Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) is a political voice in Washington I have always respected. He is a passionate crusader for our country’s elderly, middle class, children and most importantly his Brooklyn constituents.
In the past Weiner has used his position to call out his political opponents for their personal and collective hypocrisy, their ideological stubbornness and their frontal attack on public employees. During that time Weiner has made plenty of enemies on both sides of the aisle.
Unfortunately Weiner has placed himself in a situation that can no longer be characterized as an individual struggle for political survival and relevance. His indiscretions are trivial in the broad scope of political scandal. At this point he has broken no law unlike a certain Senator from Louisiana who was never prosecuted and won reelection in a landslide in his so-called “pro family” state. Weiner’s political troubles are his own doing and his attempt to mislead the people of his district through the news media has given him a self-inflicted black-eye.
If that were the total extent of his affect on the politics of Washington maybe he could survive and allow his New York electorate the final say on his career in politics but as usual, his plight is being employed by the Republican Party in an attempt to negatively portrait the entire Democratic Party.
Since our nation’s media is obviously more interested in a budding sex scandal as opposed to covering such mundane stories as the high unemployment rate, political corruption in Florida, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and, our debt Weiner’s unfortunate dilemma has taken too much airtime and newspaper space over the last two- weeks and is taking the focus of the national spotlight off the choices we must make as a country.
Every day the news media focuses on Mr. Weiner’s text messages and tweets is another day the public does not have an opportunity to learn more about the competing visions each major political party has for our country’s future.
This is why the Congressman should step down. The continuing coverage of his digital escapades is in the way. The endless stories concerning to whom he has texted or tweeted are clouding the real issues we face collectively. It is too easy for a lazy press corps to talk and write about whether the Congressman’s tweets to a 21-year old woman they conveniently characterize as a “girl” were inappropriate.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Glenn Contrarian
Weiner should step down...despite the fact that the Republicans almost never come out and say their people should step down when they're caught living with mistresses, wearing diapers with prostitutes, paying off husbands of their mistresses, breaking not just their marriage vows, but also ethics regulations AND the law...you get the idea.
But why? Because we hold our own to a higher standard, as can be seen by the reactions of Obama and Pelosi AND all but two of the leading liberal pundits. The family-values Republicans don't much care what their guys do (unless it's a gay sex scandal which is - to them - unforgivable), as long as it's another vote in Congress. But we DO care.
One side preaches family values but never holds their politicians accountable for ignoring family values...and the other side actually tries to hold their own accountable for much, much less serious infractions against 'family values'. One side has no problem being hypocritical. The other tries not to be.
That's one of the main reasons why I left the Republican party a long time ago.
2 - Ronald W Weathersby
Oh yeah, Republicans hold their own to a higher standard. NOT!
That's why there is a Republican Senator who BROKE THE LAW in at least two jurisdictions (Paying for sex) who was never asked to step down by the GOP leadership in Congress or at the national party who was re-elected by his "family values" voters back home in Louisiana.
You are absolutely correct.
3 - zingzing
weiner's gonna wait it out, see if he can weather the short storm before the media finds something else to latch onto.
4 - Baronius
I recently discovered that Democrats have been losing sleep over Vitter. They'd never mentioned it until about a week and a half ago, but now they're opening up about how deeply troubling they find his presence in the Senate. This wound must run pretty deep, too, because these people didn't object this much to Kennedy killing a girl.
5 - Glenn Contrarian
'scuse you, Baronius -
Most of us Dems did make noise about Vitter and his diaper fetish...but the Republicans ignored it, of course. He was another vote in Congress, so why would they really care? What does perversity and hypocrisy matter when there's a congressional vote at stake?
And when it comes to Kennedy, I've never made excuses for him leaving the scene of an accident or for calling his lawyers first before the police or for his extramarital affair. But did he kill her? I've seen no evidence suggesting such.
Speaking of causing wrongful deaths, how many people (American and Iraqi) were killed in the illegal invasion of Iraq? If we're going to hold our politicians responsible, then we need to hold ALL of them responsible...particularly those presidents who start wars for personal reason.
6 - Ronald W Weathersby
Baronius...
"Kennedy killing a girl?" Wow, what a blast from the past. Do you guys EVER get over ANYTHING besides your own misdeeds?
First off Mary Jo Kopechne was 28 years old and was a grown woman. I love it how you guys always attempt to characterize the adults Dems have affairs with as girls. Secondly to say Kennedy "killed" her is stretching the facts a tad bit. I guess he was never indicted because the matter took place in Mass. Look, Ted Kennedy had a part is the death of Ms Kopechne and admitted as much.
What happened was a tragic to say the least but to hammer Democrats in general in 2011 about an event in 1969 is crazy.
How many Democrats in DC today held office in 1969? Come on. Is that the best you've got to counter the fact that a confessed criminal is serving in the US Senate?
7 - zingzing
"They'd never mentioned it until about a week and a half ago, but now they're opening up about how deeply troubling they find his presence in the Senate."
vitter broke the law, which is more than you can say about weiner (so far). and really, the idiots like to bring up their opponents misdeeds to cover their own.
"This wound must run pretty deep, too, because these people didn't object this much to Kennedy killing a girl."
see, you know how the game's played!
*coughlaurabushcough*
dammit.
8 - Baronius
The best comparison to the Weiner situation is Chris Lee, a New York congressman who sent an inappropriate message online. He resigned from office the day the scandal broke.
Kennedy won reelection in 2006, just a year before the Vitter story broke. They were contemporaries in the Senate. I think it's fair to compare the treatment of "The Lion of the Senate" to Vitter.
Of course, the biggest sex scandal in recent politics serves as a backdrop to this whole story. Weiner tried to use the same tactics that Bill Clinton did - heck, he even used some of the same lines about moving past the rumors to get on with the people's business. They're both good pro-choicers, so the apparatchiks overlook their treatment of women. (Didn't Chris Matthews say that Weiner's wife was responsible for this?) Meanwhile, the Republicans continue to shun Newt Gingrich, despite his being the most experienced and articulate candidate for president, because they believe that character matters. The Democrats still brag about the fact that Bill Clinton outlasted Newt Gingrich.
9 - Glenn Contrarian
"Character matters" to Republicans?
Did they call for John Ensign to resign?
Did they call for Vitter to resign?
Did they castigate Reagan or Oliver North or ANY of the Republicans who were involved in selling arms to Iran?
Did they call out any of the current candidates who have told outright and outrageous lies? Palin's not an official candidate, but did the Right say much about her wild revision of Paul Revere's ride?
It's obvious, Baronius, that the Republicans really don't give a rat's hind end what a Republicans politician does or says as long as it doesn't involve sex with minors or homosexuality, and as long as their political 'positions' are in accordance with Republican dogma.
This reminds me so much of how the Catholics will not excommunicate someone for mass murder (look up the WWII Croatian Ustase regime), but they WILL excommunicate priests for performing a gay marriage.
And as far as Kennedy goes, you're referring to an incident with Kennedy that happened FORTY TWO YEARS ago.
10 - handyguy
#8 is quite thoroughly vile and hateful, pure partisan distortion without shame.
11 - Ronald W Weathersby
Vitter admitted to breaking the law.
Kennedy was never indicted. President Clinton was the victim of a witch hunt that finally ended up with him getting outed for having an affair with an adult intern. It was not moral but it wasn't illegal.
Republican Senator Larry Craig pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct after being arrested in an airport men's room.
No, the biggest sex scandals in DC have been perpetrated by Republicans.
Yes, Democrats have had their share of scandals but as of right now only Republicans have been prosecuted by a court of law for their misdeeds.
12 - zingzing
baronius, if weiner broke the law, let him burn. if he didn't, let him get voted out. or let him resign. he's already shamed. what more do you want?
if we publicly hang every politician who has an untoward sex life, we won't have any politicians... maybe you have a point.
whatever, though. the republicans aren't on the winning side of this argument. let it go.
13 - Baronius
What more do I want? I want people to not try to claim the high ground while they're actually digging. I want people to not use sex scandals in their party as an opportunity to declare that the other party has sex scandals; I want people to not use their booming debt as an occasion to complain that the other side causes booming debt. I want less chutzpah.
14 - Baronius
And, lest I be accused of partisanship, I don't want to see Romney trying to claim the high ground against government interference in health care.
15 - Leroy
High ground? What high ground? Is it the low ground to be in favor of UHC, as I am? Is UHC immoral and/or illegal?
16 - Cannonshop
I don't think Weiner should resign.
No, seriously, stop laughing, I don't. I doubt this 'scandal' has or will have any serious impact on Democrat power in Congress, and I don't think it really matters that much.
It is incredible to me, the mind-blowing level of Naive necessary to be upset over this behaviour when, frankly, we have Federal agents from the Dept. of EDUCATION staging SWAT-raids over student loan defaults, when we have federal AGENCIES breaking U.S. Law and arming Mexican Drug Gangs, then lying about it to congress in ways that, it turns out, are fairly easy for the relevant congressional committees to back-check and fact-check.
Wiener's Weiner is irrelevant when we have an Executive that, in the midst of two continuing wars, initiates two more.
Nine percent unemployment and climbing again, when pre-stimulus numbers said that if we didn't do something, it would climb as high as eight percent, energy prices climbing with no end in sight, by comparison a democrat congressman showing off his junk to a staffer just doesn't compare.
(though it is rather telling of the man's character that, really, he didn't have the stones to just sleep around-he had to resort to electronic fantasy. Pathetic, but hardly a high crime.)
17 - zingzing
baronius, if that's what you want, let it begin with you, rather than bringing up a kennedy "killing a girl." do you not see the conundrum? the hypocrisy? the chutzpah? the utter uselessness of your sentiment? the fact that it's just too bad and politicians will be politicians and they're going to bring up the faults of others in order to hide their own? the brick wall you'll never dent?
you just do your part, and maybe, maybe, one day the rest of the world will grow the fuck up.
18 - Baronius
I wouldn't put it that way, Leroy. But from the perspective of limited government, sure, a huge government expansion is the low ground.
19 - Dr Dreadful
I would have thought the low ground would be something like, say, selling a CIA agent down the river because her husband pissed you off.
But whatever.
20 - Baronius
Dread, that's as off-topic as my comment about Romney, but yeah.
21 - Dan
Did Valerie Plames husband ever piss Richard Armitage off? Never heard that before.
22 - Dan
I guess if 40 years is long enough to "let go" of Ted Kennedy killing a girl, then 20 years is probably enough to forget about Rep. Gerry Studds admitting to sex wih a 16-year-old male page and taking him on a European junket. Then turning his back to the speakers chair when censured by the House.
23 - handyguy
This topic certainly brings out the sweet side of our conservative friends. Ugh.
24 - zingzing
see, baronius? might dan remember that during the same year a republican congressman also fucked a page? (see, baronius?) this game can be played all day. like the rest of us, politicians like to fuck. it's up to you whether or not you make a big deal out of it. (of course, a 16-year-old boy is reprehensible, but then again, a page is a page, and a 17-year-old girl is just as illegal. and it puts weiner's relatively harmless shenanigans into focus a bit.)
25 - zingzing
and no, i don't think dan forgot about the equally disgusting republican. i think he just chose to think that no one else would remember. silly dan.