Is Bill Clinton’s History of Sexual Abuse of Women Relevant to Hillary’s Campaign?
- J.C. Guest
- Jan 8, 2016
- 2 min read
Bill Clinton recently hit the campaign trail in support of Democratic hopeful, and wife, Hillary Clinton. Republican frontrunner Donald Trump immediately targeted Bill’s past infidelity in response to Hillary’s attacks on the Donald as being sexist.
And for several days mainstream media, thinly veiling their desire to see him as the nation’s first First Gentleman, debated whether or not Bill Clinton’s past should be relevant in this year’s presidential campaign. In a word: Yes.
Hillary made it relevant when she went on record in support of rape and sexually abused women. In her own words: “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported.”
Is this the same woman who belittled stay at home mothers for “baking cookies” in the 1990s but decided to “Stand by my man” in the aftermath of the Monica Lewinsky scandal? Is she to be revered for working through her husband’s sexual addiction (assuming that’s what they did), questioned for her political motives in staying with him, or reviled for setting back the women’s rights movement?
Juanita Broaddrick (rape), Kathleen Willey (sexual assault), and Paula Jones (sexual harassment) are Bill’s most well-known victims; but his history of sexually assaulting women goes back thirty years.
According to more than one of Bill’s alleged victims, Hillary is Bill’s enabler and chief protector: the Clintons “systematically abuse women and others — sexually, physically, and psychologically — in their scramble for power and wealth,” says [“The Clintons’ War On Women”] press release.
Political consultant, lobbyist and strategist Roger Stone says, “Hillary Clinton’s core agenda is a quest for power, even while she presents herself as champion of women’s issues. If Hillary intends to build her campaign around an appeal to women, her campaign is built on quicksand,” Stone adds. “But Hillary is a life-time abuser of women and her advocacy on women issues rings hollow.”
Americans were ready to impeach Jimmy Carter for admitting he’d lusted for women in his heart. Bill Clinton had oral sex with an intern, lied about it, finally admitted to it, and Americans turned their nescient heads.
The difference wasn’t twenty years — an older, wiser, more accepting America. The difference was that, in 1979, Iran held Americans hostage, unemployment was high, and the price of a gallon of gas was nearing a dollar. Americans wanted Carter out of office.
In 1998, the government had a balanced budget, the nation was at peace, and unemployment was low, so Americans said, “That’s just Bill being Bill.” “That’s between him and Hillary.” “Leave him alone, he’s doing a fine job running the country.”
What do you think? Is Hillary Clinton’s campaign claim that the victims of sexual assault should be believed a lie? Or are women who claim to have been raped less important than power?
Photo Courtesy: www.educationalviews.org
Comments