I think the question was irrelevant to the campaign she was stumping for, and even if you could make the weak argument that it was, I think the question could have been asked of ANYONE else in the campaign.

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 8:32 PM

Now we’re getting somewhere. Baby steps. We’ll get through this. :)

Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said her experience as First Lady is germane to the argument that she should be President. Chelsea has echoed this argument. So her actions and such should be examined and explained. The Lewinsky thing was a big deal, despite the efforts of the MSM and the Clintons to minimize it. It pointed to all sorts of things, from patronage to abuse of power. Indeed, right off the bat on national television Hillary Clinton blamed a right wing smear machine that manufactured a scandal with no bearing in fact. Wondering if her actions and decisions during that time have any bearing on her credibility is a valid line of inquiry, especially since she brought it up to begin with.

Since Chelsea has made the decision to campaign for her mother, she needs to support the case she is making. No one is asking her how she feels about what her father did. If the guy said “Hey, how did the whole Lewinsky thing make you feel” then even that would be crossing the line as irrelevant and is more properly considered “prying into private family matters.” But examining the public reactions and statements of Hillary Clinton in the context of the case she is making for her election is not.

This is where I think the disconnect is. The question was not about her father’s indiscretion. The question was about her mother’s handling of it in the wake of them, something that speaks to her viability as a candidate.

- The Cat

The whole thing is unnecessarily frustrating. So some people believe this is a fair question to ask of those who would campaign for Hillary. Why does that have to cause such a problem for those of you who disagree?

Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 5:51 PM

Ironic that you’re so frustrated that we can’t understand what you claim to know. I’ll spell it out: I don’t just think it was unfair, I think it was inappropriate to put a daughter on the spot in public about her father’s indiscretion. I think the question was irrelevant to the campaign she was stumping for, and even if you could make the weak argument that it was, I think the question could have been asked of ANYONE else in the campaign. I think choosing to ask it of the daughter of anyone else other than Chelsea Clinton would be seen as prying into private family matters, which is reprehensible, and as you yourself admitted, you wouldn’t ask it.

I repeat: If you wouldn’t ask it yourself, but still think it’s appropriate, there is something wrong.

But since you still have a heart for this, how am I a hypocrite? I’d love to know.

Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 5:15 PM

You accused me of acting naive. I was not. You accuse me of insulting conservatives. I was not. I ask for explanation of the insult, you avoid telling me even though I directly ask you more than once. As I just said, you tell me not to mince words, then do so yourself. You told me not to act naive, now you’re acting aloof. Put up or shut up.

So you get finished telling me not to mince words, and now you pull this “If you don’t know, I’m not going to tell you” crap?

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 4:55 PM

From my perspective, assertions about the classless nature of the question posed to Chelsea have been following that very model.

So you get finished telling me not to mince words, and now you pull this “If you don’t know, I’m not going to tell you” crap?

You’re only convincing me that you’re more of a hypocrite than I’ve already stated.

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 4:55 PM

I’ve been trying to explain it to you over and over again. I’m a decent writer. It’s what I got my degree in and something I do for a living, but I don’t believe I’m a decent enough writer to explain my point any better than I have.

But since you still have a heart for this, how am I a hypocrite? I’d love to know.

No, and you’re only convincing me that discussing this with you is really a bad idea.

Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 4:49 PM

So you get finished telling me not to mince words, and now you pull this “If you don’t know, I’m not going to tell you” crap?

You’re only convincing me that you’re more of a hypocrite than I’ve already stated.

Who wrote that? Oh, yeah.

JohnTant on March 26, 2008 at 3:49 PM

It’s really a shame that people who agree on so much will resort to insults so quickly over something rather small.

Was it the word discriminating?

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 3:34 PM

No, and you’re only convincing me that discussing this with you is really a bad idea.

Jim Treacher on March 26, 2008 at 3:47 PM

That’s exactly my point as well. It isn’t as though the question isn’t relevant.

Fine. So you honestly have no idea how what you wrote can be construed as an insult. I’ll just have to get out of the conversation then as it leaves me with no common ground on which to communicate with you.

Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Well, there is this post earlier in the thread:

Conservative men don’t ask questions like that. We’re not women.

emailnuevo on March 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM

Tell that to all those conservatives here defending the question.

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 12:15 PM

The Cheesehead protests too much, methinks.

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 3:11 PM

A fine rant, but not persuasive.

Your assertion is that the question was an example of “low-brow cheap-shot classlessness.” To support that opinion, somehow it’s supposed to be a argument that if you don’t you aren’t conservative. Well, “not conservative” is not a synonym for “does not agree with me.”

I know you’re calling the question classless. But I don’t think the question asked was classless or out of bounds at all. If I thought it was than I’d probably agree with you. But instead of trying to point out how it is, you instead decide to toss around invective in an attempt to bully your point across instead of advocating for it. I think that does your opinion a disservice. Your repeated mischaracterizations of my very plainly written posts are just icing on the dysfunctional cake.

Second, I have not called anyone who disagrees with me a Chelsea Lover or any other insult. So you can retire that strawman with regards to your response to me.

Third, you bring up AGAIN Mary Cheney and the Bush Twins (and wouldn’t that be a great name for a cover band…?). But as has also been explored, the comparison is inept at best. It is not hypocrisy to cringe at Elizabeth Edwards saying the Cheneys are ashamed of Mary. Similarly, it is not out of bounds to ask a campaigner about Hillary Clinton’s handling of the Lewinsky affair, particularly when it was the subject of her book.

Then to top it all off, anyone who dares question your assertion (which is all that supports your opinion…is that it’s your opinion) is smeared as less than conservative in your book. And this is supposed to be a sober conservative argument?

This reminds me of a blog post I read that I thought was pretty good:

There’s a new documentary coming this spring that should finally begin to make some real waves regarding the topic of speech suppression in academia. Ben Stein is hosting Expelled, which blows the lid off of the concentrated movement by Darwinists in intelligentsia to squelch their colleagues if they even dare to suggest that Intelligent Design could be another theory. Being ostracized is only the beginning. They end up fired, having their reputations smeared, their work questioned, and their accomplishments twisted.

I really hope this gets widespread distribution, but I have no doubt that before long, this will be being attacked as an “evangelical nut piece”. Amazing how zealous a lot of atheists can get. Almost like it’s their…religion.

Who wrote that? Oh, yeah.

right2bright on March 26, 2008 at 3:08 PM

Read upthread and check what I was actually responding to.

Here’s a helpful link.

One who thinks it’s all right to prod politician’s children to give up dirt on their parents.

Were you under the impression that this kid broke into Chelsea’s house and demanded answers? He asked a question at a campaign stop about the candidate’s response to one of the biggest crises in her career. (And let’s not pretend it hasn’t been a career.)

If Hillary wants to bring up her experience as First Lady to convince me I should vote for her, she and her campaign should be prepared to deal with questions about… her experience as First Lady! The Lewinski debacle was a big part of it, whether she likes it or not. And it’s not going away. If she doesn’t want her daughter dealing with questions about it, send her home.

Fine. So you honestly have no idea how what you wrote can be construed as an insult.

Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Was it the word discriminating? Sorry if I use the actual definition rather than shudder away from the word in PC horror.

One who thinks it’s all right to prod politician’s children to give up dirt on their parents.

One who doesn’t.

Please, don’t claim that I’m saying something that I’m not. I say what I mean, and I mean what I say.

Fine. So you honestly have no idea how what you wrote can be construed as an insult. I’ll just have to get out of the conversation then as it leaves me with no common ground on which to communicate with you.

Did the Bush twins campaign for their dad?

They did in 2004. I don’t recall anyone asking them about it, but I wouldn’t have cared if they were asked.

This wasn’t Hillary, it was her daughter.

Who is traveling around the country representing Hillary. It’s not like she just happened to be there and a microphone fell into her hand.

Anyone here who was shocked about the Bush twins getting hassled for their drinking or Kerry bringing up Cheney’s daughter, and now defends this, is a hypocrite, plain and simple.

Did the Bush twins campaign for their dad? I’m not saying they did or didn’t; I honestly don’t remember. If they did, and somebody asked them about it in that context, I’d say it would be fair game. It would be up to the questioner to explain how it was relevant, of course.

Not sure what Kerry bringing up Cheney’s daughter has to do with it, though. Did Cheney lie about her under oath?

Please, don’t play naive here. There’s no reason for it.

Esthier on March 26, 2008 at 2:59 PM

Please, don’t claim that I’m saying something that I’m not. I say what I mean, and I mean what I say.

…regardless of your bullying attempts here in asserting that it is.

JohnTant on March 26, 2008 at 2:59 PM

Bullying? I’m calling a question classless, as well as those who defend it classless, and those who agree with me are essentially told off about our “precious Chelsea”, while being cried at about free speech…and what I am doing is bullying?

I have my opinion, you have yours. I could call this bullying of Chelsea Clinton, but that’s schoolyard. When you tell me it takes…

“Hey, Chelly…did you watch things go down…?”

…for you to consider whether a question was inappropriate, and then you call me a bully for pointing that out, I finish. You’re playing the same kind of victim game Hillary would in an instant. This wasn’t Hillary, it was her daughter. The question was inappropriate, and she acted accordingly towards it. Anyone here who was shocked about the Bush twins getting hassled for their drinking or Kerry bringing up Cheney’s daughter, and now defends this, is a hypocrite, plain and simple. Feel free, however, to demand that either of those situations perfectly mirror this one in order for you to justify it to yourself.

So you’d have no problem with a reporter asking the Bush twins about their dad’s former alcoholism?

Dirty laundry mania!

Slublog on March 26, 2008 at 12:29 PM

oops, you forgot, long before before being a president, and before his children were aware, he didn’t have a problem with alcohol. So the answer would be, “ask someone who knows”.
Tell me, you rode the pine on the debate team…

Is “convenient double standard” acceptable?

Tzetzes on March 26, 2008 at 2:56 PM

I’ll ask my barber and part time English teacher…Hector Malaprop. :)

MadisonConservative on March 26, 2008 at 2:53 PM

Actually, I said that if I thought the question was inappropriate I’d agree with you, and I gave an example as to an inappropriate question (IOW a genuine lowbrow, classless cheap shot….). But the question asked was not inappropriate, low brow, classless, nor a cheap shot…regardless of your bullying attempts here in asserting that it is.

Your ad hom speaks for itself.