If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Why does Rand Paul keep attacking Bill Clinton? Because he's an asshole, that's why   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 417
    More: Obvious, Rand Paul, Bill Clinton, Kentucky Senators, C-SPAN  
•       •       •

2857 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Feb 2014 at 9:11 AM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



417 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-08 09:59:46 AM
Anyone notice that republicans Libertarians go off on a rant so easily?  This is why I am no longer a Libertarian, the bat shiat crazies have taken over it too.
 
2014-02-08 10:02:15 AM

Vodka Zombie: Whoa... Vince Foster'd in the boobies?!?


Sounds kinky.
 
2014-02-08 10:05:27 AM

Bigdogdaddy: Anyone notice that republicans Libertarians go off on a rant so easily?  This is why I am no longer a Libertarian, the bat shiat crazies have taken over it too.


I used to get their newsletters in the 90s.  The craziness is not really new.
 
2014-02-08 10:05:30 AM
He's attacking the Democratic Party for talking up the, "We're for women" line while continually protecting and defending that POS who's the exact opposite of what they supposedly stand for.
 
2014-02-08 10:05:33 AM

Bigdogdaddy: Anyone notice that republicans Libertarians go off on a rant so easily?  This is why I am no longer a Libertarian, the bat shiat crazies have taken over it too.


I've found that Libertarians get terribly upset when you point out that they not enough of a man to own up to being Republicans.
 
2014-02-08 10:11:07 AM
The irony here is that according to libertarian values Bill Clinton did nothing wrong in his sexual indiscretions. This was a free exchange of services between people, the women he was with got a story they could sell, while Bill received sexual pleasure. All parties willfully agreed to this fair exchange, and leverage did not exist until government regulations got in the way and attempted to impeach him for simply utilizing the free hands of the market.
 
2014-02-08 10:11:09 AM

jjorsett: He's attacking the Democratic Party for talking up the, "We're for women" line while continually protecting and defending that POS who's the exact opposite of what they supposedly stand for.


Must have missed the part about where an extramarital affair was worse than treating women like possessions, telling them what they can or can't do with their own bodies, are sluts for wanting birth control, ect, ect.

Ones failure as a husband, ones failure as a man.
 
2014-02-08 10:12:04 AM

jjorsett: He's attacking the Democratic Party for talking up the, "We're for women" line while continually protecting and defending that POS who's the exact opposite of what they supposedly stand for.


which POS would that be?
 
2014-02-08 10:14:22 AM

pjbreeze: Rand Paul keeps attacking Bill Clinton because he's jealous of him.  The wank couldn't get a hummer at work if he tried.


Let's not be hyperbolic.  I'm sure Rand Paul is wealthy enough to afford a rent boy from any number of fine establishments.  And you know that (unlike some other Republicans I could mention) he'd buy American and help our economy.
 
2014-02-08 10:14:30 AM

parasol: jjorsett: He's attacking the Democratic Party for talking up the, "We're for women" line while continually protecting and defending that POS who's the exact opposite of what they supposedly stand for.

which POS would that be?



Forget it. He's just upset that the whole impeachment fiasco backfired on the Pubs, driving three of the hardest-charging witch hunters out of the political game entirely.
 
2014-02-08 10:16:12 AM
This man is screaming so hard he has something in his closet that he is afraid will get out.  I have seen it a lot.  Nobody is without some skeleton they want to keep buried, nobody.  He may have several.
 
2014-02-08 10:16:54 AM

fusillade762: Because he's terrified of Hillary Clinton running for president. Next question.


And we're done here...
 
2014-02-08 10:17:49 AM

Bigdogdaddy: This man is screaming so hard he has something in his closet that he is afraid will get out.  I have seen it a lot.  Nobody is without some skeleton they want to keep buried, nobody.  He may have several.


That's what happened to Hyde, Barr, and Gingrich.

Same reason eyebrows are raised when Santorum continuously rants about gays.
 
2014-02-08 10:22:45 AM

log_jammin: it is 100% fact that he lied about a question that he never should have been asked in the first place, during a political witch hunt orchestrated by the GOP to find something, anything, they could pin on Clinton. all because they couldn't stand the fact that they lost an election to him, twice.


Plus, it was some degree of payback for the investigation/hearings into St. Ronnie's Iran-Contra Treason.
 
2014-02-08 10:26:11 AM
I remember the Clinton administration very well.  Unemployment in my area was somewhere around 2%, taxes weren't as low as they are now, but they were reasonable, there was no deficit, the military was at home (except for some flare-ups in Eastern Europe), my college tuition for an entire year was the same as for only 3 credits today, and towards the end cell phones and internet were both becoming widely available and affordable.  The Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary were fiscally conservative/socially liberal, and most of the fringe on the left and the right were locked up tight in the basement where they belong.  I remember a Young Republicans meeting where we gleefully popped in a VHS tape and giggled and guffawed as Clinton squirmed his way through the definition of "is".  And most of all, I remember thinking, if the worst thing going on right now is that the President was getting blown by an intern who obviously enjoyed blowing him, then the country was doing a-okay. And I really wish we could have it all back, again, even if it meant that the President had an entire staff of young, hot interns whose entire job description was "Blow the President."  If we could get the economy back to where it was, I wouldn't even care if most of those interns were dudes.
 
2014-02-08 10:28:03 AM
Clinton was an asshole who cheated on his wife and lied to the courts and the country about it. He's also the greatest president in my lifetime, and if I could constitutionally vote for him for a third term, I would. These are not mutually exclusive.
 
2014-02-08 10:28:55 AM

RyogaM: dumbobruni: Newt Gingrich

Ran for the Republican nominee last election cycle, coming very close to winning, and not a peep regarding his infidelities was heard. Amazing how that happens, huh?


Hey, Newt just loves marriage so much that he just couldn't settle for one or two.
 
2014-02-08 10:32:10 AM

NeverDrunk23: RyogaM: dumbobruni: Newt Gingrich

Ran for the Republican nominee last election cycle, coming very close to winning, and not a peep regarding his infidelities was heard. Amazing how that happens, huh?

Hey, Newt just loves marriage so much that he just couldn't settle for one or two.



Don't make her angry, you won't like it when she's angry

media.salon.com
 
2014-02-08 10:35:10 AM
This thread reminds me of the time I was President of the United States and did everything perfectly the way everybody wanted.
 
2014-02-08 10:40:08 AM

dangelder: This thread reminds me of the time I was President of the United States and did everything perfectly the way everybody wanted.


sure - and then they all pointed out how the office had aged you and wondered if you were using hair-color for men or not.......
 
2014-02-08 10:41:59 AM
More like "Spaz31". amirite??


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!! ! !!1111111ELEVENTY
 
2014-02-08 10:45:29 AM
Occupational therapy?
 
2014-02-08 10:47:40 AM

HooskerDoo: More like "Spaz31". amirite??


I was thinking Spud31.
 
2014-02-08 10:52:25 AM

fusillade762: Because he's terrified of Hillary Clinton running for president. Next question.


Exactly. He's laying the foundation for the guilt-by-association mentality. He knows damn well that every time he says "Bill Clinton did a HORRIBLE THING, but you shouldn't blame Hillary", all his base hears is "...HORRIBLE THING...blame Hillary!"

There's quite likely also a faint hope mixed in there that if he continues with this line of attack he can somehow trick someone in the Democratic Party into saying something that can be spun as slut shaming Lewinsky, thereby "proving" that the Dems are the real misogynists.
 
2014-02-08 10:52:30 AM

Trailltrader: Rand Paul keeps attacking Bill Clinton because Bill Clinton is a lying pile of poo.  Where do you want to start?  Vince Fosters suicide with the gun found in his right hand and he's left handed?  All the shady land deals made in Arkansas?  Benghazi?  The number of women Bill Clinton has had sex with that he was dishonest with- and this guy had the authority to start WW III?

Or how about the double standards where that REPUBLICAN senator in Oregon was forced to resign, but when Bill Clinton sexually harassed a young girl all you heard was the sound of,,,,,,silence,,,,,,,from the National Organization of Women?  Where was the outrage?  ***sounds of crickets, tumbleweeds and wind***

Chelsea Clinton's father is actually Janet Reno- you can tell just by looking at her, and I'd be a 6 pack of beer (I'll pay you back, Drew) that DNA would show the truth.

Rand Paul is a hero for doing what he can to keep that quasi-repetillian female from ruining the country.


Definitely 9/10.   Almost got me.
 
2014-02-08 10:54:27 AM

pjbreeze: Rand Paul keeps attacking Bill Clinton because he's jealous of him.  The wank couldn't get a hummer at work if he tried.


I'm sure there are many of his young staffers eager to hum him. Of course 99.9% are male, NTTAWWT.
 
2014-02-08 10:56:17 AM
All right.  All right!  Fine Rand, I'll do what you want, if you'll just shut up and get back to actually doing you job.  You've won - in 2016 I won't for for Barack Obama or Bill Clinton.  Are you happy now?
 
2014-02-08 10:58:17 AM
He is attacking Bill Clinton because someone on the right told him how stupid and counter-productive it would be trying to damage Hillary Clinton by painting her in the most sympathetic light possible, but the man is defined by his Contrarianism so he must call for full steam ahead when the iceberg is spotted.

The Pauls are so incredibly bad for the republican party I truly wonder if it goes further than sheer ignorance but that they are in reality democratic plants.
 
2014-02-08 11:03:25 AM

Trailltrader: Rand Paul keeps attacking Bill Clinton because Bill Clinton is a lying pile of poo.  Where do you want to start?  Vince Fosters suicide with the gun found in his right hand and he's left handed?  All the shady land deals made in Arkansas?  Benghazi?  The number of women Bill Clinton has had sex with that he was dishonest with- and this guy had the authority to start WW III?

Or how about the double standards where that REPUBLICAN senator in Oregon was forced to resign, but when Bill Clinton sexually harassed a young girl all you heard was the sound of,,,,,,silence,,,,,,,from the National Organization of Women?  Where was the outrage?  ***sounds of crickets, tumbleweeds and wind***

Chelsea Clinton's father is actually Janet Reno- you can tell just by looking at her, and I'd be a 6 pack of beer (I'll pay you back, Drew) that DNA would show the truth.

Rand Paul is a hero for doing what he can to keep that quasi-repetillian female from ruining the country.


Yeah, they said nothing....well except:
http://www.commondreams.org/pressreleases/Aug98/081798a.htm
 
2014-02-08 11:07:00 AM
Because Bill Clinton was an asshole, Hillary Clinton his enabler, and she wants to be president and so does Rand Paul.
 
2014-02-08 11:14:08 AM
Same submitard as the "boarder" headline, right?

/Grammar, how werk it.
 
2014-02-08 11:23:01 AM

log_jammin: Spad31: Let's not pretend his troubles weren't about "getting a hummer in the oval Office", but rather, committing perjury to a Grand Jury when testifying about it. A fact conveniently left out in discussions around here.

So, yes, Clinton IS an ass hole.

oh I never leave it out.

it is 100% fact that he lied about a question that he never should have been asked in the first place, during a political witch hunt orchestrated by the GOP to find something, anything, they could pin on Clinton. all because they couldn't stand the fact that they lost an election to him, twice.


And let's remember that lying about getting a beej from a chunky broad that affected nothing whatsoever is totally worse than lying about a foreign nation's non-existant WMDs and causing the complete was of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars.  From now until the day I day, Republicans will *NEVER* have any integrity or authority about any topic higher than farking chickens.  Absolute filthy hypocrite scum that deserve to be lodged in the folds of Satan's flaming rectum for three eternities.
 
2014-02-08 11:24:47 AM
 
2014-02-08 11:34:39 AM

bindlestiff2600: /at least 24% of the population thinks so anyway


Ahem. I think you meant 27%
 
2014-02-08 11:35:44 AM
Yeah, by all means, Republicans.  Turn your guns on the guy whose presidential term ended more than 14 years ago.  Way to stay current and relevant!
 
2014-02-08 11:57:12 AM

jjorsett: He's attacking the Democratic Party for talking up the, "We're for women" line while continually protecting and defending that POS who's the exact opposite of what they supposedly stand for.


Hey look, another person who has completely forgotten Monica's "presidential knee pads" comments.


I really wish people would stop acting like Monica didn't know exactly what she was doing.
 
2014-02-08 12:01:50 PM

oryx: Because Bill Clinton was an asshole, Hillary Clinton his enabler, and she wants to be president and so does Rand Paul.


Rand Paul wants Hillary to be president?
 
2014-02-08 12:08:46 PM
Who Cares?

Does he really think attacking a candidates spouse is a good idea?

I dont see any way THAT could backfire on him...
 
2014-02-08 12:16:34 PM

Heraclitus: Who Cares?

Does he really think attacking a candidates spouse is a good idea?

I dont see any way THAT could backfire on him...


At some point, someone will respond with "You'd (figuratively) hit a girl?"
 
2014-02-08 12:17:39 PM
Of course some of us should love the Clintons! Afterall, Bill signed NAFTA and screwed over American manufacturing forever, and if they didn't do that, there would be a whole lot less coffee slingers to condescend to us while we get our brews in a desperate attempt to communicate that somehow they're not  failures.
 
2014-02-08 12:22:38 PM

walktoanarcade: Of course some of us should love the Clintons! Afterall, Bill signed NAFTA and screwed over American manufacturing forever, and if they didn't do that, there would be a whole lot less coffee slingers to condescend to us while we get our brews in a desperate attempt to communicate that somehow they're not  failures.


NAFTA didn't cause manufacturing to move to China and India.
 
2014-02-08 12:24:42 PM

cameroncrazy1984: walktoanarcade: Of course some of us should love the Clintons! Afterall, Bill signed NAFTA and screwed over American manufacturing forever, and if they didn't do that, there would be a whole lot less coffee slingers to condescend to us while we get our brews in a desperate attempt to communicate that somehow they're not  failures.

NAFTA didn't cause manufacturing to move to China and India.


You're funny. OH YOU AGAIN! :) I love you! You make me laugh a lot and I appreciate it.

Tell us how old you were when NAFTA passed and sent the jobs to exactly where you think they didn't go?
 
2014-02-08 12:29:34 PM
Because Bill Clinton was America's first black president.

Next question.
 
2014-02-08 12:33:47 PM

walktoanarcade: Tell us how old you were when NAFTA passed and sent the jobs to exactly where you think they didn't go?


I have to be over the age of, what, 20 in order to comment on events that happened in the past? I certainly hope you never comment on the Civil War, then.
 
2014-02-08 12:34:48 PM
Funny thing - I never much liked Bill Clinton. I thought he was the worst sort of opportunist, willing to sell out any principle in the service of his desire for power. Welfare "reform," the Clipper Chip, export restrictions on crypto, DADT - the list went on and on. Personally, I never voted for the man. I voted straight third-party any time Clinton was on the ballot. Couldn't stand the SOB.  Thanks to the teabaggers and the "llbertarians" and the Fark independents, though, I find myself growing fonder of Bill Clinton every day. Congratulations, derpers - mission accomplished!

Oh, and here's a protip for some of you - if you're going to go throwing around the word "perjury," learn its legal definition first. Even if Clinton did lie under oath (that depends on what the definition of "lie" is), that alone is insufficient to make out a prima facie case of perjury.
 
2014-02-08 12:41:09 PM
Funny thread.
 
2014-02-08 12:42:26 PM

cameroncrazy1984: walktoanarcade: Tell us how old you were when NAFTA passed and sent the jobs to exactly where you think they didn't go?

I have to be over the age of, what, 20 in order to comment on events that happened in the past? I certainly hope you never comment on the Civil War, then.


What I like about you (for real, and the laughs are real too) is that you calmly explain where you're coming from.  I am sure you will go far if you keep that up, and I do mean that.

OK, sorry to be an bastard to you, but c'mon...I was there. You're getting hung up on semantics, but that's the fault of politicians, NAFTA did indeed have more to do with just North America.

They play word games inside laws so that you and I misunderstand each other and never unite against the common enemy-corporations writing our nation's laws for their own benefit.

It's about spreading the pain around. NAFTA wasn't enough, so we now have CAFTA too. And others I cannot remember at the moment.

Like how "they" (I mean left and right politicians) use the word "freedom", yet they seem not to grasp its meaning.


You have been duly warned as to the Clinton's shenanigans, and I promise you they are on par with the Bush's; I play no favorites, man.
 
2014-02-08 12:49:22 PM

walktoanarcade: OK, sorry to be an bastard to you, but c'mon...I was there. You're getting hung up on semantics, but that's the fault of politicians, NAFTA did indeed have more to do with just North America.


Oh no, you were there?! Wow! That's totally proof of your claim! I will totally bow to your authority beause iyou were there, man.
 
2014-02-08 12:52:54 PM

cameroncrazy1984: walktoanarcade: OK, sorry to be an bastard to you, but c'mon...I was there. You're getting hung up on semantics, but that's the fault of politicians, NAFTA did indeed have more to do with just North America.

Oh no, you were there?! Wow! That's totally proof of your claim! I will totally bow to your authority beause iyou were there, man.


Now you're sounding like a young fool again. You must like me in crusty-bastard-mode.

OK.   While you jest, yes, it is something like that.
 
2014-02-08 12:55:14 PM

BMulligan: Funny thing - I never much liked Bill Clinton. I thought he was the worst sort of opportunist, willing to sell out any principle in the service of his desire for power. Welfare "reform," the Clipper Chip, export restrictions on crypto, DADT - the list went on and on. Personally, I never voted for the man. I voted straight third-party any time Clinton was on the ballot. Couldn't stand the SOB.  Thanks to the teabaggers and the "llbertarians" and the Fark independents, though, I find myself growing fonder of Bill Clinton every day. Congratulations, derpers - mission accomplished!

Oh, and here's a protip for some of you - if you're going to go throwing around the word "perjury," learn its legal definition first. Even if Clinton did lie under oath (that depends on what the definition of "lie" is), that alone is insufficient to make out a prima facie case of perjury.


Protip, since you're referring to me:

per·ju·ry
[pur-juh-ree]
noun, plural per·ju·ries. Law.
The willful giving of false testimony under oath or affirmation, before a competent tribunal, upon a point material to a legal inquiry.

What's your farking question?

What does "lie" mean? Really?

Every child over 5 knows what "lie" means.

And "is".

*facepalm*
 
Displayed 50 of 417 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report