Weiner: Yeah, it was my wiener!

Taichiliberal said:
I would wager that it's not wholly a "feminist effect"...as in the 30 years the "moral majority" was led by a (mostly) hypocritical bunch of men. As for Weiner losing his viability as a legislator...that would only come into question regarding propsed legislation on marriage. Other than that, technically he's the same legislator, as he's broken NO law....unless his wife files for divorce, Breitbart sues for slander or Pelosi and company find grounds for ethics violations.
Click to expand...



Women make up a huge proportion of the public, and their opinion of the issue may be more emotional (the betrayal) than practical (the botched cover-up).



anthony-weiner-6.jpg




I think Weiner has no future in politics, but we'll see.





Eliot-Spitzer201.jpg
​




Look what happened to Spitzer.
 
Bfgrn said:
OK, YOU set the criteria. Weiner lied about sexual e-mails and pictures with other women. NO ONE died or is being harmed. So you better fire off letters to every Republican in the House and Senate, because they LIED to the American people; and the outcome of their lies cost human life.


At the beginning of this process we made a strategic decision: we would make no deal with the administration. No negotiations, no compromise, nothing. We were going for all the marbles. This would be Obama’s Waterloo – just as healthcare was Clinton’s in 1994.

David Frum - Republican and former speechwriter for G.W. Bush.
Click to expand...

Have you seen me post anything in support of the Iraq War?
 
Taichiliberal said:
Here's the thing....it's not so much that he was nailed with what's essentially is an elaborate way to flirt with other women while being married.....it's the fact that he went public with outlandish lies and dodges to try and cover it up. That may cost him in political support and voter confidence. Hell, the Dem party honchos are already making public scowling noises!

What I find fascinating is that the general public seems okay with politicians lying to them, but somehow lying to a spouse is unforgivable. Go figure.
Click to expand...

"What I find fascinating is that the general public seems okay with politicians lying to them, but somehow lying to a spouse is unforgivable." I find that unforgiveable.
 
\(\(\(\/)/)/)/ said:
Women make up a huge proportion of the public, and their opinion of the issue may be more emotional (the betrayal) than practical (the botched cover-up).



anthony-weiner-6.jpg




I think Weiner has no future in politics, but we'll see.





Eliot-Spitzer201.jpg
​




Look what happened to Spitzer.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but what you say does not change the FACT that the "morality" bandwagon that has infiltrated/co-opted the political discussion has been led by men for the last 30 years.....which is hysterical given that a number of that leadership were caught in all sort of morally compromised positions.

And as for Spitzer, that was a political hit job...the one guy who had the means and ability to make Wall St. tow the line suddenly gets nailed with hookers. Also, he was questioned on using public funds for his romping, and was nailed for being a hypocrit in supporting legislation on abuses of office....big difference from Weiner, who essentially was flirting on his own time and dime.
 
WinterBorn said:
Have you seen me post anything in support of the Iraq War?
Click to expand...

I believe he was talking about the health care reform bill, not the war. He's claiming people will die without the reform thus it is the Republicans fault for trying to block it and lying about its effects.
 
WinterBorn said:
"What I find fascinating is that the general public seems okay with politicians lying to them, but somehow lying to a spouse is unforgivable." I find that unforgiveable.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, but that's a personal, private matter. If it doesn't involve public funding or influences legislation, then technically it shouldn't matter in the service of office.

See, there's nothing in the oath of office or legal requirements that a public servant be married or monogamous that I know of...so all of this is essentially a personal judgement call by the politicos and public.
 
cawacko said:
I believe he was talking about the health care reform bill, not the war. He's claiming people will die without the reform thus it is the Republicans fault for trying to block it and lying about its effects.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he and I discussed the "Death Panels" for a while. Or at least until I got tired of his dancing away from any questions.

Either way it bullshit.
 
Bfgrn said:
The causes Weiner is a strong articulate and vocal advocate for will not evaporate. I hope he stays and continues to make right wing corporatists in Congress squirm.


Go get them Anthony!
Click to expand...

What kind of person would deny the 911 responders, those who were stricken by illness while in the line of duty, medical care? Perhaps the question should be who would vote for the people denying care?

Who should resign: a man sending pictures of himself in his underwear or a man voting to deny medical care to the suffering and dying responders?

It's a strange world, indeed!
 
Taichiliberal said:
Ahhh, but that's a personal, private matter. If it doesn't involve public funding or influences legislation, then technically it shouldn't matter in the service of office.

See, there's nothing in the oath of office or legal requirements that a public servant be married or monogamous that I know of...so all of this is essentially a personal judgement call by the politicos and public.
Click to expand...

Lying to us is a personal judgement call? I think not. When a politician is caught lying to us it should be the end of their career.
 
WinterBorn said:
Yeah, he and I discussed the "Death Panels" for a while. Or at least until I got tired of his dancing away from any questions.

Either way it bullshit.
Click to expand...

I don't think too many people are going to argue that Weiner didn't lie. People may differ on what his next step should be but it is pretty clear he lied.

When one gets into (partisan) policy discussions there can obviously be (big) differences of opinion. On occassion those discussions turn into one side accusing the other side of lying. We can argue the health care legislation till we're blue in the face but people are not likely to change their opinion. Does that mean one side is lying if both sides don't agree?
 
WinterBorn said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Ahhh, but that's a personal, private matter. If it doesn't involve public funding or influences legislation, then technically it shouldn't matter in the service of office.

See, there's nothing in the oath of office or legal requirements that a public servant be married or monogamous that I know of...so all of this is essentially a personal judgement call by the politicos and public.
Click to expand...



Lying to us is a personal judgement call? I think not. When a politician is caught lying to us it should be the end of their career.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, stop and think...ask yourself, is it the public's right to have a politicians marriage as a litmus test for holding office? And if so, why stop there? Why not let your boss question you about your marriage or relationships and use that to determine if you're fit to hold your job.

IMHO, the ONLY way this would be of note is if a politician is caught legislating one way while personally living a lifestyle that's the opposite of the law...OR if caught using public funds to support their philandering....OR if their cheating is compromising the integrity of their vote.

Other than that, it's between husband and wife.

Weiner's fault was not only denying and lying, but falsely blaming others for smearing him.
 
Taichiliberal said:
sorry, but the opinions of a thousand women in a country of over 300 million is hardly a justification of the assertion.
Click to expand...



We'll see. I happen to think that many women find the actions of the peter-Tweeter disgusting, and I believe they'll express their disgust with his behavior very clearly.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Ahhh, stop and think...ask yourself, is it the public's right to have a politicians marriage as a litmus test for holding office? And if so, why stop there? Why not let your boss question you about your marriage or relationships and use that to determine if you're fit to hold your job.

IMHO, the ONLY way this would be of note is if a politician is caught legislating one way while personally living a lifestyle that's the opposite of the law...OR if caught using public funds to support their philandering....OR if their cheating is compromising the integrity of their vote.

Other than that, it's between husband and wife.

Weiner's fault was not only denying and lying, but falsely blaming others for smearing him.
Click to expand...

If you want to ignore the fact that he broke his vows, which is basically the same as breaking a sworn oath, how do you get passed the lying to us?

If an elected official lies to us, why would we keep them?
 
Taichiliberal said:
sorry, but the opinions of a thousand women in a country of over 300 million is hardly a justification of the assertion.
Click to expand...



I noticed you didn't fault the survey in any factual way...,why is that? Are you saying that your opinion is more valid than a survey?

This survey was conducted by Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, on behalf of the Women’s Voices. Women. It surveyed 1,030 respondents between October 26-28, 2008 in the battleground states of Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. The survey carries a margin of error of +/- 3.0 at a 95 percent confidence level.




[FONT=Arial, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://www.greenbergresearch.com/index.php?ID=2276[/FONT]
 
WinterBorn said:
If you want to ignore the fact that he broke his vows, which is basically the same as breaking a sworn oath, how do you get passed the lying to us?

If an elected official lies to us, why would we keep them?
Click to expand...

I definitely object to Weiner lying about the smear tactics supposedly used by Andrew Breitbart but (legal) sexual activities have no place in politics. Politicians should simply refuse to respond to questions of that nature.

A hypothetical: A person receives an email from a politician at precisely 11:05 PM. The politician replies he went to bed at 10:30 so was asleep at the time. If, in fact, at that very moment he was making love to a woman and said woman later revealed the truth would one consider the politician lied?

Was Clinton guilty of lying or guilty of trying to defend a woman's honor? If attempting to avoid the truth or to deliberately lie about sexual activities is to be considered abhorrent behavior and one is considered a stand-up guy for telling the whole truth would a guy in a bar be acknowledged as a stand-up guy if he recounted last night's sexual romp with the waitress if his buddies asked?
 
\(\(\(\/)/)/)/ said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
sorry, but the opinions of a thousand women in a country of over 300 million is hardly a justification of the assertion.
Click to expand...


We'll see. I happen to think that many women find the actions of the peter-Tweeter disgusting, and I believe they'll express their disgust with his behavior very clearly.
Click to expand...

"We'll see"...can be applied to anything....doesn't give much substance, however.
 
\(\(\(\/)/)/)/ said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
sorry, but the opinions of a thousand women in a country of over 300 million is hardly a justification of the assertion.
Click to expand...




I noticed you didn't fault the survey in any factual way...,why is that? Are you saying that your opinion is more valid than a survey?

This survey was conducted by Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, on behalf of the Women’s Voices. Women. It surveyed 1,030 respondents between October 26-28, 2008 in the battleground states of Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. The survey carries a margin of error of +/- 3.0 at a 95 percent confidence level.




[FONT=Arial, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://www.greenbergresearch.com/index.php?ID=2276[/FONT]
Click to expand...


A survey done in 13 States in two that totaled a little over one thousand women. Nothing wrong with that.
I just point out the FACT in a population of over 300 million (over 150 million being women), that this particular survey cannot claim it's an adequate representation of women across America. That's just a plain, fact based observation. Nothing wrong with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top