Chelsea: Mom Will Be "Better President" Than Dad

What the heck does she know - she's a walking zombie whose afraid of the media - and the media treats her as if she still a baby - who cares what she says - let the media melt in her little baby hands and words - can we hear from some adults please -

Logically, what else could she say? If she said she thought her Mom would not be as good a President as her dad was, that would have been all over the blogosphere and the 24 hour cable channels and subjected to ridicule.

Maybe what she needed to do was point out that her Mom would have the benefit of an additional 16 years of lessons learned. That would not insult her dad while playing into her Mom's "experience" rationale. But maybe the fact that she missed that opportunity is an indication that she really does not belong out there doing what she is doing, as she is clearly not comfortable at, or apparently well-suited to, partisan campaigning.

She also appears to be no threat to continue the family dynasty, and that's fine too.

(BTW, I support Obama. I tried to keep that from affecting my line of reasoning, but others can be the judge of how well I succeeded in that.)

Will someone ask Chelsea what her mom is doing for the brain-dead woman (whose son died in Iraq), who is being sued by Walmart? Will her dad's foundation return the donation from Walmart? Or at the very least, use it to pay off their friends at Walmart?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/clinton-foundation-receiv_n_92141.html

That's not saying much Chelsea, dear.

What a surprise answer.

Say your spit Chelsea your mom lost along time ago. Just tell your mom it is over.

Hang on, I'm confused. Isn't HRC claiming she WAS the President in the 90's?

And Chelsea only answers questions from a pro-hillary audience, probably pre-screened, and told what to ask. The Bosnia and Lewinsky questions were probably carefully planted just to garner some sympathy for her lying mom. Nothing that will enchance the 'victim' image of her mom more than the Lewinsky question from a male in the audience.

Why is Chelsea so afraid of the press? She can only answer questions from a pro-hillary audience. Most of the people who get allowed to ask a question are probably pre-screened and planted, except for the one who snuck the Lewinsky question in.

Chelsea probably meant that her mom would not be distracted by interns in the white house.

She got "tricked" into voting for Iraq. She got "bamboozled" into voting for Kyl Lieberman, before it became clear that there IS NO NUKE PROGRAM in Iran. She was "less than prudent" in her decision to both cheer lead for and vote for support of the Israeli war against Lebanon, even after it was CLEAR that it was a pointless bloodbath which (like Iraq) did not acheive a single one of it's stated goals, but rather, Hurt both the US and Israel strategically while EMPOWERING hezbollah.

She seems "confused" about whether it would be a good Idea to go into the totally uncontrolled border regions in Paksitan in order to kill Bin Laden and other al qeada leaders without pakistans permission. So by her logic it ok to attack Iraq and Iran (presumably WITHOUT their permission) where Bin Laden and Al qeada were NOT, and who pose 0 threat to the US, but we MUST defer to the wishes of a country that is 100 times more dangerous to the US both historically and currently, even thought Bin Laden, his other leaders, and thousands of al qeada and taliban are using it as a base camp.

The FIRST time she tried to "fix" health care, she handled it SO BADLY that it scuttled the very idea of reform for almost 2 decades.

Ask yourself, what more important decisions will she be faced with than the ones that she has already clearly botched?

Part 2 of 2:

...Chelsea might as well wear a short pleated skirt and carry pom-poms. I guess it's a more respectable pastime than, say, being an intern in Washington DC, but her cheerleading role is a throwback to aristocratic and monarchical societies, in which the children of royalty or aristocracy were considered "somebody" by virtue of their pedigree.

Incidentally, IMO this peculiar phenomenon was even more strikingly illustrated by Caroline Kennedy's florid endorsement of Barack Obama. It's hardly a surprise that Obama's campaign would see such an endorsement as gold, since Amerikans have indeed treated the Kennedys as the ultimate political aristocrats. Again, in my view this implies that the endorser is inherently important and somehow authoritative. But there's no "there" there!

It's a shame that the political system founded in the clear sunlight at the dawn of the Enlightenment has degenerated into an irrational, chaotic hellbroth. Although I'm glad that Mitt Romeny dropped out, sparing us the spectacle of his five patriotic sons doing the equivalent of military service by campaigning for him. If he'd gotten the nomination, I suspect even the poor family dog would be tied to the roof of the station wagon again to campaign in his (her?) own right.

Part I of 2:

I believe that the curious practice of sending children out as surrogates for a candidate, although accepted as normal, is an unfortunate vestige of the monarchism that still infects the Amerikan public like an STD that was never cured, but lies dormant in the body and flares up periodically.

I'm fully aware that children of politicians, especially politicians holding high office, become public figures or celebrities in their own right. It's obvious that children of candidates/politicians and other distinctive relatives are on-stage in various roles-- e.g. Miss Lillian and Billy Carter, JFK's children, etc.

But I question the commonplace practice of young adults stumping on behalf of a candidate. Chelsea may indeed be a perfectly presentable young woman-- but what thoughtful person would assume that such a child of celebrity and privilege has any "gravitas" or intellectual authority to function as a spokesperson for a candidate? Put bluntly-- why should anyone care what Chelsea has to say, one way or the other?

Surprisingly, my point was made in a minor news story the other day showing Chelsea greeting commuters in Philadelphia, accompanied by Clinton supporter Mayor Michael Nutter. The story described Chelsea pleasantly exchanging greetings with commuters and urging them to Vote for Mom. Nutter acknowledged, in so many words, that Chelsea wasn't actually saying much-- but of course he kindly and graciously suggested that her presence was an asset to Mom's campaign. (The headline could have been "Fluffernutter Greets Commuters".)...

yeah right chelsea, and you landed the plane in bosnia after the pilot was shot. but, your mom saved his life by removing the bullet with her nail file, while cheryl crow returned fire with her guitar which was actually an AK-47. you are just like your parents, hibitutal liars.

Some of the responses here are so pathetic. Thunder thighs? What's that got to do with brainpower? Have you noticed that Obama has hands (little tiny thin) like woman? I did. Do I go around making childish comments about it? No.

A quick perusal of comments to this very sweet little bit of a story reminds me of just why it's very important for Hillary to remain in the race. I confess. I simply do not want to see people with so little class get into power. I hate to judge Obama by the quality of his supporters, but it's often hard to avoid.

These are nothing more than flatly mean-spirited comments. And I think we've had enough mean spirit in America.

Enough with the angry mobs.

Have you noticed that they both have "thunder thighs".

What exactly are we to take from this; afterall it's not like her parents are actually running against one another and she is providing a valuable insider's take on which one we should choose. So now it's news that a candidate's daughter will vouch for her mother in glowing terms? Why don't we go ask the real Obama girls if they think their daddy would make a great president? I'm guessing even our lazy mainstream media isn't wasting time doing that since it's pretty certain that even Obama's youngest daughter knows the right answer to that question.

Yet another duh moment reported as news!

She's right.
Hillary can't get a Blow job in the oval office...as far as I know.

Ummmmm . . . no? cough cough cough Sorry, I meant NO!!!!!!

Ya think? The only difference I see is Hillary hasn't been impeached or disbarred, yet. No thank you. America deseves better than the humiliation of another LIAR in the WH.

When you really think about these campaign events, they are somewhat insulting to young voters. While Obama chooses to actually meet and hold events that cater to young voters, Hillary has chose not to campaign to young voters at all. Instead, young voters are given Hillary's daughter as a representative. Seriously, can Hillary answer one policy question. What would your mother do about student loans? What would your mother do about global warming? etc. Young voters are Americans and they deserve the candidate's attention if the candidate wants their vote.

How old is Chelsea anyway? I do hope she will be 35 before her mother's terms end so that she can be president next. After all, she will have 35 years of "experience" by then.

Isn't it fun watching children of the privileged play dress up and tell us little people what we should think and do?

Look at all these Obama nasties insulting the brilliant Chelsea Clinton! A woman who, I may add, could whop Obama on an IQ test any day of the week. I truly feel sorry for you people that you have felt the need to stoop to this level.

Chelsea a better question is why did you support your mother in the lies about the Bosnia trip. Look at the video in the attached link. Chelsea is asked about the trip and lies to the camera.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2Z9o37FQI4

And no, as a PA resident I hope that we have more sense than to vote another Clinton into office.