http://www.salon.com/2014/01/27/dim_and_divisive_rand_paul_self_destructs_again/
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paulis what you get when traditional and corrosive American nepotism meets the 21st century GOP echo chamber: a pampered princeling whose dumb ideas have never been challenged by reality.If you missed Ron Paul’s son on “Meet the Press” Sunday, go watch it. I am honestly not sure what was most ridiculous or offensive: attacking Hillary Clinton for something her husband did, or declaring that “if there was a war on women, I think they won.”Leave that question aside for a moment. Paul’s performance was most interesting for the window it gave us into his character, as the indulged but slightly dim scion of an eccentric political family whose every utterance, all his life, has been treated as important.At some points in interviews with the freshman senator, including this one, you can see the wheels turning in his head, maybe a little slowly, as he winds up to deliver what he thinks is a political hum-dinger.It’s the oily crazy of Rand Paul being adorably Rand Paul: saying what he thinks is brave and leader-like, but that thing turns out to be simply nutty.Then the media collectively scrunches its forehead and tries to decide if he’s brave or nutty.So it was with “Meet the Press” Sunday. Paul obviously set out to say cleverly what Mike Huckabee said stupidly: Republicans aren’t going to take the Democrats’ “war on women” rhetoric lying down, especially if they’re facing a Democratic woman running for president in 2016.You can almost see behind his eyes as he thinks to himself: “I’ve got it: I’ll throw a haymaker at Hillary Clinton for something stupid her husband did almost 20 years ago!”
there is nothing clever about trying to switch the topic in mid stream of referring to something totally irrelevant to the subject and as for Clinton taking advantage she took advantage of a situation with the hopes of stepping up the ladder. chalk this up to a republican trying so hard to hurt Progressives with no ammunition, retreat to the past and bring up something he keeps pushing erroneously to hurt Hilary who would probably get the sympathy vote from those he tries to poison.
Oh, and the man who opposed the Lilly Ledbetter pay equity act had the stones to frame his critique of President Clinton’s long-ago relationship with Monica Lewinsky as support for workplace laws supporting women.One of the workplace laws and rules that I think are good is that bosses shouldn’t prey on young interns in their office. And I think really the media seems to be — have given President Clinton a pass on this. He took advantage of a girl that was 20 years old and an intern in his office.There is no excuse for that. And that is predatory behavior, and it should — it should be something — we shouldn’t want to associate with people who would take advantage of a young girl in his office… I mean, really — and then they have the gall to stand up and say Republicans are having a war on women? So yes, I think it’s a factor.
well of course that proves his whole idea that it will hurt Hilary if republicans bring it up, another under estimation, she stood by him and showed herself as "THE GOOD WIFE", they worked it out it's over, but if they bring it up and t goes sour they can always rant on "BENGAHZI, BENGAHZI. always remember Pauls war on one women,
