Hillary and Me -- Pimps Forever ?!

I need to stand up and take Senator Hillary Clinton's side on this one.

There is no excuse for a network on-air personality to say Chelsea Clinton was "sort of being pimped out" by the Clinton campaign. And Barbara Walters is rather deluded if she thinks this issue really should be dropped by the Senator.

I've heard from numerous sources Chelsea Clinton is a fantastic and energizing public speaker and (gasp) fully supporting her mother (no way?) during this election. Let's just go ahead and assume a daughter can and would want to support her mother if she ran for office.

Now that Chelsea has stepped a bit further into the limelight on her own, it stands to reason the media will discuss her role, her events, her candor, her demeanor. We are no longer in the situation of the 90's where Chelsea was the daughter of a president, in the limelight due to her parent's choices.

Reporter David Shuster has apologized for the "pimp" comment. Keith Olbermann has apologized. The head of NBC has apologized. Then Senator Clinton sent a letter, reiterating how inappropriate the comment really was, and Barbara Walters thinks she's gone too far.

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaah. You come after my daughter...my kids-make some stupid remark or say something inappropriate-do you think *I* would let up?

Exactly.

Hell no.

I want heads. And I want them to roll.

In fact, I want them rolling and then wrapped in a bow and then served on a golden platter while you kneel at my feet.

I think the Mom and Daughter get to decide when to drop it, not Barbara Walters.

I'd have to argue against the idea this is a campaign ploy to keep Hillary's name in the news. I mean, really. It's all we're hearing about, so that's not a problem. I don't think it's some ploy by the campaign for Clinton to play victim and have us all feeling sorry for them. I really think this is a matter of being tired of the bullshit.

How much Chris Matthews and David Shuster can you take before you finally write the head of NBC and say WTF??!!! Enough already you assholes.

Notice Senator Clinton didn't make such a bru-ha-ha about all this when they were just going after her. Cross the line to the kids, regardless of their age or voluntary or involuntary involvement...

..and the gloves are off.

I got your back Senator Clinton. Let them brand us pimps and accuse us of exploiting our kids. We know better. And we're certainly changing the world, aren't we?

Contributor Erin Kotecki Vest continuously exploits her children on her MommyBlog QueenofSpain

Comments

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

Hillary's fake outrage is ridiculous. Chelsea is not some sweet little girl who doesn't know exactly what she is doing. What business is it of hers to be telephoning super delegates, or telephoning television personalities?

Two Secret Service agents heard Hillary's daughter Chelsea refer to them as "personal, trained pigs"... The agent on the detail tried to scold Chelsea for such disrespect. He told her that he believed her father, the President, would be shocked if he heard what she had just said to her friends. Chelsea's response? "I don't think so. That's what my parents call you." Extract from the book (Unlimited Access, p. 90).

[Bearland]

Everyone needs to get over this... these types of things are overshadowing the real issues.

All I will say on this issue is exactly what my mother would say if I were in Chelsea Clinton's shoes (and it is something everyone should remember when it comes to something like this):

"Sticks and Stones will break your bones, but words can never hurt you"

Pretty simple little thing wouldn't you agree?

[loisteagulp]

You'd think Clinton had sent the FCC to fine them into oblivion or sat secret service people outside the studio to insure Shuester never enter again. Geez.

[blogdog487]

You missed my main point (and Schuster's) - Chelsea is out there as a political operative and she is a 27 year old, not a "child" - so she is fair game for political scrutiny and criticism. You can't have it both ways but that's exactly what the Clintons want, and you are defending. If anyone is "being blinded by your own prejudice here", look in the mirror.

[Erin Kotecki Vest - Huffpost Blogger]

See Erin Kotecki Vest's Profile

I'm defending Hillary's right as Chelsea's mother to go after whomever said whatever. I'm defending Hillary's right to keep doing it until she's satisfied.

If it were my kid, I would do the same thing. If it were my kid at 27 or my kid at 2, I would do the same thing.

The only thing blinding me is motherhood.

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

Furthermore, the comment itself doesn't cast aspersions on Chelsea herself, but on Bill and Hillary's approval and use of Chelsea to further their own political gain.

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

You cannot have it both ways. She has provided the telephone numbers of super delegates and television personalities to her daughter, so her daughter can help with her political ambition. Since Hillary is perpetuating this involvement of Chelsea's she has no right to turn around and claim either of them, Chelsea or Hillary, are victims here, because of the use or misuse of ONE WORD.

[blogdog487]

Oh - now I see - it's a motherhood thing. Problem is, everyone in the world is some mother's son or daughter. So, I guess all you press people should fold your tents and go home - cause no matter what you say about anyone, there is a mom out there with some mysterious right to go after your livelihood for daring to be mean to their offspring. Good thing fathers don't have those rights too, or we'd all be in double trouble!

[OtayPanky]

Erin: I want heads. And I want them to roll.

In fact, I want them rolling and then wrapped in a bow and then served on a golden platter while you kneel at my feet.

===

Yes, well - I want the whole world to worship me as the Lizard King.

Schuster did a bad thing, and deserves being taken to the woodshed in some fashion. And he has been, for sure. Suspended, mocked in the media, having to mea culpa all over the place. He's been Imus'ed, for sure, and rightly so.

But that doesn't make Hillary THE DECIDER in terms of the long term disposition of his case. Last I looked he was a GE employee, not a Clinton employee. If GE wants to fire him, they can. But it's not Hillary's call - nor her perogative. And I, for one, am glad of that.

Think about it. If we wanted to apply this kind of journalistic "rule of law" fairly, and all around, we'd have to shut down the muckraking (but very useful) Village Voice, and take computing privileges away from lots of erudite, but acid-tongued lefty bloggers (and righty bloggers, too).

Al Franken and Rush Limbaugh? Off with their heads, both of them. And of course, we'd crucify crazy Ann Coulter, or burn her at the stake, or both . (And no doubt a bunch of lefties would love THAT!).

Nope. There's a lot - a WHOLE lot - to be said for limiting potential retribution by pols and other public figures to the reporting, ranting, raving and snarking of ALL media communicators.

Even people as despicable as the original swiftboaters of John Kerry need to be able to do their dastardly deeds - without having to deal with over-reaching direct revenge of the type Erin advocates here on Hillary's behalf.

And then, if CBS wants to fire Dan Rather, they can. But Bush can't.

[Erin Kotecki Vest - Huffpost Blogger]

See Erin Kotecki Vest's Profile

lol. um....yeah. I would want heads to roll if it were my kid. So in this instance, I think a "sternly" written letter by Hillary and being "unsatisfied" with his suspension is totally warranted.

Is it up to HER in the end? Uh...no. Do I think she's right to tell NBC to go take a hike-sure do.
Do I think Barbara Walters is the judge of when it should be dropped by the mother. Uh. No.

Other than that-if you want to discuss journalism, that's a whole other ball of wax.

[OtayPanky]

Yes, well - you're thinking with your mommy brain, which would, no doubt, rip out the throats of anyone saying nasty things about your beloved spawn.

I have a similar daddy brain.

But she's running for POTUS - not "Mother Of The Year". She's registered her disgust and displeasure to the powers at NBC. If she wallows in it, she just looks foolish.

Bill just made this exact mistake "defending" his wife in the New Hampshire-South Carolina cycle. It cost her gobs of votes from the black community...which looks like it is permanently pissed at her right now for what looks like a race-baiting set of remarks.

And when the history of this amazing primary is written - it may turn out to have cost her the nomination.

Right now, she can't afford to do anything but play up her positives, and stick to substantive critiques of Obama and McCain. If she's dumb enough to milk this Schuster thing for all it's worth (and the Clintons have been dumb as shit, so far), she'll lose, and deservedly so.

So if you have any interest in seeing Hillary win - or at least remain in the game - put away your Mommy brain and think strategically here.

Me - I think the Clintons would be really BAD for the country. So from my vantage point, her continued storming on this issue is all to the good.

[Mom101]

I didn't pull the lever for Clinton in the primary. But let's call it like it is and admit that she can't catch a break with the press.

I'm with you, Erin. I don't recall Alexandra Kerry or Chris Heinz or the Bush twins or Karenna Gore ever being accused of "whoring" for their parents. Not cool.

[Erin Kotecki Vest - Huffpost Blogger]

See Erin Kotecki Vest's Profile

Mom101 should blog here. My POINT exactly, and said much better than I did in about 20 more paragraphs.

[flatus]

"I need to stand up and take Senator Hillary Clinton's side on this one."

Right off the bat you stun me with the unexpected.

Shuster is a news bulldog. If you had a chance to watch him in action during the Plame/Libby
I'm guessing that you would be just a tetch less livid.

Shuster's efforts to interview Chelsea were thwarted with malice and his temper got the best of him. Woop-tee-do.

If hillary deems it serious enough then let her take it to court. Otherwise, I call it free speech.

[yummymaplesyrup]

With no accountability for what you say?

[Erin Kotecki Vest - Huffpost Blogger]

See Erin Kotecki Vest's Profile

Taking Senator Clinton's side-let's take a look at what I'm siding with here:

"'Nothing justifies the kind of debasing language that David Shuster used and no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient,' she wrote.

She also said that Mr. Capus should look at 'the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language.'"

Yeah, I'm down with that. I watched Chris Matthews be an outright sexist just a few short months ago.

It's totally free speech and I think Shuster, from what I know, was a fine reporter up until now.

I just don't think it's Barbara Walter's call on when Hillary Clinton or Chelsea Clinton should be satisfied in the matter.

I would think spouting any sort of offensive comment on the air, as a journalist, would get someone fired. But we no longer have traditional journalism, do we? O'Rielly can call Obama Osama and Chris Matthews can be an outright sexist-hey, why not let the reports mention "pimping!" So sure, free speech. No argument here. Should one dumb comment on air ruin your whole career? I don't know-how many corrections does a reporter get before they are no longer credible? Or does it no longer matter? And can I blame a mother for going after a reporter for a really stupid comment? Hell no.

Death of journalism. Thank God I'm not longer in that business.

I'm happy to let Shuster come blog with me. There is a whole lot less apologizing.

[BeyondGoodAndEvil]

It's not debasing language when it's not specifically referring to prostitution. It's commonly used as a metaphor. Language changes and so do the meanings. If you go to urbandictionary.com and look up the words - pimp and pimping, you will see that the way they are used nowadays has changed. Since politics is a dirty whorish game anyway, why not tell it like it is? I'm sick of political correctness. Maybe the word wasn't the right kind of word to use on national television, but the fake outrage and political spin by Clinton, to make herself appear victimized once again, is absurd. Hillary's language in real life, is pretty colorful, and her attempt to use this slip of the tongue by Shuster is hypocritical, arrogant, pompous, sanctimonious and self righteous.

Read some nice Hillary quotes here -

http://www.nowpublic.com/happy_valentines_day_from_hillary_and_bill

[yummymaplesyrup]

What I find so disturbing is that these are not old men, well a few of them are. But it looks like what women have fought for, respect from sexist men, amongst other, is not likely to happen any time soon.

Even more disturbing is that some women side with these guys. They accept all the crap men throw at them, play with the boys to be accepted as one of them.

Maybe girls like it but women don't!

[desmirl]

During the '90s, all the Republicans could talk about--when they weren't discussing Bill's zipper--was how homely Chelsea was. It was the kind of attack on an apolitical adolescent that civilized people would turn from in disgust, but Republicans ate it up and chuckled among themselves, congratulating each other on still another thoughtless comment. So, Chelsea grew up to be a striking young woman, and now her mother is 'pimping' her out? Is there any way these people could roll any deeper in the mud? Oh, my....

[blogdog487]

About as one-sided an analysis as I would expect.

Re: "Notice Senator Clinton didn't make such a bru-ha-ha about all this when they were just going after her."

Right- and I didn't notice her making any "bru-ha-ha" at all when her husband insulted millions of African Americans directly, and many of the rest of us indirectly by his demeaning remarks - he never even apologized or acknowledged his mistake.

But in your book, insulting millions isn't anything compared to insulting the royal offspring.

Givve me a break - Hillary defines the word hypocritical, and the Clintons together could give Carl Rove a run for his money i the B.S. category.

I like Shuster - so, he made a mistake, apologized, and should be back on the air.

[Erin Kotecki Vest - Huffpost Blogger]

See Erin Kotecki Vest's Profile

Well, first of all Bill Clinton did apologize, several times but that's neither here nor there-my point isn't about what the Clinton's do, it's about what the media is doing, and a mother's right to call it out.

Any mother. Michelle Obama about her daughters and Senator Clinton about Chelsea. Hell, W and his twins.

I think you want so badly to show how evil the Clinton's are in your mind you're being blinded by your own prejudice here. I may find our current President to be a hypocrite, but I respect his ability as a parent to kick the media's ass if and when they open their mouths about his children.

Lets say you're right, and the Clintons are horrible lying people. Don't the have the same right to dog NBC until they are satisfied with the apology? Or maybe they are satisfied, but the letter just drove the point home? Is it Barbara Walters position to say when they or anyone should be satisfied?

This has nothing to do with who is a better person. Or what former President Clinton did to anyone or if he said he was sorry.

Man. Just say the word HILLARY and you get gut reaction no mater what you say after it.

I swear, these comment threads crack me up.

Who's next? Where the Ron Paul zealots telling me how David Shuster is really on suspension because he backs Ron Paul...come on! I'm waiting!

[Desiderata]

Get passed it.