As the blogosphere picks up with talk of David Shuster's remark about "pimped out" Chelsea Clinton, something should be made clear. The media spent the 1990s using Chelsea and Gore kids to improve the public image of the Clintons and the Gores. When someone (like Al Gore III) misbehaved by speeding at 90 MPH, the media covered up. But they used young Al to burnish old Al for all those high school football games he attended as a devoted dad. See this NRO piece from 2000.
It's still happening now, with Chelsea used routinely to warm up Hillary's ice-queen image. Last August, Brent Bozell wrote up a particularly embarrassing piece from Jodi Kantor in The New York Times, treating Chelsea Clinton as, well, a nearly silent American Idol. "We’re told that 'people seem delighted just to watch her lips move and hear sound emerge.' As Kantor described her Jewish boyfriend, she identifies Chelsea as 'a Christmas-cookie-baking, churchgoing Methodist.'”
Shuster was either rude or displaying his affinity for hip-hop lingo by suggesting Chelsea was "pimped out." But there is no question that the liberal media has enthusiastically joined the Clintons in puffing up Chelsea as someone who makes her parents look more appealing -- almost to the point where you're expecting them to paint cartoon songbirds around her head.
UPDATE: There's one more, a 2001 Bozell column right after the media played up the 19-year-old Bush twins being arrested for drinking in Austin, Bush's Kids vs. Gore's Kids.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Oh this is all too precious
February 8, 2008 - 19:13 ET by bigtimerOh this is all too precious anymore...hypocrisy, make believe world la-la-land at it's best....keep wearing those rose-colored glasses...they are working wonders.
Doesn't get any better than this...well not yet anyway...Olbermann is one I want to see be gone.
bt - have you ever noticed
February 8, 2008 - 19:36 ET by FastEdthat when the msm(Lsm) goes off on a story about the clintons, any of them, the price of aluminum foil goes up?!?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
and those who were
February 9, 2008 - 09:02 ET by Cape Conservativemaking the charges become paranoid and start looking over their shoulders everywhere they go ;-) Is an apology enough to keep them alive?????
Chelsea, Chelsea,
February 8, 2008 - 20:12 ET by Jack BauerChelsea, Chelsea, Chelsea... an almost thirtysomething woman. Earns about a million a year working for a hedgefund. And yet to the Democrats and the MSM she's still presented like she's still a child.
Unlike 11 year girls having abortions (or ACTUAL children as we conservatives call them)... then they have to be treated like adults whose parents have no rights.
Those Democrats sure are wacky. And what about those "babies" serving in the military.
Jack
February 8, 2008 - 20:14 ET bythat's libic for ya
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Really. Chelsea's no child
February 8, 2008 - 23:48 ET by Scout FinchThink about it. In 2016 (8 years), she'll be able to run for POTUS.
As if that doesn't scare the bejeezus out of you.
LOL Scout... What is
February 8, 2008 - 23:58 ET by bigtimerLOL Scout...
What is scary is I have thought about that.
Spooky all the way round is it not?
....with Chelsea used
February 8, 2008 - 20:22 ET by MidAmerica....with Chelsea used routinely to warm up Hillary's ice-queen image.
or more accurately the grim relentless cyborg from Terminator II
Why did Shuster only John expose out Chelsea
February 8, 2008 - 20:27 ET by Lame CherryThe thought I had on this originally was why was not Hillary's wheezer mother who is being whored out too not included in this as she is a fixture on the old delegate bed post notch.
It occurs to me that Shuster has a little hottie thing for the toothsome Chelsea as he is expressing his terms as sexual. Shuster apparently likes the youngster Clinton from before and is making his bid now to Daddy Clinton her up.
I would like to ask the communist AARP if they had a comment in why wheezer mother Clinton was not included in the sexual foray in that is the biggest slap at the Clintons in not that they were exposed for whoring out Chelsea, but that no one seems to care in Oedipus Rex Shuster ignored the whoring out of mother Clinton.
Hardly seems equal or fair as the old girl certainly shook allot of duffer hands in Iowa and other places in the same way cleavage Hillary was boobing out herself as a prostitute for votes.
I hope Rush Limbaugh comes to Shuster's defense. The entire propstitution of Clinton women needs to be examined. Just who is in bounds and out of bounds in naming them as a whore so liberals will not be sanctioned for parking their car and waving over Chelsea when if Shuster drooled over Hillary it was a compliment and mother Clinton appreciated the attention.
Once again the Clintons have brought into the political arena sexual terms and discussions........the definition of "is" was before, now it is the definition of a Clinton whore.
Cleavage is ok, mother C shaking duffer hands is ok, but Chelsea playing the teaser on stage is not ok to notice.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
pimp word has taken on a life of its own
February 8, 2008 - 20:40 ET by jondelwicheI won't defend Schuster, but the word pimp has taken on
a whole new meaning in recent years (i.e TV's "pimp my ride")
where it insinuates taking something worn and making it
glamerous. Granted, it still harkens to the fact megaworn hookers
are dressed in glam clothes, but the current lexicon passes over this point when kids speak today. Gay is another word that has morphed in recent decades.
In the end, I'm still stunned that as soon as the Clintons threaten
to leave the mighty debate, the media runs like chickens. Free speech is only tolerated when it isnt affecting the MSM pocketbook. And Schuster is the fall guy.
And it isnt necessarily about kids, but rather campaign workers, and one sees the descriptions of Karl Rove in recent years.
He wishes this was his worst insult......
pimp in the new meaning of glamerous doesn't fit his context
February 8, 2008 - 20:55 ET by Dee BunkCalling someone on the phone does nothing to add to someone's appearance. It's clear that he was referring to it in the whoring sense. She was doing the dirty work for nothing while Hillary reaps all the benefits.
It wasn't critical of Chelsea - she is the innocent victim. It was suppose to be critical of Hillary. It still wasn't very professional but it's nothing compared to how the MSM have treated the Bush twins in the past.
No, I couldnt disagree
February 9, 2008 - 11:45 ET by jondelwicheNo, I couldnt disagree more.
His context here doesnt make any sense.
Even the guests simply chuckled, they weren't offended at all.
In the whoring sense, his use of pimp here makes zero sense,
unless the super delegates were viewed as hookers.?
I think he was being cutesy, in the way the TV guy pimps autos,
and the Clinton machine sees a "victim" benefit here.
Kaboom!!!
Jondel - a whore does the dirty work and the pimp gets the money
February 9, 2008 - 11:54 ET by Dee Bunkit's clear that is what he meant. If Hillary pimped out Chealsea in the cutesy way she would have dolled her up not sent her out on her own to her dirty work.
Your argument of Shuster being cutesy with a hip term makes no sense. I do think he was trying to be cutesy with the whore use and didn't really mean she was being degraded to that extent. It was always meant to be a slam against Hillary not Chealsea and I agree the Clintons are turning that around.
CC16
February 8, 2008 - 21:36 ET by VonuWhile I find it amusing that Shyster is on the sidelines for being a dick I am reminded of my compassion for the innocent life tattered when bill and hill did it that one time.
But when the Clintons are old and their danger forgotten, they will live with the knowledge CC married a guy like dad.
Freedom is a vital component of human effectiveness and fulfillment.