Anthony Weiner entered public service shortly after obtaining his bachelor’s degree in political science. He was a staffer to then-Congressmen Chuck Schumer. When Schumer ran for the Senate in 1998, Weiner ran for his seat in the House and won. He is known for working long hours and requiring his staff to do the same (with mixed responses from staffers). Many believed that the hard-working Weiner was destined for higher office, and his ambitions to the same were no secret. Here is Weiner’s official Congressional portrait.
And here he is supporting gay rights in NYC.
The problem is, when Mr. Weiner wasn’t legislating, he was taking pictures of his genitalia and sending them to various women using his cell phone. :eh: He was forced to resign from Congress in 2011 over the scandal, and disappeared from the public eye for a couple of years. He made a stunning return to public life this year when he announced his intention to run for Mayor of NYC. The public seemed to accept his apology and displays of self-reprobation, and he was the clear frontrunner in the Democratic primary. That is, until it was revealed that he continued to send explicit photos of himself to women using his cell phone, and he even apparently told one he loved her (Mr. Weiner is married with a child). His poll numbers have since plummeted and are not likely to return.
I’m having trouble understanding this one. First, what pleasure does one derive from sending explicit pictures of themselves? He never even met the women in person. Second, didn’t he realize he was going to get caught? I mean, he was a Congressman. Surely it crossed his mind that someone would recognize him? :eh: Odder still, after he was forced to resign in shame, he went right back at, this time under the pseudonym “Carlos Danger”. Finally, and this is the best part, he ran for mayor of NYC, knowing that he had carried on relationships with several women (via cell phone) after he had resigned from Congress. I mean, he knew people would find out and he’d be publicly shamed again, right? What am I missing here? :eh:
[quote]
Don’t Leave the Mayor’s Race Yet, Anthony Weiner
by Peter Beinart Jul 26, 2013 4:45 AM EDT
Yes, he lied. And he hurt his wife. But let democracy decide in New York, not the media. [/quote]
Why this piece of work gets a pass from TDB is beyond me. I don’t need to compare him to other men in power.
Some people have a self-destruct button. I think they get a thrill out of risking everything. Bill Clinton was not dissimilar.[/quote]
I don’t think he’s in the same boat as Clinton, or even the same ocean.
What irks me is the TDB is not doing a proper job of vetting him. “Let the people decide?”
Since fucking when?
They were sure there when the Tea Partiers came out in force.
Maybe one has to fuck a dog or a child for the Left to dismiss one of their own outright. :raspberry:
[quote]There was an ugly exchange on Friday between New York City mayoral hopeful Anthony Weiner and a Staten Island teacher and principal. And in another bombshell, the candidate was asked if he would he hire a schools chancellor or a police commissioner with the same sexting addiction he has.
Weiner thought his Staten Island campaign stop would get him back to talking about the issues affect New York. In this case people hurt by Hurricane Sandy.
But a local teacher and principal rained on his parade.
Peg Brunda asked the question Weiner definitely did not want to hear.
“I don’t quite understand how you would feel you would have the moral authority as the head administrator in the city to oversee employees when your standard of conduct is so much lower than the standard of conduct that’s expected of me,” the retired teacher said.
Weiner responded by saying, “You’re not voting for me?”
Absolutely. This isn’t some stupid sh8t this guy did in college twenty years ago. He’s doing it now.
All I can say is I’m glad it’s going this way, as I haven’t heard ONE SINGLE ISSUE that Weiner is promoting, have no idea what his platform is, and I’m glad. :s
And the tide is going to turn soon and sharply on his wife, who is trying to be Hillary Clinton in the 1990s.
You have to hear his name here in a NYC accent to really appreciate it. All for the best IMO as “hizzoner mayor weiner” is not something that was really meant to be said in the local patois. It’s dominating the news here of course. Know nothing about him, but he seems to have a judgement problem.
“A live boy or a dead girl” is the quote you’re looking for.
Of course, with Teddy Kennedy, the “dead girl” wasn’t enough to completely derail his political career (although at least we were spared President Ted), and nowadays in general a “live boy” is not enough.
But what can you really expect? They’re Democrats. It’s not like they even pretend a semblance of morality.
Whoremongering and infantilism didn’t derail the career of David Vitter; sleeping with an Argentinian mistress while pretending to hike the Appalachian trail didn’t hurt Mark Sanford. (Both are members of the GOP: the party that claims to embody perfect moral virtue.)
For once I want to see a politician who fully admits “Yeah, I like sex… I’m human just like you,” and shrugs off the criticism. That’s a politician with balls.
So that makes it all good? Talk about a false equivalent.
The buck never stops, huh?
A school teacher wold be fired on the spot for what he did. A police chief would be. A city bus driver. But you think it’s ok for this guy to be mayor of a huge metropolis?
It’s neither good nor bad. It’s irrelevant. Perhaps impolitic in today’s sex-obsessed political climate, but why should anyone care what sexual behaviors someone else engages in? It’s not as if he campaigned on a platform of sexual propriety (whatever that might mean).
(And no, I don’t think anyone should be fired for sexual foibles unless they actually harm others. If sexual kinkiness were grounds for dismissal, very few of us would be employed.)
Because the people under the umbrella of hiz honor would be fired for the same lapses in judgement. And clearly, HE thinks it’s a problem. You think he shouldn’t?
Because the people under the umbrella of hiz honor would be fired for the same lapses in judgement.[/quote]
I don’t think anyone should be fired for consensual sexual quirkiness. (Sexual harassment is another issue altogether.)
No. I don’t generally go out of my way to look at other men’s penises.[/quote]
So, you think Clinton should have been fired. Good. Me too.
Why not? On the penis thing. You think it’s no big deal. Why so shy of the one eye? I mean, as you say, it’s just a quirky thang he does. He’s empowering himself via captain woody and social networking. Don’t you want to get in on that pioneering pathmaker. Maybe follow his pointer on twitter :bravo:
[quote=“Chris”][quote=“rodeo”][quote=“Chris”]I don’t think anyone should be fired for consensual sexual quirkiness. (Sexual harassment is another issue altogether.)
No. I don’t generally go out of my way to look at other men’s penises.[/quote]
So, you think Clinton should have been fired.[/quote]
No. I don’t think anyone should be fired for consensual sexual quirkiness.[/quote]
Riiiight.
People like you make people on the right edge even further away. I blame you all for the Tea Party.
“I believe what Hitchens had to say when I agree with him and he was full of it when he said things I disagree with.”
So, you disagree with him that Kissinger was a war criminal?[/quote]
You really think that if I disagree with him on lots of things, it must mean I disagree with him on everything? I’ve even found myself agreeing with that scumbag Rush Limbaugh on occasion.
“I believe what Hitchens had to say when I agree with him and he was full of it when he said things I disagree with.”
So, you disagree with him that Kissinger was a war criminal?[/quote]
You really think that if I disagree with him on lots of things, it must mean I disagree with him on everything? I’ve even found myself agreeing with that scumbag Rush Limbaugh on occasion.[/quote]
No, which is why I ask. [quote]
Weiner and his campaign aides have explicitly referred to the Clintons as they privately seek to convince skeptical Democrats that voters can back Weiner despite his online sexual antics — just as they supported then-President Bill Clinton in the face of repeated allegations of marital betrayals.
“The Clintons are pissed off that Weiner’s campaign is saying that Huma is just like Hillary,’’ said the source. “How dare they compare Huma with Hillary? Hillary was the first lady. Hillary was a senator. She was secretary of state.”[/quote] nypost.com/p/news/local/clin … D4SiXeWSLJ
Finally, and this is the best part, he ran for mayor of NYC, knowing that he had carried on relationships with several women (via cell phone) after he had resigned from Congress. I mean, he knew people would find out and he’d be publicly shamed again, right? What am I missing here? :eh:
