Heart-ache: Chelsea gets the Monica question
posted at 10:14 pm on March 25, 2008 by Allahpundit
It’s Clinton Day at HA so we might as well put a bow on it. Fair game? The boss’s points are well taken but the cringe factor for me is simply too high. No need to rub her face in daddy’s shame when there are so many other important questions to be asked. Like, “Do you ever worry that pathological lying might be hereditary?” Or, “If Tuzla was too dangerous for your pop, how come he sent you there instead?”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Egtads I’m gonna go vomit and shoot myself. G’nite.
Akzed on March 25, 2008 at 11:22 PM
As someone already alluded to, she was well prepared before being sent out to stump for her mother. So, yes, I think that question was asked numerous times of her in different ways by her handlers in preparation for the campaign trail.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:23 PM
Obama supporters shouldn’t ask Chelsea about her dad.
Chakra Hammer on March 25, 2008 at 11:23 PM
I think she said “in my 70 (or something) campus college tour”. She may be a Clinton, but I don’t think the “must lie all the time” gene has kicked in yet.
I agree, but I don’t think those questions should be raised to the innocent daughter who was a teenager at the time. Don’t get me wrong, I fault Hillary for putting her on the trail as much as I fault the questioner.
malan89 on March 25, 2008 at 11:24 PM
One politician’s child to another: YOU GO GIRL!
I can’t stand her mom or her dad, but at least Chelsea Clinton can handle a punk. Maybe, just maybe, she takes calls at 3 AM. No, not from Eliot Spitzer but from the Situation Room saying, “MISSILES LAUNCHED FROM IRAN, INBOUND FOR ISRAEL, ETA TEN MINUTES! PRESIDENT CLINTON, WHAT DO WE DO?”
Frankly, this is beyond cringe. This is disgusting and dehumanizing.
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:24 PM
Blake, when you speak on a message board you are part of a community, thus the “we”. As you insist on taking the discourse threw the mud, it reflects on us all. Calling Chelsea a “whore” is the kind of garbage that the Left seizes upon to to discredit our legitimate positions.
pleaseandthankyou on March 25, 2008 at 11:25 PM
I don’t think the venal sins of the parents should be visited upon a loving daughter, regardless of party affiliation. I don’t need to know her personally to understand that she has already suffered aplenty for them. Anyway, she is not stumping for her parents’ Faustian bargain of a marriage but her mother’s politics and, in that arena, Chelsea is fair game.
Terrie on March 25, 2008 at 11:26 PM
“through the mud”
pleaseandthankyou on March 25, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Geeze guys and gals. Drop this stinkbomb and go check out the Quote of the Day. Seriously.
VolMagic on March 25, 2008 at 11:27 PM
That was yesterday’s news.
malan89 on March 25, 2008 at 11:30 PM
First, full disclosure: I don’t like Chelsea Clinton. At all.
Now, to me the argument of a Clinton being asked an inappropriate question rings very hollow to me. Was Bill Clinton not the guy who answered the “Boxers or Briefs” question on MTV? Was he not the guy who bragged about having Astroturf in the back of his El Camino? The man has made the inappropriate within bounds. And in my opinion that leaks over to anyone who speaks up for him.
Chelsea Clinton is actively campaigning for her mother. The Lewinsky affair is a valid field of inquiry. She can try to play the victim card, but the expiration date on that passed a long time ago. I really doubt she’s feeling like it’s out of bounds…instead it’s more likely indignation designed to turn the subject around and make Chelsea look good.
JohnTant on March 25, 2008 at 11:31 PM
I did, it made me almost cry.
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:31 PM
Also, if the Lewinsky matter were out of bounds, then I would have expected Hillary Clinton to keep it out of her book. Yet she wrote about it. That also makes it fair game.
JohnTant on March 25, 2008 at 11:33 PM
I’m not part of your community and you are not part of mine, so there is no “we.” Get over yourself, miss bossy.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:33 PM
Her mother’s time in the White House is being used as a major selling point in her campaign, and getting her father back in the White House in some capacity is an unspoken selling point of the campaign. The question deals with both of those subjects, and she is representing her mother in the campaign; I think it’s fair game to ask it.
exhelodrvr on March 25, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Blake, please explain to me how you are not part of the Hot Air community when you post on the message boards?
pleaseandthankyou on March 25, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Oh, knock it off. I am posting on a blog. I’m not part of your damn community and I am not subject to your made up rules.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:38 PM
For the mother, not the child in the era of YouTube, Facebook, MySpace and HotAir.com. Why should Chelsea Clinton when serving as a campaign surrogate be asked non-policy questions about her family and profoundly humiliated?!? Frankly, I could cream her in a policy debate – and so could just about any of us one Clinton. Two or three, I’d ask for Michelle Malkin or Hugh Hewitt for backup. So let’s stick to what we’re good at – policy, not personality.
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:39 PM
What you call personality, others call character which is fair game.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:40 PM
Free advice from a semi-pro muckraker: This is all public, so watch it. I hereby excuse you, if that’ll make this easier on you, sir.
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:41 PM
I didn’t ask for your advice, free or otherwise, and I certainly don’t need anything from you. You are as full of yourself as the other one.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:43 PM
Although I sort-of excused you above if you felt you had to go, I just think when dealing with campaign surrogates – especially family – we should stick to policy. But yeah, Billary are telling some tall ones lately… poor Chelsea.
I think Blake you don’t understand what it’s like to be a politician’s child between the high-strung temper flare-ups, the ego-trips, the hangers-on taking advantage of the situation and the bullying from the public I’ve had to take – including physical, the politician’s reputation making life difficult for the kids, and the like. Sadly, I do and that’s why this McCain guy is so protective of Chelsea.
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:44 PM
You are a psycho, aren’t you.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:46 PM
On the other hand, Chelsea is acting as a surrogate for the campaign and her mother. Since her mother is using her time in the White House as First Lady as a justification for her fitness for office, then her actions during the Lewinksy matter…no small incident, if you recall…are germane. I think if it were James Carville up there the question would be just as valid, as it would be for anyone singing Hillary Clinton’s praises.
I think the question is about Hillary Clinton’s judgement. Remember, when the allegations first broke she blamed a vast right wing conspiracy and dismissed it all as the work of smear merchants. Isn’t examining that, and it’s attendant insights into her judgement, worth doing?
Lastly, we’re talking about electing a President here. I’m sorry if Chelsea Clinton is embarassed over what I think is arguably a valid subject. If she doesn’t want to get embarassed, maybe she ought to stop campaigning for her mother. I don’t think we (that is, the royal we) should be made to feel ashamed over acknowledging the elephant in the room here.
JohnTant on March 25, 2008 at 11:47 PM
On the video, Brian Williams says that after the incident, Chelsea deigned to take one more question, which turned out to be about, of course, global warming.
Setting aside the question of whether Chelsea deserved to get asked about Monica, is there any reason to doubt that Chelsea’s global warming views are indistinguishable from the standard lefty Democrat boilerplate (i.e., KYOTO KYOTO KYOTO!!!1!)?
Honestly, I have a hard time working up any sympathy for people who would see the country’s economy seriously damaged over phantom hysteria.
Kensington on March 25, 2008 at 11:47 PM
But, yeah, politics is a tough game and not for the delicate. Probably better for Chelsea if she just stays out of it, given the monstrous natures of her parents.
Kensington on March 25, 2008 at 11:48 PM
Oh and amendment to the 11:44 PM comment – when a campaign surrogate (namely the wife) of a candidate starts spouting off policy thoughts like “prepare to earn less” and “For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country” – that’s fair game.
When it’s the fooling around of the parents, spare the kids any further public humiliation. Unless Chelsea Clinton stands up and says, (sarcasm)’My mom’s gonna make me proud to be an American because of a new carbon tax’(/sarcasm), let’s lay off and get back to policy. We have the right ones – and the establishment media doesn’t want to talk about our successes because they’re mostly Democrats, we’re Republicans.
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:49 PM
Chelsea is going on these campuses she is lucky, that the anti-war crowd didn’t hit he with a pie or something…
Chakra Hammer on March 25, 2008 at 11:50 PM
her* even..
Chakra Hammer on March 25, 2008 at 11:51 PM
I understand what you’re saying, and to a certain extent I agree. But I’d be more sympathetic if the Clintons weren’t “throwing up” their daughter to us every five minutes? And at 28 years old, Chelsea Clinton is certainly old enough to make the adult decision of whether she wants to be in the spotlight or not. Since she has apparently decided to remain in the spotlight, I see no reason to extend to her any “protection” above and beyond what would be accorded to anyone else in a similar situation.
Again, I don’t like her, so that likely colors my opinions somewhat…but I don’t think it’s colored all that much.
JohnTant on March 25, 2008 at 11:52 PM
Good point. lol!
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Blake: That was in really poor taste. You should be ashamed.
As far as Chelsey goes….she was shoved out in front of the public by her mother…there are going to be tough, and embarrassing questions asked of her. She handled herself well enough, I suppose…but they didn’t show what was actually asked of her. I have little doubt she had some sort of canned response ready for the ‘monica gambit’, if/when it finally reared it’s ugly head. This is politics, she’s playing the game, she should be prepared for crap like this.
The Clinton campaign should be happy…this sound bite couldn’t come at a better time, what with her Tuzla flap, and all.
It’s no different than Cheney being asked about his gay daughter.
DngrMse on March 25, 2008 at 11:54 PM
I was trying to be nice.
I think we all know what Hillary Clinton did and thought. Let’s assume the Mrs. and Ms. Clinton didn’t know then and let it go. Why inflict pain on the child for the father’s infidelity that her mother may not have known about?
I get why you want to bring this up – bring it up with Hillary and keep it there, as you should.
Yup, my point exactly – be humane & civil towards Chelsea and change the focus to our better policy. With the establishment media and Hollywood sucking at the Democrat teat plus Mr. UNcongeniality for our nominee, we won’t win any personality contests anytime until at least 2012. Again, let’s focus on policy, okay?
HotAirJosef on March 25, 2008 at 11:55 PM
It wasn’t and I am not.
No, you were cryptic, obnoxious, and bossy like the other one.
Blake on March 25, 2008 at 11:57 PM
I can’t help feeling sorry for Chelsea a lot of the time. She would probably have turned out pretty well if she had grown up in an orphanage.
LegendHasIt on March 26, 2008 at 12:02 AM
It is being brought up, as a valid question to someone who is telling me why I should vote for Hillary Clinton. Since Hillary Clinton wants Chelsea to speak on her behalf and make her case to this particular audience, then examining the case and asking questions of Chelsea is proper. She’s the one making the case in this situation, and she’s the one who should be answering the rebuttals to that case.
On a larger point, while facing a question about Lewinsky may be “inflicting pain,” I don’t think it’s the questioner who is inflicting it. It’s Bill for his antics and Hillary for putting her daughter out there who bear the blame for inflicting the pain. That is, assuming any of the Clinton clan is capable of feeling shame or humility over anything, which I frankly believe is still an open question.
JohnTant on March 26, 2008 at 12:02 AM
You know…the attacking Chelsea, particularly on her looks…the attacking the blond girl who just denounced the Hillary 3AM ad for Obama, particularly on her looks…not unlike attacking candidates’ family members’ looks some time ago.
What the hell happened to this site? Let me tell you something, and yes, I’m talking to all of you who think the lowest blow possible is the only way to win against the liberals:
You’re no better than them.
Repeat: You are no better than a DU poster, or a HuffPo poster, or a Kos poster, or an Air America host, or a NYT war photographer, or an MSNBC anchor, or any of the pathetic slime that make the liberal movement so easy to nail.
You’re hurting the cause. Knock it off, or f*** off.
MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 12:03 AM
You’re either lying or a severe narcissist.
MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 12:05 AM
Bin-go!
Yeah I agree with you there, it’s just I would have not brought up the infidelity out of respect. I can only imagine the suffering she has had to go through.
I also wish the Chelsea answer on global warming got the total, professional fisk job.
I’m going to conclude with this thought: Last October, an Ontario Liberal contact of mine who had t’d off her community was up for re-election. In fact, she was in some danger of not getting reelected in the Liberal bastion of Windsor West and also had a weak campaign that didn’t have her campaign HQ number right or her donation link on her website until I made it an issue; but thanks to a smear campaign by the Ontario Progressive Conservative candidate calling her a traitor – this Ontario Liberal I speak about got a bit over 50%. What we’d call a mandate.
Policy matters with the ballots. So does pity with the ballots. Let’s not give the other side a truckload of pity.
HotAirJosef on March 26, 2008 at 12:06 AM
See, this I find actually a little different. Cheney is the parent: He’s responsible, at least in part, for how his daughter is.
A child has no responsibility for how their parent is. Therefore, they should not be held accountable for them.
MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 12:06 AM
I have Aspergers’, among other ailments, so I apologize. My manners teachings must have got rusty.
As to your last sentence: You mind? You’re just as bad as the jerks making the Bush twins an issue. Read my previous comments – most of which are on page 2, if you would please.
Thanks. Like I said: Policy matters with the ballots. So does pity with the ballots. Let’s not give the other side a truckload of pity.
HotAirJosef on March 26, 2008 at 12:09 AM
Ok.
HotAirJosef on March 26, 2008 at 12:09 AM
I think she handled it well. Does anyone know exactly what was asked?
cannonball on March 26, 2008 at 12:10 AM
As much as I dislike her parents, this was not a topic Chelsea should have had to address at all. Kids are not responsible for their parent’s acts. Bill did what Bill did, and I’m sure it greatly hurt the rest of the family. Why rub it in?
Lately, it’s a political wife’s rite of passage to stand stoically on the stage. Here some uncouth semi-wit tries to make the daughter do it too.
I stand with HotAirJosef on this matter.
unclesmrgol on March 26, 2008 at 12:11 AM
Thank you so much.
HotAirJosef on March 26, 2008 at 12:14 AM
Reading comprehension is apparently not your strong point.
I’m not making Chelsea an issue at all. I feel sorry for her for having such horrible parents. She couldn’t choose them, and knowing how they operate, she probably can’t get away from them now, even if if she wanted.
Poor girl is doing the best she can.
I’d rather be an orphan than a Clinton. Hence, my previous comment.
LegendHasIt on March 26, 2008 at 12:22 AM
Okay, I get it now. Frankly, it’s tempting for me to think that way too.
HotAirJosef on March 26, 2008 at 12:28 AM
BTW, nice blog and great pseudo-bills. Just love that kind of a political statement, even when I disagree – but I digress.
HotAirJosef on March 26, 2008 at 12:31 AM
And you’re a lying nut. Want to keep trading insults? I’m game.
Blake on March 26, 2008 at 12:33 AM
Oh yeah, “Chelsea, what do you get when you cross a corrupt politician with a corrput lawyer?”
“Me.”
Akzed on March 26, 2008 at 12:37 AM
Want to know what hussein O and his media soldiers strategy is?
Put the negative attention on Hildebeast and everyone will forget about his MILITANT RACIST “preacher” and his NATION OF ISLAM TIES!
SaintOlaf on March 26, 2008 at 12:45 AM
I think the operative phrase heres is
Politics ain’t beanbag.
rokemronnie on March 26, 2008 at 12:46 AM
Maybe she’ll inherent something her parents never had.
A sense of personal pride, common sense and being true to ones own self.
Kini on March 26, 2008 at 12:46 AM
If they don’t have it, by definition, she can’t inherit it.
Blake on March 26, 2008 at 12:49 AM
It is funny that the media is going after the Clintons now, when they pretty much gave them a pass when Bill was in office. Could it be that they found a more liberal champion?
Johan Klaus on March 26, 2008 at 12:51 AM
Hillary’s judgement is none of our business.
Dollayo on March 26, 2008 at 12:58 AM
You never know what dormant chromosome might be there swimming in that gene pool.
Kini on March 26, 2008 at 12:59 AM
Thank you. I wish I had the time and energy to create more of the bills. Target rich environment right now.
The blog itself isn’t something I’m real proud of, but at least I get to share the occasional interesting ‘real world’ thing; and lately when some political nonsense just has to get out of my head, I can vent there.
LegendHasIt on March 26, 2008 at 1:03 AM
Point taken that she’s an adult, and it goes to the issue of her parents’ judgement.
But really. Do you ever talk, or even think, about your parents’ sex lives? Would you ever ask someone you know about their parents’ sex lives?
I would never, ever ask someone abut her dad’s sexlife, because I know I would never get an answer. And I shouldn’t get an answer. And I wouldn’t WANT an answer–not from a daughter–the skeev factor is off the scale. Yuk. Nasty. There is something wrong with people who discuss their parents’ sex lives in public, so I would respect Chelsea less if she did so.
There are plenty of other people to ask about the Monica thing, but expecting an offspring to talk about this is creepy.
juliesa on March 26, 2008 at 1:07 AM
Dollayo on March 26, 2008 at 12:58 AM
She is running for president. It is every citizen’s business.
Johan Klaus on March 26, 2008 at 1:08 AM
You know, reading some of these posts, at first I had an off-hand comment…… (no surprise)
But then I thought, “what if I were wearing Chelsea’s britches?” (don’t start)
You are raised by two sociopaths and phsychological liers. You are “handled” from one situation to another, and have witnessed everyone in your life that crossed your parents, ……. liquidated. (Vince Foster is not availble for comments)
You have a chance to expand your power, although not elected into office, as your Mom did, and have all sorts of contributors that keep the cash coming in. (Nice time to be young, isn’t it?)
Now all you have to do, is to perfect the lies of your Father (with the raspy voice and lip bite, but this time with some glossy polish), and ride the coat tails of your Mother (especially if she losses, you ride bring calm to the civil war in the Democratic party)….. get elected to a school board somewhere, then city council,… all the time being accessable to the news media, and pay someone to start her your own blog. By the time she’s twenty-three she will be in Congress.
She was raised in a house of handlers….. anyone want to bet real money she didn’t have the answer to that question before it was asked?
Fools.. (not HotAir)……… I am buying extra popcorn for the Denver. I have no doubt we have NOT seen the last of sweet, sweet Chelsea,
after that, game on………..
Seven Percent Solution on March 26, 2008 at 1:29 AM
I’m thinking you’ve never heard of genetic traits “skipping a generation“.
deesine on March 26, 2008 at 1:32 AM
Wimps. This isn’t about civility. This is about credibility. The Monica incident is public knowledge and a public spectacle. The question is legit. If anyone is to blame for making the “atmosphere” of the question uncomfortable for Chelsea it lies solely on her father.
She is stumping for her mom, she is putting herself out there, the questions wasn’t lewd, she should just should have said she is not going to answer. It was when she added that it was none of our business that I crunched my brow. Feigned outrage is so obvious.
And AP adds little to the conversation by assuming the “moral high ground.” One more squishy moment is added to the wimp factor that seems to be spreading on this website.
I know, I know, “don’t read Hot Air anymore, then.” That retort is gonna get stale.
geckomon on March 26, 2008 at 2:07 AM
That’s an apt strategy and likely to have much benefit for the Obamassiah. Although, it almost seems like Billary and her entire campaign are chumming the waters with whole meat on the hoof lately, almost as if it’s intentional.
Pick any number between 0-4. All three of the main candidates are conniving thieves and contriving liars. One of my favorite lines from Red October, “I’m a politician. When I’m not kissing babys, I’m stealing their lollipops.”
SilverStar830 on March 26, 2008 at 2:11 AM
good for her!
sko17 on March 26, 2008 at 2:11 AM
Bad form. Punk college kid makes national news.
- The Cat
MirCat on March 26, 2008 at 2:27 AM
That’s my take on it. The over-animated indignation…rookie mistake. And you’re exactly right. The question, while argumentative, was not lewd.
Clintons get to parse and select their words in order to convey multiple meanings, and thereby bamboozle an entire country. Then when their kid gets a loaded question, we’re supposed to feel guilty about her victimization.
RushBaby on March 26, 2008 at 2:41 AM
I don’t pretend to think for a second that any Monica related questions are easy for her.
However, she is out stumping for her mother and is fair game. There is NOTHING that is none of our business when it relates to the character of her family and their past. Her mother’s willingness to accept a lying, adulterous swine of a husband back into her arms tells me alot about Hilary’s spine (or lack thereof)
The ‘Monica-gate’ thing was a tour de force demonstration in the art of deflecting from the real issue and making it about an issue no one gives as much of a crap about.
Basically, if Chelsea wants to piss in the tall weeds with the big dogs, she’s going to get tough, uncomfortable questions. If she doesn’t like em, get off the campaign trail or grow a thicker skin and stick with it.
This is politics not a sweet 16 party.
MannyT-vA on March 26, 2008 at 4:35 AM
Cool, thanks. Noble is as noble does.
silverfox on March 26, 2008 at 4:57 AM
By definition, the parents have to have the trait, whether dormant or not, to pass it on to their children. Duh. I’m thinking you two should just give it up.
Blake on March 26, 2008 at 7:01 AM
Of course they are valid, and should be asked. Moreover, she and her mother should actually answer them. They go DIRECTLY to consideration of the candidate.
As to poor little Chelsea…if she doesn’t want to answer quasi-difficult questions, she shouldn’t be stumping for her mother. She can go back to her six-figure job where she does nothing and live life in peace (well, until the Obama tax increases hit her).
Darksean on March 26, 2008 at 7:32 AM
TANSTAAFL.
Hillary wanted Chelsea to roll in the political mud, and Chelsea accepted, willing or otherwise…there should be little surprise that she’d have to deal with some dirt. You can’t cite privacy concerns when you step up to a microphone.
By the way, Cheney’s daughter and the Bush Twins never campaigned for their fathers, so that comparison is wholly inept.
James on March 26, 2008 at 7:50 AM
If you are going to grab the mic and promote some one in your dysfunctional family then it is only fair that you defend your Aunt Monica.
Ha ha.
But I guess it aint nice to remind a daughter that her Dad is a lecherous dog.
TheSitRep on March 26, 2008 at 7:53 AM
Allah,
Daddy’s shame?
The Clintons know no shame.
mountainmanbob on March 26, 2008 at 7:56 AM
You may be right AP, but if my Dad was “B.J. Clinton” I would be way too ashamed to make public appearances.
But I think she is as shameless like her ogre like parents.
TheSitRep on March 26, 2008 at 8:02 AM
That little lady had to dodge sniper fire in Bosnia. I think she can handle an embarrassing question from a college student.
Dork B. on March 26, 2008 at 8:09 AM
She can be asked the question, and she can refuse to answer it, as she did.
Myself, the question is un-important,past history…there are more pressing questions. Like did she know she was a human shield for her mom? Or is her mom a bit of an exaggerator? Can someone with her mom’s propensity to exaggerate the truth be helpful at the negotiation table? Or will they not trust her…
Maybe a better question, if they want to get into it, “is your mom’s habit of denying facts and attacking people who bring truth to the table an asset or liability?
right2bright on March 26, 2008 at 8:12 AM
Huh?!!
What are you all talking about?
WHAT was the question? I didn’t hear any question.
bridgetown on March 26, 2008 at 8:26 AM
When is someone going to find that little Bosnian girl and ask her about the sniper fire, and who she would vote for?
Brat on March 26, 2008 at 8:32 AM
Way out of bounds, imo.
Midas on March 26, 2008 at 8:35 AM
Another thought…
Remember after the Lewinsky matter really took off? There was that contrived photograph of the three Clintons walking to the helicopter, Chelsea in the middle holding the hands of her parents? At that point she was an adult. Some rumors said she didn’t want to do it because she was angry with Bill (reasonable) but did it at her mother’s behest so as to present a particular image for Hillary’s political future (not so reasonable). Being used as a human shield is one thing, but willingly signing on to become one is another matter entirely.
In my opinion, at that moment Chelsea became as complicit as her parents in the entire affair, and men of good faith ought not feel one iota of shame in asking her about it.
JohnTant on March 26, 2008 at 8:38 AM
She’s just like her parents… standoffish and rude.
A true Dumbocrat.
madmonkphotog on March 26, 2008 at 8:42 AM
I see, now this little twit is telling us what is our business and what is not. She’s going to grow up and be as narcissistic and dangerous as her gangster parents.
rplat on March 26, 2008 at 9:09 AM
Damn, that newsman pisses me off. His comment that a DEMOCRAT avoided answering press questions to avoid the “hard ones” is hilarious. As if the press asks a democrat hard questions, or that they’re superior to the average schmuck when it comes to asking one.
Darth Executor on March 26, 2008 at 9:11 AM
Wasn’t the question regarding Hillary’s credibility? How is that nobody’s business? Why didn’t she just answer “No” and move on? And it just gets to me how this family thinks what they did to tarnish the image of the Presidency is none of America’s business. Thank God they’ll never reside in the White House again.
pecan pie on March 26, 2008 at 9:19 AM
so…if a republican taps his toe in a bathroom stall, its ok to ask his sexual orientation, and its OK to ask Bill Clinton if he wears boxers or briefs, its ok to Ask Mitt Romney if he ever cheated on his wife…etc, etc…but!…this? THIS!?…is off limits? Screw her!. She entered the arena, history has proven, alls fair in politics if you’re a republican, but when you’re a democrat, you are deserving of respect of privacy, since “hey…they never claimed to be so righteous”. PS- I wonder why she is waering all that clown make up.
HunnyWaggin on March 26, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Exactly. It was an appropriate question and I say “Bravo” to the student that asked it. Chelsea has put herself in this position by ACTIVELY campaigning for her mother. She should be able to handle these types of questions. If she is too sensitive to handle them, then get out of the public spotlight.
I don’t think the question was actually offensive and it deserved to be answered. Like most others are saying… she’s almost 30. Just answer “Yes” or “No” to the question and move on.
Nineball on March 26, 2008 at 9:29 AM
OK so how come no one has said what Rush always says “This is the Clinton family there are no accidents. Everything happens for a reason.” Was there some recent news story that shed a TON of negative light on dear old mom? Is there a history of Hillary’s people putting plants in the audience to ask questions of? Wouldn’t this make poor little Chelsea look like, well poor little Chelsea?
I’d bet dollars to doughnuts that it was a planted question to draw attention away from Hillary’s lies about Bosnia.
/sarc
But you know I’m probably just paranoid that there’s this vast conspiracy out to get the Clintons. /sarc off
jdog on March 26, 2008 at 9:32 AM
She is 27 or so already. She missed the deadline for Congress.
Sue on March 26, 2008 at 9:34 AM
Not that I would believe a word of it, but had she been more politcally savvy she could have responded:
“Thank you for your question. While the private matters of my family are going to be kept private, your question regarding my Mother’s credibility is fair and relevant. My response would be that, if anything, my mother’s credibility is proven stronger through that episode. She gave my Father a promise to stick with him ‘for better or worse’ and she is a person who stands by her word.”
I almost barfed typing that. It’s a total lie, but it would’ve been a better response than the one she gave. Ugh…I’m gonna be sick now, sorry folks.
pecan pie on March 26, 2008 at 9:41 AM
My point was just that she isn’t as good as this as her Dad.
pecan pie on March 26, 2008 at 9:43 AM
She’s 28. I am curious since the press deliberately spinned this story to put her in a good light, whether every time she steps in it on the campaign trail whether it will be spun again or even reported.
Blake on March 26, 2008 at 9:52 AM
Of course you’re not. You can write whatever pops into your head here if you choose. You might get banned if you cross any lines that the owners of this blog find offensive or that reflect poorly on this blog and/or conservatives in general.
But I don’t know why other posters are bothering to give you advice. Given enough rope, you’re bound and determined to hang yourself.
And I have to agree. I’m not fond of people asking her that question. I wouldn’t personally do it and would encourage others to refrain from it as well. However, when she’s campaigning for her mom, and her mom claims being First Lady as job experience, I think it’s fair game to ask about that experience.
Undeniably, even if Hillary does not love Bill, the Monica scandal was a very trying time for her, and instead of being level-headed about the ordeal, the woman made up a conspiracy.
I’m sorry that you know how it feels and understand your sentiments, but I think it’s your parents and her parents who should be worrying about this.
I’ve long felt bad for Chelsea because of her bad fortune to have such opportunistic parents, she’s an adult now and as such has made the decision to be a part of this political mess.
Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 9:54 AM
I lost all patience with Chelsea Clinton when a couple of months ago a little girl who was a reporter for her grade school paper attempted to ask her an innocuous question and Chelsea told her she didn’t give interviews.
Blake on March 26, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Same to you, cupcake.
Blake on March 26, 2008 at 9:55 AM
She should have answered, “Your drunk Mr. Kennedy… Shut Up and go home.”
CynicalOptimist on March 26, 2008 at 10:12 AM
You can’t look at this as “Hillary’s daughter being asked a tough question,” but rather through the prism of “Hillary supporter being asked a tough question.”
It’s not like paparazzi chased down Chelsea, invaded her privacy, and asked her rude questions. No. Chelsea took on a role as a spokesman/defender of the Hillary Clinton campaign. As such, any question that would be fair to, say, James Carville, should be fair game for Chelsea.
Is the question fair? Yes. Tough and fair. Although the question itself is not shown in the clip above.
ynot4tony2 on March 26, 2008 at 10:18 AM
I think Blake is just sad that Ron Paul didn’t make it.
MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 10:24 AM
This is the ultimate problem for me. Most sensible conservatives agree that Chelsea is not her mother, and we reserve judgment for until she does things independently. Most sensible conservatives also agree that her parents are two of the most conniving, coercive, domineering, manipulating conmen this side of the Mississippi.
That being said, are we really assuming that those same parents put no pressure whatsoever on their daughter to punt for them? We know they’ll do whatever it takes to win, but we’re giving them the benefit of the doubt that they wouldn’t do everything in their power to force their daughter out there? If she wasn’t out there, it would be a serious chink in their armor, and they know it.
As someone else posted, when we see Chelsea running for Congress on the same platform as her mother, have at it. Until then, be consistent about the motives, tactics, and personalities of Bill and Hillary Clinton, and use some critical thinking before you target someone who had no choice in being born to those two reprobates.
MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »