Anthony Weiner Should Resign - James Fallows

[Pryderi]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/06/poor-rep-weiner/240056/

I felt for Rep. Weiner during his press conference and, to get to the point, in most cases I would think that his online activity is nobody's business but his -- and once he was married, his wife's; and the other women's of course too.

But this isn't most cases. He has run for office, asked for people's trust, and made himself a prominent champion of one side of an important political fight -- a side that he has now embarrassed and let down.

By analogy: Most people are allowed to duck or run away in terror if they hear a shot fired. But police officers or combat leaders aren't allowed to, if they want to retain that role. Most couples are allowed to bicker and yell at each other, if tempers rise. But in their role as parents, they try not to do that in front of the kids. Most people are allowed to say, "I don't like your looks" or "I think you're lying." But a judge presiding over a trial cannot say those things without putting everyone else's efforts at the trial in jeopardy.

That's the equivalent of what Weiner has done. If he weren't a prominent Congressman, it wouldn't matter to anyone outside his immediate circle what he is doing online. But he is a prominent Congressman, and had worked for years to put himself in that role. He worked himself into a position where, now, his lack of judgment hurts not just him but many other people who relied on him and were his allies. He has let them down, and he will hurt their cause every time he speaks in its favor now. He is like a surgeon who swoons at the sight of blood, a football quarterback who dreads being hit, a pilot who shows up drunk. Those behaviors are not "wrong" in some deep transcendent sense (apart from the lying); but they betray others who rely on performance in a certain role. This is why I agree, sadly, with Joshua Green: Weiner should go.

[liberal N proud]

1. Only after every adulterer in Congress resigns

They all get so goody two shoes when the media makes a big show out one of their sexcapades but so many of them are just as guilty if not more.

[Xipe Totec]

2. Your analogy is flawed

Policemen have stood on the sidelines and watched people drown, because departmental policy prohibited them from intervening.

As ordinary citizens they would have been free to try to rescue a drowning man, but as police officers, they had to stand by and watch him drown.

How fucked up is that?

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/06/01/california-city-changes-policy-after-police-watch-man-drown/

[RandomThoughts]

3. How many people are against him becuase they fear smear?

It is not about him, it is about how government will be ran, by smear merchants intimidation, or by people electing people.

How many are for or against him becuase of his votes on many issues.


Side note, I do think it is a good idea to have accountability on issues, however the gossip and smear merchants are showing the character they have, and have been using for years against people, many that were either innocent, or prosecuted outside of laws of justice in society.

Should we have laws and rules?

[dkf]

4. My co-worker says Weiner doesn't represent Democrats...Obama does.

Weiner represents progressives. Ouch.

[Indykatie]

5. Despite His Progressive Stance He Should Resign

We'd call for the resignation of any republican under the same circumstances. He will be a continuing distraction and no one needs that right now.

[Pryderi]

6. +1

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. The voters of his district and/or Weiner himself should decide whether or not he should resign

If he didn't do anything illegal and/or unethical, then it's nobody else's business other than his wife and "cyber-followers". This whole will eventually die down IMHO. The media has just found their shiny new toy to play with. They'll get bored with this all at some point. It's also not a good idea to make rash decisions in the heat of the moment IMHO. He may not get to serve in higher office now nor win re-election but I don't agree that we should be willing to cut him loose unless, like I said, he actually broke some law or did something unethical. He disgraced himself for sure but he can be personally disgraced AND remain in office (and there have been several whom have done so on the other side of the aisle). Also, do we need to worry about losing another vote in the House and/or face the prospect of a Republican capturing his seat NOW? If voters want to toss him out on his ass in 2012, fine, but why give Republicans more opportunities to capture more seats now???? Granted, one seat might not make that much of a difference ultimately but why make things easier for our opponents?

[Kaleva]

8. Didn't hear that arguement much concerning Stupak

Many of the statements about Stupak were that he ought to be kicked out of the party and failing that, be primaried. Very few, if I recall correctly, suggested that the voters in his district ought to decide if he is to be re-elected.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. The voters in our system ARE the ones that ultimately make the decision

about who gets nominated/(re-)elected to public office. Stupak, if I recall correctly, (justifiably) took a lot of heat for holding up health care reform over spurious anti-choice objections and he ultimately chose to not run again instead of having to risk losing re-election- either during a primary or a general election. He could have chosen to run again and faced the will of the voters.

[Pryderi]

9. "If he didn't do anything illegal and/or unethical, "? Isn't lieing unethical???

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Lying is not good by any stretch of the imagination

nor, I imagine, would most people consider lying to be "ethical". However, nobody can be prosecuted for lying unless they do so while under oath and AFAIK lying to cover up perverted sexual activities has AFAIK never been grounds for a congressional ethics investigation and shouldn't have any bearing on one's job performance as a Congressman (at least it hasn't for several Republicans). The only things I would be concerned about in regards to Weiner's behavior and continued service as a Congressman are: a.)Did he share any pictures with minors and/or sexually harass anybody? So far, the answers to those questions are no. and b.)Did he use government resources to engage in this behavior? That question is still up in the air. I presume that this is the focus of Pelosi's demands for an ethics investigation.

[JDPriestly]

12. Weiner would hold out for Social Security. Thus he had to be brought down.

Certainly, he caused his own downfall in a sense, but then, someone was watching for him, and watching very carefully.

Anyone who supports Social Security is on notice now. The powers that be want to let older Americans die in misery, and anyone who stands up for us will be embarrassed out of politics. That is the message I get here.

The percentage of Americans who are addicted to something, be it cigarettes, alcohol, gambling, food (usually wheat or sugar), sports, methamphetamines, texting, posting on DU, plain old TV (I know someone who does not feel complete without having the Weather Channel on most of the day) or some other internet blog such as Facebook, reading, horseback riding, keeping cats, running, or sex is pretty close to 100%.

Certain of these addictions are more socially destructive than others. Some destroy the addict's health. Some destroy the addict's finances. Some destroy the addict's marriage and family. And many of them destroy the addict's career.

I hope that Weiner can find a way to deal with this without quitting. We really need him in the House, really, really.

This is not the worst addiction. Alcohol is much worse, and we have a prominent member of Congress on the Republican side who appears to have a serious problem with it. When will we hear about that?