If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   First Sanford, now Wiener. HEY EVERYONE. WE'RE ALL GONNA GET LAID   (politico.com) divider line 41
    More: Interesting, Anthony Weiner, old South Carolina, Tina Brown, National Republican  
•       •       •

936 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 May 2013 at 9:09 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-09 09:13:49 AM
You ain't nothin' but a Houn' Dog.
 
2013-05-09 09:27:56 AM
Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.  You can also count me in the camp that considers his indiscretions as considerably different than Sanford's.  While flashing you junk to the internet is a horrible judgement for a politician, misusing funds to travel to Argentina while lying to your constituents to cheat on your wife is a scandal of a whole 'nother nature.
 
2013-05-09 09:29:07 AM
Wiener should never had to resign in the first place.
 
2013-05-09 09:29:29 AM
And Sanford, who is marrying the Argentinian woman he snuck out of the country to see, apologized to almost every person he encountered, over and over and over, saying he had learned from his mistakes.

If you were really sorry, you wouldn't put yourself and your new fiancee in the limelight by asking to go back to the situation that afforded you the opportunity to cheat on your wife, steal money from taxpayers, and vanish from your office without a hint of where you went. Instead, what you're likely sorry about is that your lies and theft were discovered. And... hey, it seems the people of your state don't seem to give a sh*t because you have that magical "R" after your name.
 
2013-05-09 09:30:13 AM
Wiener is polling at half of what his rival is.
The guy in third place is just a couple of points shy of Wiener.
So Wiener has a lot of ground to cover.
(IIRC it was 28, 15, 11)

Besides being a loud mouth who has set back bipartisanship and the sponsoring of the Mohair bill and the visas for models bill, I don't get why people want him elected.

A MSNBC correspondent to take over the Ed Schultz shoe fits his "value added" a lot more
 
2013-05-09 09:34:18 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: Besides being a loud mouth who has set back bipartisanship and the sponsoring of the Mohair bill and the visas for models bill, I don't get why people want him elected.


Those damn Democrats and their lack of bipartisanship.
 
2013-05-09 09:37:15 AM
Tonight, at the pit.
 
2013-05-09 09:37:23 AM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: tenpoundsofcheese: Besides being a loud mouth who has set back bipartisanship and the sponsoring of the Mohair bill and the visas for models bill, I don't get why people want him elected.

Those damn Democrats and their lack of bipartisanship.


This particular democrat, absolutely.
I wasn't saying all democrats, nor is this article about a republican.

If you want to change things and get to more partisanship, you get there with each election, not by whining about the clouds.
 
2013-05-09 09:45:56 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: I wasn't saying all democrats, nor is this article about a republican


The 16 references that refer to Sanford's scandal disagree with you.
 
2013-05-09 09:51:11 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: nor is this article about a republican.


Yes it is. It is about a democrat and a republican. Fully 1/3 of that piece was about Sanford.
 
2013-05-09 10:01:53 AM

dumbobruni: Wiener should never had to resign in the first place.


THIS. I do hope Mayor Weiner (Get used to it, Republicans, you made it happen!) makes it a point to take an annual pilgrimage to piss on Breitbart's grave.
 
2013-05-09 10:06:25 AM
Weiner's got my vote. He was a dumbass for what he did but really I'm just mad at him for it because he isn't in congress anymore. We need more Democrats like him.
 
2013-05-09 10:09:34 AM
i.qkme.me
Just cause I know we all wanna see his smilin face.
 
2013-05-09 10:15:22 AM

Kome: tenpoundsofcheese: nor is this article about a republican.

Yes it is. It is about a democrat and a republican. Fully 1/3 of that piece was about Sanford.


Sanford was already elected.
Get over it.

Point of the article:  "Any lessons for Anthony Weiner in your victory?"

Your head, way under the point.
 
2013-05-09 10:18:09 AM
It'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford attacking Weiner.
 
2013-05-09 10:23:04 AM

LordJiro: It'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford attacking Weiner.


When did Sanford attack Wiener?  Citation?

FTA:  "I wouldn't presume to give any other politician advice," Sanford told CNN.
 
2013-05-09 10:24:37 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: Point of the article: "Any lessons for Anthony Weiner in your victory?"


Yes, that is the point of the article... by talking about a Republican who was embroiled in his own scandal and was still re-elected. That means, almost by definition, that the article is *about* a Republican inasmuch as it relates to their discussion *about* a Democrat.

I don't see why you're arguing this. I'm not disagreeing with your claim of partisanship or your claim that the article is about a Democrat. But to say that in an article that discusses a Republican one-third of the time is not about a Republican is simply incorrect. It may not be the main focus of the article - it isn't - but the article simply could not exist without it being about Sanford to a significant degree.

But, if you want to continue to play the "I'm always right and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong and a poopyhead" you go right ahead, cupcake.
 
2013-05-09 10:27:51 AM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.


Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.
 
2013-05-09 10:29:30 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: Kome: tenpoundsofcheese: nor is this article about a republican.

Yes it is. It is about a democrat and a republican. Fully 1/3 of that piece was about Sanford.

Sanford was already elected.
Get over it.

Point of the article:  "Any lessons for Anthony Weiner in your victory?"

Your head, way under the point.


Point made.  Contrary to what you originally stated (and was corrected by the other poster) the article is, in fact, about a Republican.
 
2013-05-09 10:31:06 AM

Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.


You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.
 
2013-05-09 11:11:37 AM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.

You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.


Then suggest an alternative.
 
2013-05-09 11:21:47 AM

Kome: tenpoundsofcheese: Point of the article: "Any lessons for Anthony Weiner in your victory?"

Yes, that is the point of the article... by talking about a Republican who was embroiled in his own scandal and was still re-elected. That means, almost by definition, that the article is *about* a Republican inasmuch as it relates to their discussion *about* a Democrat.

I don't see why you're arguing this. I'm not disagreeing with your claim of partisanship or your claim that the article is about a Democrat. But to say that in an article that discusses a Republican one-third of the time is not about a Republican is simply incorrect. It may not be the main focus of the article - it isn't - but the article simply could not exist without it being about Sanford to a significant degree.

But, if you want to continue to play the "I'm always right and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong and a poopyhead" you go right ahead, cupcake.


The article used Sanford's victory to discuss Wiener's prospects.  Sure, you can say the article is about the victory and therefore about Sanford, but I took the purpose of the article as that Wiener has a shot and can learn from this and possibly come back.

If the article was meant to be about Sanford, or about successful comebacks, there would be no reason to mention Wiener.
 
2013-05-09 11:24:52 AM

un4gvn666: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.

You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.

Then suggest an alternative.


Quinn
 
2013-05-09 11:51:24 AM

un4gvn666: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.

You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.

Then suggest an alternative.


Ok. Off the tip of my head...Shumer, Cuomo, Clinton. All better candidates than Wiener. And all would likely poll higher than him as well. And, just like Wiener, none of these people are declared in the primary.
 
2013-05-09 11:54:23 AM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: un4gvn666: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.

You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.

Then suggest an alternative.

Ok. Off the tip of my head...Shumer, Cuomo, Clinton. All better candidates than Wiener. And all would likely poll higher than him as well. And, just like Wiener, none of these people are declared in the primary.


Shumer: Why leave the power you have in the Senate to be Mayor?

Cuomo: Really?  You want him to downgrade?

Clinton: As much as it would amuse him to be Mayor; I think he's enjoing his post-Presidential life quite well.

Again, if Weiner ran I'd vote for him.  He's a lot better than the options we have now.
 
2013-05-09 12:01:47 PM

Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: un4gvn666: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.

You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.

Then suggest an alternative.

Ok. Off the tip of my head...Shumer, Cuomo, Clinton. All better candidates than Wiener. And all would likely poll higher than him as well. And, just like Wiener, none of these people are declared in the primary.

Shumer: Why leave the power you have in the Senate to be Mayor?

Cuomo: Really?  You want him to downgrade?

Clinton: As much as it would amuse him to be Mayor; I think he's enjoing his post-Presidential life quite well.

Again, if Weiner ran I'd vote for him.  He's a lot better than the options we have now.


Man, you are quite the straw man. I listed Democrats who would be better mayors. Why they should or shouldn't run is a whole different conversation. I stick by my statement that I think a better candidate than Wiener should declare
 
2013-05-09 12:12:03 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: LordJiro: It'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford attacking Weiner.

When did Sanford attack Wiener?  Citation?

FTA:  "I wouldn't presume to give any other politician advice," Sanford told CNN.


I think he meant that it'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford then proceed toattack Weiner.

By the way, I understand that what Weiner did was stupid, but is there any evidence that he actually CHEATED?  Usually when something like this happens, especially with porn stars and strippers, the girls in question won't shut up about it.  Hell, when Tiger Woods cheated, Howard Stern was able to get a bunch of them together for a beauty pageant.

And, again not defending the stupidity of how he handled it, couples spice up their love life this way all the time.
 
2013-05-09 01:01:57 PM

The Lone Gunman: I understand that what Weiner did was stupid, but is there any evidence that he actually CHEATED?


IIRC it wasn't an allegation of cheating it was how he attacked people for reporting it, made claims that they were lying, some conspiracy nut talk, then claimed he was hacked, then he was hacked by someone who was lying and so on.
He heavily played the victim card, the media fell for it (especially since Breitbart was involved) and then the media, and even Jon Stewart turned on him when they realized they were played after they were supporting him so heavily.

He only needed to say one thing: "I did something really stupid, now excuse me while I go apologize to the only person that matters in this, my wife".
 
2013-05-09 01:04:59 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: The Lone Gunman: I understand that what Weiner did was stupid, but is there any evidence that he actually CHEATED?

IIRC it wasn't an allegation of cheating it was how he attacked people for reporting it, made claims that they were lying, some conspiracy nut talk, then claimed he was hacked, then he was hacked by someone who was lying and so on.
He heavily played the victim card, the media fell for it (especially since Breitbart was involved) and then the media, and even Jon Stewart turned on him when they realized they were played after they were supporting him so heavily.

He only needed to say one thing: "I did something really stupid, now excuse me while I go apologize to the only person that matters in this, my wife".


Well, that's why I made sure to say that I wasn't defending the stupidity of how he handled it.
 
2013-05-09 01:11:35 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: The Lone Gunman: I understand that what Weiner did was stupid, but is there any evidence that he actually CHEATED?

IIRC it wasn't an allegation of cheating it was how he attacked people for reporting it, made claims that they were lying, some conspiracy nut talk, then claimed he was hacked, then he was hacked by someone who was lying and so on.
He heavily played the victim card, the media fell for it (especially since Breitbart was involved) and then the media, and even Jon Stewart turned on him when they realized they were played after they were supporting him so heavily.

He only needed to say one thing: "I did something really stupid, now excuse me while I go apologize to the only person that matters in this, my wife".


We agree on this one.  He made it much worse than it should have been, hence why I believe he is damaged goods.
 
2013-05-09 01:20:06 PM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: tenpoundsofcheese: The Lone Gunman: I understand that what Weiner did was stupid, but is there any evidence that he actually CHEATED?

IIRC it wasn't an allegation of cheating it was how he attacked people for reporting it, made claims that they were lying, some conspiracy nut talk, then claimed he was hacked, then he was hacked by someone who was lying and so on.
He heavily played the victim card, the media fell for it (especially since Breitbart was involved) and then the media, and even Jon Stewart turned on him when they realized they were played after they were supporting him so heavily.

He only needed to say one thing: "I did something really stupid, now excuse me while I go apologize to the only person that matters in this, my wife".

We agree on this one.  He made it much worse than it should have been, hence why I believe he is damaged goods.


Yeah, it is a funny world.  You can lie to the constituents, you can cheat on your taxes and get re-elected, but boy, don't get the press pissed off.

I honestly don't remember, did Sanford lie to the press or did he do the no comment thing?
 
2013-05-09 01:25:06 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: I honestly don't remember, did Sanford lie to the press or did he do the no comment thing?


He lied to his staff, who he had field questions from the press on his whereabouts.
 
2013-05-09 02:15:32 PM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: un4gvn666: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Chalk me up as a liberal who once respected Wiener but now thinks he should move along.

Really?  You wanna leave NYC to a bunch of substitute teachers? That's who's really running for the Mayor's seat.

You may not be aware of this, but Wiener isn't the only Democrat in New York City.

Then suggest an alternative.

Ok. Off the tip of my head...Shumer, Cuomo, Clinton. All better candidates than Wiener. And all would likely poll higher than him as well. And, just like Wiener, none of these people are declared in the primary.

Shumer: Why leave the power you have in the Senate to be Mayor?

Cuomo: Really?  You want him to downgrade?

Clinton: As much as it would amuse him to be Mayor; I think he's enjoing his post-Presidential life quite well.

Again, if Weiner ran I'd vote for him.  He's a lot better than the options we have now.

Man, you are quite the straw man.


Not if I was playing Devil's Advocate.

I listed Democrats who would be better mayors. Why they should or shouldn't run is a whole different conversation. I stick by my statement that I think a better candidate than Wiener should declare

I'm sorry, but when people have elected or keeping standing by individuals like that idiot Sanford or Vitter from Louisiana, Weiner's "transgression" shouldn't disqualify him from running for whatever public office he so chooses.
 
2013-05-09 02:17:38 PM

The Lone Gunman: I think he meant that it'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford then proceed toattack Weiner.


Better:  Those very same Republicans that defended/will defend Sanford were front and center in criticizing Clinton back in the day.
 
2013-05-09 02:58:42 PM

Rwa2play: The Lone Gunman: I think he meant that it'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford then proceed toattack Weiner.

Better:  Those very same Republicans that defended/will defend Sanford were front and center in criticizing Clinton back in the day.


Did Sanford commit perjury?
Was he accused of sexual harassment or sexual assault?
Was he being sued?
Did he settle by paying off one of the accusers?
 
2013-05-09 03:12:47 PM

Rwa2play: I'm sorry, but when people have elected or keeping standing by individuals like that idiot Sanford or Vitter from Louisiana, Weiner's "transgression" shouldn't disqualify him from running for whatever public office he so chooses.


C'mon man, another straw man. As I've stated several times already, I don't think his transgression was as bad as Sanford, Vitter, Foley, etc.  I also do not want "substitute teachers" elected Mayor of NYC.  I also do not think this should disqualify him from running.  I believe that if he wins the primary, he will not be elected (which early polling seems to back up), thus making him a liability for Democrats.

I never made a comment about his experience or ability to lead, nor do I think the voters in NYC will concern themselves with WHY idiots like Sanford or Vitter were re-elected. My opinion of the guy is he used awful judgement that he knew could have (and potentially has) ruined his career in the court of public opinion.  And as much as I hate to be seen agreeing with cheese, he has a valid point.  Hell, I would be in this thread defending him had he simply came out and said "Yep, that's my junk. Move along".
 
2013-05-09 03:15:18 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Sure, you can say the article is about the victory and therefore about Sanford, but I took the purpose of the article as that Wiener has a shot and can learn from this and possibly come back.


That's more or less what I'm trying to say. When you compare two things, the comparison is by necessity about those two things. It isn't about only one of them; it couldn't possibly be. That's the entire point of my response to you, and I have no clue why you are resistant to being corrected on what, in the grand scheme of the thread, amounts to a incredibly minor mistake. It's very peculiar to be so defensive about that.
 
2013-05-09 04:20:52 PM
Congratulations everybody!  Now DIAF.
 
2013-05-09 05:16:41 PM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: Rwa2play: I'm sorry, but when people have elected or keeping standing by individuals like that idiot Sanford or Vitter from Louisiana, Weiner's "transgression" shouldn't disqualify him from running for whatever public office he so chooses.

C'mon man, another straw man. As I've stated several times already, I don't think his transgression was as bad as Sanford, Vitter, Foley, etc.  I also do not want "substitute teachers" elected Mayor of NYC.


Sorry, but that wasn't really pointed towards you as so much pointed towards people who try to make that argument against Weiner running for Mayor.

I also do not think this should disqualify him from running.  I believe that if he wins the primary, he will not be elected (which early polling seems to back up), thus making him a liability for Democrats.

Uh, do you realize what city we're talking about here?  The last time Bloomberg ran for re-election, he went up against Bill Thompson, who was such an incompetent buffoon, he made Inspector Clouseau look like Sherlock Holmes...and he almost won~!  Seriously, this guy should've been crushed by 20 points and he lost by 5 points or so.

I never made a comment about his experience or ability to lead, nor do I think the voters in NYC will concern themselves with WHY idiots like Sanford or Vitter were re-elected.  My opinion of the guy is he used awful judgement that he knew could have (and potentially has) ruined his career in the court of public opinion.

Considering that Vitter's still around and now Sanford's been elected, Weiner's career in politics just got reborn.

And as much as I hate to be seen agreeing with cheese, he has a valid point.  Hell, I would be in this thread defending him had he simply came out and said "Yep, that's my junk. Move along".

Oh, I agree.  It wouldn't have been that big a deal had he just admitted it and said, "I farked up, my bad."
 
2013-05-09 08:59:19 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Rwa2play: The Lone Gunman: I think he meant that it'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford then proceed toattack Weiner.

Better:  Those very same Republicans that defended/will defend Sanford were front and center in criticizing Clinton back in the day.

Did Sanford commit perjury?
Was he accused of sexual harassment or sexual assault?
Was he being sued?
Did he settle by paying off one of the accusers?


People sue for the sole purpose of getting people to pay them to go away all the time.  It's possible, POSSIBLE, that Paula Jones hurt her credibility when she posed for Penthouse.  Similar to how Gennifer Flowers might have possibly hurt her complaints by posing for Playboy.

The problem is that you're making the BSABSVR argument.  My argument is that if I vote for a candidate, or donate to his campaign, or work for his election, if he gets elected, he damn well better stay there.  Sanford caused a panic when he disappeared, and THAT is why he no longer should be allowed to hold public office.

By the way, Democrats like Allyson Schwartz and Nancy Pelosi called on Weiner to resign.  When Mark Foley got caught making lewd texts to 14yo Congressional pages, the Republican response was to call for an end to the page system.
 
2013-05-09 10:57:30 PM

The Lone Gunman: tenpoundsofcheese: Rwa2play: The Lone Gunman: I think he meant that it'll be glorious to watch the inevitable flood of Republicans who defended Sanford then proceed toattack Weiner.

Better:  Those very same Republicans that defended/will defend Sanford were front and center in criticizing Clinton back in the day.

Did Sanford commit perjury?
Was he accused of sexual harassment or sexual assault?
Was he being sued?
Did he settle by paying off one of the accusers?

People sue for the sole purpose of getting people to pay them to go away all the time.  It's possible, POSSIBLE, that Paula Jones hurt her credibility when she posed for Penthouse.  Similar to how Gennifer Flowers might have possibly hurt her complaints by posing for Playboy.

The problem is that you're making the BSABSVR argument.  My argument is that if I vote for a candidate, or donate to his campaign, or work for his election, if he gets elected, he damn well better stay there.  Sanford caused a panic when he disappeared, and THAT is why he no longer should be allowed to hold public office.

By the way, Democrats like Allyson Schwartz and Nancy Pelosi called on Weiner to resign.  When Mark Foley got caught making lewd texts to 14yo Congressional pages, the Republican response was to call for an end to the page system.


I love how TPOC wants to run away as fast as he possibly can from the mine of "family values" that Republicans held so dear...while they were boinking their lovers.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report