WASHINGTON, D.C., February 7, 2014 ( – Gearing up for a likely 2016 presidential run, Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul has doubled down after making waves for calling former president Bill Clinton a “sexual predator.”

Over the last two weeks, Paul has called out Clinton for “having sex with an intern at the office.” The comments first aired in a “Meet the Press” interview, and have been repeated on Newsmax TV and C-Span's “Newsmaker” program.

In the Newsmax and C-Span interviews, Paul called on Democrats who claim there is a GOP “war on women” to return funds Clinton has either donated to, or raised for, them. “If they want to be credible in saying they defend women's rights in the workplace, they really need to disown and really return any contributions that Bill Clinton's either raising for people or giving to people,” the senator said.


A number of conservative women told LifeSiteNews they agreed with Paul's critiques.

Washington Examiner commentary writer Ashe Schow said, “Democrats claim to be pro-woman and insist Republicans are waging a 'war on women.' Yet time and again the Democratic Party hails Bill Clinton as a hero. How can they be against a so-called war on women when they take cues from a notorious womanizer? It's indefensible.”

Blogger and activist Gabriella Hoffman was similarly critical. “The people perpetuating the notion of a 'war on women' should hold their own, particularly Bill Clinton, accountable. Excusing sexual harassment is hypocritical for the so-called pro-woman party.”

Furthermore, according to Hoffman, the left is “coercing women into cradle-to-grave government,” which she says “is more problematic than any imaginary war on women.”

Erica Szalkowski, a graduate of Mount St. Mary's University's MBA program who has written about the dangers of pornography, said the “acceptance of Mr. Clinton” by Democrats “isn't surprising.”

“The Democratic Party is generally silent on the dangers that pornography, abortion, and similar issues pose to the welfare of women,” according to Szalkowski. “If Democrats were truly concerned about women's issues, they would focus less on legislation and more on individual integrity. Monica Lewinsky enjoyed many legal freedoms, but she was, in a way, imprisoned by Mr. Clinton's behavior. Stepping away from Mr. Clinton would be a good way for Democrats to prove that they care about women's wellbeing, not just women's rights.”

Self-described “libertarian feminist” and film producer Amanda Winkler told LifeSiteNews she “[is] not convinced the party should have to return money” raised by Clinton, but “Democrats are definitely hypocritical when it comes to the 'war on women,' which they largely sensationalized.”

Democrats are standing by the former president. In response to Paul's comments, some of which have tied former secretary of state and potential 2016 presidential opponent Hillary Clinton to her husband, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-MO, told MSNBC, “I think most women understand that they should not be held accountable for the behaviors of their husbands. And you know, frankly, it was a long time ago, and our country did very well under the leadership of Bill Clinton.”

In 2006, McCaskill famously said Clinton has “been a great leader but I don't want my daughter near him.” Clinton was raising money for McCaskill at the time, during a re-election campaign for the senator.

The money raised by Clinton is a substantial benefit to Democrats as a whole and the Clintons personally. One estimate shows between their respective campaigns and non-profits, the Clintons have raised over two billion dollars since 1992. Bill Clinton personally took in over $75 million in speaking income from 2001 through the end of 2010. In December, the former president helped raise over $700,000 for Jersey City Mayor Steven Fullop, a record amount for a mayor in New Jersey.

This is not the first time Paul has criticized Clinton. In 2010, he said he was “not sure I would trust a guy who had had sexual relations with an intern.” The “Meet the Press” statement came after Paul's wife, Kelley, criticized Clinton's behavior in a 2013 Vogue profile, and the senator was asked about her comments.


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.