Image 01 Image 03

Will Hillary face “prop” charge, like Palin did?

Will Hillary face “prop” charge, like Palin did?

Remember when liberals accused Sarah Palin of using her own child, Trig, as a campaign prop?

Chelsea Clinton has announced she’s pregnant.

Congratulations. Best wishes for mother and child.

It would be perfectly natural for Hillary to show off the grandbaby, particularly if, as expected, she runs for President.

I can envision the family, including grandbaby, on stage at the Democratic National Convention in 2016 as Hillary accepts the nomination — maybe with Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow playing in the background

Hillary more than anyone needs humanizing, in what already is a multi-year rebranding project.

And Hillary isn’t waiting for the arrival to publicly express her joy:

Will Hillary be treated like Sarah Palin was back in 2008, when Palin appeared with her own child Trig, and was accused of using him as a prop?

From the Legal Insurrection archives:

Then there were the attacks on Palin for bringing Trig on stage at the Republican National Convention, and with her on the campaign trail. HuffPo blogger Suzy Shuster wrote after Palin brought Trig to the V.P. debate in early October 2008:

It actually came after the debate, when for seemingly the millionth time, Sarah Palin trotted out her piece de resistance, her favorite prop of this campaign season: her five and a half month old son Trig. Why is this child up so late every time there is a camera op? … My point is, if Palin is going to keep shoving the motherhood card down our collective throats, maybe she can start being a mom again and stop using her own kid for political gain. Trig deserves a good night sleep.”

And this post from a self-proclaimed feminist:

In addition to keeping Trig up all hours of the night so that she can parade him around a stage after a pitiful debate performance or speech, she’s decided to use baby Trig to get some lusty applause out of the audience, because, let’s face it, there’s nothing evangelical Christians love more than a developmentally disabled baby they can use to their own end.

The accusation that Trig is used as a “prop” has continued to this day. Megan Elaine at Political Inaction, who accuses Palin of “pimping” Trig in the most recent issue of Runner’s World:

it’s amazing that Palin is, once again, using Trig as a prop. I mean–is it really necessary to have the baby in a picture with her for Runner’s World?? Again, we see her willing to pimp out her children, until one of them gets knocked up. Amazing.

If showing off your own child leads to being accused of using the child as a prop, how about showing off the grandchild?

Applying that standard to the Hillary grandbaby apparently is off limits (jump ahead to 3:20)(added — text from TPM):

The gang on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” is usually game to analyze (if not set) the latest political narrative, but as Andrew Ross Sorkin proved on Friday, even that show has limits.

Following a discussion about Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers, the New York Times financial columnist eagerly turned the panel’s attention to the real story.

“Can we talk about the human drama that is Grandma Clinton?” Sorkin asked, referring to Chelsea Clinton’s announcement that she’s pregnant.

“I don’t want to be cynical and I’m not suggesting anyone’s having a baby for election purposes, but —” Sorkin added before being drowned out by the panel’s collective groans.

And with that, Sorkin had lost the room, despite his best efforts to salvage his argument. He insisted that the pregnancy was a game changer for Hillary Clinton.

“It’s gonna change the dynamic of the campaign,” he said.

How exactly?

“It’s a softening, there’s a compassion thing,” Sorkin explained. “You don’t think that over the next two years on the campaign trail this is gonna be part of the narrative? Come on. That’s interesting.”

The other panelists did not find his observation interesting.

Palin should not have been criticized for using the child as a “prop” and neither should Hillary. But don’t expect consistency there form the media. Hillary will be vigorously defended.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Henry Hawkins | April 18, 2014 at 12:04 pm

No mention of a name yet. Hillary is arguing with Chelsea, trying to force her to name it after murdered Libyan ambassador Christopher Stevens. Not for cynical political reasons, mind you, oh no.


Maybe, on Planet Uranus.

Otherwise, see the definition of hypocrisy – DemoNcrats and their media whores.

The lapdog media went from hating Hillary and loving O to loving Hillary, once again. They have their orders and will do whatever they’re told. They’d probably like it better if Chelsea made the announcement that she was having an abortion.

If it’s a boy, it would be a nice gesture for Chelsea to name him “Webb” after her biological father.

LukeHandCool | April 18, 2014 at 1:13 pm

MSNBC Talking Head: “An entire country is going to watch a family have a child.”

It takes a village of inbred media Beltways to raise a reset button.

If it’s a boy, Grandpa can teach him how to pick up girls. If it’s a girl, Grandma can do the honors.

LukeHandCool | April 18, 2014 at 1:18 pm

In all fairness to the feminists, they would argue they were angry at Palin for bringing an unwanted child into this world. Unwanted by them, the feminists.

Whispers of Wendy Davis in the running as Baby Clinton’s Godmother.

    AConsidiot in reply to LukeHandCool. | April 18, 2014 at 2:05 pm

    Why don’t you look up ‘choice’ in the dictionary? Chelsea had a choice.

    She was also was taught about and had access to contraception. That allowed her to choose when she wanted a child. What a concept!

    Why do you need to fabricate or purposely mis-understand in order to make your argument? Was Palin’s child really unwanted by feminists? Was that a leaden attempt at humor?

    I’m a feminist and a liberal, and I supported Sarah Palin against the sexist mud slung her way. Just as I will support Hillary.

    The hypocrisy, and sexism, from both sides is disgusting.

      Rosalie in reply to gxm17. | April 18, 2014 at 5:14 pm

      Then you’re unusual. I have never seen such hypocrisy coming from feminists. Just look at what they did at Brandeis U. I rest my case.

        gxm17 in reply to Rosalie. | April 18, 2014 at 7:38 pm

        They? As in, feminists? I’m not finding anything to show that Brandeis U. president Fred Lawrence is a feminist. His online bio says “An accomplished scholar, teacher and attorney, Lawrence is one of the nation’s leading experts on civil rights, free expression and bias crimes.” Nothing about feminism. I really don’t understand how anyone could come to the conclusion that feminists are responsible for the Ayaan Hirsi Ali dust-up.

        Even Sarah Palin called herself a feminist. It’s not a narrow ideology limited to only one side of red/blue divide.

      scooterjay in reply to gxm17. | April 18, 2014 at 5:17 pm

      suuuuuuuure you did!

LukeHandCool | April 18, 2014 at 1:27 pm

Media village idiots:

“We can see Hillary 2016 from Chelsea’s womb!”

    AConsidiot in reply to LukeHandCool. | April 18, 2014 at 2:10 pm

    Didn’t Palin actually say that you could see Russia from parts of Alaska? Yes Did she even assert that she had any other knowledge of foreign affairs? No.

      Like many prog drone morons, you have apparently confused things you have seen/heard on comedy shows with factual news. Go crawl back under your rock troll.

        AConsidiot in reply to Paul. | April 18, 2014 at 2:28 pm

        I saw the interview. Notice that I didn’t claim she said she could see Russia from her house. But she most definitely said you could see Russia from parts of Alaska when she was asked about her foreign policy qualifications.

        The latter was the truth. The former did become a joke. It became a joke because her answer was vacuous.

          Vacuous? How so? What she said is true. You don’t think growing up through the cold war living that close to Russia gave Alaskans a slightly different perspective on Russia?

          What, she’s somehow less qualified than a no-show one term State Senator from Illinois? How so?

          You progs are such hypocritical jerk-offs.

          AConsidiot in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 3:26 pm

          @Paul So what was that perspective. If that comment was the beginning of a reasoned answer, it wouldn’t have been laughed at. But that was the entirety of her answer.

          Besides, what else did she observe from Alaska? What did she learn of Islam, Europe, Africa, South America, or Asia?

          Recently she made a big deal because she made a prediction on Crimea. Not bad for 6 years in the public eye – especially when the ones she missed got swept under the rug.

          Cue the insults.

          snopercod in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 4:50 pm

          Yes, it’s so great that we have a foreign-policy genius at the helm now. Otherwise, our allies wouldn’t trust us and our enemies wouldn’t fear us.

          Rosalie in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 5:18 pm

          You know what’s a joke? Obama. Now there’s someone who doesn’t know sh*t from Shinola.

          gxm17 in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 7:55 pm

          I agree with Paul. At least Sarah Palin speaks in coherent sentences and actually *says* something. Obama speaks in word fogs and never actually says anything. Why are people so impressed with politicians like Obama who have perfected the art of using an abundance of $10 words to say nothing? Personally, I have more respect for someone who says what they mean, and means what they say. And doesn’t hide behind vague “intellectual” references and bullshit.

          And as someone with family in the Bering Strait tribes, yeah, Russia’s really effing close. And it’s absolutely absurd to ridicule a fact. It makes you progs look downright stupid, and incredibly sexist too.

          gxm17 in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 7:59 pm

          Obama has perfected the art of the vacuous answer. Why was no one ridiculing him?

      scooterjay in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 5:18 pm

      heh heh heh…..I love it when the “enlightened” ones fall for that. If I were SP I would hammer that in their faces 24/7

      Its Mr Gibson in the interview who initiates the issue of Alaska’s proximity to Russia which might give Sarah Palin an understanding to Russia’s actions.

      As a gesture, she took the initiative and gave the American people some trivia that most Americans didn’t know, that you can actually see Russia from an island in Alaska.

      She elaborated on what Mr Gibson in the interview himself suggested, that the fact that Russia as Alaska’s neighbor gives her a unique understanding of that country’s activities.

      A transcript of the unedited interview of Sarah Palin by Charles Gibson clearly shows that ABC News edited out crucial portions of the interview that showed Palin as knowledgeable or presented her answers out of context.

      “As governor of Alaska, Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified material may rival even Biden’s.”

    LukeHandCool in reply to LukeHandCool. | April 18, 2014 at 2:51 pm

    She not only saw Russia, she saw Russia invading Ukraine.

    Of course, the supposed non-idiots called her an idiot for that.

If children are considered “props”, then I say we need more props.

Make life, not abortion.

    AConsidiot in reply to n.n. | April 18, 2014 at 2:32 pm

    That is your choice.

    But liberty requires that you don’t force your choice on others. That actually used to play well in the Libertarian moverment. I know, because I was one. But now that the Libertarians have joined forces with religious conservatives, they have lost their soul.

      Observer in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 2:52 pm

      Liberty requires that you don’t force your choice on others . . .
      except when those “others” are defenseless babies in the womb, in which case, Liberty permits you to destroy those others’ lives so that their mothers can avoid the inconvenience of having to deal with the results of their choice to have unprotected sex.

      In the interests of accuracy, why didn’t you call yourself “AProgIdiot” instead?

        AConsidiot in reply to Observer. | April 18, 2014 at 3:32 pm

        That is your religious belief. It isn’t even an ancient religious belief. When did they start having funerals for miscarriages? They don’t have them in the religion I was raised in. I know. I had plenty of religious training.

        Besides, it isn’t always unprotected sex.

          Observer in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 4:18 pm

          LOL. It’s my “religious belief” that a fetus is a developing human baby, as opposed to an animal, alien, or indeterminate “clump of cells” or “mass of tissue”? I thought you progs were supposed to be the party of science.

          As for your assertion that a funeral service constitutes some type of proof that a person was human, that’s just a bizarre argument, even for someone with your limited reasoning skills.

      Immolate in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 3:07 pm

      I hope Hillary does parade the baby around the stage like a proud grandmother. No matter how cynical her reasons, I love to see babies.

      People who condone the murder of innocents, not so much. I’d prefer the lot of you remain close to the dark and fetid mires that spawned you.

      Rosalie in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 5:21 pm

      And how about not forcing abortions on nuns and people who do not believe in abortions.

      Yukio Ngaby in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 6:49 pm

      Hey, that guy’s going to shoot that other guy in the head… Should I do something?

      Nope. Liberty REQUIRES me to respect that guy’s choice to murder that other guy.

      Good one. Why don’t you make up a better excuse for the medical murder of children than your false conception of “liberty”– an excuse that’s been failing for decades now, btw.

      Oh, but look who I’m asking that from… Someone lost in the moral nether realms of Maya without standard Leftie talking points… Forget it.

As I remember it, Palin 1st introduced Trig by placing him in the lap of her pregnant unwed daughter.

That 1st speech was a huge success. Too bad she kept openning up her mouth.

But it all worked out OK. He unwed daughter turned that into fact into a job. Reality show; lecturers on chastity – not contraception. You guys will buy anything if it is presented by the party.

    snopercod in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 2:36 pm

    You guys will buy anything if it is presented by the party.

    …unlike you progs who believe Obamacare is a great success, the world is safer now, and the economy is booming because your messiah says so.

      AConsidiot in reply to snopercod. | April 18, 2014 at 3:39 pm

      I don’t know if ObamaCare is a great success. You don’t know it is a failure. You may have some anecdotes. I could have some.

      I do know that you guys were celebrating when the website rollout failed. Then when it started succeeding, you claimed they were lying. You rooted around for any sign of failure and ignored any sign of success. It seems rather partisan and prejudiced. Dontcha think?

        snopercod in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 4:53 pm

        If you define “success” as destroying the best health care system in the world, then I stand corrected. Oh, and my wife has no health insurance now thanks to morons like you.

        Oh please, stick a sock in it. You are just a parrot of OFA talking points.

        George Will had a nice analogy… Obama tooting his horn about 7 million, or 7.1 or 8 or whatever the count is today is a joke. It’s like saying the Soviet Union was the best bread seller in the world! Get in line for your government bread, Comrade! The only place you can buy it is here at the government shop! Have your ration card handy, Comrade?

        Or think of it like this….Obama ‘selling’ health insurance policies is like a mobster who owns a glass company driving around town breaking windows.

        He cancelled 6.5 million perfectly good policies, that reasonable people decided they wanted, and then ‘sells’ 7 or 8 million new policies, and you think that is a ‘success?’

        How many of those have paid? Oh they don’t know? What a joke, of course they know! They’re scared and embarrassed to release the data!

        This thing is a train wreck in slow motion, and YES I am relishing every minute of the failure. I can’t wait until you prog drones get your noses rubbed in it in Nov, just like a dog that crapped on the living room rug.

        gxm17 in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 8:13 pm

        As an Obama supporter, please explain to me why Obama shut out the public option advocates. And please explain why the Stupak Amendment was a *necessary* compromise. And then please explain how on earth anyone who claims to lean even a little left could call the Health Insurance Profit Protection Plan a victory or a success. I really wish you progs would put the Overton window back where you found it and never ever touch it again.

        gxm17 in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 8:17 pm

        I’m presuming you’re an Obama supporter AC. Otherwise, I don’t know how you could defend that mess.

    Immolate in reply to AConsidiot. | April 18, 2014 at 3:12 pm

    Yeah after hearing her gaffe about 57 states, the bitter clingers in PA and her association with a known terrorist, I really started to loose interest in Palin.

    If it hadn’t been for the Greek columns, I would have.

      Paul in reply to Immolate. | April 18, 2014 at 3:24 pm

      For me it was her known, well documented associations with radical Marxists all throughout her life, coupled with her repeated statements about wanting to ‘fundamentally transform’ what was already the greatest country on earth, all without providing any details whatsoever what those ‘fundamental transformations’ might be.

      57 with 1 more to go. so its actually him thinking 58.

      snopercod in reply to Immolate. | April 18, 2014 at 4:55 pm

      What really frosts me about Palin is that whenever there’s a crisis, she goes golfing. What a putz!

    creeper in reply to AConsidiot. | April 20, 2014 at 9:58 am

    Please explain to me exactly what it is about Sarah Palin that makes you go all twisty inside. Your kind of hatred is beyond my experience.

      Kepha H in reply to creeper. | April 21, 2014 at 9:24 pm

      Hillary Clinton lost her first legal job on the team investigating Watergate because she LIED–and her former boss, as Nixon-hating a liberal as ever there was, was the source.

      Her Whitewatergate files were “lost” until the Statute of Limitations ran out.

      When a yokel in Florida burned the Qur’an and when an obscure Coptic immigrant made an obscure video about Islam (and, sleazy as the man may have been, he at least knew a thing or two about living as a Dhimmi), this woman insinuated that Free Speech was too dangerous a liberty for us yokel Americans when there’s a volatile Islamic street that tends to get incensed at the drop of a hijab and everything else. She served an administration which supports the OIC’s attempt to silence all criticism of Muhammad. She allowed an Italian oil-drilling firm to sucker us into supporting pro-Qaida rebels in eastern Libya, and ignored cable traffic from our own Embassy that said a trip to Benghazi would not be safe. In Syria, she helped get us into backing the side that’s practicing genocide on Syria’s Christians.

      She let that Chinese state visit openly insult us in the White House itself when Lang Lang played the theme “My Motherland” from a Korean War-vinage Chinese film that glorified killing Americans.

      When pressed by a half-hearted Congressional Committee on the Benghazi killings, she whined, “What difference does it make?”

      The woman is incompetent and has character issues, no matter what the MSM tries to hide.

      Hillary Clinton is barely a tenth the woman Sarah Palin is.

Wow! At his advanced age, I’m surprised that Bill can still get it up.

Maybe the pregnancy will give Chelsea or Hillary a headache, which will lead to the baby being aborted, which Hillary will celebrate as heroic.

Henry Hawkins | April 18, 2014 at 3:48 pm

LI gets the most inept trolls on the internet. How is that possible? Over and over.

    come on Henry, you’re not that bad 🙂 🙂

      Henry Hawkins in reply to dmacleo. | April 18, 2014 at 11:29 pm

      Remember that kid from Wisconsin during the 2012 primaries? He was entertaining at least. All the other ones just offer ‘you all are poopy heads!’ and call it rebuttal. You’d think Liz Warren could afford better.

        missed this earlier,, I vaguely remember something about him but not much.
        funny that my joking comment got thumbs down, people need to get a sense of humor and get over themselves.

    creeper in reply to Henry Hawkins. | April 20, 2014 at 10:01 am

    Anyone with half a brain (and that’s the most you’ll find in any lib) refuses the troll assignment to LI to avoid being embarrassed. I actually feel sorry for the trolls here. Talk about outclassed…

BannedbytheGuardian | April 18, 2014 at 10:47 pm

She still has plenty of time to abort in NY .

Hillary Clinton deserves no mercy. Hecklers should ask her at every gathering how it was that her Whitewater filed suddenly “reappeared” after the Statute of limitations ran out. They should also ask why she tried to blame the blowups on 9/11/12 on an obscure video by an even more obscure Coptic immigrant and insinuate that Free Speech is too dangerous a liberty for us mere yokels when there’s sensitive diplomacy going on in the Middle East (like almost getting snookered into during the dirty work for Erdogan’s neo-Ottoman designs in Syria).

Ask her how she would’ve reacted had she been POTUS when that Chinese general asked her hubby if Taiwan was worth a nuclear-blasted LA.

Every flaw in this man-woman-b***h-goddess’s past should be taken out and flown from flagpoles across the land. Every lie in which she’s ever been caught should be broadcast everywhere.The future of the country depends on this woman not returning to the White House.