Congressman Weiner's inappropriate tweet

[Ziggurat]

It's remarkable that you could convince so many people on this thread that my honesty is a character defect, when you can't even be honest about your own blinders and bias.

This isn't even about honesty, at least not in the ordinary sense of the word. It's about whether or not you can recognize the reasons for the mistakes you've made. And you can't. That blindness may be honest, but it's still a blindness.

The irony in all of this is that the person who stands the most to gain from listening to what I say is you.

I wonder if you would have been as honest as me if this whole thing had turned out to be another Breitbart Hoax. Somehow I doubt it.

I'm sure you do doubt that. Just like believing that Weiner was telling the truth, it's comfortable to believe that. Fortunately for you, that will remain forever a hypothetical, so you can rest easy knowing that at least this time you won't be proven wrong.

 

[Neally]

I've learned that you will pretend that Breitbart's most infamous lies, the sabotage of ACORN and of Shirley Sherrod, were so inconsequential that you could play "percentage of truth" games.

The fact that you call "percentage of truth" a "game" shows the error of your ways and how you ended up discounting the evidence that Weiner was lying. You stated, "Anything Breitbart touches is a scam." Your hate and that bias lead you to the wrong conclusion, and you still fail to acknowledge that. Others have acknowledged that same bias lead them to the same wrong conclusion, yet you steadfastly refuse to.

Well, if indicates that the actor is utterly deranged like Diapers Vitter,

Please list the sexual deviancy acts so that we might know when someones private sex lives are fair game for public scrutiny.

 

[TraneWreck]

And I note that Greenwald lets himself off the hook for not condemning the media for Republican sex scandals by claiming that, "It's all about teh hypocrisy."

Spitzer was a democrat. His hypocrisy made that a scandal.

-Buying whores---who cares?
-Buying whores while prosecuting and putting other people in prison for buying whores--big deal.

Does this really need to be explained? It seems to me you're trying to play dumb here.

Hypocrisy is the only thing that could make something like the Weiner "scandal" worth scrutiny. If Rick Santorum, who runs around comparing homosexuals to bestiality, was revealed to be gay, that would be a meaningful event. Those types of moral condemnations are revealed to be spurious when the sanctimonious critic is revealed to be a hypocrite.

If you've never said anything insulting and slanderous about homosexuals, then turn out to be homosexual, there's nothing there.

Larry Craig moralized on the floor of Congress, voted down bill after bill aimed at enhancing Civil Rights for Gays, all the while trying to pick up man-ass in airport restrooms. That is much different than Barnie Frank meeting men in airport restrooms.

Likewise, if a member of PETA was elected and called everyone who wore shoes made from leather an inhuman deviant that should be ostracized from society, and was then revealed to dress up in white-leather ass-less chaps on the weekend, it would be worth pointing out. Whether you do or do not wear white leather ass-less chaps on the weekend is really none of my business.

 

[A Laughing Baby]

To those people who are left doubtful of Weiner's Liberal Cred thanks to Democrats wanting to force him to resign (I guess the idea being that if he were actually a liberal, they wouldn't), I'd just like to point out that as it stands now, Congressional Democrats != Liberals.

 

[Brainster]

Spitzer was a democrat. His hypocrisy made that a scandal.

-Buying whores---who cares?
-Buying whores while prosecuting and putting other people in prison for buying whores--big deal.

Does this really need to be explained? It seems to me you're trying to play dumb here.

No, Spitzer I completely understand. I should have snipped him out.

 

[Ziggurat]

Hypocrisy is the only thing that could make something like the Weiner "scandal" worth scrutiny.

The "at least he's not a hypocrite" defense has rather two serious (and related) deficiencies. The first is that the very premise isn't one that democrats should want voters to take seriously, because it basically broadcasts that democrats are the party of no morals. And yes, this is a moral issue, because he's a married man and this was NOT, by his own admission, a victimless offense. The second is that Weiner and other democrats who similarly stray from marital vows are hypocrites. Every politician in the country takes the position that stable families are a bedrock of American life. There is no party, and no politician, which adopts the platform that cheating on your spouse is OK. This hypocrisy may offend you less than other forms of hypocrisy, but to claim that it isn't hypocrisy is to engage in denial.

And lastly, even if you want to try to take the defense that at least he didn't try to make hay out of such moral issues, you'd still be wrong.

 

[tyr_13]

And lastly, even if you want to try to take the defense that at least he didn't try to make hay out of such moral issues, you'd still be wrong.

That clip doesn't say what you apparently think it says...


(I disagree with Weiner's position in that story, but I don't think public statues at a city hall are the equivalent of people's bedroom, or chatroom, life.)

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

The "at least he's not a hypocrite" defense has rather two serious (and related) deficiencies. The first is that the very premise isn't one that democrats should want voters to take seriously, because it basically broadcasts that democrats are the party of no morals. And yes, this is a moral issue, because he's a married man and this was NOT, by his own admission, a victimless offense. The second is that Weiner and other democrats who similarly stray from marital vows are hypocrites. Every politician in the country takes the position that stable families are a bedrock of American life. There is no party, and no politician, which adopts the platform that cheating on your spouse is OK. This hypocrisy may offend you less than other forms of hypocrisy, but to claim that it isn't hypocrisy is to engage in denial.

And lastly, even if you want to try to take the defense that at least he didn't try to make hay out of such moral issues, you'd still be wrong.

And this matters to us.. why?

 

[Ziggurat]

And this matters to us.. why?

I have no idea if it matters to you. The post was not addressed to you, you have not given any indication of what you care about, nor do I even care what you care about.

 

[TraneWreck]

The "at least he's not a hypocrite" defense has rather two serious (and related) deficiencies. The first is that the very premise isn't one that democrats should want voters to take seriously, because it basically broadcasts that democrats are the party of no morals. And yes, this is a moral issue, because he's a married man and this was NOT, by his own admission, a victimless offense. The second is that Weiner and other democrats who similarly stray from marital vows are hypocrites. Every politician in the country takes the position that stable families are a bedrock of American life. There is no party, and no politician, which adopts the platform that cheating on your spouse is OK. This hypocrisy may offend you less than other forms of hypocrisy, but to claim that it isn't hypocrisy is to engage in denial.

Not to derail your rant, but was Spitzer was a democrat. His hypocrisy was sickening.

As for the infidelity, Weiner was flirting with chicks on the internet. His wife is Hilary Clinton's aid. She travels with the Secretary of State wherever she goes. Whether she considers this sort of behavior cheating is all that matters, and she hasn't spoken on the subject.

But once again, Martin Luther King, THomas Jefferson, JFK, FDR, Rudy Giuliani, and countless others we will never know about, all cheated. Should they have been kicked out of public life forever the minute these allegations were revealed?

I would say, no. I don't see how that has much to do with anything. If I want to evaluate a Congressperson I will look at the votes they cast, the bills they proposed, and the deals they make.

And lastly, even if you want to try to take the defense that at least he didn't try to make hay out of such moral issues, you'd still be wrong.

I can't turn on the volume at work. What does this statue have to do with anything?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Well, wait a minute, Sockboy, I thought sex scandals were nobody's business but the people involved. Greenwald's simply elevating convenience to the level of principle.

When people make their "family values" platforms for campaigning, they are making it everyone's business. Also, illegal activity is a matter of public discourse.

 

[thaiboxerken]

The "at least he's not a hypocrite" defense has rather two serious (and related) deficiencies. The first is that the very premise isn't one that democrats should want voters to take seriously, because it basically broadcasts that democrats are the party of no morals.

Wrong. The party just doesn't want to dictate morality onto people. There is a difference.

The second is that Weiner and other democrats who similarly stray from marital vows are hypocrites. Every politician in the country takes the position that stable families are a bedrock of American life.

Almost every person says this. Unless they make a campaign platform on it, then I'll treat politicians just like every other person on this.

There is no party, and no politician, which adopts the platform that cheating on your spouse is OK. This hypocrisy may offend you less than other forms of hypocrisy, but to claim that it isn't hypocrisy is to engage in denial.

There is no party or politician that campaigns on the platform that breaking the speed limit is OK. Are all politicians that drive 5mph over the speed limit hypocrites? I don't think so. Now if a politician campaigned to throw people in jail for speeding, and then was caught speeding, there would be a hypocrisy issue.

And lastly, even if you want to try to take the defense that at least he didn't try to make hay out of such moral issues, you'd still be wrong.

Wow, you must have strained your cortex to accomplish the mental gymnastics to believe that this has anything to do with adultry, infidelity or imposing "family values" onto others.

 

[thaiboxerken]

No, Spitzer I completely understand. I should have snipped him out.

You don't seem to understand. Some of us are trying to apply the same standards, whether a person is a D or and R.

 

[Ziggurat]

Wrong. The party just doesn't want to dictate morality onto people. There is a difference.

The democratic party absolutely wants to dictate morality onto other people. It's just that the morality in question isn't quite the same, and they don't like to call it that. They prefer terms like "social justice".

Almost every person says this.

And so that makes almost every cheater a hypocrite as well. That doesn't get you out of the double standard.

There is no party or politician that campaigns on the platform that breaking the speed limit is OK. Are all politicians that drive 5mph over the speed limit hypocrites? I don't think so.

You're wrong. It does. You seem to think that this position would pose some sort of problem for me, but it doesn't.

You see, YOU are the one obsessed with the charge of hypocrisy because you think you can use it to create a double standard. I'm not. Hypocrisy isn't the problem for me. The actual actions are. I don't really care if a politician is hypocritical about speeding, because I don't really care much about speeding.

But it's interesting that you bring up driving issues, given that Weiner is actually quite notable for his hypocrisy on parking tickets. Does that hypocrisy bother you?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Nope, his hypocrisy on parking tickets mean nothing to me. His cyber-sex lifestyle is of no consequence to me either. I'd vote for him based on his job performance and if I was in his district, he'd still have my vote.

The ONLY reason the GOP is making a big deal out of this is because Anthony Weiner has been a very vocal fighter for progressive values.

 

[Ziggurat]

As for the infidelity, Weiner was flirting with chicks on the internet. His wife is Hilary Clinton's aid. She travels with the Secretary of State wherever she goes. Whether she considers this sort of behavior cheating is all that matters, and she hasn't spoken on the subject.

It doesn't really matter what exact word she would use to describe what happened. He hurt her deeply by his actions. That should have been obvious just from what happened, and he stated it during his confession.

But once again, Martin Luther King, THomas Jefferson, JFK, FDR, Rudy Giuliani, and countless others we will never know about, all cheated. Should they have been kicked out of public life forever the minute these allegations were revealed?

And that's relevant to anything I said... how?

I never demanded that Weiner be kicked out of public life forever.

I can't turn on the volume at work. What does this statue have to do with anything?

He was pissing and moaning about how the statue of a man (virtue) standing on top of women (sirens of corruption) was degrading to women, and the city should get rid of it. He was posturing for the feminist vote, and his actual actions don't reveal any such high respect for women.

 

[Ziggurat]

Nope, his hypocrisy on parking tickets mean nothing to me.

Exactly my point. You don't actually care about hypocrisy. You only use it as a tool when it works for your side.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Exactly my point. You don't actually care about hypocrisy. You only use it as a tool when it works for your side.

Did Anthony Weiner run on a platform of harsher parking laws?

 

[Neally]

The ONLY reason the GOP is making a big deal out of this is because Anthony Weiner has been a very vocal fighter for progressive values.

Is that why Dems are calling for his resignation as well? Is that why the GOP called for Larry Craig to resign?

 

[TraneWreck]

It doesn't really matter what exact word she would use to describe what happened. He hurt her deeply by his actions. That should have been obvious just from what happened, and he stated it during his confession.

And how she moves forward is her choice and her choice alone.

And that's relevant to anything I said... how?

I never demanded that Weiner be kicked out of public life forever.

I possibly confused your position with others. Do you think he should resign?

He was pissing and moaning about how the statue of a man (virtue) standing on top of women (sirens of corruption) was degrading to women, and the city should get rid of it. He was posturing for the feminist vote, and his actual actions don't reveal any such high respect for women.

There is one thing I will agree with you on: Weiner has forever lost the ability to have is moral outrage taken seriously. I don't find that particularly damaging to his career, but instances like that (as you describe it) or the speech on the floor where he was rightly taking the Republicans to task for blocking funding for 9-11 first responders, cannot be made the same way.