The Clintons cried wolf last week while basking in the indignity of their outrage and the perceived national indifference to the offense of their suffering! Why is Hillary Clinton so easily offended — while the same sort of attacks wash off the back of Barack Obama?

Hillary Clinton cried again last week.

I guess her polling shows that tears make her race.

The rumble around the offense happened when David Shuster of MSNBC
— while guest-hosting a news talk show — accused the Clintons of
“pimping out” their soon-to-be-28-year-old daughter Chelsea to help win
her mother’s presidential campaign.

The Clintons, and their supporters, were Outraged and Demanded Justice and they wanted Shuster taken off the air. Shuster apologized. He is still off the air.

The Clintons are still threatening to boycott the next debate hosted by MSNBC.
Was that the right decision to remove David Shuster from the air?
Is Chelsea Clinton “pimped out” by her parents?

Clinton has been on the campaign trail. She has placed herself in the
public eye and so must suffer the analysis and courtship of the media
even if it is negative, unfair, and vicious. You can’t complain about
the criticism of what you present or the answer you get when you ask

Chelsea calls Superdelegates on behalf of her mother.
Chelsea Clinton refuses to do interviews with the press — even when the questioner in a 9-year-old girl:

Sydney Rieckhoff, a Cedar Rapids fourth grader and “kid
reporter” for Scholastic News, has posed questions to seven Republican
and Democratic presidential hopefuls as they’ve campaigned across Iowa
this year.

But when she approached the 27-year-old Chelsea after a
campaign event Sunday, she got a different response.
“Do you think your dad would be a good ‘first man’ in the White House?”
Sydney asked, but Chelsea brushed her question aside.
“I’m sorry, I don’t talk to the press and that applies to you,
unfortunately. Even though I think you’re cute,” Chelsea told the
pint-sized journalist.

Is the young Clinton trying to have it both ways?
Can she claim to be untouchable — “un-whorable,” if you will — while
publicly shilling for her mother and blowing off 9-year-olds?
While the Clinton campaign demand apologies and took retribution
against a negligible “member of the press” — last night Barack Obama beat Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter to win his second Grammy award.

Over the weekend, Barack also won landslide victories in Nebraska, Louisiana, Washington and Maine — while yesterday Hillary fired her campaign manager.

The more Barack pulls away, the louder the Clintons wail against their
unfair treatment and their prejudicial punishing at the hands of the
media elite.
Can we bear their complaining for six more months?

Will their whining win them Florida and Michigan even though they were taken off the delegate table?


  1. David,
    While I agree with you that the Clintons are manipulative, really what politician isn’t?
    Additionally, I don’t think it’d be rude or out of line for any commentator or reporter to say that Chelsea has been placing phone calls on her mother’s behalf. There have been reports of Michelle Obama calling superdelegates yet no one is making sexual insinuations about her calls. The very terminology — “pimped out” — makes even more blatant the sexist criticisms of Clinton. Chelsea is certainly old enough to take care of herself but if the media is going to jump on its high horse, it had better level criticism equally.
    As for the superdelegates, they need to go. No disagreement there.

  2. Anne —
    Barack’s kids are 8 and 12 not almost 28. The Obamas are not asking their kids to call Superdelegates or famous people to curry support for their parent’s campaign.

  3. neelofer —
    The pimp/whore dyad isn’t about sex. It’s about power, influence and commerce. It’s also about older people getting the younger, more attractive, to do their bidding in the marketplace.
    Michelle Obama is Barack’s wife just as Bill is Hillary’s husband. They’re expected to “whore themselves out” for their better halves.
    Chelsea, on the other hand, is out there calling Superdelegates and celebrities on behalf of her mother — the women on “The View” were mocking her calls to them this morning — and doing the “streetwalking” her parents should be doing, but they pimped her out to do it instead.
    Yes, it’s an ugly metaphor, but there isn’t any sexuality in it — perhaps there is manipulation and the inference of a bartered exchange — but no one thinks Chelsea Clinton is “pimped out” in that she’s giving blow jobs in back seats or quickies in the back alley. We understand the metaphor being employed and on a certain, crass, level, it is apt because it helps shatter the idea that Chelsea is untouchable even while doing her parent’s political bidding.

  4. David,
    Isn’t sexuality inherent in the fact that Chelsea is younger, more attractive form of Bill and/or Hillary?
    I was never under the impression that Chelsea is/was untouchable. The media commented (rightfully so) on when she refuse to speak to the 9-year-old reporter. Both of Kerry’s daughters were active in his 2004 campaign. I don’t recall derogatory statements being made about them for supporting their father.
    Like I said earlier, I don’t think it’s wrong of commentators/reporters to draw attention to Chelsea doing this. But the matter is certainly less than respectable. If we are suppose to have this hope that Obama inspires in us to heal ourselves and our trust in the system, that yes we can achieve the change, that we can move beyond the petty, crude, and divisive politics, then shouldn’t we vote with our actions just as much as our mouths?
    What if Chelsea wanted to support Obama or McCain or Huckabee rather than her mother? Of course, she should be allowed to support whomever. In that case, she’d probably lay low on the campaign trail. Maybe, she’s playing as prominent a role because she actually does believe in her mother and her policies. Who are we to judge who Chelsea as an American voter wants to support? I am not saying that’s all she is but she shouldn’t be spoken of in such a way for supporting someone she believes in.

  5. You make many good points, neelofer.
    Did John Kerry’s daughters take such a public role during their father’s campaign? The current issue of Time magazine has a long story about Chelsea’s historic, hectic, role in her mother’s campaign. She is of the machine and not a dispassionate outsider along for the ride. She is invested and rooted.
    I again don’t see a sexual component to the “pimping out” metaphor. I only see an economic one that suggests a misshapen power dyad between the asking and the assignee and the owned and the pawned.
    If the Clintons had the public attitude that Chelsea was part of the machine and “touchable” — the “pimping out” metaphor never would been made or stuck around so long — that’s what you risk when trying to have it both ways: “I don’t talk to the press, but I expect to be treated with kid gloves on television.” The psychic split doesn’t wash in today’s politics and when those who try to make it happen, they fail and come off as privileged and duplicitous.

  6. It’s sad when a group of students from the University of Washington students contact the Obama campaign about going to the rally and are called back less than five minutes later – and when they try to make similar arrangements for the Clinton visit, they are told they will be called later – no call ever came.
    When they originally called to try to get through to a Washington State campaign headquarters for Clinton – well the person thought they meant Washington, DC – turns out Clinton didn’t have a Washington state headquarters because she probably didn’t think it would matter. Senator Obama has had headquarters here from the beginning. The sign on the door says “Since Day 1!” It’s telling, it really is.
    I can’t believe that Chelsea’s the same person I had a slight crush on in college. (Did I say that?) I bet some part of her actually likes a lot of what Obama has to say.

  7. Gordon!
    I love your reports from your state. You give a unique and valuable perspective “on the ground” and we love it!
    What you are witnessing is the proof of how much money Hillary doesn’t have. Barack’s early money gave him the funds and the means to set up home offices in all the states. Hillary didn’t have that kind of money. Barack is on the ground and inside and Hillary flies over.
    I think Chelsea is a beautiful woman. She’s smart. She has a wonderful face and personality. She’s a big, big, help to her mother’s cause. I think you’re right that Obama speaks to her on some level — just as he spoke to Rudy Giuliani’s daughter:

Comments are closed.