The XX Factor: Slate women blog about politics, etc...

Who Needs Chelsea When We've Got Amy?

It seems patently ridiculous to say Chelsea is being "pimped out." She's 28. She's smart and articulate. She's been quiet a long time. In fact, I would say she hasn't been pimped out enough. Where is there a candidate's child anywhere in America who doesn't shill for their parents? It seems natural, and when they fail to do it, we think something's wrong (Reagan's son, Guiliani's kids). If you want to argue about pimping out, then look at the Edwards kids, campaigning before they were out of diapers.

Shuster was totally wrong, but the more important point is the Clintons' reactions. Apparently, Shuster has offered to apologize to all involved; the NBC president got down on his knees. But they won't have it--they are just too insulted and outraged.

I mean, come on. Hillary's the tough one who knows how to fight the right-wing machine, right? So, why does she take it seriously? Why does she pay any attention to this nonsense? Are we supposed to believe Chelsea just crumpled when she heard the word pimp attached to her name and took to her bed? No. This is just the Clintons, at home and alive again, in their happy role as the Most Aggrieved.

Who needs Chelsea, anyway, when we've got Amy? Amy Winehouse, that is. I've seen that recent paparazzi shot of her wandering the streets in just her bra. I've watched that cell-phone video of her smoking crack in a seedy room. I know she looks like a heroin addict, and she's an embarrassment to Jewish women everywhere. I know that song "Rehab" is an absolute lie--nobody needs rehab more (and she, in fact, DID go to rehab a couple of weeks ago). Accepting her Grammy award, she was barely comprehensible, and she seemed to sign off with something like "Burn Londontown Down." 

I usually have no interest in the starlets hellbent on self-destruction. And yet, I can't get enough of her.