Quantcast

Former Rep. Anthony Weiner Had No Other Choice but to Resign, Right?

Gil Kaufman 2011/06/18 11:00:00
You!
Add Photos & Videos
There are only two ways these things can end: the teary, reluctant resignation speech that clears the path for colleagues to get back to the important business at hand or the defiant stand and vow to fight on in the face of injustice.

In former Rep. Anthony Weiner's case, though, there was only really one choice. Literally caught with his pants down (I'll spare you any more lame double entendres about his hilariously unfortunate surname), Weiner had no other options than to step down.

Amid the heckling from Howard Stern staffers and the quizzical looks from confused elders at the senior center where he made his announcement on Thursday, Weiner finally ended the three-week ordeal that was the late-night comedian's equivalent to holding Mardi Gras at the Super Bowl during the "American Idol" finale while a reunited ABBA played house band.

Unlike other political wang-wavers in similar situations, Weiner felt he had to give up the fight and just take the fall. He was caught red-handed, the social media maven taken down by the very medium he endlessly championed. The evidence was everywhere, everyone was talking, the embarrassing images stared at him from every screen and every newsstand, and once the allegations surfaced that a minor may have been involved, well … some things are unforgivable.

The fact that he didn't actually have physical sex with any of his digital paramours was almost beside the point. The offer of a job from "Hustler" lord Larry Flynt didn't help either, even though the famed pornographer swore he was making a legitimate offer to the disgraced New York pol to join his online company at a rate that is 20 percent higher than Weiner's congressional salary.

Weiner proved that more than underage pages, bathroom stall foot tapping, affairs with aides or allegedly hectoring wives, it's online dalliances that are the deadliest because they leave an indisputable digital paper trail. And nobody is buying that "hacking" excuse anymore.

As Politico noted, dozens of politicians have been caught stepping out, but the key in Weiner's case was the one thing most of those others didn’t have: photographs.

But did Weiner really have to give up his office?

Republican Sen. David Vitter was busted in a prostitution scandal in 2007 and managed to stay popular with his constituents and get re-elected last fall. Foot-tapping Republican Sen. Larry Craig served out his term rather quietly after refusing to resign despite an arrest for soliciting another man in the Minneapolis airport.

President Bill Clinton defiantly held on after splitting fibers over his affair with intern Monica Lewinsky, but former Republican Rep. Mark Foley had to throw in the towel after he was caught sending suggestive IM's to male pages in 2006. And earlier this year Republican Rep. Chris Lee of New York quickly stepped down after getting caught sending shirtless photos to an online mistress.

It didn't help that Weiner wasn't that well-liked by his colleagues, or frankly, many of his constituents. He was described as sort of a "loner" in the House, a status confirmed when few of his fellow Democrats came to his defense.

He could have held out, gone to treatment and stood defiant in the face of the allegations. It might have worked and it could have potentially made his detractors love him a little more for showing such strength. It would have made for great political theater and while distracting to his efforts in the House, Weiner could have looked to such ignoble inspirations as Craig for lessons in how to hold on and keep your head down until the next scandal wave crashes.

As despicable as his cyber-cheating was, I would have loved to watch Weiner fight it out, if only to see the strategy involved in rehabilitating such a political laughingstock.

But let's be honest, it was all the above-mentioned factors, plus the Rep.'s tabloid headline-punchline name that made it impossible for him to hold on. And if we learn nothing else from this scandal (and trust me, nobody in Washington has, because it will happen again), we will remember the strength of social media for both good and, well, stupid.

Mark my words. Weiner will be back. Just ask Eliot Spitzer.

Do you think Rep. Anthony Weiner had to resign?
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • freebirdie 2011/06/18 16:01:15
    Yes, he had to go
    freebirdie
    +10
    I'm reposting an older answer from another question: I don't understand how people can think this is just a little thing. Yes, they all lie and stretch the truth to it's limits, but this is a U.S. CONGRESSMAN. A man of great power in our country. A man who affects change! A man who has authority and convinces others to vote certain ways. This was different, it was not just an affair with another woman. This was a pervert sending lewd messages and pictures of his penis to strangers--people he didn't even know-- for years!! Then looking you the taxpayer in the eyes and lying to you and blaming someone else. You sent him there, you pay his salary, pension and all perks he enjoys. You work your butt off to pay his bills and he makes us the laughing stock of the world and quite possibly puts us in danger because he feels the need to show his junk to strangers. How about Al Qaeda getting hold of that and blackmailing him to vote in certain ways that could affect things we need or do. Sometimes I think half of our leaders are already being blackmailed because of their idiotic decisions!!!! Soros comes to mind...

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Casey H 2011/06/29 23:57:47
    No, he could have stuck it out
    Casey H
    Weiner did not have to step down, but likely would have been out of a job on January 3, 2013. I am happy that he did step down because it was in his best interest to do so to because he became unstable. He is not leaving quietly overnight because he is a New Yorker. This means that he will likely re-emerge as a TV host/personality discussing politics.
  • Curious George 2011/06/20 18:54:48
    No, he could have stuck it out
    Curious George
    really, it was just a bunch of photos people. its not like he comited a crime. all this over a big cock in underpants, meanwhile the president continues his ILLEGAL war in Libya in violation of the war powers act and barley a peep from the media and public.......... i wonder if it was like this in rome after ceasar crossed the rubicon with his legions to declare himself dictator.
  • Dennis 2011/06/20 18:50:04
    Undecided
    Dennis
    The worst part of this for him is how much it conflicts with his values whereby this is really NO BIG DEAL for a practicing progressive liberal.The mere fact that our society still embraces a shred of decency,character,and morals is a pain that gnaws at this segment seeking to diminish any such societal leanings.This by itself is equal punishment for this perv.
  • Jackie O 2011/06/20 18:44:06
    Yes, he had to go
    Jackie O
    He lied and lost his credibility. What he actually did could have been blamed on a sexual addiction. (Isn't that the new catch-all phrase for bad sexual behavior?) But he lied and there lies "the rub".
  • Curious... Jackie O 2011/06/20 18:55:56
    Curious George
    "He lied and lost his credibility" with that kind of reasoning then obama should be impeached
  • Jackie O Curious... 2011/06/20 20:44:15
    Jackie O
    Oh my God...grow up, get a life and stop beating that drum. The only liars here are RWNJS like you spreading lies , conspiracy theories and innuendos.
  • Curious... Jackie O 2011/06/21 01:06:20
  • smitty 2011/06/20 17:26:24
    No, he could have stuck it out
    smitty
    +1
    I would have much rather seen him get his arse tossed out of the house.
  • Birthpangs 2011/06/20 17:06:52
  • none 2011/06/20 16:53:20
    Undecided
    none
    +1
    What he did wasn't as bad as what some other politicians have done, it he'd told the truth instead of lying to the public for a week the whole thing would have blown over, but he didn't.
  • DDogbreath 2011/06/20 16:47:47
    Yes, he had to go
    DDogbreath
    He stepped on his wiener...
  • Manster 2011/06/20 16:43:26 (edited)
    Undecided
    Manster
    Actually he had to go, because all he would have been was another lying jerk with the backing of his constituents only! I can't imagine anyone wanting to work with him in getting any bills presented.They would not have wanted their names associated with his and that would have been perfectly within their rights to not want to be associated with him!Conversely,the people of his district might have been willing to have him continue on as their representative Which would have only contributed more smoke and ash to an already toxic situation for Weiner.
  • Boss Manster 2011/06/20 17:54:19
    Boss
    +1
    gee..then that cheating senator must be totally useless!!!
  • Manster Boss 2011/06/20 23:47:44 (edited)
    Manster
    Did he own up to it immediately, or did he try to use the lies and coverup scheme? That's a major differencein this sort of situation.And which cheating senator are you talking about, because I don't believe you could toss a stick in the Senate chamber and not whack some lying Sack Of S!
  • MikeMerker 2011/06/20 16:34:05
    Yes, he had to go
    MikeMerker
    +1
    Had he admitted it from the start and not cover it up he would have been fine. It's never the offense of the act that gets you in trouble it's the attempted cover up!
  • Pat 2011/06/20 16:06:55
    No, he could have stuck it out
    Pat
    He coulds have been a REAL PATRIOT & stuck it out (for the sake of CONSERVATIVE candidates in the next election).
  • Tony 2011/06/20 15:53:09
    Yes, he had to go
    Tony
    +1
    Of course he had to go! who does he think he is? Bill Clinton?
  • denny 2011/06/20 15:49:12
    No, he could have stuck it out
    denny
    +1
    he still get a cool mil of tax payers money
  • jacktown kid 2011/06/20 15:47:38
    No, he could have stuck it out
    jacktown kid
    Coud have stay on
  • Judson 3:16 2011/06/20 15:42:02
    Undecided
    Judson 3:16
    Na let him stay represent the people that elected him buhahaha..kinda like a dog and pony show!!
  • moviebuff 2011/06/20 15:38:47
    Undecided
    moviebuff
    Although he shouldn't have done what he did. It's not the worse thing that a politician can do. It sucks that he has to go out like this. If Elliott Spitzer can make it so can Weiner.
  • boo 2011/06/20 15:30:56
    No, he could have stuck it out
    boo
    As sexualized as this nation is, I find it humorous that they dwell so much on sex related grievances i.e. sex scandals. Hypocritical much ?? ... I bet if we started digging through congress, we'd have to lose more than half of them. I think his mistake was getting caught ... lol ... On a lighter note y'all need to chill. All those shrewd women who wanted him out, I suggest you best start checking your husbands social networking and cell phones. Let's see how many of yours would have to step down aye ?? !!
  • Tony boo 2011/06/20 15:52:02
    Tony
    +3
    " I bet if we started digging through congress, we'd have to lose more than half of them. "

    you say that like it would be a bad thing! *LOL*
  • justfred 2011/06/20 15:25:21
    No, he could have stuck it out
    justfred
    He could have been like a Republicon and just kept going despite the fact he was caught doing stupid things. After all, unlike David Vitter, what Weiner did was not a crime.
  • Tony justfred 2011/06/20 15:52:36
    Tony
    +1
    actually, cheating on your spouse IS a crime.
  • justfred Tony 2011/06/20 15:54:23
    justfred
    Really? Where? What codified law?
  • Tony justfred 2011/06/20 15:58:59
    Tony
    +1
    I probably should have said, it is a crime here in Florida.
    But, check the laws in your state, you might be surprised what is considered a crime.
  • justfred Tony 2011/06/20 19:44:41
    justfred
    A crime? Really? People go to jail for adultery in Florida?
  • Tony justfred 2011/06/21 03:24:14
    Tony
    no, but there are penalties. dunno them off the top of my head
  • smitty justfred 2011/06/20 17:32:59
  • justfred smitty 2011/06/20 19:44:15
    justfred
    What you sourced concern civil and not criminal matters. Nice try but no cigar.
  • smitty justfred 2011/06/20 20:30:30
    smitty
    http://www.merriam-webster.co...

    It wasn't a nice try. Not all crimes are punishable by jail time. Please check your definitions. It is a crime that is punishable by monetary amounts. You can do your own research on the 30 million awarded to the spouse by her husband girlfriend. I have my own cigars, thanks!
  • justfred smitty 2011/06/20 20:36:44
    justfred
    But the amount paid was not to the State and not a violation of public law, as was the definition you posted (did you even bother to read it???).

    It is, in some states, the basis of a lawsuit and reason for damages to another party, but that doesn't make it a crime.

    posted bother read basis lawsuit reason damages party crime Epic fail
  • smitty justfred 2011/06/20 20:54:26 (edited)
    smitty
    Obviously you didn't. Obviously you do not know the definition of a crime. Obviously you are just not with it. Let me throw out 3 question marks when obviously it means more than 1???

    definition crime throw 3 marks 1 fred the idiot

    Figures. One needs pictures with you.

    Obviously.... see the trend.........

    I showed you definition of a crime. Give me justfred's definition of a crime. Let me laugh some more.
  • justfred smitty 2011/06/20 21:40:14
    justfred
    Yes, I did read your definition. Here it is for your edification with some explanations to help you with your general lack of comprehension.

    Definition of CRIME
    1: an act or the commission of an act that is forbidden or the omission of a duty that is commanded by a public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law; especially : a gross violation of law
    (this is the actual definition of crime in a legal sense of the word.

    2: a grave offense especially against morality
    (this is like 'a crime against nature' or a 'crime against humanity' - not 'the crime of adultery')

    3: criminal activity

    4: something reprehensible, foolish, or disgraceful (it's a="" crime="" to="" waste="" good="" food=")

    Now I am going to type this very slowly so you might be able to understand. Adultery might be grounds for a lawsuit. It is not a crime. It has not been a crime since the days of the Puritans.

    slowly understand adultery grounds lawsuit crime crime days puritans Epic fail
  • smitty justfred 2011/06/21 13:21:19
    smitty
    Keep typing... Sometime maybe it will click in your pea sized brain.

    "1: an act or the commission of an act that is forbidden or the omission of a duty that is commanded by a public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law; especially : a gross violation of law"

    Law on books called alienation of affection. If convicted you own monetary damages. Compensatory.

    Typical stupid liberal. Go ahead keep arguing your point. Bottom line you are wrong. No matter how many times you state it you are still wrong.

    compensatory typical stupid liberal arguing line wrong times wrong head in sand
  • justfred smitty 2011/06/21 13:32:58
    justfred
    Okay, look, you stupid f%#k, crimes are tried in criminal courts with prosecuting attorneys and defendants. Lawsuits are matters decided in civil courts with plaintiffs and defendants.

    If my neighbor's tree is dead and leaning over my property I can sue him in a civil court to remove it, but that doesn't mean he is guilty of a crime.

    Alienation of affection is allowed as basis of a civil lawsuit in order to receive monetary compensation for the loss of something else. It doesn't make it a crime.

    Your continuing to insist that it does, however, just goes to prove that you're a blathering imbecile.
  • smitty justfred 2011/06/21 14:58:03 (edited)
    smitty
    Name calling. Nice. Typical stupid liberal. Sorry I guess I need to talk down to you.

    an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited.

    Look you idiot.

    An action of negligence. Adultery could be considered negligence (it would have to be argued.) Depends on the state as I have stated above. Fact 1 me.

    Injurious to the public welfare or morals of the state. As shown above it is the case. Fact 2 me.

    Legally prohibited. As stated above in certain states, yes. Fact 3 me.

    If you have negligence, injury (emotional or physical), and it is legally prohibited it is a crime.

    You lose again. Please keep making yourself look stupid. We will have a good laugh at your stupid arse today at lunch. You aren't the sharpest tool in the tool shed. You do make for great comedy. Keep it up fred I need more swearing to make my morning laughter go easier.

    lunch brightest tool tool comedy fred swearing laughter easier idiot tool
  • justfred smitty 2011/06/21 15:11:39
    justfred
    Oh, and I guess you didn't engage in name calling? Really? Maybe you should check again..or better yet have one of your co-workers do it for you since you don't even seem to be able to cut and paste worth a damn.

    You gave a definition of a crime. Here is the link you gave. http://www.merriam-webster.co...

    Then you used this definition in your post "an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited." - - except that is not found in your own definitive post.

    You claimed three points using this definition...except it wasn't your definition. Not only do you lose on all three points by building a strawman, you also lose any shred of credibility you have ever had in this discussion.

    Here is the definition of negligence. http://www.merriam-webster.co...

    It says "failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like circumstances".

    Negligence is not a crime unless under certain instances, and adultery is not an act of negligence, it is a commission of sin. No one 'accidentally' commits adultery. No one commits adultery by failing to exercise care....they do it. It is an overt action.

    I would say that you fail again, moron, but in order to do th...



    Oh, and I guess you didn't engage in name calling? Really? Maybe you should check again..or better yet have one of your co-workers do it for you since you don't even seem to be able to cut and paste worth a damn.

    You gave a definition of a crime. Here is the link you gave. http://www.merriam-webster.co...

    Then you used this definition in your post "an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited." - - except that is not found in your own definitive post.

    You claimed three points using this definition...except it wasn't your definition. Not only do you lose on all three points by building a strawman, you also lose any shred of credibility you have ever had in this discussion.

    Here is the definition of negligence. http://www.merriam-webster.co...

    It says "failure to exercise the care that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in like circumstances".

    Negligence is not a crime unless under certain instances, and adultery is not an act of negligence, it is a commission of sin. No one 'accidentally' commits adultery. No one commits adultery by failing to exercise care....they do it. It is an overt action.

    I would say that you fail again, moron, but in order to do that you would have to not fail, once.



    failing exercise care overt action fail moron order fail loser
    (more)
  • smitty justfred 2011/06/21 15:22:33 (edited)
    smitty
    faceplant

    I am sorry I thought you were smart enough to do your own research. I guess I was wrong. Thank you for correcting yourself.

    The adultery itself is not the crime, it is the actions of the other man/woman that determines whether a law has been broken. Go call your lawyer then get back to me.



    smart research guess wrong correcting failure
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/06/19 23:28:56

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals