Skip to main content

Rand Paul speaking at LPAC 2011 in Reno, Nevada.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Sen. Rand Paul continues to want to talk about Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct of nearly 20 years ago. According to the Kentucky Republican, Clinton is a "throwback to a sort of troglodyte time," apparently unlike ultrasound-happy Republicans. Why is Paul so concerned about Clinton's mid-1990s actions? Here's what he says:
“It is quite hypocritical that a party that says they’re great defenders of women in the workplace supports a guy who violated all of those pledges, all of those promises that the workplace is a safer place for women than it has been in the past,” he said.

He said he believes it’s “fair game for Democrats to have to defend” Clinton, since they lean on him heavily for fundraising and campaigning help.

Of course, Bill Clinton has been fundraising and campaigning for Democrats for years and it's only now that we're hearing this constant whining refrain from Republicans. Why might that be, do you think? Gosh, could it be that Clinton's wife looks like a lock for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, should she choose to run, and leads Republicans in general election polling, and one Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky has presidential aspirations? Could it be that Republicans have repeatedly gotten into trouble in recent years over their troglodyte throwback tendencies, and that trying to distract from their failure to improve their policies affecting or messaging about women is a lot harder than whining about what Bill Clinton did in the 1990s? Because, hey, he might not be running for anything, but maybe possibly his wife is, so it feels ... almost kinda sorta relevant, Paul hopes?

There's an obligatory reminder that goes with any Republican attempt to use Bill Clinton as a shiny object to distract from actual issues affecting American women today: Bill Clinton signed the first Violence Against Women Act. He signed the Family and Medical Leave Act. He signed an increase in the minimum wage. These are all policies affecting millions of women that Democrats are trying to build on and strengthen, improvements that Republicans like Rand Paul are blocking.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:33 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  It's not new, either. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TomP, annieli, Chitown Kev, Subterranean

    Some cons never stopped whining about Clinton. Even in the two thousands I found them constantly dragging Bill into everything left of them on-line.

  •  Rand...the man with a plan...though figuring it (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Crashing Vor, TomP, IndieGuy

    out may be difficult.

    •  I'll confess to being puzzled. (10+ / 0-)

      Does he really think reminding people--particularly women--of that affair will somehow make them less sympathetic to her? How would that work?

      I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

      by Crashing Vor on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:37:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's Well Established That Negative Campaigning (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Crashing Vor, annieli

        works, particularly negative emotional messaging, particularly at driving down opposition turnout.

        This is 70% about this year's midterm and 30% about 2016.

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:42:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Ditto. N/T (0+ / 0-)

          Mollie

          "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


          hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

          by musiccitymollie on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:48:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Oh come ON (4+ / 0-)

          I know you are the bleakest pessimist at DailyKos, Goosrock. But how exactly is reminding them about something  Bill Clinton, whom they like and still turn out to hear, did 20 years ago going to impact TURNOUT?

          It won't. This "negative emotional messaging" A. didn't work back in the ’90s; people just shrugged and went "So?" and B. has nothing to do with state candidates like those we have here in Ohio. Black voters, for instance, will turn out because they are excited that we have a powerful black woman running for secretary of state and access to voting is an issue that strikes deep with them, as I learned when I was phone banking  for Jennifer Brunner's U.S. Senate campaign. All I had to do was tell these older black women — one of the most reliable turnout groups — that as SoS she had cleaned up the 2004 message so they could vote without problems in 2008, and they were 100% for her.

          Things like THAT impact turnout in state races, not this ancient history.

          Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

          by anastasia p on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:50:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Guilt by association. (7+ / 0-)

        She should have divorced him, in which case Rand would condemn her for divoricing her husband.

        There is no logic to it.  Just smears, attacks.  

        Rand is not the brightest bulb.  These attacks help Hillary and Bill, and only feed the base.  But he has to get the nomination, so feeding the base is what he is about.  

        Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

        by TomP on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:43:32 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No, because many Republican (conservative) woman (0+ / 0-)

        wouldn't vote for her, anyway.

        Rand Paul's poll numbers were leading all the 2016 Presidential contenders a few months ago, in regard to "young people."

        I imagine that he also knows that Dems have invested much time and energy courting this group--many of whom are too young to remember MonicaGate.

        That's why he's harping on it.

        He hopes that it will hurt Dems amongst more "conservative" youth (or garner him votes).

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


        hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

        by musiccitymollie on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:47:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh baloney! (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mmacdDE, smartalek

          First of all, young voters are less likely to turn out. Second, it's three years out and barely anyone knows what Rand Paul REALLY stands for. Third, WHAT "poll numbers"? Are you referring to a single poll as is usually the case with unsourced contentions like this? I can guarantee you that if the GOP runs a full-throated extreme right-wing campaign, none of their candidates will win young voters, even if Hillary — who is  unexciting to young voters — IS the candidate, and there's a good chance she won't be. "Conservative youth" is a tiny group and they weren't going to vote Democratic anyway.

          Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

          by anastasia p on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:53:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Check out POTUS Channel on Sirius/XM -- polls are (0+ / 0-)

            quoted there at least a couple of times a week.

            The last I heard mention of Paul's high numbers among youth, was (as I said) several months ago--before Chrisitie's implosion.

            Your comment that HRC is unexciting among youth was also reflected in the polls that I heard quoted.

            Her supporters (PACs) are keenly aware of this deficit, and are trying to reverse this by getting some of PBO's "tech" folks to work on outreach to this cohort.  And holding some type of townhalls geared toward youth voters, etc.

            I have two residencies--in a blue and a red state.

            Both in university towns.  In 2008, strong support for PBO.  In 2012, massive support for Ron Paul.

            So, I tend to believe the polls cited could be correct.

            Much of the 2016 election will hinge 'the ACA.'  With younger voters that I interact with, another issue will be college debt.

            Time will tell, I suppose . . .

            Mollie

            "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


            hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

            by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:47:20 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Except for this poll (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musiccitymollie

          http://www.latimes.com/...

          True, some of these numbers may reflect a percentage of libertarians, but overall, Randy is on the wrong side of their inclinations.    Voting for Hillary may be like voting for their mother or grandmother, but they are a generation that likes their parents, and who doesn't love Nana?

          •  See my reply to anastasia p. Personally, I'm (0+ / 0-)

            not convinced that HRC will actually run.

            Please check out polls at Real Clear Politics (for a wide variety).

            And thanks for the LA Times poll.

            I do think that Dems need to be realistic--male or female, there is no "advantage" to nominating a very "mature" candidate, when it comes to the youth vote.

            It's already looking like (unless someone other than Biden or Clinton are nominated) we're going to have a candidate who is very close to being old enough to be the "parent" of the Republican candidate.

            (Easily, if Marco Rubio were the Republican candidate.)

            And while this may be helpful in some age cohorts, can't see anyway that it will shake out to be a great advantage regarding the youth vote.

            But, we'll see.  A lot can happen between now and 2016.

            Mollie

            "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


            hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

            by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:56:35 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Clinton fatigue (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mostserene1, musiccitymollie

        I think they're going to work at making us so sick of hearing about the Clintons by 2016 that the last thing people are going to want is 8 more years of them.

        •  You may be on to something.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musiccitymollie

          Rand intends on being president and he needs to neutralize the Clintons early on.  By constantly putting them in the news, he hopes middle America will tire of them and want someone new, fresh, and young (insert Rand here).

          •  Another reason she needs primary challengers (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LihTox, musiccitymollie, Mostserene1

            We need to know if she is going to campaign as a young passionate senior and appeal to all of us Boomers who never believe getting old could happen to us or if she is going to come off as a bit tired, a bit entitled, and a bit unable to relate to younger voters.

            I think it's hard to tell.  Sometimes people who've been around power and wealth too long start having Barbara Bush moments.  

            •  I don't disagree but.... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              atana, BlueDragonNH

              unlike the GOP, we don't want our primaries to damage our candidates.  We desperately need to hold the White House.  And Hillary looks like the best shot.  The Supreme Court is at stake, so the next 8 years are vital to progressive interests.  

              Hillary has strong national and international appeal.. Yes, she is hawkish and more towards the center, but that is, sadly, what America elects: centrists.  We can't change that reality.  But under even a centrist Dem we can continue to push for gay rights, women's rights, and immigration reform.  

              Under a Repub, we can kiss all our progress goodbye.

              •  The goal "should be" nominating the best (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                smartalek, BenFranklin99

                "progressive" candidate.

                How do you think we've gotten where we have--one conservative Democrat after another.

                Could not have imagined that in my lifetime, I would ever have seen a Democratic President want to "trade away" Social Security and Medicare benefits for tax revenue.

                Jeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzz!!!!!!!!!!

                We need to stick to our progressive values, now more than ever!

                Mollie

                "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

                by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 10:31:26 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm on SS and medicare and (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  atana

                  am not aware these were traded away by Obama.  This kind of hysterical fear-mongering does not help us achieve our aims.  Purity tests would remain with the GOP.  We should work within reality.

                  •  You wouldn't have noticed this, since you are (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BenFranklin99

                    already comfortably in the position to enjoy these benefits.

                    There is no threat (looming near) for those ALREADY receiving their Social Security checks, EXCEPT for the approximately 3% reduction in their promised benefits (amounting to a full annual benefit check if one lives into one's eighties).

                    In case you missed that discussion, I'm referring to the "Chained or Superlative CPI" which was not included in the 2015 Budget, but which is STILL on the table.  

                    I have posted several links to articles (as have many others, including Joan McCarter, IIRC) which make this assertation--IF the Administration is able to get "revenue" in a "deal," (Grand, or otherwise), they are willing to enact this change.

                    I'll be back and post a link for you later, on the several "cuts" to Medicare and Medigap insurance that are in the President's 2015 budget.  I'm too pressed for time, now.

                    Some of these cuts, you may escape.  

                    But many other millions of "near-retirees" (and younger Americans) won't.

                    Check out the Grand Bargain group's many diaries from about February through May of 2013.

                    There is PLENTY to be concerned about regarding the trend to dismantle the social insurance programs [as we've known them for years].

                    I've provided literally hundreds of links in my own comments, over the past couple of years, which explain and discuss these proposed cuts.

                    Including multitudes of links to the Bowles-Simpson proposal:

                    The Moment Of Truth

                    Lawmakers just took another "whack" at federal retirements this past December--with several more proposed that could greatly affect us.

                    So, yeah, we're concerned.

                    I spend decades counseling and advocating for the underprivileged, and the majority of them had NO OTHER retirement, other than Social Security.

                    Mr M and I are very fortunate to have both federal and private retirements (when we call them in) in addition to Social Security.

                    And that includes our "defined benefit" retirements under the original Civil Service Retirement System--the gold standard for retirement benefits.

                    Seems to me that we all need to keep in mind that NOT EVERYONE is so fortunate.

                    Mollie

                    "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                    hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

                    by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 11:43:19 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Hillary has exactly the positions it takes (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Mostserene1

                for a Democrat to get elected president and, moreover, for a woman to get elected president. There is and will be heightened "nervousness" about a woman Commander in Chief among a certain segment of the voters. Hillary has neutralized that "nervousness" as effectively as possible.

                And please don't anybody cite Obama as a supposed peacenik counterexample -- the Dems could have run a cheese sandwich and won in '08 after the economic meltdown.

                American Presidents: 43 men, 0 women. Ready for Hillary

                by atana on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 10:43:59 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Thank you. Well said, atana..... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  atana

                  I find it hard to believe - but some Kossacks openly state it - that progressives would rather write in Elizabeth Warren (or Ralph Nader) and lose the election then vote for Hillary.  Talk about cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

                  They would give the presidency to the GOP just to feel the purity of their progressive beliefs.  And guarantee the GOP 8 years to fill Supreme Court seats with arch conservatives.

                  We have to look outside our own bubble to see what middle America wants.  And every poll shows they want centrists.  And they show Hillary is wildly popular.  

                •  She has the positions to suit more (0+ / 0-)

                  conservative Dems, of course--that's not in question (that I can tell).

                  But you really should check out the entire progressive  blogosphere (I blog at nine blogs, myself).

                  Many liberal activists are not thrilled at the prospect of a "coronation"--period.

                  Much less of a DLCer.

                  What we've witnessed for the past five plus years, has been the carrying out of the DLC "Hyde Park Declaration," which very must aligns with the Bowles-Simpson proposal, The Moment Of Truth [link above].

                  Look, you have a "Ready For Hillary" link--and it's obvious your right to be in her camp, or support her.

                  But you'll probably find that many liberal Dems want a primary challenge from someone who represents their values.  

                  And it would be smart for the Dem Leadership to allow this, unless they want to see some of their Base sit out the election.  (And nobody wants that.)

                  Apologize for typos, in advance.  ;-)

                  Mollie

                  "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                  hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

                  by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 11:59:04 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I want to see a Dem landslide that leaves Repugs (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BlueDragonNH, Mostserene1

                    a withered rump party of aging white racists. And I want a president who is a fighter, and will use that mandate, not compromise it away.

                    Hillary is that woman. I campaigned for her in 2008, and I think she would have made the better president -- though Obama is certainly vastly preferable to gramps McCain and Caribou Barbie. I will campaign for her again in 2016, and this time we will win.

                    And if the Repugs are crushed into insignificance, then the Dems can become the center party and there will be room for a new party on the left -- a party that actually wants to do something significant about climate change, which is going to be the central political issue of the 21st century.

                    American Presidents: 43 men, 0 women. Ready for Hillary

                    by atana on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 12:32:18 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Much as I've grown to respect Hilary, (0+ / 0-)

                      I'd prefer Liz Warren to bring the banks to heel and create jobs.  I think she would do well internationally as well.  A Warren/Sanders or  Sanders/Warren ticket would be a dream, though Hillary is probably more electable.

                      Real plastic here; none of that new synthetic stuff made from chicken feathers. By the morning of 9/12/2001 the people of NYC had won the War on Terror.

                      by triplepoint on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 01:15:32 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  IMO, the status of the ACA (0+ / 0-)

                      by year's end, and the results of the midterm elections will determine whether Former Secretary Clinton decides to run.

                      I will look at the Democratic field, and decide my course of action at that time.

                      Good luck in your endeavors!

                      Mollie

                      "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                      hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

                      by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 02:23:26 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  We had a coronation for BHO (0+ / 0-)

                    And got a President who is ideologically somewhere between the Republicans and the Democrats.  I'm not thrilled with President Obama, and neither is any other Progressive.

                    Warren/Grayson 2016! Yes We Can!

                    by BenFranklin99 on Sun Mar 09, 2014 at 01:59:29 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The word Coronation shuts down conversation... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      musiccitymollie

                      if it comes down to a moderate den lil eHillary or a Right Winger, you will have a decision:  Vote for Hillary, or not.  And the consequences of not voting for a non-perfect Dem will be huge.  The Right Wing will own the White House, and probably the entire congress.  

                      And you will feel good that you stuck to your guns and wrote in a candidate that matches your own beliefs.  And cost us the election.

                    •  Hear, hear, BF99! ;-) N/T (0+ / 0-)

                      Mollie

                      "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                      hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

                      by musiccitymollie on Sun Mar 09, 2014 at 02:39:12 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

            •  Ditto, gb. N/T (0+ / 0-)

              Mollie

              "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


              hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

              by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 12:01:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  In case you haven't noticed (0+ / 0-)

          Bill hasn't lived with Hillary in a long time.  I will never forget that Hillary worked to bring American National Health Care.

          Warren/Grayson 2016! Yes We Can!

          by BenFranklin99 on Sun Mar 09, 2014 at 01:56:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Paul's idea is to make it more difficult to argue (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenbell, musiccitymollie

        there is a war on women from Republicans as part of HRC campaign and decrease Bill's effectiveness.

        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

        by nextstep on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:04:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The plan might be (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skillet, JeffW, anastasia p, hawkseye, Chas 981

      say anything no matter how stupid .

      "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

      by indycam on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:58:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  1990s Clinton was very Popular (7+ / 0-)

    He would have won a third term.

    Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. www.hamiltonproject.org

    by PatriciaVa on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:41:38 AM PST

  •  AquaBuddha jealous of DFHs! (9+ / 0-)

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:48:27 AM PST

  •  I bet he's obsessed with Tiger Woods, too. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IndieGuy, VPofKarma

    It's all about finding a way to keep a mistress (or 10) on the side without the wife finding out.

    As if any one would want to BE with Rand Paul.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    —Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:04:50 AM PST

  •  He plagiarizes everything else (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milkbone, VPofKarma

    So why are we surprised that he goes after 1990's political attack material?

  •  Hmm. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IndieGuy
    “It is quite hypocritical that a party that says they’re great defenders of women in the workplace supports a guy who violated all of those pledges, all of those promises that the workplace is a safer place for women than it has been in the past,” he said.

    Umm, pardon me for so noting, but aren't the relevant events long in the past?  Hmm.

    I'm not always political, but when I am I vote Democratic. Stay Democratic, my friends. -The Most Interesting Man in the World

    by boran2 on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:22:28 AM PST

  •  For younger voters (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IndieGuy, milkbone, greenbell, atana, Chas 981

    Bill Clinton is ancient history, stuff they read about in dull history books and not relevant to their life experience.

    •  Exactly this. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ojibwa, atana

      Anybody 21 years old today was born in 1993.

      •  Which is exactly "why" Paul is talking about (0+ / 0-)

        MonicaGate--his intention is to inform very young voters who wouldn't "know about" this American saga [for lack of a better expression, LOL!].

        I believe that he will be one of two of the toughest GOP challengers, in 2016 (based upon what we know today).

        And as nexstep said above, Paul's primary intention is most likely to "neutralize" the Dem Party's appeal to women--IOW, "the war on women."

        THAT'S his real goal, IMO.  That, and creating 'Clinton fatigue,' well in advance of the race.

        I'm inclined to believe that the progressive community does more harm, than good, to dwell on this chapter of the Clinton's past.  (And I can hardly imagine that the Clintons care to see so much coverage of this topic.)

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


        hiddennplainsight--Relaunched 2014!

        by musiccitymollie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 10:20:36 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  And for older voters (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atana, Chas 981

      it's stuff they didn't care about in the ’90s.

      So who exactly does this appeal to other than radical teabaggers? So maybe it's not about Hillary at all but rather a ploy to improve his shot at the GOP nomination.

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

      by anastasia p on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:56:45 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  and for older voters (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atana, RadGal70

      we all remember the Clinton presidency as being the good old days and the good old times (even though they were far more complicated than that).

    •  Hmm… (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      greenbell, joesig

      If Bill Clinton is ancient history, then does that make Hillary "ancient" as well?  Is this part of the "Hillary is really old" campaign?

      It's certainly not "Oh no, don't elect a Clinton again, we might end up reliving the economy of the 1990s!"

    •  Nope. Even if they've got up-to-date texts, their (0+ / 0-)

      teachers rarely get to the more recent history.

      Putting the fun back in dysfunctional.

      by hawkseye on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 10:09:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bill Clinton's biggest accusers were cheaters (6+ / 0-)

    Why is Rand so obsessed with Clinton's imperfections 20 years later? It seems like at this point it would be prudent for some muckrakers to start sniffing around Rand Paul's personal life. He's got all the symptoms of Newt's Disorder. I wouldn't care at all about his proclivities except that he's such a hard-hearted, vicious little bundle of entitlement.

  •  Rand:limbo candidate/under 47 pct.. (0+ / 0-)

    decent wages don't eliminate jobs. Republicans eliminate jobs; and workers, and prospects, and then excuse it all and call for more austerity. there is no end to their ignorant, arrogant avarice. only political dinosaurs support their treachery.

    by renzo capetti on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 11:46:27 AM PST

  •  Wasn't it Stephen Colbert who said (4+ / 0-)

    the most dangerous man in America today is Bill Clinton 20 years ago? Someone should explain to Rand that Colbert's show is a parody.

    I'm no philosopher, I am no poet, I'm just trying to help you out - Gomez (from the song Hamoa Beach)

    by jhecht on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 12:30:39 PM PST

  •  Hey Rand, if you wanna bring up the 1990s... (5+ / 0-)

    care to explain how your dad was making a nice profit off those incredibly racist and homophobic newsletters?

    Seriously, would that some journalist ask this of him.

  •  How long before they drag Monica out (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rudewarrior, annieli, onionjim, VPofKarma

    for an appearance on Hannity?

  •  hey... he's a board certified (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rudewarrior, VPofKarma

    skidmark...

  •  Because Bill supports Hillary for Prez... (0+ / 0-)

    he is supposedly holding women back and being hypocritical in defending them? Srsly?

  •  Rand's "blue-dress-momnet" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    anastasia p, onionjim, VPofKarma

    is probably on its way.

    GOPers have a tendency to hypocrisy.  If he's harping on this, he's probably porking some intern somewhere.


    "Legalizing pot won't make more pot-smokers. It will just make fewer criminals. - Me

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:37:11 AM PST

  •  His quiver of attack barbs is weak (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    onionjim

    Rand is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Benghazi, IRS, Obamacare, Obama-tyrant are old news and thoroughly debunked.

  •  It's the same damn, dumb GOP, Koch Addicts, (0+ / 0-)

    Tea Baggers:  can't win on the issues so we will invent fake issues which amount to less than a small hill of beans like Bill Clinton and trying to dirty him up.  We know Bill Clinton and we love him so do your damnest to throw dirt and smoke screen issues of tax reform on the the super wealthy who do not pay their fair share and are making a case for taxes on them that are way beyond what is asked for now.  Then you will howl proper because your vast capital wealth will be handed over for the commonwealth of the many and not the whim of the arrogant entitled super-rich.

  •  Consensual office relationships (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VPofKarma

    This whole line of attack just reinforces the idea that Republicans don't really grok the whole "sexual harassment" thing.

  •  Wow if he really cared (0+ / 0-)

    about jobs and stuff like that, Rand could attack Clinton on passing NAFTA. But no, he gets right into the sexy part. Notice how these so called small government  types are so into the sexy parts? It fucking creepy.

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:58:53 AM PST

  •  Someone Has "Daddy Issues" nt (0+ / 0-)

    Men are so necessarily mad, that not to be mad would amount to another form of madness. -Pascal

    by bernardpliers on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:06:23 AM PST

  •  Rand Paul - Moran distraction Du Jour (0+ / 0-)

    Last week it was Daryl Issa and the "IRS Investigation".

    Next week it will be John McLAME whining about Why King
    Dictator Obama refuses to start a WAR with Russia.

    If the Wingnut Teabaggers had ANYTHING they could point
    to as a REAL accomplishment, they Would.

    But they Can't. There is NOTHING there.

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:20:56 AM PST

  •  A Reporter Needs to Ask him (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ishmaelbychoice, mmacdDE

    about John Vitter.  "Senator, do you think it's appropriate for a man who hires prostitutes to be in the Senate?"

    Let's see how serious he is about this moralizing bullshit.

    "Unrestricted immigration is a dangerous thing -- look at what happened to the Iroquois." Garrison Keillor

    by Spider Stumbled on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:25:12 AM PST

  •  Going Further Back, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeninSC

    Republicans cry about every Democrat, all the way to the sexual improprieties of Thomas Jefferson. It is much easier to attack those than policy results.

    Living in the nightmare reality of working in the oilfields of South and West Texas.

    by Incarnate on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:28:36 AM PST

  •  Rand Paul is a WANNABE, kneeling before Clinton. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla
  •  With Republicans the past is never past (0+ / 0-)

    Unless it is something reprehensible that they did.  When that occurs, they act like Russian "historians" under Stalin.  They simply rewrite what happened.

    There are a number of Republicans who have never gotten over Bill Clinton.  They hate Obama just as much if not more, but they also can't get over that Clinton was president.  Paul is hoping to stoke that old flame and use it as a rocket booster for his campaign in 2016.

    However, if I were Paul, I'd spend some more time trying to help McConnell beat Grimes this Fall.  If Grimes who is a big Clinton supporter wins, how is Paul going to insist that Hillary Clinton and her husband are so vile when he didn't do anything to stop one of their supporters on his home turf?  I think one of Paul's opponents would use that line against him.

    •  I think we're missin a big part of Rand's strategy (0+ / 0-)

      Bill Clinton is still popular here in Kentucky -- certainly more so than Mitch McConnell -- and he's shown that he's willing to come help Alison Lundergan Grimes campaign.

      Republicans are employing their usual strategy here: take your opponent's strength and turn it into a weakness. They're desperate to turn Bill Clinton from an asset to a liability for the Grimes campaign.

      We've seen this strategy time and time again from the Republicans. "Wow, Barack Obama sure is an inspiring speaker. Um, how about criticizing him for using a teleprompter?"

      •  I agree with you (0+ / 0-)

        Trying to make Bill Clinton toxic in KY is part of Rand's strategy, but I think the other part is the Republican fixation on past defeats and trying to obtain revenge for those defeats.  It is part and parcel of the character of conservative Republicans to fulminate on their losses for decades to come.  

        However, I think that criticizing Hillary through Bill is as far as Rand will go to help McConnell.  Rand is too lazy and not fond of McConnell to expend much time or energy to get McConnell reelected.  But Rand will get a pass for this lack of effort from the crazy right even though it might lead to a Clinton supporter like Grimes to become a senator.

  •  going after the clintons (0+ / 0-)

    for the 90's will work on the rw base but it will annoy the moderates and they are the ones needed to win in 2016.

  •  This tragic (0+ / 0-)

    obstetric misfire must've endured horrifying treatment at the hands of the football team in high school, coupled with unrelenting rejection by his female classmates.

    Here he is, all these years later, obsessed with Clinton's penis (which was 'befriended' by a privileged brat who'd bragged to friends that she was going to Washington to "earn my presidential kneepads").

    Yeah.. little Randy really knows how to pick his 'victims' and their 'oppressors'.

    A hopeful audience pleads, "Ohh, puh-leeez... let him somehow wrangle the GOP nomination!"

  •  Maybe it's about Kentucky in '14 and '16. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z

    Bill Clinton is actively campaigning for Grimes in Kentucky.  

    Bill Clinton won Kentucky in both presidential elections.

    The last time a Democrat won a Senate election in Kentucky: 1992, sharing the ballot with Clinton.

    Bill Clinton successfully campaigns for Grimes, and Grimes wins, guess who's on the campaign trail in 2016 for Rand Paul's opponent?

    Rand Paul needs to neutralize Bill Clinton in any way possible.  He could help the man lose the job he wants and the job he has in one fell swoop, while also delivering a state to the "D" column that has been a reliable GOP state in every election since 2000.

    •  What will make and Paul a contender (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lysis

      in 2016 is his fierce opposition to NSA over-reach. That's what drew the biggest cheers at the recent convention, and that's what will propel him through the primaries.

      Keep in mind that Tea Partiers are not the only ones who agree with him on this issue. If Obama wants to help Hillary, he'd better get busy on those reforms he keeps talking about.

    •  Sorry, I meant to reply to the diarist. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Aqua Buddha has a lot of brass (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gardnerhill

    lecturing anyone else about sexual harassment or mistreatment of women 20 years ago. The Clintons should throw that back in his face.

    Why do I have the feeling George W. Bush joined the Stonecutters, ate a mess of ribs, and used the Constitution as a napkin?

    by Matt Z on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 11:59:40 AM PST

  •  GOP accusing others of hypocrisy??? That's RICH! (0+ / 0-)
  •  Clinton not only had permission to play sex (0+ / 0-)

    games with Monica, he was invited by her.
    And she was the one who split on him and therefore caused their affair to go public, showing her to be a little .....will loose morally in an orgasmic way.

    So what ever shame, or negative impact that affair had on her she literally asked for it, and literally broadcast it.

    However, Monica has gotten on with her life, and might actually prefer to not be remembered for being sexually permissive and causing a POTUS to reach the brink of impeachment.

    Except Randie, without her having asked for or given permission to, has decided to drag her sexual immoralities out into the national press over and over and over and over.

    So who exactly is abusing Moinica more, Randie?  Bill who was involved in a consequential relationship, or Randie who is defaming Monica every time he defames Bill.

    Or is it just that Randie can't keep his mind of what Bill and Monica did together, that he probably will never have the opportunity to enjoy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site