Kirsten Powers

Paul has suddenly been afflicted with an obsession with the decades-old Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair.

He said Bill Clinton used his %22position of authority to take advantage of a young woman.%22

He wondered to Newsmax TV what the affair might mean for Hillary%27s presidential campaign.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is trying to prove there is no GOP "war on women" by launching a war on one woman: Hillary Clinton. He has suddenly been afflicted with a feverish obsession with the decades-old Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky affair. He seems to be of the view that Hillary's husband is a chink in her presidential armor and a drag on the Democrats' argument that Republicans are waging a war on women. But his Lewinsky nostalgia tour is doing more to reinforce that meme than counter it.

Paul told C-SPAN that Bill Clinton was an "abusive boss" who used his "position of authority to take advantage of a young woman." Democrats should return any money that Clinton has raised for them, he demanded. He told Fox News that Clinton committed a "workplace kind of violence" against Lewinsky. On Meet the Press, he alleged that Clinton "took advantage of a girl that was 20 years old," calling it "predatory behavior."

'Prey' she was not

This is total lunacy. Let's remember how the affair started: Lewinsky flashed her thong at the president. She later described this act to Barbara Walters as a "small, subtle, flirtatious gesture." "Prey" she was not. Unless, that is, you view an adult woman the way Sen. Paul apparently does: as too mentally undeveloped to make her own (bad) decisions.

Though Paul says the "girl" was 20, she was actually 22 when the affair started and 24 when it ended. Either way, younger people sign up to go to war. It's hard to imagine Paul portraying a man Lewinsky's age as the abused victim of an affair in which he eagerly participated. None of this excuses the former president's behavior. But even the most fanatical Clinton hater knows there was no violence or abuse or unwanted advances. There was a consensual affair.

Where's the evidence?

In an interview with Newsmax TV, Paul suggested that Democrats (including Mrs. Clinton) must distance themselves from the former president because he is a "sexual predator" who has preyed on "dozens or at least a half a dozen" women. Which is it? "Dozens" would mean 24 or more women. A half dozen would mean six. This is a remarkable accusation from a sitting senator and potential presidential candidate. Where is his evidence to support these claims?

We know of three women who made accusations: Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey. But Paul surely knows that no court of law ever found Clinton guilty of the accusations.

When Paul started this proxy war against Hillary on Meet the Press, he assured David Gregory that he was not blaming her for the Lewinsky affair. But just a week later, he wondered to Newsmax TV what it might mean for Hillary's presidential campaign that her "unsavory character" of a husband is guilty of "having sex with an intern at the office."

So, after claiming he is driven by nothing more than a deep concern that a woman was victimized by President Clinton, Paul took aim at the only person who can reasonably claim that status: the wife.

Keep digging, senator.

Kirsten Powers writes weeklyfor USA TODAY and is a Fox News political analyst.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns like this, go to the opinion front page or follow us on twitter@USATopinion or Facebook.

