Chelsea to perform $2,300 “favors”?

MSNBC correspondent David Shuster was suspended recently for calling Chelsea Clinton “a hot little slut with a tight ass.”  He then went on to suggest that she might serve her mother’s campaign best “on her knees in the dressing rooms of a few fat-cat boosters, if you get my terms.”

Oh, wait a minute.  That’s not what he said.  Sheesh, my bad, folks.  What he actually said was:  “Doesn’t it seem as if Chelsea is sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?”

That’s it.  It’s a bit crass, perhaps, but a genuine comment on rough-and-tumble politics, and an observation that certainly seems to jive with the way the Clintons have been, uh, “deployed.”

So naturally, Hillary is outraged.  Quoting her spokesman, Howard Wolfson:

“I, at this point, can’t envision a scenario where we could continue to engage in debates on that network, given the comments that were made.”

He also went on to add the time-honored “disgusting” and “beneath contempt.”

And Shuster, suddenly aware he’s fighting for his job in our society of hyperoffensibility, has yanked the stick violently the other way, now claiming that “all Americans should be proud of Chelsea Clinton.”

Please.  I’m going to lose my Froot Loops.

One thing I find funny about the whole dust-up is that it’s really at least as much a comment on Hillary as it is Chelsea.  But apparently, her reaction manufacturers determined that she needed to play this one as the protective mother.

So there you go.

Stay tuned for further focus group-tested episodes of outrage as events warrant.

You might also like:

4 thoughts on “Chelsea to perform $2,300 “favors”?”

  1. Following in Daddy’s footsteps, are we?

    Look, Chelsea is a grown-up. I’d be disgusted if she were being manipulated by her parents for their own ends – if she were a baby being put in cutesy little outfits and propped up on a pony or something – but she’s not. Besides, it’s not ABOUT Chelsea OR her relationship with her mother, it’s about whether or not her mother can get the job done.

    It amazes me that the news media has nothing better to do with itself than peddle this trash…

    Reply
  2. I think I blame the Hillary communications machine much more than the media on this one. Shuster’s comment, while a bit severe, wasn’t absurd. Who the hell can tell what Chelsea’s doing? They make a big deal of her not being available to the press—to the point that she basically told a grade-schooler who wanted to ask her a question to go to hell—but then she shows up gushing about “my mom” here and there. WTF?

    They don’t really care, except in terms of the demographic with which the outrage plays well. It’s all manufactured in the dies and presses of focus groups and opinion polls, polished up slick as a Bombay martini olive, and having not the slightest connection to the genuine emotion so passionately espoused.

    Hillary’s hardly the only offender, but in my view she is one of the purest.

    Reply
  3. “Pimped out” is, to me, a completely inappropriate way to refer to this young woman, or any young woman, or, perhaps, anyone. I am unaware of any reason I should pay any attention to young Ms. Clinton, but I find no fault in her participation in her mother’s (hopefully unsuccessful) campaign.

    Should the idjit who used this term lose his job? I don’t think so. Would a bit of self-examination do him some good? Sounds like it.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

CAPTCHA


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

BoWilliams.com