The powerful play by different rules

Carol Iannone explains how our most powerful 'liberals' exploited women under their authority again and again, violating the laws that they supported and passed.  Being 'humanitarians', the laws never applied to them.  The lack of personal morality among these men is astounding.  But not as astounding as the gap jawed credulous hero worship afforded these serial abusers by our liberal elites.  That they worship these men is a window into their souls.  And it ain't pretty.

And now the latest group of compassion filled liberal 'leaders' are in the process of making the laws even more draconian.  Which is OK.  Because they know that the laws won't apply to them.  After all, our leaders are humanitarians.  More here.

With all the talk of a “war on women,” it is well to remember that the origins of contemporary feminism lay in the radical movements of the Sixties, in the boorish behavior of the male leftists of the time. When Stokely Carmichael, leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, was asked about the position of women in the radical movement, he replied, “prone.” Think of the guy that Forrest Gump punches out because of the way he mistreats Jenny. Released from all traditional restraints, the ’60s radicals outraged the females in their midst, who went on to fashion the core of what we know as feminism, which has been waging war on men ever since.

We have long known that JFK was a massive consumer of women, but now, even worse, we find that he used a young, sexually inexperienced intern as a virtual, albeit willing, prostitute. LBJ, surprisingly, was almost as bad, according to some accounts, parading around naked, sleeping with female secretaries and aides, and having them placed elsewhere if they didn’t comply. He even carried on while on Air Force One and with Lady Bird nearby. Meanwhile he was signing executive orders prohibiting sex discrimination. And of course there was Clinton.
Perhaps liberals and leftists allow themselves license because they feel they are on the right side of things and are saving the world. But they are hypocrites, ready to saddle other people with restraints they do not want applied to themselves. Thus Clinton deplored the intrusive questioning he was subject to regarding Monica Lewinsky in the Paula Jones case, but that very type of questioning was allowed under the Violence Against Women Act which he himself had signed as president in 1994, and which he signed again at its renewal in 2000, even after his experience with the law and after the several felonies he committed in order to evade its consequences. The VAWA is again up for renewal, evidently with even more expansive measures of inquisition and reprisal.