Chelsea Come Lately

I won't vote for any member of the Clinton family in any capacity. Hopefully Sen. Obama will pick someone else as a running mate, Gov. Richardson for example.

Hillary/Obama positions:
1. Surrender Iraq to the terrorists,
2. Raise taxes,
3. Keep the borders open to illegal immigrants (including possible terrorists),
4. Force people to use government-run healthcare, and 5. Prevent people under 35 from ever getting Social Security benefits (even though they pay for it)

McCain/Huckabee positions:
1. Win in Iraq,
2. Lower taxes,
3. Protect Americans by securing the border,
4. Allow people to choose their healthcare provider,
5. Guarantee that people who pay into Social Security will one day be eligible for benefits

There is a clear difference here. Vote with these facts in mind.

Though Chelsea has swayed more than a few voters, some have come away unconvinced. "She did a good job of conveying her mom's message," says Nicky Adamson, a student who saw Chelsea last month at Stanford University and ended up voting for Obama. "But the average college student can't relate to her, because she seems so intellectual."

Just what we need...another candidate that was selected because they didn't alienate those who were unable to relate to someone so "intellectual."

Yes - I do believe that Chelsea is proving to be an asset to HRC -. It is unfortunat that Schuster's comments have taken on a life if their own - what does HRC want him or his employer to do??? I do believe that Schuster's thoughts were caught up in the "kid's lingo" (arguably - ne he should have sought a kid to explain it's proper usage) - which in essence is "to exploit" - which in my reality is to take advantage of - and I am sure for HRC in the only "gentlessnes of ways" . it is a fact that Chelsea was a "silent" smiling mannequin until Obama handed HRC consistent lossess with the youth - and now Chlsea is all over the place - again in the "kid's language" - to use for personal benefit. It does bother me as a baby boomer, past "joint" smoking, highly educated black woman that it appears that HRC cannot stand the heat - and is in essence having a temper tantrum. Why could she or Chelsea not accept his apology and move on. ? In my jugment, HRC protest too much and sees "slights" in any negative towards her and her family - why did she not raise as much indignation over B. Johnson & her husband's double edged comments. Again, if HRC is going to have Chelsea doing "some heavy" lifting - take the good with the bad -

I know African Americans are proud that Obama is running, but to me it's just another guy that wants to be president. As a young woman, I want so much more to see a woman in the White House as president because it seems like so much more. Any little boy, no matter what color, can believe he can be president. But no little girl, no matter what color, can look to the past and think she can be president. I hope Hillary becomes the nominee, because it will show all girls that they can be president, just like any boy can.

It's a shame that the hate toward Hillary is so intense. I'm hoping that the hate that these people hold against George Bush and his party is just as strong because of what they have done to the country and that they will support the Democrat nominee whichever that may be. Change is in the air and it's with the Democrats.

Though Chelsea has swayed more than a few voters, some have come away unconvinced. "She did a good job of conveying her mom's message," says Nicky Adamson, a student who saw Chelsea last month at Stanford University and ended up voting for Obama. "But the average college student can't relate to her, because she seems so intellectual."

Geez. Just what we need...another president who was selected because he didn't alienate those who couldn't relate to someone "so intellectual."

Interesting Whoopi Goldberg changed her mind and voted for Hillary. The reason being something that was said in Congress by Hillary about a bill to tax companies in the US that take their work overseas. Obama is now saying this in his speeches, and makes it look like it was his idea. How much more of this has went on?

If she doesn't allow her emotions to show, she's branded cold-hearted, and a shrew. If she does allow her emotions to be visible (yet STILL contained and non-interfering with her message) then she's viewed as weak. Did she break down in tears? No. Did she stumble over her own words, like her competitor CONSTANTLY DOES (and yet is viewed as a 'master communicator' HA!)? No. I don't think that leading this nation is anything more than a very dirty job, and I refuse to elect someone who I feel is terribly under-qualified for this position, no matter HOW charming he is or how brightly he smiles. He's the current media darling, but wait til the hounds of hell turn on him. He'll collapse like a house of cards, simply because he's never been subjected to the maelstrom the former First Lady had to weather (which she came out the clear winner). So, I don't think her getting misty-eyed indicates that she's not strong enough to stand toe-to-toe with world leaders when she seems to be on the losing end. She's already DONE that, and turned the situation around to her benefit! Now THAT's the skill set I want representing me! When talking about foreign policy, I'm not ashamed to say that I applaud someone who's capable of 'manipulating' the tableau to benefit our country -- and I cringe to think of someone who's 'communicating' our strategy to everyone else - friendly and antagonistic countries alike. No thank you!

I think Chelsea Clinton is a delightful young woman. I am happy that she supports her mom and seems to have a good relationship with her. But I have two problems with this -- the first is that the MSM seems to forget to mention that this daughter of privilege, child of two supposedly progressive, caring and liberal parents is a .... hedge fund manager in New York??? Look -- she should be able to do what she wants with her life, but when she steps forward to tell us why she thinks we should support her mom, it's appropriate for us to see what the basis for her judgment is. And her mindset and values and level of activism. Unfortunately, we have to do a lot of guessing because, as alluded to above, Ms. Clinton does not do interviews. Now that's a fine stance to take when you stand in the background and wave for the cameras, but not when you're sent out on the stump on solo campaign appearances. I think that the Clintons' united effort to shield their daughter from the hyperactive media scrutiny during their White House years was admirable and I'm certain it contributed to the poised young lady she is today. But you can't have it both ways. She can't be a campaign surrogate and "off limits" to interviews and scrutiny. Sorry ... she should open up.