General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRand Paul's Laughable Lewinsky Obsession
Rand Paul wants to party like its 1998. The big question is why.
Americas Ophthalmologist, who somehow sees himself as a credible presidential candidate, seems to think he can undercut Hillary Clinton by resurrecting her husbands last-century sins. Six times in recent weeks, including a recent Sunday on C-Span, the libertarian Kentucky senator has assailed Bill for his trysts with Monica Lewinsky, accused Hillary of guilt-by-marital-association, and suggested that Bill was waging a war on women.
He really wants to resurrect a scandal that most Americans long ago consigned to historys dustbin? He really thinks he can make hay by recycling 98? Whats next for him, a nostalgia tour with Celine Dion?
Apparently Paul has no clue that after the dust settled in 98, after a year of GOP-concocted constitutional crisis, after the impeachment show, President Clinton posted a 66 percent approval rating in the Gallup poll. Perhaps he can be excused for not knowing the history, because then he was an eye doc minoring in fringe-politics pamphleteering.
Paul launched his first salvo 15 days ago, when he told Meet the Press, Bosses shouldnt prey on young interns in their office. And I think really the media seems to have given President Clinton a pass on this ... We shouldnt want to associate with people who would take advantage of a young girl in his office ... I mean, really and then (Democrats) have the gall to stand up and say Republicans are having a war on women? Granted, Bills behavior was not Hillarys fault, but sometimes its hard to separate one from the other.
MORE...
http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20140216/NEWS01/302160018/Rand-Paul-s-laughable-Lewinsky-obsession?nclick_check=1
Gothmog
(145,489 posts)Rand Paul is too stupid to know that he is a joke
SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)SDjack
(1,448 posts)Paul is living vicariously through Clinton. Paul, you are a dirty old man.
IggleDoer
(1,186 posts)If Bill should ever decide to run for President again, and win, Aqua Buddha should try to impeach him.
FSogol
(45,524 posts)Tic, tic, tic, ....
11 Bravo
(23,926 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)ByJames Wolcott
11:18 AM, April 15 2005
This morning on Air America, Jerry Springer ran the tape of Rush Limbaugh's bizarre outburst against Al Gore's upcoming cable news venture for "yoof" (as they say in British papers), mocking its mission to represent the viewpoints of young people by claiming that the only thing kids cared about today was blowjobs, which were rampant in the nation's high schools today thanks to Al's good friend Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Maybe it should be called "The BJ Network," Rush railed, since blowjobs were now the only thing occupying the empty minds of MTV audiences--all those teenage Monicas out there hooking up with teenage Bubbas.
Limbaugh seemed to be implying at the top of his voice that blowjobs are an integral part of the liberal agenda, an argument which he may want to rethink. The popularity of blowjobs is difficult to metric but undeniable; they cause little harm and zero unwanted pregnancies. If the plentitude of blowjobs is part of the Clinton legacy, millions owe the former president a debt of gratitude and an annual pilgrimage to the Clinton Memorial Library in Arkansas.
Yet, like so many products and pleasures, blowjobs aren't evenly distributed in society. It's a renewable natural resource not everyone gets to enjoy, and I was struck by the vehement tone of Limbaugh's tirade. He sounded bitter. I've seen this rancor inflict so many middle-aged men. Reading about all the oral sex young people are presumably having, they feel envious and resentful. No classmates were treating them to afterschool blowjobs in high school! Nor were hot teachers like that one in Florida seducing them in parked cars. It doesn't seem fair. It doesn't seem just. We're living in the Golden Age of BJs, and men in Rush's recumbent position feel barred from Eden, forced to imagine the action from their recliners as they stare sullenly at their plasma screens. It's probably how many adults felt during the free-love Sixties as the lid came off the nation's libido.
Clearly no small part of the undying enmity conservatives like Rush (and many liberal men too) have for Bill Clinton was that he was their age (maybe even older) and yet was able to participate in the exciting blowjob youth movement courtesy of Monica Lewinsky's bright red mouth. How this made them seethe, and the fact they still mention it at the slightest farfetched opportunity shows that they seethe still.
Snip--more hilarity at link..
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott/2005/04/on-some-sad-lap
wandy
(3,539 posts)Things like this cause a gut (or somewhat lower) emotional response in some.
It could have been Bill Clinton's great grand father, it would still produce the desired effect.
Do we hate Bill and all around him because he got something god says he shouldn't have got?
Job done!
Do we hate Bill and all around him because he got something We didn't get?
Job done!
If ya got nothing to offer, sell hate.
The GOP game plan.
They pay people to to find what evokes an emotional response. They pay people to exploit these things you know.
Ever wonder why Benghazi is such a hit?
How did Benghazi become a 'golder oldie' when other scandals have gone to the dustbin?
Marketing research. Corporate America does it all the time.
After all. Where's the beef? When it rains it pours.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Shrike47
(6,913 posts)Blaming Bill's behavior on Hillary is more war on women, although he's too dumb to see it. To me as a wife, it's grossly offensive. First my souse offends me and then you blame ME for what he did. F you.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)domestic terrorist rand paul thinks people do not recognize it is the same strategy on the Clintons, and the Obamas. We are not going to let these racist wingnuts overthrow our gov't no matter how imperfect!