The politics of “pimping”

Chelsea is in the spotlight now.Senator Clinton is mad, and David Shuster is screwed.

David Shuster, for now of MSNBC, make a comment last week that the Clinton campaign was “pimping out” Chelsea Clinton by using her to call superdelegates to try to convince them to vote for her mother.  Was that the real motivation behind the outrage?  Was the comment so offensive that it warranted the letter Senator Clinton sent to the head of NBC?

Chelsea Clinton has been treated with kid gloves when she lived in the White House and while in college, as she should have been.  She didn’t run for anything, wasn’t campaigning, was just a kid living her life.  The media treated her much differently than they did the Bush twins, whose every adolescent folly was all over the news.  Maybe Chelsea is the perfect child who have never done anything wrong, never had a sip of alcohol before the age of 21, we don’t know and don’t really care.  Just interesting how the media cared when it was the children of a Republican…

Anyway, that was then and this is now.  Chelsea is no longer a little girl, she’s 27 and a well-paid hedge fund manager in New York City, though she doesn’t seem to have been to work lately, spending a lot of time on the campaign trail both with her mother and on her own.  She is, in other words, fair game.

She doesn’t talk to reporters, not even 9 year old kid reporters, just gives speeches.  Pretty sad when you think of it.  Why is it that this woman can go out and spew talking points prepared for her by her handlers but can’t answer questions those talking points inspire?  The common line is that she’s trying to protect her privacy, but that point loses all merit when she’s out on the stump.  She stepped into the spotlight, it did not find her.

Shuster could have used a different word, sure.  But the word “pimped” isn’t what it used to be, it’s used all the time now.  But the faltering Clinton campaign saw an opening, a way to gain sympathy again, to humanize Senator Clinton without having her cry again, and they pounced.  Shuster was just collateral damage. 


1 Response to “The politics of “pimping””

  1. 1 Julie
    February 12, 2008 at 4:13 am

    Oh Boo Hoo. Get over it Hillary!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

February 2008
« Jan   Mar »

%d bloggers like this: