Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do. Was trying to avoid it.
1. The John Edwards prosecution: witch hunt. There is no way that what he did was illegal. And if it is, he could not have known it was illegal. There was no campaign contribution. This is just prosecutorial harrassment of someone where our political judgment is that he's a bad guy. And, okay, he is a bad guy. But that's not a crime. All Edwards has to say is that he kept it secret to hide his affair and the bimbette's pregnancy from his wife. That is reasonable doubt. End of story. If prosecutors are free to bring trumped up charges like this, we are all less safe.
2. The Anthony Weiner saga: really? What the hell? There is not even an allegation of a crime. And I can't blame the media, 'cause they are just serving up what you bunch of Rocks are cookin'-smellin'. Not saying media can't write about it, that's fine. But I pledge that I will change channels, URLs, or tweets any time I see anything more about the Congressman's weiner. This is a softer, but still ugly, kind of public harrassment. Why would anyone want to run for office? (If they had a chance to win, I mean, something I don't know anything about). This is just puritannical garbage.
So, there.
12 comments:
I don't care what you say, a congressman tweeting a picture of his, ahem, weiner is news. This is especially true since he is the one that drew everyone's attention to it. He effectively called everyone in the virtual town square, referenced a tweet and picture that very few had seen, told a completely implausible story, and then attacked ALL of the people who he called to the square (reporters). What did he think would happen. It couldn't have happened to a bigger weiner. I will continue to watch for now and let the reporters take their victory lap. Ask me if that is still the case in a week. Puns intended.
It isn't illegal for politicians to be scumbags to their wives but it is news.
Since you went there:
1) Johnny was running for federal office, different rules apply. Someone running for office cannot seek personal gain based on their candidacy. Maybe hiding a affair isn't contemplated in this situation, but if his wife found out, and the public did, it would have ruined his public image and his candidacy. The two aren't mutually exclusive. But I agree that the case appears rather weak, and the real reason charges are being brought is that after a two year investigation the AG's office has to have something to show for their time.
2) If he used public property to send inappropriate pictures and send them to possibly to underage girls, then yes, it is news. (Besides all the jokes that are possible from this situation).
3) I may be getting old, but I do wish these stories never happened. Although I did not like either of these politicians previously, the effects on their kids is just too sad to this about.
--anonyman
Agree on the first, but not the second. Call me a Puritan. I've been called worse.
Nothing in the Edwards affair qualifies as a crime in my book, but from a strictly legal view point there is this: neither Edwards nor Bunny Mellon paid any gift tax on the more than $3M she gave him. 'Sup wid dat?
As for Weiner, it's hard not to laugh when a pompous ass gets shit on his face. Jay Leno had a lot of fun with it 8-)
So, Anthony gets replaced by a different person -- proly another pompous ass, but also proly not quite as stupid.
I have paid no attention to the first.
On the second, while there aren't grounds for tossing him out of congress, he has truly reaped what he has sewn in terms of the media frenzy. No sympathies there.
1) Edwards was a proponent for McCain-Feingold, which seems to me to be a pretty bad law. Now that he's being prosecuted under this law is more like poetic justice.
2) What's currently come to light on Weiner is not illegal, but the bald-faced lying and false accusations during his cover-up are certainly unethical. He doesn't need to resign but he should lose his security clearance and all access to classified information.
Further, I think the Weiner scandal is worse for Democrats than Republicans if he stays. He was known as a kind of attack dog - but now he's been defanged.
To me, it's a matter of trust. If he's violated the trust of the person he presumably loves more than any other, why would I, were I a constituent, expect him to honor my trust.
Yes, people make mistakes, and I believe they should be forgiven and given second chances. That doesn't mean such foibles are not matters of the public's concern.
And no, he shouldn't be forced out of congress or anything like that.
I think Gene Healy had the best perspective on Weiner. Basically, although the guy didn't break any laws, he's shown himself to be stupid and reckless, and only good can come of reminding people that those who want to lead us are just as stupid and reckless as the rest of us (often more so). I'm a fan of anything that increases skepticism about our "leaders." It can only be healthy.
Besides, his name is Weiner. I mean, come on.
here's a useful summary of the Edwards deal, on propublica:
http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/john-edwards-cheat-sheet-what-are-the-facts-criminal-charges
So it seems at least possible that what he did was illegal and that he might be convicted. For me the bigger question is why is the prosectutor bothering? The primary restriction on prosecutors indicting and trying every they see is scarce resources. What do they hope to obtain through this colossal expenditure? What's the Latin, Mike, cui bono? Google says yes.
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/02/25/rep-anthony-weiner-wants-sexist-queens-statue-removed/
Given his past poseur stances on things like this statue I like seeing the little hypocrite hoisted on his own petard.
Post a Comment