Tuesday, June 07, 2011

A message for Anthony Weiner

So Anthony Weiner finally admitted that he sent the photo of his wiener in his undies and made up a story about his Twitter account being hacked to try to cover it. Last week in interviews he had denied sending the photo but when asked directly if the photo was of him he used the now infamous line about not being able to say with "certitude" it was not, and thus left open the proverbial door about the veracity of his assertion even among those who would be on his side. But when another photo of Weiner shirtless came out, his hand was forced and he had to come clean.

He tried to soften his misdeeds by admitting that although he had engaged in "inappropriate" conversations with women in tweets or on Facebook or in emails or phone calls, at no point had he met them or had any physical relationships (as though that would make it better—or at least less bad).

And on behalf of (we'll say) the American public, I'll say this to Representative Weiner: You were right when you said you made a mistake, but it wasn't the one you thought it was.

If there's something the American people cannot abide in our elected officials, it is failing to put the effort into ensuring that their semi-salacious pics of their junk go only to the intended recipient. As you admitted, you had conducted these surreptitious exchanges without them being revealed for quite some time; you had an established record of proper quality control that you merely needed to maintain. Obviously you had been thinking with that little brain in your pants when engaging in these exchanges you had not let that prevent the brain in your skull from acting like it was thinking with the little brain in your pants (or lack thereof). We expect politicians to have two skills: 1) to be able to convince us you're not as bad as your opponent during the campaign, and 2) to keep us from finding out who we really elected after you're in office.

Oh, sure, we delude ourselves into believing we expect you to represent our values, but those of us who don't run for office grasp, either consciously or subconsciously, that we don't have game enough to carry on such exchanges (and have the recipients keep quiet about them) so we'd certainly lack game required to get elected. Campaigning is ultimately flirting with the electorate, so of course you'd have that aspect to your personality, but we shouldn't notice it. However, once you were caught, you should have been able to woo us without having to resort to pedestrian lying. Heck, anyone can do that. Bear in mind: Charlie Sheen probably still has a career to salvage; this is not an era where hideous behavior destroys you (well, exept when it goes too far and literally does). Your mistake there probably was that you had not been outrageous enough.

It was not an embarrassingly small bulge in those boxer briefs you tweeted; you should have proudly exclaimed, "Hell yeah, that's me. Boo-ya! This cannot be limited to only my wife to see, am I right or am I right?"

Oh, and on that point: You were flirting but not actually trying to get some? As Stephen Colbert noted on Monday's show, at least Republicans who've been caught engaging in inappropriate situations are actively trying to "hit that"; you were doing this just for the very modest kicks of showing your bulge without the woman being able to touch it? Perhaps that made you feel like you weren't crossing a line, but those you represent would understand it better if there was something more coming out of it (pun intended). It's like cheating at poker but still losing all your chips, making the dishonorable behavior pointless. How un-American.

We deserve better.


As odd as this will sound, this is the sort of thing that makes me think Sarah Palin could be the ideal candidate: I get the impression that she's not clever enough to pull anything that would later be revealed to undermine the character she portrays. She'd be a lousy leader, but she'd never let us down in this way, because I'm pretty sure she cannot do anything with social media that isn't intended to be seen by everyone.


While I don't have any inappropriate relationships to be revealed, it's pretty clear that the existence of this site  ensures I'd never have any chance of being elected for anything--not because it's too embarrassing, but because it's not embarrassing enough.

1 comment:

  1. I think New Yorkers deserve what they get when they elect such scum.


So, what do you think?