We're comparing the GOP's systematic dismantling of women's control over their reproductive lives to Bill Clinton's consensual affair with Monica Lewinsky.
"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."
He also says that while it wasn't Hillary's fault, it's hard to separate one Clinton from another:
Paul said that Bill Clinton's infidelity shouldn't be used against Hillary Rodham Clinton if she seeks the Democratic nomination for president. "Now, it's not Hillary's fault," he said.
But of the Clintons, he added "sometimes it's hard to separate one from the other."
I'm not even going to begin to deconstruct the logical fallacies in the above -- false equivalence doesn't cover the juxtaposition of horse apples that came out of Rand Paul's mouth. I want to point out a couple of things that piss me off, though.
Must we rehash? Really?
Monica was clearly a consenting adult. There was no crime of coercion at play. Say what you want about indiscretion, but there was nothing hostile about this affair. It's been used as a toy for false equivalence since it was discovered, though. And how was it discovered? By false equivalence. As I recall, the excuse was that they were "establishing a history" of coercive behavior by Clinton in the Jennifer Flowers case. The Lewinsky story -- if she was a consenting adult (and it appears that she was enthusiastically so) -- does not establish a relevant trend.
It doesn't establish a trend unless all women are incapable of making sexual choices for themselves. In fact, Mr. Paul seems to think that women -- and in this case Hillary -- are defined by the sexual choices their husbands make.
Nobody could have Teasplained it better than Rand Paul did.
Hillary is a prop -- a proxy Bill Clinton. And that poor woman who stood by her man can't be separated from his legacy. Forget that she was a Senator. Forget that she was Secretary of State. Forget that she is anything but a function of whatever her husband wants to do with his private life.
Confidential to Rand -- ya'll vetted Hillary already. There isn't anything new.