The country remains obsessed with Anthony Weiner’s weiner pics and sexting, apparently finding this to be a far more urgent issue than the economy or health care. Pressure is mounting on Weiner to resign from members of both parties. Ideally the question of whether Weiner is fit to represent his district in Congress could be settled by the vote of his constituents, but it is understandable that Democratic leaders would want an end to this distraction. To Democratic leaders, attempts to retake the House are the prime consideration. Anthony Weiner’s behavior was wrong but there are worse things a Congressman can do, such as vote to destroy Medicare.
As Weiner’s reputation has justifiably been seriously damaged, there has been a strange response from some to rehabilitate Andrew Breitbart. Should Andrew Breitbart get credit for being right this one time on Weiner, or should he be further condemned for making public a comparatively trivial sex scandal which was limited to consenting adults on line with no actual physical contact or violation of the law? Is Breitbart a crusading journalist, or is he just scum for making public pictures which should have remained private?
There is a strange double standard here if one thinks Breitbart was vindicated. After a long and distinguished career of delivering hard news, Dan Rather was forced out of CBS due to using one poorly chosen source in a story. After a brief career of intentionally distorting the news, Andrew Breitbart is suddenly being treated as credible because he was finally right on one story.
Dan Rather and Watergate. Andrew Breitbart and Weinergate. Hardly any comparison in terms of journalistic accomplishments.
When the National Enquirer turned out to be right about John Edwards, they might have enhanced their credibility in terms of searching out sex scandals, but this did not give them any credibility with regards to political coverage. Similarly, Breitbart is no more credible than he was before in his political smears. Weiner just made it too easy for Breitbart this time. It was foolish of Weiner to make it so easy for Breitbart by actually engaging in such behavior. He saved Breitbart of making things up, as he usually does.
The initial picture from Twitter showed Weiner’s weiner covered. More recently Weiner’s uncovered weiner from Andrew Breitbart’s phone became public. In a case of very unfortunate timing for the couple. It was revealed yesterday that Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin, is pregnant. Next will Breitbart release ultrasounds displaying the fetal genitals?
You bias against Breitbart is evident in your piece. Weiner is a derelict slut and has no business being in Congress. If he were single I would look at this through different eyes although the fact that he is privy to sensitive government information could potentially make him a target of extortion or blackmail. A sitting Congressman should not be behaving this way. I, as a Conservative hopes he does not resign because the arrogant loudmouth Weiner will become the gift that keeps on giving right through to the 2012 election.
Yes, I am biased against people like Breitbart who smear people by fabricating evidence. Being right in this case does not exonerate him for all the times he fabricated evidence.
A Congressman should not act this way, but there are many who have done far worse, in both parties. If someone with Weiner’s transgressions presents a national security risk, I assume you voted for Obama over someone like McCain with a history of adultery, and similarly would vote for Obama if Gingrich gets the nomination (which is not looking very likely).
You both express worries about Weiner being a national security risk and say you hope he remains in Congress as it would help the Republicans. In other words, you are placing partisanship over concern for your country.
RT @ronchusid: Fallout From Weiner's Sexting Continues Including Bizarre Suggestion That This Vindicates http://t.co/1sCbmUk