Say what you will about Jon Stewart, but I thought his self-roast of the Daily Show’s coverage done in the style of a Weiner press conference was finally on point . It was also impressive that he managed to keep the bit going despite bleeding all over the place for the second half of it. I’m not even sure the show’s producers realized it was a significant problem until Oliver mentioned several minutes later that Stewart was really hurt.
Politically, there’s absolutely no advantage for him or the Democrats in resignation IMO. Unless something that deals another blow to his credibility comes out (like a physical relationship with a woman he met online), this is going to be a non-issue pretty quickly. The circus of a special election in that district is not going to make this go away faster, and resigning turns him into the guy who was kicked out of office instead of the guy who had a mild scandal a while ago. Unless he gets fucked in redistricting, I don’t see him having any trouble getting re-elected if he runs again, and I wouldn’t even be so sure that it’s totally shot down his chances to be the next mayor.
And if he’d kept his business off his twitter account, it would have stayed a private matter. Instead, he sent a picture of his junk to women that aren’t his wife. I expect better judgment from elected officials. Lying about it is a multiplier that gets us into the resignation bonus round.
These things should be decided by the voters. That’s why we have elections. He didn’t break any laws. He was duly elected. it’s up to his constituents to decide whether or not to keep him, not faux outraged Republicans who aren’t even in his state.
Exactly like Louisiana voters got to decide they wanted to keep David Vitter as their U.S. senator, given the revelation that he was a regular customer of brothels in New Orleans and of call girls in Washington. Given that standard, I don’t think any politician should ever have to resign in the face of a sex scandal. Certainly not in the case of Weiner, in which he never actually even met any of his sexting partners face-to-face.
I don’t give a rat’s ass what the man does in his private life. However, sending multiple, questionable pictures to multiple people through a notoriously public venue is sketchy and juvenile - if they were unsolicited submissions and I were the recipient, I might feel moved to retaliate if I was offended enough. Maybe I’d want to teach him a lesson, try selling the pic to a reporter, humiliate him and make some money off the deal.
Now, if I were a relatively savvy, intelligent person (say, savvy and intelligent enough to get elected as a federal legislator), I would probably weigh the aforementioned possible consequences of sending such pictures and conclude that it’s not worth the risk. Since Weiner sent them anyway and then lied about it even when it was inevitable that he would be caught lying, I’m of the opinion that his judgement is not keen enough to be a public figure, broken laws or not. I don’t question his ability to do his job because of his mating rituals, I question his ability to do his job because of his lack of decision-making skills.
That’s for the voters to decide. That’s why we have elections.
Perhaps he could find future employment in the boudior photography industry.
The calculus he needs to make, along with Speaker Pelosi and whoever else is running things for the Dems, is whether his staying in office is better or worse for the party. If they determine it’s worse, he should resign.
If he wants to leave the Democratic party and establish himself as an independent, then he can do whatever he pleases.
The Democratic leadership is Clintonista, “business-friendly”, Republican Lite. Wiener is decidedly lefty. His district is fairly safe, in all likelihood, they could run one of their own, someone more “centrist”, and keep the seat, and still pluck away an embarrassment.
They will fuck him. With grand displays of mealy-mouthed piety, they will fuck him.
He was elected by the voters in his district, not his party. Those voters are his employer, not Nancy Pelosi (and I have said the same thing about the GOP trying to force its own members trying to resign after sex scandals). I don’t like the idea of party organizations interfering with the decisions of voters.
Having said that, I don’t think this kind of thing affects whole parties. Are there people who are going to refuse to vote for Dems in their own districts because Anthony Weiner didn’t resign in his own? No.
This could change if it’s discovered that Weiner did anything criminal.
We can’t even be sure about that. There are plenty of couples out there who would not even consider this cheating. She’s a bit of a Washington power-player herself, as Hillary Clinton’s longtime right-hand woman, so for all we know she has the same appetite for strange that seems to be endemic among powerful men. Maybe they were adult enough to realize this before they made commitments to one another that they couldn’t keep.
The stories I’ve read say that she believed the bullshit at first and was upset when the truth came out, but I think she has to say that. Even though it’s becoming more common for married couples to allow for some extracurricular activity, it’s far from mainstream. It would add a huge unwanted dimension to this story if she came out and said, “So what? It’s a silly pastime. I’m a busy woman.”
(I have long suspected that Hillary Clinton had a similar attitude about Bill’s philandering, and was really only pissed off that he was dumb enough to get caught.)
The Democrats look to lose big, again, in 2012 if the economy is stalled, which seems likely. This stuff can easily hurt at the margins, with swing districts going more towards Republicans if there is a sense the Democrats aren’t cleaning house properly.
Yes, you run for election in your district, but the more you climb the party ladder (and he has been climbing it for some time), the more your actions reflect on the party. This is a 13 term Congressman, not some freshman.
I suspect the best thing for them to do is to let him serve out his term, and make it clear that the party will support another candidate against him in the primary should he try to run again.
Or violating the House ethics. But yes, criminal acts = gone.
He’s in his seventh term but has held the seat for thirteen years (which is perhaps the source of confusion).
This is about the third time that someone has made this claim, and it needs correcting.
If Weiner were a 13-term Congressman, he would have been first elected in 1984, when he was 20 years old.
Weiner was first elected to Congress in 1998. He is in his 13th year in Congress. It is his 7th term.
ETA: Damn you, Dewey Finn. :shakes fist:
[QUOTE=John Mace]
This is a 13 term Congressman, not some freshman.
[/QUOTE]
Thirteen years, not 13 terms, right? (Assumed office in Jan '99.)
Edit: Heh.
I wonder, though, if politicians tend to be risk takers. It’s taking a risk to run for any office, after all. Perhaps some of them enjoy living on the edge, knowing the risk and hoping they’ll avoid it.
I don’t know why people keep saying he is a 13 term Congressman. Sheesh!
OK, get it straight, last time! 10 inches, 6 terms, 13 years.
Weiner is roasted, folks. Now there are reports that a bare naked dick pic has surfaced. Other reports are saying he’s going to lose his district in redistricting.