IMO, his choice of words was purposeful. He intended it to illicit a response.

IMO, his choice of words was purposeful. He intended it to illicit a response.

What was his purpose? Did he mean his words to be taken literally? Was he trying to get suspended or fired? Was he intentionally providing the faltering Clinton administration a diversion?

What was his purpose? Did he mean his words to be taken literally? Was he trying to get suspended or fired? Was he intentionally providing the faltering Clinton administration a diversion?

 

IMO, shock value...keep stirring the pot.

IMO, shock value...keep stirring the pot.

 

I really don't think that the thought of "shock value" entered his mind. Its not an uncommon phrase.

I really don't think that the thought of "shock value" entered his mind. Its not an uncommon phrase.

 

Not uncommon for teenagers and maybe twenty somethings...and shock jocks. IMO, fairly uncommon amongst educated adults.

Not uncommon for teenagers and maybe twenty somethings...and shock jocks. IMO, fairly uncommon amongst educated adults.

 

I'd disagree.

I'd disagree.

 

Ok.

Being educated is a broad term

So Hillary and her staff failed to understand the contextual meaning of Shuster's comments because they were too educated and too old. No wonder Obama's campaign is picking up steam.:lol:

Being educated is a broad term

 

I agree.

I just betcha if any of you or I were running for a local office and someone made that kind of remark about one of our children we'd be spit firing mad and we all know it.

 

It makes no difference who the child, adult or not, belongs to, no one should allow someone to say that about any of them.

 

The only reason that some don't think that it was "too" bad of a remark is she just happens to be Hillary's daughter. If someone had made that remark about McCain's or Obama's daughter there would be an outcry for the person who said it's head.

 

I have never made any bones about my dislike for "W" but even I would think that it was horrible if someone said that about one of his girls.

I'm generally a defender of the Clintons. I voted for Bill Clinton twice and would have voted for him a third time. I may even vote for Hillary, for whom I have a lot of respect.

 

But pure and simple, they overreacted to this ... no insult was meant by it, period.

To the Members:

If you have a daughter and someone made A comment Like this about them would you be MAD/UPSET???? Whether your a Political Candidate or Not!!!

 

I sure would and If you say that you wouldn't want to protect her then your not much of a Parent!!! IMO

To the Members:

If you have a daughter and someone made A comment Like this about them would you be MAD/UPSET???? Whether your a Political Candidate or Not!!!

 

I sure would and If you say that you wouldn't want to protect her then your not much of a Parent!!! IMO

 

Would you be upset if he had said "the Clinton's were using Chelsea to pick up votes?" It's the same thing in the parlance of our times, as Lebowski would say.

Would you be upset if he had said "the Clinton's were using Chelsea to pick up votes?" It's the same thing in the parlance of our times, as Lebowski would say.

 

I would be. Again, back to the issue, Chelsea should be allowed to campaign for her parent, now that she is an adult. I don't understand why THAT is an issue. Isn't she 27 now? How are they "using" her?

Hillary could have made a simple statement about how inappropriate the statement was, then dropped it. She'd have made herself look above it. Instead, she dove right into the muck.