Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Weiner and Spitzer

Two Democrats are running for office again in New York.  
Anthony Weiner, a Congressman, is running for Mayor and is the frontrunner.
Elliot Spitzer, a former governor for a little more than a year, of NY State, is running for comptroller.

Anthony, you might remember, sent nude pictures of himself to teenagers and others.
Elliot Spitzer, you might recall, spent $80,000 in one year on prostitutes.



They are both liberal Democrats.

Let me suggest that Democrats might say of these two men "they should run;  why let sex scandals ruin the lives of two very intelligent men?  I say 'live and let live', we have no right to judge."

Let me speak for some Republicans when I suggest they might say "here's two men who think so little of themselves or their families and friends and constituents that they'd engage in terribly risky behavior.  While nobody has a right to judge, shouldn't discernment tell us that men who are this reckless with themselves might not be the best choices for public office?"

(I like to think Republicans would say that about Mark Sanford of S. Carolina, who had an affair on his wife and four young sons, but the state of N. Carolina voted him in as Congressman in May of this year and I'm sure a lot of Republicans voted for him.)

SO...Spitzer, Weiner, pretty big sex scandals, pretty reckless behavior and they could both easily win.  And probably will.

Good idea?   Or should character count?

z




39 comments:

Sam Huntington said...

Character never counts in the world of politics. But here, I think there is something more going on ... beyond two slimy reptiles seeking to reenter a lucrative business: scoundrelism. Below the surface, if you look carefully enough, you will find that Spitzer has Weiner envy. If Anthony can do it, then darn it, so can Elliot. "Move over big boy," he must have said to himself, "Here I come."

Ducky's here said...

David Vitter.

Silverfiddle said...

Liberals stand for amoral piggery, so the actions of these men can't be held against them.

The same actions will always be used against conservatives like David Vitter, as the Leftwing Duck so dutifully quacked, becuase Vitter had the temerity to espouse Christian values, which he famously violated.

So, by liberal duck logic, only the immoral dregs of society may be given a free pass.

See how the nefarious leftist agenda works?

Only perfect Christians pass muster with them.


Wait! ... As any humble follower of Christ understands all too well, there are not perfect Christians.

Check and mate, Ducky. Well played, old boy!

Z said...

Sam, you may be right there...."reptiles" is right.

Ducky...I mentioned Sanford.

The two Dem scumbags are running again and NOW...that's why I posted this.

Z said...

Thanks, SF...well said.

Check out Wikipedia comparing Weiner to Vetter. Vetter's scandal's mentioned in some detail. Including a quote by The Nation slamming Republicans for not getting rid of him.
Apparently, Dems are okay to re-run men much worse than Vitter.
Weiner only says "he was caught sexting."
You'll laugh. Amazing.

JonBerg said...

Given the relaxed character standards of the DemocRAT party these two "reptiles" should be a shoo-in.

Ducky's here said...

Yup, that's the way it works on the right, Silverfiddle.
Commit the sin, ask for forgiveness, rinse and repeat.

"Family values", yeah, we get it.

FrogBurger said...

Only in politics can you have a career after being a sleaze bag. Those guys would have a hard time finding jobs in the private sector after a potential employer would ask for recommendations.

That goes with my theory that politics attracts sex addicts, power hungry scum bags, or people who think it's easier to talk than to do real work.

Anonymous said...

FROM Z AT WORK:

FrogBurger...I hope you're right about private enterprises not wanting to hire people like Weiner or Spitzer or Sanford, etc...

Ducky, Sadly, that's the Christian (and dare I include Catholic for you?) walk..."commit the sin, ask for forgiveness (confession)..do it again".

The point I need to redirect you back to is DO WE REELECT PEOPLE WITH LOUSY CHARACTER AND VALUES?

Do we honor people like that by trusting them in office when they've shown they can't use restraint or self discipline?

Ducky's here said...

Don't forget the idea of contrition, z.

Silverfiddle said...

Glad you agree with me, Ducky.

Now go back to wallowing in your political pig sty.

Anonymous said...

From Z at WORK:

who'd you see more contrition from, Ducky? Spitzer, Weiner or Vitter?

Always On Watch said...

I predict that they both will win. Character used to matter to the electorate -- now, not much.

Silverfiddle said...

Before the Marxist Merganser does another flyby and craps out more leftwing propaganda...

I will say that the political fate of these men, like that of Sanford, Gingrich, Vitter and other malefactors, is in the hands of their families and the voters.

I believe in redemption, and forgiveness is between God, the offender, and the offended.

Extreme leftwingers like Ducky only believe in redemption for Democrats who sexually abuse barely legal girls in the Oval Office and leave women to drown.

sue hanes said...


Z - Character should count. But maybe they have 'recovered' from their problems and could do a good job in those offices.

I'm speaking as someone who is a fan of Bill Clinton and Tiger Woods. So why should these two be any different.

I can see your viewpoint - Z.
But character DOES count. I'm not sure what the best thing is.

Bob said...

Blogger Ducky's here said... "David Vitter."

Ducky has just committed the fallacy of expressing himself through the vehicle of optical recticality, seeing all events through the same, crappy viewpoint.

The basic idea he espouses is that if crappy conduct happened in some past event, it is permissible for someone to do so, now. Following this logic, since Stalin spied on all Russians,etc., it is permissible for Obama to spy on all Americans.

You would think that Bill Clinton lowered the moral bar for politicians with the Monica Lewinsky affair, but Democrats have always been that way.

Ducky lends credence to the optical recticality dimension of Democrats, or maybe it is moral relativity. Either way, we know what the nation is up against, morally, with Democrats. They have none.

Always On Watch said...

Bob mentioned optical recticality. A new term that I must find a way to use!

Mustang said...

Bob for President.

Pris said...

Character does matter. If these men would cheat or lie to their wives, they'd do the same to the people they're supposed to serve.
Am I judging them? Yes, I am.

Morality matters, and there are no two ways about it. Ye Gods, no wonder there's such corruption in govt.

BTW, Bill Clinton was the leader of the free world! Tiger Woods is a golfer. Big difference IMO. Woods was responsible for his marriage and himself.

Clinton embarrassed America, big time, and showed his weakness for all to see. He was also accused of rape, or doesn't that matter either Sue?

JonBerg said...

Bob,

You mention Bill Clinton, AKA the Coward-In-Chief. I wouldn't argue with your point about Democrats having always been that way. But [his] total lack of rectitude and respect for women and his craven denial of sexual exploits, both consensual and otherwise, and the tacit approval from the Liberal Feminists of him and his behavior, opened my eyes, wide, to their hyper-hypocritical way(s) of thinking. Clinton is one of the poorest excuses for a man that has ever defiled the White House.

Jack Whyte said...

What everyone criticizing Clinton fails to realize is that Mr. Clinton was a chronic misogynist and a sexaholic. This means that he is unable to control his passions, does not know right from wrong, and no longer has the power of choice. Bill Clinton is thus protected under federal law; he is entitled to unlimited do-overs, and along with this “get out of jail” card, he is also entitled to a lifetime handicap decal for his car.

And this, of course, means that he will be forever loved by the progressive left.

Impertinent said...

@Ducky:

"Don't forget the idea of contrition.."

Coming from these two is as phony as the junk in Weiners undies and the crock tears from Spit-zer boy.

So the idea is to be tolerant of these two deviant assholes? One trolling for teenagers...the other paying 80K on whores.

And I know you'll mention Mark Sanford...who is still with the women for love at least.

His wife was a real harpy too...some of that old southern belle bulldinky from the reconstruction days...and an arranged marriage of privilege.

dmarks said...

Weiner is a great champion of the ruling elites who cares little for the ruled. The human hot-dog is a curse on the body politic.

So is Socks.

TS/WS said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kid said...

Just like the clinton deal. It's NOT that he had sex with anyone(he had sex with everyone I think.) It's that he put himself in a very compromising position and what could an external force gain in terms of an advantage over America by gaining an advantage over the POTUS ?

Is this so hard to understand ?
What did Vlad Putey Pute get from clinton in favors and advantages? Middle East Dictators, you name it.

This is the main problem, then you step down to - do you want to give all that power and money to people who think they can just do whatever they want, treating the public like the moronic dependent dumbasses they are at will ?
Reference the entire democrat party, and the entire obama administration of incompetent, arrogant thieving bastards who have such little respect for the populus they don't even put an effort in to conceal it.

And people vote enthusiastically for that shit.

And yes, nothing but lip service from the repubs too, but at least they quit when they get caught.

Z said...

Yes, Kid...at least they do that :-)

TS/WS said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
FreeThinke said...

Sanford had a LOVE affair. It was undoubtedly foolish, but it was a LOVE affair.

Spitzer was a WHOREMASTER, and little Anthony was so proud of his wiener, he felt compelled to display it in a PUBLIC venue.

Comparisons between Sanford and those other two are specious.

However, we, the Great American Public, know NOTHING about the nature of the relationship between any of those men and their wives. Because we know nothing, we are incompetent to judge them harshly.

New York City is my home town. Largely because of "White Flight," a phenomenon the reason for which could easily be laid at the feet of the mostly-corrupt Democrats who ran the City for too many years, the great City became what it is today -- Sodom on the Hudson, where only the very rich, the wretchedly poor, a few highly distinguished artists and performers, and the more outré elements in society can survive.

Therefore, it is only natural that such an environment would make it not only possible, but very likely that an individual of little Anthony's obnoxious ilk could be elected mayor.

I'm amazed that anyone would think otherwise.

sue hanes said...


Pris - I've never heard that Clinton was accused of rape.
Of course that matters.

Z said...

FT, mostly I agree with you, but it was "LOVE" affair which took place while in the scrutiny of public life and which ruined family life for his four young sons at a pretty impressionable age.....

I hope he's made it up to them somehow; he might be a great dad, but who'd take this risk?

JonBerg said...

"I've never heard that Clinton was accused of rape"

Here is but one source out of many:

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=164165

beamish said...

As someone who desires the repeal of of the 17th Amendment and the return of state legislatures appointing Senators to Washington (and the subsequent end of national political parties that would go with it) I can't say I really care who people from other states elect. Both of those aforementioned Demoslugs are running for local and state offices outside my right to participate and well below any power that would affect me.

Kudos to FT for making the distinction between love and lechery.

Kid said...

Sue Hanes. yes, Juanita Broaddrick

I believe her.

JonBerg said...

Kid, Sue:

I find it unbelievable that this POS and his horrible record isn't recognized in it's totality . Not only was he a lying sack of $#!t to avoid his military obligation, that he promised to fulfill, (Commander-In- Chief later) but he garnered a record of sexual misconduct that rivals no President in history. Anyone that could support him or his scumbag wife is a complete misinformed idiot!

Kid said...

JonBerg, Can't add much to that. But don't you know the clintons are for the Chillllldren :)

JonBerg said...

Kid,

Hey buddy is this a harbinger for when B.O. finally falls? The Germans made a big mistake and so did we (twice)!

Nameless Cynic said...

Absolutely right! Those liberals and their immoral ways! It's just business as usual for the libs! They have no morals, and we can blame their liberalism on that. Not like our fine, upstanding conservative leaders, like David "Diaper" Vitter. Or Ted Haggard. Mark Ensign. Mark Foley. Mark Sanford. (What is it about guys named "Mark"?) Larry Craig. Fine, upstanding conservatives all!

Nameless Cynic said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quincy said...

Gorgeous!