Congressman Weiner's inappropriate tweet

tyr_13 said:
That's a might fine straw man you're gleefully attacking. The argument isn't that he shouldn't be ashamed.* The argument is that it's his personal life mostly unrelated to his governmental work. I know my job doesn't ask if I'm flirting with other women behind my (fictional) wife's back.

If he legitimized his mandate to work in government because of his strong moral family values, then it would be an issue. Did he?

He lied to reporters about his personal life. That was wrong. If he lied about governmental or other related things, that would be wrong, and a problem for the public. I'm sure you think he did, but please try to remember the subject of this thread and if you really, really, really want to talk about the other stuff, open a new thread.

EDIT: * I bet someone does make the argument that he shouldn't be ashamed based off of their own view of relationships and sexuality, but that is their value system and obviously not the argument you were trying to address in your post.
Click to expand...

I was going to post a rebuttal to FarmallMTA myself. Thanks for saving me the time. :)


GB
 
Gandalfs Beard said:
Nice snip job! You should apply for a job slicing and dicing video for Breitbart. I think I just got Breitbarted by you.
Click to expand...

I suppose I did take you out of context, and I'm sorry. However, that sentence does seem to indicate that you still have reservations.

So, how convinced are you? 80%? 99%?

And what he admitted to was not just this one errant tweet, but "he also admitted to "inappropriate" exchanges with six women before and after he got married." Why would he admit to all that stuff too? Would democratic leaders have pressured him into admitting all these other "inappropriate" exchanges with six women that they didn't even know about too, just because they were "anxious to move on"? If you think about that, it doesn't make any sense.
 
Puppycow said:
I suppose I did take you out of context, and I'm sorry. However, that sentence does seem to indicate that you still have reservations.

So, how convinced are you? 80%? 99%?

And what he admitted to was not just this one errant tweet, but "he also admitted to "inappropriate" exchanges with six women before and after he got married." Why would he admit to all that stuff too? Would democratic leaders have pressured him into admitting all these other "inappropriate" exchanges with six women that they didn't even know about too, just because they were "anxious to move on"? If you think about that, it doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Speculation doesn't count as evidence. And I hold myself to the same standard. If Weiner says he did it, that's the end.

I have my suspicions about how things went down, but I don't have the evidence to back it up. The End.

And by the way, I've been having a nice chat with some friends in the UK on another forum. And we all agree that this is the feeblest excuse for a "sex-scandal" of all time.

I remember when sex-scandals were juicy and truly entertaining. Like a Democratic president getting a BJ in the White House, or "Family Values" Conservatives getting caught soliciting gay sex in Airport Bathrooms.

This is some pretty weak tea as far as sex-scandals go. Just another example of the US flushing itself down the tubes.

GB
 
BeAChooser said:
Perhaps a little blast from the past is appropriate now, lest we forget the roots of this ...

http://www.thefrontpageonline.com/articles1-9292/IWishIWereanOscarMayerWeiner



The truth is this is as much a story about the mainstream media as anything else.
Click to expand...

Veteran Times readers know that you look in the back pages of the A section for scandals about the Democrats/liberals. They also stall running those stories. Perhaps the funniest was when Eason Jordan, the head of CNN's news division ignited a firestorm by claiming at a conference in Davos that American soldiers were targeting journalists in Iraq. The remarks were so controversial that Barney Frank, who was on the panel and who is clearly no hawk, demanded that Jordan provide evidence to back up his assertion.

The story raged on the conservative blogs for 3-4 days, and finally Jordan was forced to step down. And the New York Times, which had failed to cover the story, finally had to acknowledge that something had happened. As a wag commented at the time, their article amounted to, "Remember that controversy that we didn't cover? Well, it's over."
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:
BeAChooser said:
Perhaps a little blast from the past is appropriate now, lest we forget the roots of this ...

http://www.thefrontpageonline.com/articles1-9292/IWishIWereanOscarMayerWeiner



The truth is this is as much a story about the mainstream media as anything else.
Click to expand...

Veteran Times readers know that you look in the back pages of the A section for scandals about the Democrats/liberals. They also stall running those stories. Perhaps the funniest was when Eason Jordan, the head of CNN's news division ignited a firestorm by claiming at a conference in Davos that American soldiers were targeting journalists in Iraq. The remarks were so controversial that Barney Frank, who was on the panel and who is clearly no hawk, demanded that Jordan provide evidence to back up his assertion.

The story raged on the conservative blogs for 3-4 days, and finally Jordan was forced to step down. And the New York Times, which had failed to cover the story, finally had to acknowledge that something had happened. As a wag commented at the time, their article amounted to, "Remember that controversy that we didn't cover? Well, it's over."
Click to expand...

I couldn't quite put my finger on what was seriously wrong with the linked blog. Then I came upon this choice piece of rubbish:

http://www.thefrontpageonline.com/articles1-9292/IWishIWereanOscarMayerWeiner

With liberals in charge of 98 percent of liberal media in the country, the Weiner scandal is being reported the way the left-wing media reports all self-embarrassment stories about Democrats, carefully, evasively.
Click to expand...

I don't think this ranter was talking about The Nation, Z Magazine, or The Progressive Magazine (actual liberal media outlets). And I don't think a few progressive hosts on MSNBC constitute 98% of any media. Nor do John Stewart, Bill Maher, and Michael Moore make up the other 89% of the allegedly "Liberal Media."

In fact, the 98% number might be more accurately applied to the Mainstream media that are owned by Corporate Behemoths. And these Corporations promote one ideology in their Media--Capitalism; which is Right Wing by definition. If they can fool a few Right Wing populists into believing that the Capitalist Media is "Liberal" (which in Conserva-speak means Communist) then so much the better.

It is in this way that the Corporate Media can maintain their illusion of being "objective" and "neutral," while promoting an ideology that is anything but.


GB

ETA: The Corporate media does indeed play a role in stories like this. They can play it out for days or weeks while they steal the tattered remnants of democracy from under us. I'd wager that 98% of politicos have some sort of skeleton in their closets. And the media will ply us with these titillating tidbits to distract us from real stories when it is convenient to distract us from something far more important. So, I suppose, in a sense, I do have something in common with the crazy guy with a blog...with one key difference. I'm not a dunce enough to believe that the Corporate Media is the Commie Media.
 
Last edited:
TraneWreck said:
Martin Luther King liked prostitutes. Does that reflect on his work in any way? Would our nation be better if his entire movement had been discredited because he bought whores?
Click to expand...


Rented, surely?


JudeBrando said:
Never before have I seen any man more richly deserving of a most public humbling.
Click to expand...

Have you been living in a cave the last couple of decades or something?
 
Snide said:
Your posting habits here.
...and?

You seem lost. Let me help. Here is the nonsense from you that most here, I'm willing to bet, would agree is just that:



I ask again, ready to take boooeee up on his request?



Now how can I continue believing something I don't already believe?

Oh, yeah, you're trying a pathetic strawman to wiggle out of this. More documented nonsense, consistent with your history here.

Considering your horrible failure at logic above, I'm not surprised.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing. I'll file your comments in the appropriate receptacle, but fortunately will now be unable read any more of your missives.
 
Peephole said:
Really?

I don't get you Americans' obsession with politicians' private lives.

As if a politician who likes to send pictures of his weiner around is somehow a worse politician.
Click to expand...
What could possibly constitute a scandal in Belgium with pedophile rings apparently now mainstream?

A conventional marriage perhaps?
 
Drip, drip, drip:

Congressman Anthony Weiner instructed one of his Internet women how to lie about their relationship ... and even offered PR help from his team, which could create major legal issues for him ... TMZ has learned.

Weiner and former porn star Ginger Lee exchanged scores of sexual emails over a long period of time. When the underwear scandal broke on May 28, Lee began receiving calls from the media, and Weiner was more than happy to help her control the situation ... by lying.
Click to expand...

Plenty of photos of this girlfriend out there; just Google her name with safesearch off... but not from work!

And photos of the Las Vegas gf here.

If Weiner hoped that he'd get this behind him with his presser last night, he's got another think coming.
 
Brainster said:
Drip, drip, drip:



Plenty of photos of this girlfriend out there; just Google her name with safesearch off... but not from work!

And photos of the Las Vegas gf here.

If Weiner hoped that he'd get this behind him with his presser last night, he's got another think coming.
Click to expand...

So you won't mind if I keep attacking Newt Gingrich.

GB
 
Meanwhile, Joe Cannon is still concocting conspiracy theories:

I don't believe that scenario. I accept every part of his confession except for the statement about the night of the 27th.

I wouldn't believe that part if Weiner personally called me up and insisted.
Click to expand...

And:
Did Breitbart contact the congressman and blackmail him?

That's hardly necessary. Breitbart's own words this day constitute an implied threat. He has said that he possesses an extremely explicit photo which he would prefer not to show. That as-yet unseen photo constitutes a Sword of Damocles (no pun intended). Perhaps without realizing the implications, Breitbart has today made statements which place him perilously close to the "Charles Augustus Milverton" category.

If I were Weiner, I would have said exactly what he said today, even if I had not sent the picture on the 27th.
Click to expand...

That's not a skeptic, that's a cynic.
 
Last edited:
EvilSmurf said:
I was wrong and will totally admit it. My opinion of Weiner is that he is a very effective congressman, but a terrible person. However, I will still treat any story that comes from Breitbart with appropriate skepticism.
Click to expand...

Can I just quote this 'cuz I'm tired and signing off for the night? I concur, from the first sentence to the last.

Sticking with my screen-name, "Okay, Weiner! That's one!"
 
Ziggurat said:
Go for it.

But start your own thread, since it's off-topic here.
Click to expand...


Not really. It's useful for comparison to Weiner's sex scandal.

Congressman Christopher Lee R--"Sent flirtatious e-mails and a shirtless photo in response to a personal ad of a single 34-year-old woman on Craigslist."

Assemblyman Mike Duvall R--KCAL-TV in Los Angeles played a tape of the married Yorba Linda Republican speaking about sex with two women. He apparently did not realize a microphone was on during a legislative hearing.

Congressman Larry Craig R--Soliciting gay sex in Airport restroom.

GB
 
Gandalfs Beard said:
Not really. It's useful for comparison to Weiner's sex scandal.
Click to expand...

Except, of course, you aren't actually making a comparison at all. All you're doing (and rather pathetically at that) is bringing up other names in an attempt to distract from Weiner's actions, along with the fact that you were completely wrong from the start and I was completely right. I wonder how long it will take you to come to terms with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom