Is anyone under the impression that Chelsea never had a story important enough to print in the newspapers? She was given a total pass. You know what, I think that's appropriate. I may think her folks are the devil's spawn, but that doesn't give us license to screw with their child.
The Bush kids should be given the same treatment. You know it. I know it. And we both know that the media is and will continue to play games along these lines.
Everything positive about Chelsea will be shouted to the mountain tops. Everything negative will be deemed unworthy of publication. Every worthy about the Bush siblings will be deemed unworthy of publication, and their negatives broadcast to the four corners of the earth.
Hear, hear!!!
And again, you are wrong if you think that if the press had police reports naming Chelsea Clinton in hand, or photos in hand of Chelsea Clinton falling down drunk, that they would not have run them. Trust me, I've been in the business for more than a quarter-century. It would have happened, regardless of any protestation from the White House. All the columnists, pundits, etc., would've fussed about it ... that's where Billy and Hilly would've called in their chips ... but as far as an everyday news decision by the working stiffs in the newsroom, that stuff would've been in the paper.
Which as I said in another response here, begs the question as to whether Chelsea had the good sense, either from her own intuition or because of drilling by her parents and their handlers, to know her stopping point and to never let herself completely go to the point of not realizing that photographers could lurk behind every pillar.