I find this odd.
Rosario Dawson has been taking heat for even mentioning the name "Monica Lewinsky" in the course of making a case for voting for Bernie Sanders. Jeez, do these Clintonistas have a thin skin, or what?
On Saturday, April 23, Rosario said, "We are literally under attack for not just supporting the other candidate. Now I'm with Monica Lewinsky with this: bullying is bad. She's actually dedicated her life now to talking about that." She said that bullying is still bullying when it is a "campaign strategy."
First, obvious, point. One doesn't need to invoke Monica Lewinsky's name to make the point that bullying (however actually defined) is bad. In American politics, in a campaign with someone named Clinton in it, there is a natural suspicion that the name has been introduced for other purposes -- to remind us of a once-juicy sex scandal.
Second point: so what? One's impression is that politicians used to be made of sterner stuff. Dawson was out of line only if your concept of being "in line" involves the Marquis of Queensbury rules or summin like that.
Final point: what the heck does 'bullying' mean in such a context? Those who are complaining about Dawson sound whiney, but the essence of her complaint itself seems a tad whiney.
An odd deal all around, as aforesaid.