Chelsea Clinton

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

Originally Posted by PricklyGoo

Chelsea is I'd do her

I really hate to say it because I hate the Clintons but she is pretty good looking.

[signora]

Originally Posted by AndyMarquisLIVE

I really hate to say it because I hate the Clintons but she is pretty good looking.

hate is pretty harsh word to use towards people - what did they ever really do to you?

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by signora

hate is pretty harsh word to use towards people - what did they ever really do to you?

Besides usher in an era of guerrilla gutter politics and leftwing media excuse-making?

I think Chelsea's very pretty - she definitely got the best from both of her parents.

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

Originally Posted by signora

hate is pretty harsh word to use towards people - what did they ever really do to you?

I can't stand how they decided to help out in "evening out the playing field" for college. Now, intelligence, enthusiasim and determination alone can't get you in college and the people who get those scholarships and those final positions in the big name colleges and get the free money is all based purely in skin color. The Clinton's alone didn't cause that but they sure did help out a lot. That was one of Shrillary's big things. It's seemingly also beginning to tarnish the reputation of a college degree. Just like I said, people are getting a free ride based on skin color and religion and, imo, meaningless bullchit.

I can't stand all this talk about Socialized healthcare.

I also can't stand hearing about Shrillary Clinton, Barack Hussein Obama and Hannah Montana everywhere I go.

[signora]

[quote=vraiblonde;2822924]Besides usher in an era of guerrilla gutter politics and leftwing media excuse-making? QUOTE]

Everybody has a right to their own opionion, but I think the economy was a lot better off back in the Clinton days then they have been the last several years.

[RadioPatrol]

[awpitt]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

There's no such thing as "a family matter" when it comes to the presidency. They know that going in, so they just look silly if they try to complain about it.

Actually, there is a such thing. At this point, Chelsea chose not to talk about it. Now the voters will make their judgements. From a campaign standpoint, it might have been better to have a response like some that were sugested in this thread but there is no obligation for Chelsea to address it and , again, the voters will judge accordingly.

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

Originally Posted by awpitt

Actually, there is a such thing. At this point, Chelsea chose not to talk about it. Now the voters will make their judgements. From a campaign standpoint, it might have been better to have a response like some that were sugested in this thread but there is no obligation for Chelsea to address it and , again, the voters will judge accordingly.

Nobody said she had to address it. I think she could've given a better response, like, "it's in my mom's book" or "that's a family matter." I just kind of thought her comments were somewhat snyde.

[awpitt]

Originally Posted by AndyMarquisLIVE

Nobody said she had to address it. I think she could've given a better response, like, "it's in my mom's book" or "that's a family matter." I just kind of thought her comments were somewhat snyde.

No snydeness. Can't help that you read it that way. (Misread your post. I thought you were talking about my comments. Sorry)


In fact, in my last post I said that, "from a campaign standpoint, it might have been better to have a response like some that were sugested in this thread". The two that you suggested would've been very good responses for Chelsea to have used.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by AndyMarquisLIVE

I just kind of thought her comments were somewhat snyde.

I didn't think she was snide at all. But there was a better answer, and a candidate's past is indeed our business if they want us to vote for them.