but the fact of the matter is that Chelsea is now a 20 some year old woman who has chosen to help her mother get elected.

Chelsea Victoria Clinton (born February 27, 1980)

 

She's 27 years old. She's not a child anymore.

If she's going to run with the big dogs, she needs to understand that there is no hydrant that is off-limits.

 

You DO have a way with metaphors, Hearsay!

What people are missing here is that the questioner, a fellow named Evan Strange, is a Clinton supporter who was actually tossing Chelsea a softball for her to give an answer about her mother's strength in fighting through the ordeal. Chelsea heard "Lewinsky" and went into defensive mode.

 

If she's going to run with the big dogs, she needs to understand that there is no hydrant that is off-limits.

 

Yes, but she can answer it however she chooses, including exactly how she did. I think she is to be commended for not playing into anyones hands or swinging at any low pitches.

One of the problems with life today is that we have all forgotten our manners. That wasn't a tough question, it was rude. Her answer was far more polite than he had a right to. As far as Ms Clinton refusing questions from the media, she is a private citizen. She can choose to answer or not answer questions as she sees fit. If the media doesn't like it, they don't have to cover her events.

One of the problems with life today is that we have all forgotten our manners. That wasn't a tough question, it was rude. Her answer was far more polite than he had a right to. As far as Ms Clinton refusing questions from the media, she is a private citizen. She can choose to answer or not answer questions as she sees fit. If the media doesn't like it, they don't have to cover her events.

The controlling precedent in the United States was set in 1964 by the United States Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. It is considered a key decision in supporting the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

A fairly high threshold of public activity is necessary to elevate a person to public figure status. Typically, they must either be:

• a public figure pervasively involved in public affairs, or
  
• a limited purpose public figure, meaning those who have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved." A "particularized determination" is required to decide whether a person is a limited purpose public figure, which can be variously interpreted.

A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of unwanted publicity. A person accused of a high profile crime may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their innocence is established on this basis. A person can also become a "limited public figure" by engaging in actions which generate publicity within a narrow area of interest. For example, jokes about Terry Rakolta, an activist who spearheaded a boycott of the show Married With Children, are fair comments within the confines of her public conduct and are protected because she was a "limited public figure."

One of the problems with life today is that we have all forgotten our manners. That wasn't a tough question, it was rude. Her answer was far more polite than he had a right to. As far as Ms Clinton refusing questions from the media, she is a private citizen. She can choose to answer or not answer questions as she sees fit. If the media doesn't like it, they don't have to cover her events.

This is a fair question for Hilliary or Bill Clinton. Chelsea had no part in this. It was a rude question to ask.

Whether she's a public figure or not, campaigning for her mother or not, if it's OK for her to be asked such a question, it must surely be OK for her to give the answer she did.

 

Frankly, everyone bemoans the amount of PC talk and poli-speak, isn't it refreshing when a public figure says point blank that it's non of our business?

 

When I saw the clip, I was getting ready for work. I'll flat out admit it...I stopped what I was doing and issued a "You go girl!". I never really had an opinion of her prior to this. She was just Bill and Hillary's little girl. Now, I admire her in her own right!

This is a fair question for Hilliary or Bill Clinton. Chelsea had no part in this. It was a rude question to ask.

I agree that is was probably an inappropriate question for Chelsea but I would love to hear somebody put the same question to Bill at every campaign appearance.

First, Jackie Kennedy isn't and hasn't ran for anything let alone POTUS.

 

Second, "her willingness to try and save a marriage" smells more like trying to stay in the public eye because she's power hungry. If Monica was his first affair, I could buy your argument Hatz. But Bill has a long, long history of cheating on Hillary. I think your examples don't even come close to the example set by Bill and Hill.

 

These types of behaviors say a lot for a candidate. Others would be Rudy divorcing his wife who stood by him through his cancer and using police as his girlfiend's personal taxi service. Newt handing his wife their divorce papers while visiting her in the hospital. Edwards (allegedly) cheating on his dying wife (and getting the girlfriend pregnant). Huckabee pardoning a rapist (who went on to rape and kill 2 more women.) Romney railing against illegals while hiring illegal gardners. Obama's relationship with Rezko. McCain and the Keating 5. And so on and so on.

 

Sometimes its not about what you knew and did. Sometimes its about what you knew and didn't do. And why.

 

Let he without sin cast the first stone

Let he without sin cast the first stone

You'll never catch me running for public office. But I do supply stones.

I have a much greater appreciation for her answer than the canned responses we're are so used to. Perhaps the question was low, but she is 28, and she is choosing to campaign for her mother in this fashion. I think if there is one thing we've learned, it's that Chelsea may not be cut out for her role on her mother's campaign.

Whether she's a public figure or not, campaigning for her mother or not, if it's OK for her to be asked such a question, it must surely be OK for her to give the answer she did.

 

Frankly, everyone bemoans the amount of PC talk and poli-speak, isn't it refreshing when a public figure says point blank that it's non of our business?

 

When I saw the clip, I was getting ready for work. I'll flat out admit it...I stopped what I was doing and issued a "You go girl!". I never really had an opinion of her prior to this. She was just Bill and Hillary's little girl. Now, I admire her in her own right!

 

I have no problem with her answer BUT she chose to put herself in the campaign so I really have no problem with the question either.

 

And maybe Chelsea was so quick with her response because of the cocoon that has been built around her. I still feel like if she is going to be a very visible part of the campaign she should face the scrutiny than anyone else in her position would.

All's fair in politics.

 

I could not disagree with a post you have ever made in a stronger manner.

You'll never catch me running for public office. But I do supply stones.

 

All I can think of is the "stoning" scene in Life of Brian. There's a man selling stones for the event including a bag of pebbles for the less wealthy patrons. :lol:

 

I now have you speaking in a Monty Python accent HHS and can't get it out of my head.

All's fair in politics.

That is what I was going to say. In the world of politics nothing is off the board. Politics can just be plain nasty... and the Clintons are perfect example of that plain nastiness.

 

Bill cheating with other women is like you or I drawing a breath of air. Them marriage? Yeah right that is a business agreement... And she is supposed to be one of the smartest women in the world? I bet she is the one that told him to lie, and to tell his girlfriend not to admitt to anything either!