There was a win here, under normal circumstances.

Unfortunately, this is a Clinton and these are anything but “normal” circumstances. The primary reason a reporter has the gall to ask such a humiliating question is *because* of her father.

Remember Bill “Boxers or Briefs?” the candidate?

or Governor “Jennifer Flowers” Clinton?

Or how about how he graciously addressed the whole Paula Jones situation? Two words: Kiss It. Or, if you prefer, two other words: Trailer Trash.

Notice how we haven’t even MENTIONED that Monica person. And yet you know as well as I do, there’s MORE!

Katherine Willey anyone?

And these are just the *sexual* peccadilloes of her dad.

The insult here isn’t that someone put Chelsea Clinton into a “difficult situation.” The insult is that after what her parents did to this nation, they still have the audacity to be seen in pubic.

Err… I mean “public….”

On March 26th, 2008 at 4:15 pm, jeanie said:
Bad taste even if Chelsea is part of the campaign. She was NOT part of the Monica affair. This jerk should have taken it up with the parent Clinton’s if it was so important to him.

It is a just question and one asked of many people who spout the attributes of Hillary. When Cankles rolled out Chelsea to pander for votes, she opened the gates for all questions.

Would you rather have question and answer sessions with plants. Or interviews with all the questions vetted by Hillary?

#49 Leave MM’s family out of this as she nor her family are on the tax payers dime which is entirely different from being a public figure.

Durangodarlin said:

I agree. Asking the question was tacky and classless.

I would agree if his intention was only to embarrass her.

Did you see 30’s post above? Looks as though he was trying, albeit poorly, to give her a soft pitch.

For the record, I probably would not ask the question myself. I just disagree that Chelsea should be considered “off-limits” given her active participation in the campaign.

Peejz said:

On March 26th, 2008 at 11:25 am, Salt said:

Chelsea is always going to be the child of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Michelles children will be called to answer for some of her stances whether they ask for it or not..Neither situation is acceptable.

I disagree and we will likely have to agree to disagree on this.

By campaigning for her mother, I believe that Chelsea has become her representative/agent. Why else would she go around speaking for her if she does not also have the ability to answer questions about her campaign?

What would be the point of that? No one cares whether or not Chelsea would be first daughter or not, right?

So, unless Chelsea is willing to take challenging questions about her candidates position, why should we be willing to listen to her glowing endorsements?

Again, it’s not as though Chelsea has tried to remove herself from the political life. When she was refusing to answer questions, I would have sided with your viewpoint on this. However, once she decided to be an active member and an agent for her candidate, she opened herself to being asked questions.

The fact that she also happens to be her daughter is immaterial in my mind. The questioner didn’t attack her thoughts and feelings, he asked her candidate’s reaction to an event.

Chelsea is out there as the child of (adult child) a candidate..she is nothing but a symbolic figure on the campaign trail.

Then she should be only that. Her opinions on her mother’s campaign and political positions should be only that, symbolic.

The notion that she gets all of the positive with none of the potential negative is just a bit silly, I think.

Based on your rantings of her, it is Hillary that should be answering your questions, not her daughter.

1. I am not ranting, honestly. That implies an emotional value that simply isn’t there despite what you might have inferred.

2. I believe that Hillary (and anyone that represents her) should be asked any question that speaks to her character.

As someone else mentioned, since when do we as Americans shy away from tough questions? If it was Hillary’s chief of staff, would you say the same thing about the question?

Evan Strange, a Butler University student, told CBS he is a supporter of Hillary Clinton, and meant no harm with his question about the infamous White House scandal.

“Surprisingly, I am a supporter of Hillary, I love Hillary. But when I talk to my friends, one of their constant questions to me is, ‘What makes her such a strong leader?’, and they always bring up that scandal,” Strange said in an appearance on the CBS Early Show.

“It’s not something I asked to cause trouble, it was to show those people what makes Hillary so strong, and was an opportunity for Chelsea to show all the doubters how strong Hillary is,” he added.

Oh well…maybe next time.

I noticed how the press doesn’t cut the Bush Twins any slack at all for any little thing they do. Chelsea is a target as long as her parents use her on the campaign trail. So, no sympathy from me. Her answer was harsh,whether the question was appropriate or not.

Chelsea is out there as the child of (adult child) a candidate..she is nothing but a symbolic figure on the campaign trail.

Based on your rantings of her, it is Hillary that should be answering your questions, not her daughter.

Who is turing a blind eye to the scandal? Again, ask the questions to the people that should be answering them..That would be Bill and Hill.

Peejz said:

On March 26th, 2008 at 9:46 am, MDH3 said

Not false at all. Hillary is a public figure, just as Michelle is. Both chose to be out in the public. The question was ignorant, and so is trying to say that Chelsea should answer for it.

Your analogy falls pathetically short.

Michelle’s children are not public figures, Chelsea is and by her own decision.

Chelsea is also not a child. Seriously, how many other 28 year olds with graduate degrees do you protect as if they were children?

And since you like throwing the word ignorant around, perhaps you should consider what the word really means. Not asking a question would be a sign of ignorance. Choosing to turn a blind eye to Hillary’s character as defined by the scandal which captivated this country for a year is ignorant and short-sighted.

Let’s not pretend that Sen. Clinton has not used that situation as a means to draw pity and support for her campaign. The whole “stand-by-her-man” crowd has used it to portray Hillary as someone of deep loyalty.

So what would make the question off limits?

There were several adult answers that Chelsea could have answered with that would have served her much better.