Now the important question: What are we going to do about sleaze merchants?

[Liberal Veteran]

It has become clear that the sides are somewhat divided on the issue of a certain representative's future.

I, for one, am getting tired of peeping toms passing themselves off as journalists in the hope stumbling across some nugget with which to use as a political weapon.

We let Drudge get away with it.

We let O'Keefe get away with it.

We are letting Breitbart get away with it.

And then we complain about the mediocrity of our officials and our press.

Is it time to take a stand or should we continue to cower and capitulate to muckrakers to avoid a moment's embarrassment?

I despise everything the republicans stand for, but when attacked, they circle the wagons. When we are attacked, we circle the firing squad.

Is it time to change our tactics?

[LARED]

1. Maybe we should focus on avoiding the sleazy

politicians.

[Liberal Veteran]

3. Where might we find these paragons of virtue?

[Cronus Protagonist]

6. I recommend looking among the pols that do NOT have a hard-on in their Twitter feed

Especially if it's their own.

[Liberal Veteran]

9. So, capitulation is the key?

And people wonder why our party is not known for having a spine.

[Cronus Protagonist]

10. I have more spine than most, but I do NOT have a boner picture on the web

And that, my friend, makes me more electable than those who do.

I have NOT bare-faced lied to everyone on TV. And that, my friend, makes me more electable than those who do.

I have not made horrible judgment call to post my hard-on to a web site. And that, my friend, makes me more electable than those who do.

And I'm not even running for office.

Shouldn't we hold ALL elected representatives to a higher standard then me? How about the same standard? No? Must we go lower than that to select our politicians? How about we go as low as weiner?

[Liberal Veteran]

16. I'll keep that in mind the next time I am voting for a pope.

[Capitalocracy]

21. Something we have no way of knowing until it happens.

So to a certain extent, it's unavoidable. Why do we let it damage our party so much more politically than the Republicans, who are even more hypocritical about it to begin with?

[Cronus Protagonist]

22. I've seen Weiner's erection

Impressive, but I have seen no Republican cock in the last fifty years, despite all the scandals, this one is a full frontal, which is why it means Weiner's a porn star, not a politician any more.

[Liberal Veteran]

27. Would you happen to have any dramamine?

Hyperbole always makes me a tad bit nauseous.

[cali]

17. here

http://welch.house.gov/

That's my rep. not sleazy.

[reACTIONary]

36. He's just luck to have been born with an inoculous name (nm)

[LARED]

20. I'm not exactly demanding paragons of virtue.

I will settle for congresscritters that can manage to avoid cheating on their spouse or posting unsavory pictures on twitter.

[Warren DeMontague]

26. Hitler never looked at another woman after he met Eva Braun

Marital fidelity is not an indicator of any sort of virtue beyond marital fidelity.

[Liberal Veteran]

29. Exactly. By giving in to the Breitbarts et al, we let them steer the narrative.

A person can do something stupid and embarrassing, but I am not going to throw them under the bus and kick them when they are down.

[LARED]

32. That is true, but not absolute

I think our representatives have an important responsibility that requires them to be people of character and virtue. This should be required by us because we hand over to them the ability to have great impact on our lives and fortunes. I for one would much rather have a virtuous man or women representing me than a morally bankrupt one. We should hold our elected representative to a higher standard. No?

I find it somewhat odd that people will pretend that a lack of virtue in one area of a life says absolutely nothing about a persons virtue in other areas of their life.

[Liberal Veteran]

33. I'm sure many would say the same about pre-marital sex.

I'll leave virtues and vices to the priesthood. If cybersexing with adults gets his rocks off, more power to him. When it comes to his votes and his positions on issues that really matter to me, I haven't any issue with him. Your mileage may vary.

[LARED]

38. I guess to each his (or her) own

If I had a choice I would rather not have the cybersexing attention whore representative flirting with someone other than his wife representing me.

It just seems to point to someone that is not to be taken seriously.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. No. Unless he broke a law, it's between him and his wife.

Especially since he's not a 'family values' hypocrite.

End of story, AFAIC.

[lame54]

7. and replace them with who...

power corrupts

[emilyg]

24. Yep.

[pnwmom]

2. Nothing. Freedom of speech is in the constitution, remember?

[Liberal Veteran]

4. Nothing? Does the constitution force us to reward muckrakers?

If your answer is simply, "nothing", we have lost and we are just putting off the inevitable.

[pnwmom]

5. Legally, it's protected speech. Were you speaking of personal

rather than legal means?

[Liberal Veteran]

8. I'm talking about how we respond as a party.

It isn't going to change by capitulating to people digging around in the garbage looking for something to embarrass us with.

The only other options afforded to us is turn politics into "The Truman Show" where their every intimate moment is broadcast or produce only milquetoast wishy-washy politicians that have are so boring personally and professionally that have all the personality of paint drying.

[pnwmom]

11. There's nothing we can do as a party, except

call on Weiner to resign. That will be the end of the drip drip drip of the sleeze merchants. The photos will be worthless once he's gone.

[Liberal Veteran]

14. If that's the case, I might have to rethink if I am ever going to vote again.

If my only options is a choice between the greedy or the invertebrates, I am simply wasting my time and energy.

A pox on both their houses.

I've nothing to win either way now.

[cali]

18. force? just who is being forced to reward muckrakers?

And how do you feel about Larry Flynt?

[former9thward]

12. If politicians would be embarrassed by having their emails,

twitter, facebook published then they should not be in politics. If they follow that rule they don't have to worry about Drudge or anyone else getting access to their accounts.

When I was the manager of a governmental unit in Chicago I always told my employees that if they would be embarrassed by having one of their emails show up tomorrow morning on the front page of the Chicago Tribune then just don't write/send it!

[Cronus Protagonist]

13. Watch ABC news for the latest info

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/anthony-weiner-photos-emerge-amid-renewed-calls-resignation/story?id=13822416

[Cleita]

15. Unfortunately, you would have to define what is sleaze

and that leads to censorship and limited freedom of speech. I would be happy just to have a rule or law that defines what are lies or half truths by the media that they shouldn't be allowed to use.

[Liberal Veteran]

19. I don't pay attention to people on the corner screaming that I am going to burn in hell.

That is not censorship.

Freedom of speech doesn't imply freedom to force us to listen or agree.

I don't buy tabloids telling me that Brad cheated on Angelina (or whatever) because I don't find it worthy of my attention.

That is not censorship.

[Riftaxe]

23. By repealing the 1st Amendment of course

Then we can put you in charge of determining sleaze and metering out punishment without due process of course, it will be a golden age!

What could go wrong? :shrug:

[Liberal Veteran]

25. I beg your pardon?

Did I anywhere state that I wanted to repeal the 1st amendment?

How we respond (or not respond) to the muckrakers in our society by capitulating to them is not the same as saying "censor them".

I'll thank you not put words in my mouth. I am quite capable of speaking for myself. Do we understand one another now?

[reACTIONary]

30. LOL (nm)

[reACTIONary]

28. You aren't characterizing dems or repubs correctly

Republicans have called for the resignation of their own. And Democrats have been defensive and protective even when uncalled for. I don't see a big difference.

And what specifically do you want done about Drudge, O'Keef, and Breitbart? O'Keef basically self-destructed. But what change in tactics are you looking for with respect to the other two?

[Liberal Veteran]

31. How about tactics like, "It was certainly embarrassing, but certainly not criminal".

There are probably a hundred better ways than Debbie Wasserman Schultz calling on him to resign.

If nothing else, doing so hands Breitbart and his ilk the reward they are after.

Is that the kind of political discourse we want to live down to?

[reACTIONary]

35. "It was embarising, but not illegal"...

... is a reasonable defense to try, and, by the way, one that has been made. Nonetheless, there will be many who will not accept that, since Congress critters are supposed to be held to a high standard.

I like the "therapy" line of defense. Taken from the religious right-wing repressed gay preacher play book. Too bad he isn't a drinker, he could check into rehab. That would make it all right.

[sabrina 1]

37. We are letting Breitbart get away with it.

He has ruined many lives, but he could never have done that had Democrats had the spine to stand up to him. Instead, they cave every time.

Either we build our own sleaze machine, since no one seems willing to go after him, or we learn to stop reacting to his filthy, dirty tricks.

But we would need leadership for that to happen, so right now I'm leaning towards building our own sleaze machine and as soon as it's operational, let's start with Breitbart! It's called 'returning the favor'.