ever work the way they are supposed to ever again by mutilating them at a young age because she feels her God-given, “biological destiny” is all wrong. Yeah. Getting pregnant and having a baby IS pretty rad. Being part of another human’s destiny is also pretty dang special.

Moving on to more the of NYT’s commentary.

Along with her words came a portrait taken from the side, in which Miller is shown wearing low-slung, unbuttoned jeans and a black sports bra, her dark hair cascading in waves down her back. Like the stretchy and black knit Milly dress with a tulip on the front worn by Usha Vance for a military mothers celebration at the White House, and the form-fitting gowns worn by Leavitt and Miller to the White House Correspondents’ dinner in April, the photograph placed Miller’s rounded stomach front and center, enshrining her pregnancy for all to see.

Whatever the reason, Vance acknowledged that her choice of clothes reflected her change in circumstance. In March, she told NBC News: ‘I have to dress up a lot more. I enjoyed my last pregnancy — there were a lot of sweatpants. I was working from home and sometimes put a blazer on over what was under.’

After all, as second lady, her job is also to represent and humanize the vice president. By spotlighting her pregnancy, she is doing exactly that.”-Vanessa Friedman, The New York Times

Translation: Usha Vance, along with Katie Miller and Karoline Leavitt are not women who CHOSE to be pregnant. They are women who are merely serving as “fertility billboards” for pregnancy of pro-life MAGA tradwives and “humanizing” their dreadful husbands. “Enshrining”. their pregnancy bellies and not covering them in a Mu-Mu or a tent dress is now “oppressive”, somehow. This, from the same lot of people who applaud 300+ pound, purple-haired, naked people parading around in the streets in front of children on Pride Month in the name of “body positivity”.

Seems the NYT got more that they bargained for with Usha, however.

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! In the meantime, enjoy my pregnancy fashion (or lack thereof) and a good…

— Second Lady Usha Vance (@SLOTUS) June 24, 2026

The orange dress in Storytime With The Second Lady did them in…

Imagine, for but a second, if JD Vance were a liberal. Anna Wintour would be rabid about getting pregnant Usha Vance on the cover of Vogue. Couture designers would be clamoring and getting into cat fights to dress the expectant Second Lady. Instead, she shops at Old Navy and, she still looks fabulous.

#1, you look beautiful in that dress, #2, I didn’t even stop to wonder where it came from, #3, now that I know, I’m delighted to learn you can look chic in pregnancy with a brand that is attainable for every American. Talk about relatable! Thanks for keeping it real!

— Here_for_the_Show (@3Ring_circus_ss) June 24, 2026

Well, THAT did not go as planned for the NYT.

You have nothing to worry about! pic.twitter.com/cymwsaCLNL

— Hawaii Pearl 🇺🇸 (@hawaiipearl) June 24, 2026

In reality, if Usha’s dress were a couture monstrosity that cost as much as a downpayment on a car, the left would be criticizing as well. Gas prices and THIS is what the Second Lady wears? What about all of the poor, starving children (that we didn’t advocate to abort)? Now, they grasp at straws as they criticize the Second Lady for choosing a $10 dollar dress instead of commissioning Balenciaga. Their desperate attempts to paint all women of the MAGA movement as the mindless, subservient, barefoot-and-pregnat wives of their alpha-males is growing increasingly pathetic day by day.

It’s “journalism” or something.

SLOW SLOW news day when picking apart maternity wear is all you have. You people are embarrassing yourselves trying to look edgy. Are there ANY real journalists out there. With all we have going on in the world, THIS is deemed newsworthy. She looks lovely – enough said.

— LTforReal (@LT66236) June 25, 2026

You know what’s also edgy? An Indian-American woman who holds Ivy League degrees OWNING a pretentious fluff piece with a $10-dollar Old Navy dress. Honestly, it’s freaking epic.

Featured Image: Usha Vance Official Portrait/Wikimedia Commons.org/cropped/Public Domain