Liberals are all about making unfounded charges against conservatives. Opposing abortion on demand that kills preborn babies – 50 percent of which are female and in some countries an even higher percentage – is turned into a “Republican war on women.”

Forcing me to pay for a woman’s birth control bills is not viewed as government theft but an assault on a woman’s right to reproductive health.

I firmly believe that the war on women charge is designed to cloud the fact that Democrat icons have been in the woman-abuse business for decades and the reason that liberal women support these abusers is because they support policies like abortion on demand.

They’re willing to tolerate some abuse in order to garner a larger prize. Consider Robert Filner, the current, sex-abusing mayor of San Diego. He got into office because of union support:

“Filner was swept into office last year largely thanks to efforts by the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, which contributed more than $2 million as well as shoe leather, phone banks and related efforts to get the city’s first Democratic mayor in two decades into office.”

While Lorena Gonzalez, former head of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council and current Assemblywoman has come out against Filner and called for him to resign, Tom Lemmon, head of the San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council said he believes in ‘due process’ and explained, ‘It’s an awkward situation, but we have a lot invested in him.’”

Ten women have come forward accusing Filner of the abuse. In fact, Filner’s been doing this type of thing for 20 years. But as long as he towed the liberal line and the sexual abuse was not publically known, he was a flawed but good soldier for the cause.

Bill Clinton had sex with an impressionable and vulnerable young woman who was serving as a White House intern. Then there were the charges of rape by Juanita Broaddrick:

“Michael Isikoff’s book, Uncovering Clinton, and Christopher Hitchens’ book, No One Left to Lie To, argued that Broaddrick’s claim is credible and shows similarities to Paula Jones’ later allegation of sexual harassment. Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen commented, ‘And yet, I cannot get [Broaddrick’s] accusation out of my head. On television, and in interviews with newspaper reporters, Broaddrick appeared credible.’”

It didn’t matter. Clinton supported the liberal sacrament of abortion. The sex charges made him beholden to feminist groups.

Then there was Democrat Ted Kennedy of Chappaquiddick infamy. The Democrats played a tribute to the womanizer, putting aside his war on women actions. Former Kennedy speechwriter and campaign operative Bob Shrum described Kennedy, that “over a very long period of time,” as “a liberal lion, entirely principled, . . . could actually get things done.”

A “long period of time” is right. The Chappaquiddick story is so well known that the words “Ted Kennedy” and “Chappaquiddick” are inseparably linked for all time. But there are many people who don’t know the story.

Kennedy was most likely driving under the influence of alcohol on the evening of July 18, 1969, when he drove his car off Dike Bridge and into Poucha Pond, leaving Mary Jo Kopechne, a young campaign worker, to drown. To add to the tragedy, Kennedy left the scene of the accident and did not report it to the police until 9:45 the next morning. Kennedy hoped to contrive a story that would put Kopechne in the driver’s seat and absolve him of criminal neglect for driving too fast for conditions and under the influence.

Fortunately, no one would go along with this particular lie, although there was still a massive cover-up by the Kennedy political machine to protect the powerful Senator and their own dependent jobs. The Kennedy operatives whisked the other “Boiler Room girls” — who had been with Kennedy and Kopechne at the Lawrence Cottage, where the party was held — off the island and removed any evidence that the senator had been drinking. In addition, the fact of Kennedy’s expired driver’s license disappeared from the Massachusetts motor vehicle office.

Chuck Moss, a journalist for the Detroit News, gets it right in his review of Leo Damore’s Senatorial Privilege: The Chappaquiddick Cover-Up. Damore’s book “reveals the arrogance, the power and the corruption that permitted him to simply walk away into the future, where he can address a nationally televised Democratic convention [in 1988] — on the subject of public morals.”1

Let’s not forget John Edwards. In 2011, Edwards was indicted by a North Carolina grand jury on six felony charges of violating multiple federal campaign contribution laws to cover up an extramarital affair that he admitted having that resulted in the birth of a child. The media kept the information under wraps like they did for John and Robert Kennedy.

And let’s not forget Anthony Weiner who still has high level support among young women voters because he votes the right way.

So the next time some Democrat brings up the war on women narrative, just say all three Kennedys, Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Anthony Weiner, and Robert Filner. Say it over and over again until they start stuttering, try to change the subject, go silent, or walk away.

None of this is to say that Republicans are immune from sexual peccadilloes, adultery, and general sexual inversion. In most cases, however, the voters reject them and do not lionize them as the Democrats have done with the Kennedys and Bill Clinton.

Republicans have had their sexual scoundrels. Newt Gingrich, Eliot Spitzer, and Mark Sanford come to mind. But for the most part, Republicans haven’t lionized them. I am mystified, however, how Sanford got reelected and garnered the support of a number of conservative Republicans. Pornography publishers had the best line: “[Sanford’s] open embrace of his mistress in the name of love, breaking his sacred marriage vows, was an act of bravery that has drawn my support.”

1. Chuck Moss, “Author Offers Damning, Disturbing Look at Kennedy and Chappaquiddick Tragedy,” The Atlanta Journal and Constitution (August 28, 1988), 13M. [↩]