Sen. Rand Paul: Bill Clinton's infidelity 'war on women'
By The Associated Press
Published: Sunday, Jan. 26, 2014, 8:45 p.m.
WASHINGTON — Democrats should remember President Bill Clinton's sexual affair with a White House intern before turning their criticism to Republicans' attitudes toward women, Sen. Rand Paul said on Sunday.
“He took advantage of a girl that was 20 years old and an intern in his office,” said Paul, R-Ky. “There is no excuse for that — and that is predatory behavior.”
Paul's invocation of intern Monica Lewinsky, who was 22 at the time of her first liaison with Clinton in November 1995, occurs as Democrats have redoubled efforts to paint the GOP as opposed to women on issues such as contraception, abortion rights and equal pay.
The GOP's efforts appeared to some to stumble last week when former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee linked women's “libido” and government-sponsored birth control while addressing the Republican National Committee. Although Huckabee said Democrats are patronizing to women, Democrats quickly seized on the phrasing to underscore their campaign.
Clinton's lies about his sexual relationship were among the reasons the House voted to impeach him in 1998. The Senate acquitted him.
“Someone who takes advantage of a young girl in their office? I mean, really. And then they have the gall to stand up and say: ‘Republicans are having a war on women'?” Paul told NBC's “Meet the Press.”
Paul said the infidelity should not be used against Hillary Rodham Clinton if she seeks the Democratic nomination for president.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Snowden captivates tech crowd
- D.C. mayor denies he knew of illegal ‘shadow campaign’
- Lanza’s father says he wishes son was never born
- Fannie, Freddie profits surprise
- Depth, distance reduce impact of quake off California’s northern coast
- Elephants attuned to human voices
- NRA seeks to block gun magazine ban
- Powerful quake shakes N. California; no injuries
- Changes to Medicare drug coverage scrapped
- General’s court-martial is thrown into jeopardy
- Senate OKs bill scrapping ‘good soldier defense’