One of the worst answers of the night at the YouTube/CNN debate was when Hillary Clinton answered a question on why she sent Chelsea to a private school rather than a public one in DC. Here’s her answer:

CLINTON: And Chelsea went to public schools, kindergarten through eighth grade, until we moved to Washington. And then I was advised, and it was, unfortunately, good advice, that if she were to go to a public school, the press would never leave her alone, because it’s a public school. So I had to make a very difficult decision.

Since when does the “press” have unfettered access to a public school? And why didn’t the “press” bother Chelsea when she was in public school in Little Rock? Back in 1993, when the Clintons made this decision, the NY Times editorialized (Times Select required):

When one of the nation’s staunchest advocates of public education chooses not to use those schools, he owes the public a clear, detailed explanation. Absent that explanation, educators and students in public schools have every reason to believe he views their institutions as second-rate — and to question the President-elect’s commitment.
That message was reinforced by the dishonest way in which the decision was announced. Mr. Clinton’s spokesman, George Stephanopoulos, insisted that the Clintons “didn’t reject public schools.” But, of course, that is exactly what they did. The reasons were probably those that lead many middle- and upper-income parents — even those who support public education as an important vehicle of social and economic mobility — to opt for private or parochial schools for their own children.

I can only imagine what the Times’ editors would have written had Hillary used the press excuse back in 1993.