Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

If he'd taken an honest position from the outset, this might have actually worked for him in some small way. Because if you can get caught with your junk exposed to the public and survive it....that says something about either your connections or your popularity with voters.

But he clearly didn't have the backbone for that kind of position when he started lying, so I doubt he can turn any of this back to his advantage. Right now he looks spineless, flimsy and like he's out of his depth.

[Darkmere]

But he clearly didn't have the backbone for that kind of position when he started lying, so I doubt he can turn any of this back to his advantage. Right now he looks spineless, flimsy and like he's out of his depth.

Can you name a single politician that, when cornered, hasn't done the exact same thing? it's either the traditional wishy-washy nonspeak, or a denial, which is typically another lie.

[nenjin]

The list isn't long, but didn't McGreevy basically get caught, cop to the whole thing, apologize sincerely and leave politics? That one was over pretty much as soon as it began. And he was gay to boot.

[Darkmere]

The list isn't long, but didn't McGreevy basically get caught, cop to the whole thing, apologize sincerely and leave politics? That one was over pretty much as soon as it began. And he was gay to boot.

I'd never heard of that case, but it was an interesting read. I do find it funny that if every politician accused of anything was as honest as he is we'd have a 100% turnover every single election. Kinda harsh from the wife though.

[Ampersand]

Assuming the rate of infidelity among politicians is equal to the rate of infidelity among the general populace, and we treated them all the same as we treated this guy, we wouldn't have any politicians anymore.

[RedKing]

I think the larger question is, how as a congressman named Wiener, could you not do what he did? 

I would put my junk on yard signs and campaign literature if I was him.

If I was Weiner, I'd make wild accusations about my opponent's junk come next election.
"I believe that the public has a right to see my opponent's junk! I have shown you my junk. What does my opponent have to hide? Does he secretly have Inadiquate Junk Syndrome? Is he a female cross-dresser?! The public has a right to know the truth about <Opponent Name>'s junk!"

That is an awesome idea.

"I'm *so* in favor of government transparency, that I'm not wearing any pants!"

Although this could lead to a bill to make all Congresscritters report to work naked. Which would make C-SPAN the worst idea ever.

[h3lblad3]

So am I the only one who truly believes that what a man does in his privacy is absolutely none of my business, nor the business of anyone else? Seriously?

If he didn't use government resources, this really isn't anyone's business.  It's between him, his family, and those 6 or so women, yes.  But I really don't see the need for the news to constantly bombard me with stuff that doesn't affect me in the least bit.  No, he shouldn't have lied.  But when he did, the whole story should have been over.

Hell, from what I can tell it never affected his ability to do his job.  Well, you know, until the news latched onto it like a pack of rabid dogs and wouldn't leave the man alone.
I'd still vote for the guy if I believed his policies.  I'm not from New York, though, so meh.

[RedKing]

So am I the only one who truly believes that what a man does in his privacy is absolutely none of my business, nor the business of anyone else? Seriously?

If he didn't use government resources, this really isn't anyone's business.  It's between him, his family, and those 6 or so women, yes.  But I really don't see the need for the news to constantly bombard me with stuff that doesn't affect me in the least bit.  No, he shouldn't have lied.  But when he did, the whole story should have been over.

Hell, from what I can tell it never affected his ability to do his job.  Well, you know, until the news latched onto it like a pack of rabid dogs and wouldn't leave the man alone.
I'd still vote for the guy if I believed his policies.  I'm not from New York, though, so meh.

That's kinda the thing though. It became a story when he put it on Twitter by mistake. At which point, it ain't private anymore. And if it was my Congressperson, I'd be a bit concerned if they randomly put a junk shot out on Twitter. Because it's...shall we say, a sign of erratic behavior? I vote for my Rep because I expect them to be my voice of sanity in government.

[Africa]

Can the phrase "junkshot tomfoolery" become widespread please?

Anyway, to me, the fact that he was dumb enough to publicly post the picture on Twitter would be a way bigger red flag than the fact of trying to send dick pix to internet women (or "women") in the first place. (Somewhere, a crusty 60 year old man was already wanking to whatever other Weiner pix he had received).

As for it being used by Republicans...I'm sure it will be brought up by radio commentators and Fox News, but it would be idiotic for them to make too much of a thing about it, considering the number of holier-than-thou Republicans who have been caught doing things considerably more out-of-bounds than internet flirtations with adult women. I think both parties know they have enough mud to be slung at them that they don't want to go down that road. It's just funnier when a Republican does it because it's usually so much more hypocritical.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

sanity in government.

oh ho ho ho you so funny

[h3lblad3]

So am I the only one who truly believes that what a man does in his privacy is absolutely none of my business, nor the business of anyone else? Seriously?

If he didn't use government resources, this really isn't anyone's business.  It's between him, his family, and those 6 or so women, yes.  But I really don't see the need for the news to constantly bombard me with stuff that doesn't affect me in the least bit.  No, he shouldn't have lied.  But when he did, the whole story should have been over.

Hell, from what I can tell it never affected his ability to do his job.  Well, you know, until the news latched onto it like a pack of rabid dogs and wouldn't leave the man alone.
I'd still vote for the guy if I believed his policies.  I'm not from New York, though, so meh.

That's kinda the thing though. It became a story when he put it on Twitter by mistake. At which point, it ain't private anymore. And if it was my Congressperson, I'd be a bit concerned if they randomly put a junk shot out on Twitter. Because it's...shall we say, a sign of erratic behavior? I vote for my Rep because I expect them to be my voice of sanity in government.

Yes.  He put it on Twitter.  By mistake.  If he had meant you to see it, it'd be your business.
Which is kinda the whole point from the get go.

The real question of his "erratic behavior" is how in the world he managed to do that by accident in the first place.

[nenjin]

Saw an article on CNN today. Titled "Wiener reaches out to Bill Clinton."

And all I could picture is the typical smiling Clinton mug shot with Wiener's junk slowly edging in from the left to poke him in the ear.

But I'm too lazy for photo shop.

[RedKing]

So am I the only one who truly believes that what a man does in his privacy is absolutely none of my business, nor the business of anyone else? Seriously?

If he didn't use government resources, this really isn't anyone's business.  It's between him, his family, and those 6 or so women, yes.  But I really don't see the need for the news to constantly bombard me with stuff that doesn't affect me in the least bit.  No, he shouldn't have lied.  But when he did, the whole story should have been over.

Hell, from what I can tell it never affected his ability to do his job.  Well, you know, until the news latched onto it like a pack of rabid dogs and wouldn't leave the man alone.
I'd still vote for the guy if I believed his policies.  I'm not from New York, though, so meh.

That's kinda the thing though. It became a story when he put it on Twitter by mistake. At which point, it ain't private anymore. And if it was my Congressperson, I'd be a bit concerned if they randomly put a junk shot out on Twitter. Because it's...shall we say, a sign of erratic behavior? I vote for my Rep because I expect them to be my voice of sanity in government.

Yes.  He put it on Twitter.  By mistake.  If he had meant you to see it, it'd be your business.
Which is kinda the whole point from the get go.

Umm, no. Let me make an analogy:

If a politician makes an incredibly offensive racist remark when he mistakenly thinks the microphone is off, do you think everyone should just pretend he didn't say anything? Do you think people honestly WOULD be able to pretend that? Doesn't matter if it was a mistake or not. If it enters the public sphere, it becomes a public matter. People are still free to judge Weiner as leniently or as harshly as their personal attitudes dictate. But to say this is a private matter and should be off the public radar altogether is disingenuous.

[Hiiri]

So am I the only one who truly believes that what a man does in his privacy is absolutely none of my business, nor the business of anyone else? Seriously?

No, you're not the only one. We might be the only ones that don't give a shit and clicked the topic anyways

Who cares? Seriously. It's not like he raped anyone.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I do not particularly care on the political front, but this turn of events is amusing to me.