http://wcbstv.com/politics/chelsea.clinton.monica.2.685012.html

I can't really blame Chelsea for her response, and I can't see where Bill's affairs can be blamed on Hillary.

I didn't think the question was appropriate either.

It's just another non-issue.

If you want to run in public, the public has a right to know how you think.

Any question of a presidential candidate is valid.

They need to get Chelsea off the campaign. She looked bad when she put off the little girl reporter earlier this year.

Of course, with a mother who is a B---, what can we expect?

"Of course, with a mother who is a B---, what can we expect?"

Wow. If Hillary were a man, we'd call her a strong leader. But because she's a woman she's a bitch?

"Wow. If Hillary were a man, we'd call her a strong leader."

You might, I wouldn't.

If she were a man, I'd call her a stupid D--- or Bastard.

If George Bush were a female, I'd have to call her Edith.

...otherwise known as "Dingbat".

But you know what Archie Bunker would say about the whole Lewinski thing: "Her husband was infidelicate with another woman. Men gets these here, waddya call, surges, where the chromostones are burlin' over...back since time immamoral. But I ain't a man of carnival instinctuals like you. What ya do in the privates of your own room is your own privates."

Go Chelsea! She was absolutely right. An affair is first and foremost a personal family matter, something that was extremely painful for those directly involved. Why is it anyone else's business? What does that have to do with Hillary Clinton's qualifications to be president? ZERO!

It was an inappropriate question and it got the response it deserved.

Andrew

Uh huh, and I suppose its also inappropriate to talk about the presidents daughters and their problems in the past?

I did not see you defending their right to privacy when they were being questioned.

What past problems has Chelsea had? Sorry, I don't really have a clue what you mean in this post.

Andrew

The point was that you think its not ok to ask Chelsea about her family problems but why is it ok to bash on Bush for his daughters problems.

Not saying you did that in paticular. Speaking in general terms.

Mc74 writes:
The point was that you think its not ok to ask Chelsea about her family problems but why is it ok to bash on Bush for his daughters problems.

I don't like it when people bash the Bush daughters, because I find that totally inappropriate...but they are celebrities and in the public eye. It's a totally different thing when a presidential daughter does something publicly from when something happens privately. Asking Jenna or Barbara about the state of their parents' marriage or how they handled it would be completely inappropriate also.

Andrew

What Clinton did was not privatley. It was in the oval office while he was on duty.

If the question posed to Chelsea was to find out how strong her mom was there were certainly many other types of questions that could have been asked.

I was simply a bad question.

Wow, Mc74 - everything that happens in the Oval Office should be accessible and discussible by the public? Does Bush know this?

I think Chelsea answered appropriately. The person has the right to ask, and she has the right to brush him off.

From everything I've seen, Chelsea has done quite well for herself and seems to be pretty intelligent. Good for her. Maybe she should run for President rather than her Mom.

Yup, I dont have a problem with her not wanting to answer it, but the person did have the right to ask.

If she is going to go to different colleges and do speaking events then be prepared to answer some tough and difficult questions.

So how is asking her about the Lewinsky scandal seen as a good journalistic question?

Her perspective as a close insider during an unprecedented episode of American presidential history is certainly a valid topic, and it hasn't been asked of her because she hasn't been accessible to actual journalists. Still isn't.

The impeachment, despite being a politically-motivated entrapment, turned a sad instance of human failure into the public's business. There are several questions that Chelsea could shed light on pertaining to her father's performance of his duties, and her mother's reaction to a crisis.

This particular question was inartfully put by a student, but it's surprising it hasn't been asked before. It did give Chelsea an easy opportunity to mark the topic as off-limits, without followup questions, but it will surely come up again, particularly if she pursues any kind of a public life.

No question is out of bounds during a campaign. Every candidate should be an open book, no secrets.

Anyone who campaigns for a candidate should either answer the questions or politely say no comment, but to say it is none of the questioner's business is wrong.

If Chelsea cannot stand the heat, should get out of the kitchen. Her mother has enough problems without negativity from her spoiled brat.

Q: Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?

A: Because her father is Janet Reno.

John McCain said that in 1998, and I am sure he still feels that way. The joke is classic John. It is also mean, and indicative of the sort of polarized feeling that this cabal of powerful trailer trash creates by their very existence. The fact that the Clinton klan is still in this race is testament to the desire of the media to reward foolishness.

Chelsea works for a hedge fund and much of her role is as a front for broader Clinton financial interests. While the sons and daughters of Reagan and Carter have gone on the bigger and better things, she remains a selfish little twerp who profits from the connections of the family. Does that dynamic remind you of anyone? If her tax returns were also made public, we would know who mommy and daddy will be taking care of if selected, not elected by the party to run for another shot at the Oval Office.

If there was an answer to the question that made her parents look good, she would have given it. Unfortunately, there are few answers to any questions that make them look good. So, she played the snotty rich kid card. What else does she have? Nothing.

Littlesongs, I think your criticism of Chelsea is both mean spirited and wrong. While she can't help what family she was born into, Chelsea has proven that she is certianly worthy and capable.

Selfish little twerps don't graduate from Stanford with disticition and then go on to earn a masters at Oxford, unless their is something upstairs, beyond the last name. Of course she's had opportunities thanks to her name, but I'm certain if her last name was something else she'd be a smart and productive member of society anyway.

If her last name was Bush I am sure you would view Chelsea much differently.

Hey, off topic I know, But why iz u playin with that TROLL on the other side man? It ain't worth it! Just wait till it happens then slam her, it, him!

If her last name was Bush she'd be out boozing it and not amounting to much like the Bush twins.

Or getting prego before she's even married.... OOOOOOOOO SINNER!

Thank you Vitalogy for proving my point.

So the Bush twins like to booze? Who gives a FUCK! What 24 year old woman doesn't? I'm not real sure what that has to do with anything.

But you see if it was Chelsea doing it then nobody here would want to talk about it. It would be a matter of respecting her privacy.

thats what irritates me. Bash on both sides of the isle people....

Imagine if your dad was one of the most hated person in the country, YOU would want to have a drink often also! I just applaud the Bush Twins for not making a home video and leaking it out on the internet. Once the Bush twins have a Sex tape than I will start judging them,(mainly for being stupid) until then, I see nothing wrong with them wanting to Booze. Sorry people this is NORMAL for all 20 something women!

I'm not bashing the Bush twins for doing what they do. I was defending Chelsea in that she's not a total loser or hanger on as Littlesongs would have us believe. Hey, I like to booze it up as much as the next guy. However, to compare Chelsea Clinton to either of the Bush twins is like comparing a GED to a MD. No comparison.

Thats true, Chelsea is a graduate of Stanford University and The Bush Twins are graduates of AA meetings.

_If the Bush Twins DO make a sex tape OR it gets leaked on the internet, Im afraid I would actually watch it. Like Paris Hilton would say "THATS HOT!"

Chelsea also went to Oxford. Clearly she has good genes, something the Bush twins couldn't even buy with the family's riches.

The bush girls got real jobs based on their skills. they are giving back to the community by teaching and writing children's books.

Chelsea got a high-paying job based on her name. I don't doubt she has the skills, but no one gets that kind of money right out of college.

Both the Bush twins and Chelsea are beneficiaries of their last name. Comparing educations and jobs, I'd say Chelsea has the hand up at this point.

Chelsea got a high-paying job based on her name.

She sure didn't get it on her looks!

IMHO.

"She sure didn't get it on her looks!"

And you can say that because you are the finest looking human specimen on the planet?

Actually, Chelsea turned out more attractive than I thought she would. she is not that geeky looking, frizzied hair teen anymore.

And you can say that because you are the finest looking human specimen on the planet?

Hell no! It's truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

LOL

Do you know where that quote came from originally?

"Wow. If Hillary were a man, we'd call her a strong leader. But because she's a woman she's a bitch?"

Yes. People expect different behavior from men than they do from women. I'm not condoning this viewpoint, just making an observation.

Do you know where that quote came from originally?

No. I had to go look it up;

POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK - The "Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins" by William and Mary Morris has more detail about this phrase than other reference books. (Note: iron pots and kettles are already black, even when new.) Judge for yourself whether the phrase has racial connotations. I guess that issue hinges on whether the color black being associated with "evil" has a connection to racial prejudice towards dark-skinned people:

"There are two slightly varying interpretations of this phrase, which is used figuratively to apply to persons. One theory is that such action is ridiculous because they are both black, presumably from standing for years on a wood-burning stove or in a fireplace. So the pot as well as the kettle is black (evil) and neither one is better than the other. This supports the explanation of the phrase as given in 'Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable': 'Said of one accusing another of faults similar to those committed by himself.'

The other theory is that the pot was black but the kettle polished copper and the pot, seeing its own blackness reflected in the shiny surface of the kettle, maintained that the kettle, not it, was actually black. In any event, it seems that the best, if slangy, retort by the kettle may have been: 'Look who's talking!'

Usually the source of the phrase is given as Cervantes' 'Don Quixote' and simply as 'The pot calls the kettle black,' but another version of Don Quixote comes out as: 'Said the pot to the kettle, get away black-face!' Henry Fielding, eighteenth century writer, reverses the roles in 'Covent Garden Tragedy': 'Dares thus the kettle to rebuke our sin!/Dares thus the kettle say the pot is black!' Even Shakespeare used the idea in 'Troilus and Cressida': 'The raven chides blackness.'"