I didn’t get to join this conversation yesterday, but let me say I think Will’s piece isn’t very persuasive at all. Bill Clinton swore in a “60 Minutes” interview that his problems with women were behind him and implying that were it to happen again it would be a major issue (why else insist that they were behind him?). Hillary Clinton said that if the Lewinsky thing were true it would be a major issue, as did much of the press and Congress at first. Bill Clinton ran for office promising “two for the price of one,” and made his wife and marriage central components of his presidency — including giving his signature policy proposal to her. Bill Clinton was in office and hit on an intern which — when feminists cared about disproportionate power relationships and all that — was a pretty big deal. Clinton tried to brand Lewinsky as a stalker. Clinton created new executive privileges. He was the chief enforcer of America’s federal sexual harassment laws. Meanwhile Ryan was a pig with his wife. Wasn’t in office. Isn’t married to his wife. Isn’t planning on making her an equal partner. Didn’t lie under oath. And, as far as I understand it, didn’t even lie at all — he kept secret court records secret.

Now, as I said yesterday I think Ryan should go. But if the hypocrisy card is going to be played, let’s play it both ways. Why aren’t Democrats defending Ryan if they think the comparison is even remotely apt?