On December 30, 2015, I wrote:
Bill Cosby's arrest for rape is a political nightmare for Hillary Clinton. Today, Mark Steyn asked; "Why is Bill Cosby finished while Bill Clinton is beloved?"
I'll be blunt. This is what many black people and young college students are asking: "Why was Bill Cosby arrested and Bill Clinton not?"
The world has changed in 20 years and Hillary Clinton has not. Her upper class upbringing that sex is dirty and a wife has to put up with a husband's philandering stands in stark contrast with today's assumption that when two people get drunk and have sex, the man is raping the woman.
The Bill Cosby-Bill Clinton is Hillary's own doing. She said she was going to bring in Bill Clinton. On paper, that makes sense, except when one considers that a core market for her is under 30 and most of them know little to nothing about his sexual predation. History marks it down as "he lied about getting a b---j--." But now the details will come to light. Paula Jones getting every dime she demanded of the Clintons for his sexual harassment will open a few under 30 eyes.Other conservatives followed. On January 7, 2016, Donald Trump released an ad connecting Clinton to Cosby and to Anthony Weiner, but no one quite connected the changed world -- the new mores -- to the Clinton-Cosby scandals.
Now a New York Times columnist has.
From Maureen Dowd:
Instead of just admitting that he had had an affair with Monica Lewinsky and taking his lumps, Bill lied and hid behind the skirts of his wife and female cabinet members, who had to go out before the cameras and vouch for his veracity, even when it was apparent he was lying.
Seeing Albright, the first female secretary of state, give cover to President Clinton was a low point in women’s rights. As was the New York Times op-ed by Steinem, arguing that Lewinsky’s will was not violated, so no feminist principles were violated. What about Clinton humiliating his wife and daughter and female cabinet members? What about a president taking advantage of a gargantuan power imbalance with a 22-year-old intern? What about imperiling his party with reckless behavior that put their feminist agenda at risk?
It rang hollow after the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings. When it was politically beneficial, the feminists went after Thomas for bad behavior and painted Hill as a victim. And later, when it was politically beneficial, they defended Bill’s bad behavior and stayed mute as Clinton allies mauled his dalliances as trailer trash and stalkers.
The same feminists who were outraged at the portrayal of Hill by David Brock — then a Clinton foe but now bizarrely head of one of her “super PACs” — as “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty,” hypocritically went along when Hillary and other defenders of Bill used that same aspersion against Lewinsky.
Hillary knew that she could count on the complicity of feminist leaders and Democratic women in Congress who liked Bill’s progressive policies on women. And that’s always the ugly Faustian bargain with the Clintons, not only on the sex cover-ups but the money grabs: You can have our bright public service side as long as you accept our dark sketchy side.
Young women today, though, are playing by a different set of rules. And they don’t like the Clintons setting themselves above the rules.I doubt she saw my post, but it is satisfying to have a notorious lefty agree with me that lefty hypocrisy has caught up with Hillary.