happiness Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 He should resign. What kind of grown man acts like a teenager sending photos of his private parts? I could care less what he does with these women behind his wife's back--- not my business. But this type of sophomoric behavior really exposes this man as being unfit to serve in office. How dumb can you be? I don't think it has to do with whether or not we "care" about what he does behind his wife's back. It's more so that if a man will behave like that towards his own family, the people he is supposed to love most, he cannot be trusted for anything requiring a level of trust, security, ethics, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jabe Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 My wife believes Weiner and Screech could be related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouillon Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 There would be public outrage if anything like that happened over here. Why has he not been fired? What are you, a bunch of perv-apologists? Or did his oh-so-genuine tears of regret hoodwink you all? Unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Silver Rider, I hope you didn't take the "you" to actually mean you personally. My apologies if you took it that way. When I said "how dumb can you be?" It was meant for anyone who's sophomoric behaviour is such that they (especially an adult in public office) would participate in those types of antics. His independent thinking matters nothing now after this incident. It was he who went to the media with a cock-a-mayme story about how his twitter account was hacked. When Bret Baer from Fox news asked him point blank why then he had not contacted the FBI to investigate; Weiner then back-peddled and said that he felt that it should not be a matter to waste the FBI's time (paraphrazing here). The reporter then said that it should be a matter for the FBI if a member of congess had their personal account hacked. And Wiener still backed away from it. And obviously becuase at that moment he was like a kid in the principle's office trying to get his is story straight on the fly and looking very silly and guilty all at the same time. He got owned in that moment in front of a national audience. A liar and a sneak who is probably used to talking his way out of everything he gets himself into trouble over. Sorry, but Republican or Democrat it doesn't matter to me. Sleazy is sleazy and he needs to go. Not because he cheats on his wife. But because he acted dumb. Who could vote for him now? Thank you for clarifying your remarks. We really don't know all the facts yet. Nancy Pelosi has taken steps to properly inquire into whether he violated the ethics of the House of Representatives. We'll just have to wait and see how this episode pans out. His independent thinking has a lot to do with whether he decides to resign or not. And, he's not a kid in the principal's office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electrophile Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I don't think it has to do with whether or not we "care" about what he does behind his wife's back. It's more so that if a man will behave like that towards his own family, the people he is supposed to love most, he cannot be trusted for anything requiring a level of trust, security, ethics, etc. Oh please. Fucking around on your wife and being bad at your job or being unable to do your job aren't linked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 There would be public outrage if anything like that happened over here. Over here,......there is public outrage. Why has he not been fired? A US Congressmen can't be fired. What are you, a bunch of perv-apologists? Or did his oh-so-genuine tears of regret hoodwink you all? What do me be 'you' and 'you all'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happiness Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Oh please. Fucking around on your wife and being bad at your job or being unable to do your job aren't linked. In his type of work, it most certainly is linked. Ethics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 In his type of work, it most certainly is linked. Ethics. Maybe and maybe not; it depends on whether or not he violated the ethics rules of the House of Representatives. And we don't have all the facts, although the Minority Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, has called for a proper investigation into the matter. I glanced through the Frequently Asked Questions and did not see anything pertinent, but he may have a problem with Rule 1.A; we'll see. I guess it depends on how they interpret the word "creditably" as it applies in this situation. I honestly don't envy him going through this process. It's embarrassing, but a lot depends on the degree of the scandal. It will be really interesting to see if he wishes to remain a member in the upcoming days. Repesentatives who are remiss in their personal affairs don't always quit and are sometimes re-elected by their constituents even after being censured. Maybe they will update the FAQs so members wil know better how to conduct themselves on the internet. 1. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representatives shall conduct himself at all times in a manner which shall reflect creditably on the House of Representatives. house.gov/house/Ethics ethics.house.gov en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_congressional_page_sex_scandal On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee recommended that Rep. Dan Crane (R-IL) and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA) be reprimanded for having engaged in sexual relationships with minors. specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Studds gave up his right to a public hearing reluctantly, saying that he objected to the conclusions of the Ethics Committee but wanted to protect the privacy of the pages involved and that the affair was a "mutually voluntary, private relationship between adults." At the same time, Studds did admit to "a very serious error in judgment," saying that he should not have had sex with a congressional subordinate, regardless of the individual's age or sex. As his censure was read, Studds faced the Speaker who was reading the motion, with his back to the other House members. Studds continued to be re-elected until his retirement in 1997; he died in 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Oh please. Fucking around on your wife and being bad at your job or being unable to do your job aren't linked. Lying is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouillon Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 This is how we deal with similar indiscretions over here: Guess we're not so different after all: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FafVtHWn4X8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 ^ It's called "damage control". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2bitnogoodjive Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planted Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I just read Mrs. Weiner is expecting their first child. Great. Forgive me, but, have we determined if there are any laws broken? I get that we depend on those who represent us to use good judgement, but does anyone know the answer to my question? And please don't preach to me about the moral issues. Yeah, yeah, I get that too. We are a nation of laws, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 I just read Mrs. Weiner is expecting their first child. Great. Forgive me, but, have we determined if there are any laws broken? I get that we depend on those who represent us to use good judgement, but does anyone know the answer to my question? And please don't preach to me about the moral issues. Yeah, yeah, I get that too. We are a nation of laws, no? At this point in time no laws have been broken as far as we know. The issue is over possible violations of the rules of ethics for the House of Representatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Bill Posted June 8, 2011 Share Posted June 8, 2011 Forgive me, but, have we determined if there are any laws broken? This article spells it out. Conclusion: A criminal investigation will no doubt occur, and there might be some minor charges about use of public facilities, but I'm guessing all participants were of age and consented. Civil liability requires intent, and there doesn't appear to be any intent for him to expose the target of his attentions to public scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 They may be. What if the CEO of a large corporation with many shareholders and other investment partners acted in such an indiscreet way? Using poor judgment and jeopardizing the faith of those who keep you in your position in this way is ill advised. Sorry, but this does affect how you can do your job. I'm no prude, and what goes on between this man and his wife is their own business. Cheating spouses is not a rare occurrence, but this man is a fool. Fools don't inspire confidence or respect. Nobody wants to follow the leadership of a fool. It does affect your job. Yeah, but we're talking about the House of Representatives. On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee recommended that Rep. Dan Crane (R-IL) and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA) be reprimanded for having engaged in sexual relationships with minors. specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Studds gave up his right to a public hearing reluctantly, saying that he objected to the conclusions of the Ethics Committee but wanted to protect the privacy of the pages involved and that the affair was a "mutually voluntary, private relationship between adults." At the same time, Studds did admit to "a very serious error in judgment," saying that he should not have had sex with a congressional subordinate, regardless of the individual's age or sex. As his censure was read, Studds faced the Speaker who was reading the motion, with his back to the other House members. Studds continued to be re-elected until his retirement in 1997; he died in 2006. source: wiki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Yes, a position of leadership. Not much difference than a CEO is it? Come on! Texting photos of your private parts to MULTIPLE women with whom he had no guarantee that they would not leak this information or use it against him? Who leaves evidence like that around to trip you up? Boneheadedness is not a virtue in my book. It's way different. Neither the United States of America, nor its House of Representatives has ever been a corporation. And if Rep. Studds can be re-elected after his affair with a page, then maybe Weiner can be re-elected also. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anjin-san Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I just read Mrs. Weiner is expecting their first child. Great. Forgive me, but, have we determined if there are any laws broken? I get that we depend on those who represent us to use good judgement, but does anyone know the answer to my question? And please don't preach to me about the moral issues. Yeah, yeah, I get that too. We are a nation of laws, no? Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, lying to federal government agents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetleron Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 I just read Mrs. Weiner is expecting their first child. Great. can't wait till the Rep texts us all a picture of the little weiner or not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazedcat Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Memo to Congressman Weiner...........hi tech isn't always a good thing............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Rider Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, lying to federal government agents Did he lie to a federal agent? So far the reports have indicated that he briefly lied to the media, mainly because he was embarrassed, but otherwise http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5IOou6qN1o. The most recently released photo was reported to be too explicit to show on television; and not only that but his wife is pregnant and he refuses to resign. I'm sorry but http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHWyaQUw_Kw. Anthony Weiner called Bill Clinton and apologized... for what? copyright infringement? :hysterical: :hysterical: The big question is, how will the Congressman's Brooklyn and Queens constituents react to the scandal? Interviewer - Can you tell us how you felt when you woke up? Anthony Weiner - Of course. Neighbor-Anthony, go in, go in, tell 'em to leave you alone, go inside! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planted Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, lying to federal government agents I was unaware of this line of questioning. Guess I haven't been following the case very closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Levee Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Republican or Democrat, you have to step down. Nobody in your party will have anything to do with you now and that means nothing gets done. IMO him trying to hang on to his dignity by not leaving is just nothing short of selfish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrum Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 Memo to Congressman Weiner...........hi tech isn't always a good thing............. Can you see me now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2bitnogoodjive Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Hillary consoling Huma: HILLARY: Dear, dear, Huma. I know exactly how you feel. HUMA: What am I supposed to do now? HILLARY: Good question. As you know I stood by Bill when that schmuck couldn’t keep his dick in his pants. But that may not be what’s best for you. HUMA: I do not know what is best for me yet. I was thinking about castrating that mealy-mouthed douche bag. HILLARY: There is nothing worse than having your dirty laundry aired for all to see. HUMA: Especially the underwear. HILLARY: You’re a smart woman and you will do the right thing. And castrating is definitely a great first step. Works like a charm. (Bill Clinton enters room, sees the two women talking by the fireplace and makes a quick B-line out of the room.) HILLARY: See what I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.