I was driving home from the office yesterday catching up on one of my favorite podcasts, The Andrew Klavan Show, and he made a statement that got me thinking. Now first, this is NOT a hit piece against Andrew, he wasn’t advocating for what I’m about to talk about, he merely made a statement that I took as sarcasm from him, but one that many people in the political arena seems to hold true. That statement being “Politicians’ kids are off limits in politics.”
I spent the remainder of my drive home thinking about this statement, and whether or not I thought it was accurate, and my honest conclusion was “it depends.” So why does it depend? Well I think sometimes a Politicians “kids” are completely fair game in politics, and other times they are not. So here’s my reasoning for feeling the way I do.
Politicians’ kids are off limits when:
- They are minors. Any child under the age of 18 should be completely off limits, not just a matter of morality, but the obvious reasons that a kid can’t really defend themselves the same way you or I could. Though I’m sure some are quite astute and would have no problem owning some of todays’ politicians.
- The politicians’ “kids” are over 18, but they are not at all part of the political process. In other words they are not on stage giving speeches, campaigning, going to fundraisers, talking on TV, etc etc for their politician parent. I feel they should be off limits because as adults they’ve chosen not to be a part of their parent’s career and are instead living their own life. No one picks their parents, and we are not guilty of, or held responsible for our parent’s mistakes.
- Their child is of any age, and is no longer with us. obviously meaning they’ve passed away. This should be a no brainer, but I’m ensuring to list it for completeness.
Politicians’ kids are fair game when:
This one is very simple, and doesn’t need numbered bullets because there’s really only one time a politicians “kids” are fair game in the political arena, and that is when they are over the age of 18 and actively engaged in their parent’s political careers. This election cycle this would apply to the children of both candidates. Chelsea Clinton, and all but one of the Trump “kids” have given speeches, campaigned, and fund raised for their parents’ political campaigns. They opened the door to the political process, and all that comes with it the second they walked onto a stage and gave a speech for their Dad or Mom. Chelsea’s involvement in the Clinton Foundation, her time at NBC where she’s done almost nothing while getting paid quite handsomely (reports on just how much are contested and a matter of debate but either way she was paid to do very little), or her husband owning a hedge fund, the very thing Hillary claims to want to fight, along with any dealings the Trump “kids” are involved in are all fair game this election cycle, and any scrutiny that brings about valid questions or details of questionable activity are absolutely fair political talking points, and should be explored to their natural ends.
Let me know what you think, either in the comments below, or on Twitter.
-The Mid ‘Merican