I think you’re obsessed with your leaders’ penises. They really are none of your concern, and when you demand to know all about your leaders’ penises, you should be lied to. Audaciously. That would be a good leader.
Just checking: is Huma Abedin a medusa because her husband likes to send cock shots to coeds?
I think Anthony Weiner is kind of obsessed with his penis. He’s the one who made it public.
No, it was a skank ho who made it public.
I just breathe by myself; I never thought of asking anyone to help me with it. I suppose when you’re Mayor of New York City you’ve got people to do everything for you.
He’d be a great mayor for NYC
However, I can’t find anything in the Online Eytmology Dictionary that connects fascinus in the sense of “phallic charm” with fascinus in the sense of “magic spell” (“fascinate” apparently deriving from the latter). Are they perhaps different Latin words with different pronunciation but the same spelling, like liber in the sense of “book” and in the sense of “free”?
For NYC, yes. The city does have its sleaze-rep to uphold.
Once he sent something to a dozen members of the public, it was public. And if there’s a skank ho here, surely it’s the married Congressman who sent pictures of his dick to a bunch of women.
Discussed here, BTW.
Then denied it, obfuscated, lied about it, resigned Congress, then kept doing it!
Its not about his dick, people!
Then lied about it again, and… well, that’s the campaign so far, but I guess there is still some time left. You would kind of have to be a sucker to elect a guy who could say the words “as I became more and more honest” with a straight face.
At least he’s being honest about it.
Who are you, the new NSA spokesman? 
Sending adult oriented selfies to other consenting adults is not “public.” Did he just randomly send out pics to the public? I thought it originated in an adult sexting pic trading site and then went to email, etc? None of that is “public.”
Obviously this stuff can be released to the public by money & fame grubbing skank hoes, but it ought to be left to the tabloids, and ignored by sensible citizens.
With one person there’s an expectation of privacy. When you do this with about a dozen people using your real name and making big promises based on your fame and connections you do lose some of that expectation - particularly after you’ve already been burned for doing this same exact thing.
I think that’s what happened with the latest one. I don’t know that that’s what happened with the first six.
I don’t really think you’re going to care, but this is coming off as absolutely sexist. Weiner can do whatever he wants, but if a woman says anything she’s a skank. :rolleyes:
Really? Hillary decides to have some hot cyber sex, some skank ho boytoys keep copies and publish it and you really think I’d have anything kind to say about them?
Well, good for you, I guess.
I have no idea what you’d say. I do know what you’re saying about this situation right now, and I’m telling you how it sounds. The guy who acts like a braindead Internet whore gets a pass, the women (who may very well be pieces of work themselves) keep getting called the same name over and over again.
If Weiner were publishing women’s intimate selfies without their permission your argument might make a little sense. As it is, you’re making the women (as usual around here) helpless victims and the man (as usual around here) a braindead Internet whore. Doper misandry 101.
I never said they were victims. I said he’s the idiot who made this public, and I’m less entertained than you are by the word skank.
Come to think of it, levdrakon, I think you’re wrong about some of the particulars here. There were women Weiner had consensual sexting and phone sex sessions with, and there were other cases where he sent crotch photos to people he barely knew.
And don’t forget that Weiner sexted because his wife is a Medusa. So it’s still all the bitches’ faults.