Rand Paul demands Dems return money raised by ‘sexual predator’ Bill Clinton

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

I don't think many people know what Rand is pitted against. These 'people' don't fear anything but the projection of strength. It's like two alpha males that randomly run into each other in a jungle clearing. They are both going to do all in their power to visually intimidate each other before they finally battle. Rand is essentially warning the Clintons that he's not going to back down after they send their media minions after him.

...and it is in that arena, and very soon, that we will begin to see the "repercussions" of Rand's action. Also, it will be vindication for Rand, as the Clinton political machine always makes clear who it deems to be a threat.

 

[SilentBull]

Damn, I'm not sure I like this strategy. He's gonna piss off a lot of independents who have a positive opinion of Bill. Not sure what can be gained from bringing up such an old story.

 

[SilentBull]

Perhaps the tactic here is to show--and I mean really show--that he is willing to actually fight. And his real audience is big donors who, for once, see that Rand Paul is the real deal and perhaps the last chance for the republic?

Perhaps.

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Even when it was fresh, none of this did anything to seriously damage the people Clinton supported or endorsed.

I have no idea why anyone imagines that it will be any different now that it's 15+ years stale ...

You raise an interesting question, and I will propose an answer: social media, and the internet.

Back when this stuff was fresh, really the only one getting the word out was <shudder> Rush Limbaugh. Sure, there were the local drive time talkers, but was there even a FNC then? The DNC had a lock on all media in the 90s; print, tv, and radio. TIME and Newsweek were still "viable" news sources. Just because most of us here at RPF were internet-connected then, we don't represent the overwhelming majority of 'Murricans. Then, as now, most 'Murricans were more concerned with beer and NASCAR.

Now, their favorite beer and driver have a Facebook page, and a twitter.

If the political shit were to meet the fan, say, another Bill Clinton-esque scandal...oh, wait, I just remembered...Fast and Furious, Snowden, Solyndra, PRISM, and all the rest...

Nevermind. You're right. We're fucked. Sorry. I thought I could answer your question, but I obviously cannot. One would certainly think that in this more connected world, word would spread, but as to whether or not anyone would give a shit, which is really the point you raise...I don't know, Occum. I sure wish they would.

 

[jllundqu]

RPF is pretty mixed about the whole thing, it would seem. Good move, bad move, old story, bad for hillary, yada yada yada

Well one thing is for sure.... it's a gamble. Let's see if it pays off.

 

[jj-]

Another thing is that it makes conservatives say "Yeah! Go, Rand!". See here, for example: http://hotair.com/headlines/archive...money-raised-by-sexual-predator-bill-clinton/

 

[Dr.3D]

Chinagate

Even when it was fresh, none of this did anything to seriously damage the people Clinton supported or endorsed.

I have no idea why anyone imagines that it will be any different now that it's 15+ years stale ...

Wasn't that whole ordeal just a coverup for what was really important at the time?

As I recall, there was the Chinagate scandal that never saw the light of day. That was when China was funneling campaign contributions to the Clinton campaign in exchange for military secrets.


As you can see, they are pretty touchy about it.

The following video is long but explains a lot about it.

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

Damn, I'm not sure I like this strategy. He's gonna piss off a lot of independents who have a positive opinion of Bill. Not sure what can be gained from bringing up such an old story.

...denuding the truth about the Clintons? It hurts Hillary, too, as she didn't divorce the sonufabitch. One key to defeating Hillary in 2016 would be to remind the public of all that baggage that the Clintons brought to the White House, and coming up with a good counterargument against the whole, "...but the economy was sooo good in the 90s! Let's bring that back," crap. A method that doesn't require the public to learn even the slightest bit about the economy...perhaps an END THE FED plank??

 

[Occam's Banana]

One would certainly think that in this more connected world, word would spread, but as to whether or not anyone would give a shit, which is really the point you raise...I don't know, Occum. I sure wish they would.

I wish they would, too. But I just don't see it happening. At best, it will only serve as red meat for people who already hate the Clintons. I doubt it will carry much weight with independents and others who are indifferent to Slick Willie's philandery - in fact, it may even turn them off.

So would this (dubious) "upside" be worth the "downside?" I don't think so. If Rand deploys this "guilt by association" tactic, he opens himself wide to the tables being turned - by being hammered for his association with his "quixotic racist kook" of a father. Of course, his enemies may very well resort to that tack regardless of what Rand does. But if he plays the "guilt by association" card himself, he'll lose sympathy - not to mention the moral high ground - with the aforementioned independents and fence-sitters. I just don't see the "payoff" (if there even is any) being worth it ...

This all may just be a tactic in the run-up to the 2014 elections. If so, he might be able to get away with it. But it would be wise not to push it any further than that.

 

[jj-]

Rand will be attacked mercilessly regardless of what he says or doesn't.

 

[AuH20]

Rand will be attacked mercilessly regardless of what he says or doesn't.

Bingo.

 

[ObiRandKenobi]

say what you believe and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[NorfolkPCSolutions]

If Rand deploys this "guilt by association" tactic, he opens himself wide to the tables being turned - by being hammered for his association with his "quixotic racist kook" of a father. Of course, his enemies may very well resort to that tack regardless of what Rand does.

Rand will be attacked mercilessly regardless of what he says or doesn't.

I think jj's correct, Occam, and I think you agree with him, too. Rand will be dragged through the mud even more so than his father was, without regard as to what Rand actually says or does. I'm with Rand on this one; I believe it was smart to take a preemtive "swipe" at the Clintons.

Especially considering what we've learned from the success the Obama administration has found with Ailinsky-esque tactics...attack, attack, marginalize, and attack. Sun Tzu teaches us that we must learn the tactics of our enemies, and use them. Hell, that's how the Seahawks won the Super Bowl. OMAHAAA

 

[Occam's Banana]

Rand will be attacked mercilessly regardless of what he says or doesn't.

Bingo.

Probably. But what he does or doesn't say WILL determine whether he is able to keep the moral high ground.

And keeping that high ground could very well make all the difference with independents and swing voters, who will be absolutely critical to his chances. It's a lot harder to get sympathy for being the victim of others' smears when you are smearing others yourself ...

Using this tactic is a pointless waste. I want to hear about ending (or at least auditing) the Fed. I want to hear about a number of other things. I do NOT want to hear moldy, 15-year-old complaints about Bill C not being able to keep his dick in his pants - and I'm pretty damn sure that there are one HELL of a lot more voters out there who agree with me about that than there are voters who don't ...

 

[Dr.3D]

If I were Hillary, I would see this as Rand poised with a sharp needle, ready to pop the fragile balloon that has been obscuring the view of Chinagate for so long.

If I were her, I wouldn't even run, so as to let sleeping dog's lie.

 

[jj-]

I want to hear about ending (or at least auditing) the Fed.

You're definitely a good representative of 0,5% of the voting population.

 

[Travlyr]

If I were Hillary, I would see this as Rand poised with a sharp needle, ready to pop the fragile balloon that has been obscuring the view of Chinagate for so long.

If I were her, I wouldn't even run, so as to let sleeping dog's lie.

Spot on. Chinagate Scandal

Uploaded on Dec 8, 2011 - 591 views
In this 1999 presentation, William Norman Grigg provides a sweeping analysis of the Chinagate national security scandal, showing that President Clinton did more than just commit perjury.

If Hillary runs that video may go viral.

 

[Occam's Banana]

You're definitely a good representative of 0,5% of the voting population.

Maybe so - but so are you, if you think any significant number of people really give a shit about where Bill Clinton was putting his pecker 15 years ago. In fact, in that case I'd be willing to bet that you represent a much smaller percentage than 0.5% ...

 

[jj-]

So are you, if you think any significant number of people really give a shit about where Bill Clinton was putting his pecker 15 years ago.

In fact, in that case I'd be willing to bet that you represent a much smaller percentage than 0.5% ...

Time will tell. I think it will neutralize the "War on Women" attack.

 

[serenityrick]

I think conservatives/libertarians/republicans, etc are way too hung up on what the moderates or independents think. Progressives democrats are among the most vile, accusatory people in the political scene and yet we're constantly led to believe that if we ever speak out about something (namely, the truth) we're going to scare them right into the democrats' arms.. but apparently that line of thinking doesn't work in the reverse.

Good on Rand. I am sick of republicans always on the defensive when it comes to the "war on women". What a load of horse shit