Giving the Dog a Bone

It’s been about 48 hours since someone sent a photo of an engorged under-wear clad penis from Anthony Weiner’s twitter account seemingly directed at some young co-ed, and right-wingers are in a tizzy:

One thing is for sure, we can expect these intrepid sleuths to tug on every lead, massaging the facts until they get to the root of the issue. They are swallowing every detail, and eager for more, until they reach a triumphant conclusion.

In all seriousness, I have no idea what is going on- Weiner claims he was hacked, but the person the tweet was directed at was someone who was following him and mentioned Weiner in her own tweets. It wouldn’t surprise me if Weiner was this stupid- particularly stupid considering he is married to the beautiful Huma Abedin, but at this point I know about as much as you do.






160 replies
  1. 1
    aisce says:

    so what they’re saying is that weiner technically still kept it in his pants?

    progress.

    what is it about the male mind and camera phones that leads automatically to dick shots at every turn?

  2. 2
    General Stuck says:

    It doesn’t help his momma named him Weiner.

    or his pappy did, as it twer/

  3. 3
    LM says:

    I think this story has already been debunked. Rawstory (among others) has it here with a link to this.

  4. 4
    StonyPillow says:

    The taint of Breitbart hasn’t stopped anyone. Ladies and gentlemen, presenting your corporate media.

  5. 5
    Hill Dweller says:

    How many of those wingers rubbed one out while gazing longingly at the pic before joining the rabble in the echo chamber?

  6. 6
    dr. bloor says:

    Is “Huma Abedin” Arabic or Farsi for “Eating Disorder?”

    It’s probably a hack but yeah, Weiner is entirely capable of being that dumb.

  7. 7
    General Stuck says:

    Since Obama’s poll numbers seem solid right now above the 50 percent mark, while grannies across the land are forming squads to jihad the GOP for fucking with medicare, the wingers need something to pound.

  8. 8
    MikeJ says:

    Why are they shoving this down our throats!?

  9. 9

    anne coulter and brietbart both promised they won’t rest until they get to the bottom of that weiner.

  10. 10
    muddy says:

    My mac was running slow the other day and when I checked for viruses (not really expecting to find any) I did find one, which the finding program informed me had been making Wikipedia changes under my name involving lube. It said they were incorrect changes, whatever they may have been. I’ve never put anything into Wikipedia with or without lube, it is very weird.

  11. 11
    Allan says:

    Astute observers will note that Weiner spent much time on Friday tweeting and issuing press releases about the contents of Clarence Thomas’s financial disclosure forms, and how Mrs. Thomas’s employment creates conflicts of interest for Justice Thomas.

    Even more astute observers will note that Andrew Breitbart dedicated his latest book to his personal hero and Savior, Clarence Thomas, and becomes verklempt when relating the magical moment that Ginni Thomas touched him (on the shoulder).

    And the most astute observers will note that as of Sunday, the RW media is focused like a laser on following Breitbart’s lead to discredit Anthony Weiner, while the rest of the media is dutifully ignoring what Weiner highlights about Clarence Thomas’s conflicts of interest.

  12. 12
    WereBear says:

    I consider the source; and thus I do not believe it’s true.

  13. 13

    Oh God I had managed to miss this story.

    And now I haven’t.

    So thanks for that.

  14. 14
    Alex S. says:

    I checked a few sites (lol), and I think he did it, which basically means that he might have had an affair, maybe even only over the internet. Eh, could be worse.

  15. 15
    Some says:

    “Coed”? Did I wake up in the fifties again?

  16. 16
    Mister Papercut says:

    That debunking amounts to exactly nil for me. Not to defend Slimebart, but why would he need to manufacture a screengrab of something Weiner admits was sent from his account?

    I’m going with “meant to be a DM to the co-ed but (*ahem*) bollocksed all to hell.”

  17. 17
    Jenny says:

    I don’t get why lefty bloggers like Weiner (no pun intended).

    He’s been in Congress for 14 years and other than voting for the IRaq invasion, he’s accomplished zero legislation. In short, he’s a taller Kucinich (once again, no pun intended).

    I like rants as much as the next person, but as lefty bloggers have said, millions of times, they want legislation, not words.

  18. 18
    shortstop says:

    @Some: I know. I’ve gently mocked Cole for this one before. Never heard any other non-Republican under 80 using that term, which originated in the 1920s, if I’m not mistaken.

  19. 19
    Alex S. says:

    Here’s the complete overview:
    http://justpaste.it/weinerboner

    She’s a 21-year-old journalist with a crush on Weiner, he couldn’t get enough and failed to use Twitter appropriately.

  20. 20
    Yutsano says:

    Every time I see that picture it makes me want my own Chocobo dammit.

    Not to defend Slimebart, but why would he need to manufacture a screengrab of something Weiner admits was sent from his account?

    Umm…because the screen grab was shown to be altered? Or is it a simple matter of credibility with you?

  21. 21
    General Stuck says:

    but as lefty bloggers have said, millions of times, they want legislation, not words.

    `

    And if they were serious, we wouldn’t hear a peep out of them.

  22. 22
    JonF says:

    I don’t buy for a second that a congressman would be trying to creep via twitter since all tweets/dm probably get archived by federal law-even personal accounts.

  23. 23
    shortstop says:

    It wouldn’t surprise me if Weiner was this stupid- particularly stupid considering he is married to the beautiful Huma Abedin, but at this point I know about as much as you do.

    The beauty of the spouse or partner (and she is stunning, although I want to join dr. bloor in offering her a sandwich) has fuck-all to do with whether people cheat.

  24. 24
    Hill Dweller says:

    @Mister Papercut: Brietbart is a piece of shit that has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to lie and deceive when trying to destroy anyone/thing the Right doesn’t like.

    I don’t know if the pic is a fake or not, but I sure as hell won’t give Brietbart the benefit of the doubt.

  25. 25
    Rihilism says:

    @Some: Again?

  26. 26
    Fred says:

    Ah yes the always suspect John Galt Cole is ‘just curious’. ‘Just asking questions’ is all.

    Never mentions Briebart once. And why would he. That has NOTHING to do with this anyways.

    He could like TOTALLY see Weiner doing this but he is reserving judgement. Just want’s to get to the bottom of it is all and who better than to go read some right wing blogs in between the “why the birth certificate is a forgery” posts. John Galt Cole just wants the facts.

  27. 27
    shortstop says:

    @Rihilism: I’m guessing he or she woke up in the real fifties, when they were happening.

  28. 28
    jane from hell says:

    *whew* I need a cigarette.

  29. 29
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Hill Dweller:

    Exactly. Every story he’s ever “broken” has turned out to be seriously suspect at the very least, if not an outright lie. Why should I believe anything he says?

  30. 30
    Rihilism says:

    @shortstop: Just teasin’…

  31. 31
  32. 32
    John Cole says:

    @Fred: Goodness, you are a clown. I’m openly mocking Breitbart and company this entire post.

  33. 33
    shortstop says:

    @jane from hell: Maybe I need to check this photo out. I like an accidentally exposed Weiner as much as the next girl.

  34. 34
    Fred says:

    @MikeJ: Actually you should be asking why John Galt Cole is shoving this down your throat.

  35. 35
    MikeJ says:

    Since no Republican has never had an account hacked, we know the explanation is false.

    Edited to add:
    http://politicalticker.blogs.c.....ts-hacked/
    and
    http://thehill.com/blogs/twitt.....bospammers

  36. 36
    John Puma says:

    It’s abundantly clear that the “intrepid sleuths” are simply not able to “reach a triumphant conclusion.”

    The question is: “Why must their problems necessarily have to be transformed into ours”?

  37. 37
    shortstop says:

    @John Cole: But not! with exclamation points! You! naive! fool!

  38. 38
    jane from hell says:

    @Alex S.:
    I appreciated the following from your link- I was about to panic, heh:
    “UPDATE 4: Just a note, this is memorial day weekend… don’t attack the media too much… drudge doesn’t even have a link up yet let alone the siren…”

  39. 39
    Fred says:

    @John Cole: What part of “In all seriousness, I have no idea what is going on……Weiner claims he was hacked……it wouldn’t surprise me if Weiner was this stupid” did I not understand Mr. Galt?

  40. 40
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @Hill Dweller: This. Anything from Brightlight should be ignored. He’s proven himself to be totally unreliable.

  41. 41
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    Also, is it just me, or was this exactly the plot of The Adjustment Bureau? I think the Matt Damon character was even supposed to represent the same district as Weiner.

    Anthony Weiner will soon be able to transcend space and time, is what I’m saying. And he’ll be wearing a bitchin’ fedora.

  42. 42
    jane from hell says:

    @shortstop: I was referring to JC in the second paragraph above. ;)

  43. 43
    Martin says:

    I’m going with a prank by Jon Stewart on this one. He just gave his show material for a week.

  44. 44
    shortstop says:

    @jane from hell: Well, there goes my cover for looking at the photo. Thanks a lot, Jane.

  45. 45
    Yevgraf says:

    I just want to go on record as being somewhat saddened that cute hardbody 21year olds don’t throw themselves at me.

  46. 46
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Fred:

    I agree. The second paragraph obviously shows that JC is taking this story with the utmost seriousness and giving the right-wing all the respect they deserve.

  47. 47
    MikeJ says:

    Last week when Jorge Posada decided he was too afraid to play against the Red Sox? He was in the club house hacking Weiner’s account. Yet another reason to hate the FY.

  48. 48
    jane from hell says:

    @shortstop: I suggest looking at the photo while reading this aloud: “…we can expect these intrepid sleuths to tug on every lead, massaging the facts until they get to the root of the issue. They are swallowing every detail, and eager for more, until they reach a triumphant conclusion.”

    Hawt.

  49. 49
    aisce says:

    how exactly did this thread become about the professional left, huma abedin’s weight, and john cole’s stealth republicanism?

    weird crowd.

  50. 50
    John Cole says:

    What part of “In all seriousness, I have no idea what is going on……Weiner claims he was hacked……it wouldn’t surprise me if Weiner was this stupid” did I not understand Mr. Galt?

    A.) I can’t with any certainty say I know for sure what has happened. You can’t either.

    B.) Would it surprise you if male politician was this stupid?

    C.) And even if he was this stupid, so what. He didn’t break any laws.

  51. 51
    shortstop says:

    @jane from hell: It’s deeply subtle, yes, but isn’t that what gives it its effervescently provocative quality?

  52. 52
    Mister Papercut says:

    @Yutsano:

    Umm…because the screen grab was shown to be altered?

    How was it shown to be altered, though? If it’s that the photo may have been resaved multiple times compared to the yfrog site graphics, well, *shrug*. Assuming it was a high-res cell phone pic, I imagine it could have undergone processing and downsampling in the process of being posted.

  53. 53
    Fred says:

    @Spaghetti Lee: He is Libertarian curious, voted for Bush twice….AND worships Greenwald. So I wouldn’t put it past him but that is a bit of a stretch…even for him

  54. 54
    Gravenstone says:

    I haz a sad that the pie filter seems to have stopped working for me, because Fred desperately needs some pie.

  55. 55
    Alex S. says:

    @jane from hell:

    It’s really interesting. The person behind that link must be some kind of republican operative or conservative blogger, and a clever one at that. But he seems to be talking to his own people and doesn’t give the impression that all this stuff is fake.

  56. 56
    shortstop says:

    Is this Fred person for real? Because I’m getting bored troll vibe off him.

  57. 57
    Fred says:

    @John Cole: Still no mention that Briebart is behind all this. Because why would that have anything to do with this eh? How could that answer those bogus questions of yours eh?

    But I like totally understand Mr. Galt. You’re just curious. You just want it out there…you know…to talk about it…to get to the bottom of this. That’s all.

    Oh yea, I know where your comin from….wink!

  58. 58
    jane from hell says:

    @Gravenstone: Fred desperately needs some pie a hug.

  59. 59
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Fred:

    I was more trying to subtly imply that you’re a complete fuckin’ idiot who doesn’t understand sarcasm without getting all obvious about it, but I guess it didn’t work. But sure, John is totally pretending to be a Democrat, for 5 years, during which time no one was able to figure it out except you, because…um, it amuses him? He’s got nothing better to do? I don’t speak Paranoid Lunatic, so you’ll have to tell me.

  60. 60
    John Cole says:

    He is Libertarian curious

    Ok. It is clear now that this is spoof.

  61. 61
    MikeJ says:

    @jane from hell: I may modify the chrome version of the filter because of the inspiration of your comment.

  62. 62
    Mouse Tolliver says:

    @StonyPillow:

    The taint of Breitbart

    This post needs a vomit smilie.

  63. 63
    RossInDetroit says:

    @Fred: Are we getting played by a prankster? Because if so I want a different game.

  64. 64
    Rihilism says:

    @John Cole: John, it’s quite clear that the only reasonable means for you to settle this dispute with Fred is to post an image of your erect penis covered suggestively by a pair heather gray boxer-briefs.

    The logic demands it…

  65. 65
    lamh34 says:

    I honestly don’t really care if Weiner did or did not do anything, but I’ve long since given up being surprised or shocked at how stupid straight male politicians can be when they get a little power and prestige and are able to get a little “pootie tang” from young, stupid congress-groupies.

    Anyway, true or not, it’s beyond interesting to me all these “scandals” going on and someone’s been blogging about Where Are the Obama Scandals?

    Aren’t there enough non-Presidential scandals to go around?

  66. 66
    lamh34 says:

    O/T, I apologize to anyone who knows someone who suffers from dementia or Alzheimers, but seriously is McCain just losing it or what?

    McCain: ‘Of course’ Palin can beat Obama

  67. 67
    Admiral_Komack says:

    Oh, come now.

  68. 68
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @lamh34:

    That’s one of the more village-y things I’ve read recently. Don’t know if this guy has that reputation, but that’s the vibe I got.

  69. 69
    Rihilism says:

    Oh, come on. Moderation? It was “logic” wasn’t it?…

  70. 70
    Anya says:

    @dr. bloor: That would be Urdu.

  71. 71
    General Stuck says:

    Ok. It is clear now that this is spoof.

    Fred strikes me as living in the gray zone between spoof and what I call hypersnark. I don’t think he is pretending to be something he is not, which mostly is asshole, and left of center. I also call these personal mendacity trolls, after much experience experiencing these my self low these years on BJ.

    I don’t sense hatred, like so many of them bring, but Fred got in line twice when they were handing out smartass.

    At times, he flashes some similar to TZ, other times not so much. I fully approve of Fred, so long as his target is you and not me. the interwebs are cruel that way.

  72. 72
    DonBoy says:

    @Martin: Actually, this will put Stewart in a bind, since he and Weiner are old friends — roommates when they were first out of college. His reaction, if any, will be worth watching.

  73. 73
    eemom says:

    @Some:

    uh….what happened to Just and Fuckhead? Or is this an exercise in super-stealth Nickery?

  74. 74
    elle says:

    @JonF:

    thank you!! i mean, does jcole know something about congressamn weiner that no one else does, or what exactly makes him dumb enough to do that?

  75. 75
    Svensker says:

    @MikeJ:

    At last, a reasonable explanation.

  76. 76
    eemom says:

    @Rihilism:

    that would make an excellent addition to our photographic collection of John Cole body parts. So far all we’ve got is a pair of hairy legs and an elbow.

    It may take years, but sooner or later we’ll piece him together, like a blogger Mr. Potatohead.

  77. 77
    Sharl says:

    Cute hover-over text on that image, Mr. Cole.

  78. 78
    Svensker says:

    @John Cole:

    If Fred is DougJ then you need to give young Doug a talkin’ to cuz it’s uber lame. Take off the raspberry beret, DougJ!

    And if Fred is just Fred then I apologize to DougJ.

  79. 79
    Martin says:

    @lamh34:

    seriously is McCain just losing it or what?

    Wrong tense.

  80. 80
    piratedan says:

    So Weiner doesn’t sponsor enough legislation but is good at cogent intelligent rants while speaking on the telly and while on C-Span. Sorry, the Dems don’t have enough of those folks around, hence I’d like to keep him on “our” team. We need a few folks who can muster well-spoken outraged truths against the folks that spew their idiotic righteous indignation… just sayin’.

    Also, anyone who goes after Uncle Clarence is gonna draw fire from the right and lets face it, the right has shown a healthy inclination for a total disregard of the rules, much less apologizing for what they did after the fact. as has been said already, no laws have been broken, no proof rendered of any wrongdoing and the timing is odiously dubious considering what is on Weiner’s political agenda.

    @ JC, maybe you should have used “turgid” somewhere in your post, that’s always a good word…. “heaving” would have worked too… ;-)

  81. 81
    NobodySpecial says:

    @eemom: Bwahahah, you see sockpuppets everywhere!

    Hint: The internet is really all two people: You and a really bored guy.

  82. 82
    DJShay says:

    the default position for any story involving Breitbart is that it’s a fake. The fact that you “don’t know what’s going on” disappoints me. Every scandal Breitbart has broken has been shown to either an outright fake or manipulated.

  83. 83
    ChrisNYC says:

    Here’s why I don’t believe this yet. It was, what, 3 days ago that there was that tiny scandal about Twitter dm’s from that Palin person, where she was talking about Bristol, etc. Plus once every couple of months another GOPer is exposed as chronically unfaithful/gross/pitifully chasing sex. Now there’s this thing about Weiner. The wingnuts are copiers and sore losers. I can just see them saying, “What if we could set up something along those lines about some prominent Dem? Awesome!” It just feels made up. And, Breitbart.

  84. 84
    hamletta says:

    @piratedan: I’m rather fond of “tumescent.”

  85. 85
    MaximusNYC says:

    I don’t always agree with Weiner (I even argued with him at a town hall meeting once about health care reform), but he is far too smart — and ambitious — to do something like this.

    Consider the lying, malicious source. This deserves no more notice than a bad photoshop of “Bat-Boy” on the cover of the Weekly World News.

  86. 86
    Larkspur says:

    If this story lasts over 24 hours, Breitbart should seek immediate medical help to avoid long-term injury. Or not. Let’s not tell him.

  87. 87
  88. 88
    moe99 says:

    Weiner just gave a phenomenal takedown of the Republicans’ medicare cravenness. It makes sense that they would want to discredit him asap.

  89. 89
    maya says:

    As everybody should know. The best time to commit a sex scandal is right on the heals of a big one –
    or is that Wall Street scams?

  90. 90
    piratedan says:

    @hamletta: that’s a good one, I would have been okay with “fevered”, perhaps even a “glowing” reference would have given it the right tone of playfulness…

  91. 91
    Yutsano says:

    @maya: Yes.

    @DJShay: And this. Breitbart has shown himself to be neither a credible source nor a trustworthy human being in general. Not. Buying. It.

  92. 92
    Rihilism says:

    @piratedan:

    So Weiner doesn’t sponsor enough legislation but is good at cogent intelligent rants while speaking on the telly and while on C-Span. Sorry, the Dems don’t have enough of those folks around, hence I’d like to keep him on “our” team. We need a few folks who can muster well-spoken outraged truths against the folks that spew their idiotic righteous indignation… just sayin’.

    Agreed.

    @eemom:

    So far all we’ve got is a pair of hairy legs and an elbow.

    Really, I could have sworn John had posted some candid pics from his Easter celebrations last month…

  93. 93
    eemom says:

    @NobodySpecial:

    ‘twaz a joke, loozer.

  94. 94
    Mister Papercut says:

    @Rihilism:

    Really, I could have sworn John had posted some candid pics from his Easter celebrations last month…

    Not Safe For Life, she says, putting her eyes back in her head.

  95. 95
    Evolved Deep Southerner says:

    @Fred: Those Michael Gass-esque ellipses …

  96. 96
    Rihilism says:

    @Mister Papercut:

    Not Safe For Life

    I beg to differ. Celebrating life to it’s fullest is how I sees it.

    Since I’m rudely sharing other people’s family pics, here’s a shot from my family’s trip to Mount Rushmore last summer. I’m the second one from the left…

  97. 97
    Fred says:

    @Rihilism: Clearly you want to see that. So yea, I’m game. Yea, that’s it. I totally want to see John’s dick. Finally someone got to the bottom of what I am all about.

  98. 98
    Steve says:

    When was the last time a politician claimed “hack” and it was actually a hack? Put my prediction down as “not a hack” for the record.

  99. 99
    MikeJ says:

    @Steve: See my #35.

  100. 100
    Fred says:

    @General Stuck: But you did not answer the most important question Yoda. WHAT…Isssssssss my favorite color (sound of dramatic music). Hmmmmm?

  101. 101
    Rihilism says:

    @Fred: Why does it always have to be about you and your desire to get to the bottom of things?

  102. 102
    General Stuck says:

    @Fred:

    WHAT…Isssssssss my favorite color

    That’s classified. I ain’t no wikileaks.

  103. 103
    Fred says:

    @Svensker: Right now I am seriously speculating that John Cole is this mysterious Patriotusa76 that starting this whole Faux manufactured nontroversy which is obviously another Briebart manufactured smear campaign. And of course you people are there to take the bait once again.

    But you people couldn’t even figure out Chump had no intention of running so clearly not the sharpest tools in the shed around here.
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/.....ia=siderec

  104. 104
    shortstop says:

    @Rihilism: I’m not sayin’ you’re not sexy as hell just the way you are, but I have it on good authority that Chris Hayes likes his tube socks pulled all the way up to his kneecaps.

  105. 105
    Sixers says:

    If a GOP member(ha!) posted his bulge on twitter this place would revel in it like a motherfucker. I’m a dem who likes Weiner(ha!) but this is pretty shady shit. If you believe he was hacked you’re no better than Breitbart every time he pretends not to see Palin make a fool of herself.

  106. 106
    shortstop says:

    Fred, if you don’t learn how to spell Breitbart, we’re going to have to stop taking you totally seriously.

  107. 107
    Allan says:

    @shortstop: Could it be some form of obscure snark? Briebart? A soft runny French cheese?

  108. 108
    Fred says:

    @Spaghetti Lee: A democrat that voted for G Dubya twice and likes Greenwald Libertarian Presidential candidate picks?

    That is not a democrat in my book. DINO or Professional Left (ie. Primary Obama because “insert your special interest or hidden agenda here”). But not what I call a real democrat. A solid independent at the very least.

    Like I said yesterday. I don’t trust anyone who can be convinced to vote for the texas dummy….TWICE! If you can be convinced of that you can be convinced of just about anything. Like voting for a Libertarian because they say they oppose war. Even if it means ignoring the other problems with libertarians like, oh I don’t know..say opposing child labour laws and civil rights laws for starters. None of that matters as long as they ‘say’ they oppose war.

    the stupid it burns.

  109. 109
    Rihilism says:

    @shortstop: Hayes is such a tease…

  110. 110
    shortstop says:

    @Rihilism: Oh, honey, yes. But don’t he make it hurt so good?

  111. 111
    Cacti says:

    @Sixers:

    If you believe he was hacked you’re no better than Breitbart

    Andrew, is that you?

  112. 112
    Keith G says:

    @shortstop:

    I like an accidentally exposed Weiner as much as the next girl.

    Me too.

  113. 113
    Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again) says:

    @Fred:

    A democrat that voted for G Dubya twice and likes Greenwald Libertarian Presidential candidate picks?

    That’s what all of your nonsense was about? Jebus…

    Look, maybe Cole is a pearl-clutcher when it comes to Obama-related civil liberties issues, but I’ve read through the archives, saw how he went through the transformation he did, and he’s fine by me. Who appointed you the Grand Inquisitor of the Democrats?

  114. 114
    Citizen_X says:

    To Our Esteemed Customers:

    We understand that many of you are concerned as to _XCorp’s take on this matter. It is our official position that:

    A) Given that its source is a lying piece of shit, we consider this story to be a crock.

    B) Even if this story were true, we would not give a flying fuck.

    Thank you for your attention. And, as always, thank you for choosing _XCorp.

    Citizen_X
    CEO and Junior Assistant Flunkie
    _XCorp

  115. 115
    shortstop says:

    @Keith G: Keith! Do you kiss your right-wing brother with that mouth?

  116. 116
    John Cole says:

    @Fred:

    Right now I am seriously speculating that John Cole is this mysterious Patriotusa76

    LOL. I was so drunk Friday night when this happened I couldn’t run my own fucking twitter account, much less someone else’s.

  117. 117
  118. 118
  119. 119
    elle says:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_.....m_rep.html

    thats a link to the supposed mistress’ statement about the whole findango.

    yet another breitbart faked up pseudo scandal

  120. 120
    Jules says:

    Seriously, people actually believed the Weiner story from AB?

  121. 121
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    @Fred:

    Ah yes the always suspect John Galt Cole is ‘just curious’. ‘Just asking questions’ is all. Never mentions Briebart once. And why would he. That has NOTHING to do with this anyways. He could like TOTALLY see Weiner doing this but he is reserving judgement. Just want’s to get to the bottom of it is all and who better than to go read some right wing blogs in between the “why the birth certificate is a forgery” posts. John Galt Cole just wants the facts.

    This.

  122. 122
    Step2 says:

    Before the Weiner overexposure-gate gets blown out of proportion, I think it is important to consider all the screw-jobs connected to an enlarged scandal like this. Each rumor needs to be thoroughly exposed to get to the naked truth, no matter if it is hard to swallow, until the issue is drained of its juice.

  123. 123
    Rihilism says:

    @elle: Wow! Fucking wow! There needs to be some serious consequences for Britebutt for this one. If I were that young woman’s father, I’d have a very hard time staying out of jail…

  124. 124
    Cat Lady says:

    That’s a huge cock.

  125. 125
    Svensker says:

    @Fred:

    You are a big silly.

  126. 126
    PS says:

    @Cat Lady: You’re just trying to tempt the perp into, ah, exposing himself, aren’t you?

  127. 127
    Djur says:

    I’ve always been skeptical of Weiner, but this stinks to high heaven. I hope he doesn’t get bullied out of office by the Breitbart clowns. And the way the woman is being treated is despicable.

  128. 128
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    Could we PLEASE just agree to not use the terms “penis” and “weiner” and “prick” when referring to the tubular portion of the male reproductive unit?

    To my ear these three terms denote something best prodded with a tweezers while wearing rubber gloves.

    Wiser to stick with the jocular, All American-sounding “COCK.” Just making the word requires two hard, muscular, noisy contractions of the throat; toss a soft “O” sound in between, which forces the mouth open, and you’ve got the perfect word for this pleasure giving and receiving appendage.

    Then there’s always my personal favorite, “SCHLONG,” the saying of which honors my German heritage and blood. Go ahead, say “Schlong.” It just sounds huge and moist, doesn’t it?

  129. 129
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Fred:

    Like I said yesterday. I don’t trust anyone

    That’s real nice dear but your opinions ain’t worth a hill of shit to me. Leastaways not until you show you’re someone more worthwhile then today’s brand of troll.

  130. 130
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @elle:

    From the comments section on that story: “Doesn’t this girl realize she’s being used.” Obviously, from an expert on being used.

  131. 131
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    @Spaghetti Lee:

    Leastaways not until you show you’re someone more worthwhile then today’s brand of troll.

    Spaghetti, could you please share your definition of “troll?”

    Thanks.

  132. 132
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Tim, Interrupted:

    The classic definition of course is someone who seeks to derail a topic thread with off-topic and/or inflammatory replies. I’d say Fred’s contribution to this thread is off-topic, having nothing to do with examining the content of the post or the news story it relates to, and inflammatory, as accusing someone of trying to make excuses or provide cover for Andrew Breitbart is fighting words around these parts, as is accusing the bloghost of a popular Democratic blog as being a sleeper agent for the other side. A comment element of trolling is the use of logical fallacies, which Fred is using here in the form of ad hominem (Don’t trust him! He’s a secret Republican!) and a related No True Scotsmen argument (anyone worth listening to would have never voted for Bush), and raising ambiguous questions about John’s secret alliegances without taking the time to actually back his claims up-all insinuation with no substance, ironically the same thing he’s accusing John of.

  133. 133

    @shortstop:

    But not! with exclamation points! You! naive! fool!

    Did anyone else read this in William Shatner’s voice?

  134. 134
    El Cid says:

    And while you libruls are here trying to coverup Weiner, America is left wide open for Obama to once again ram a massive package down our throats.

    He had barely even shut the door behind him in the Oval Office when suddenly he’s pushing straight through the biggest ‘stimulus’ most Americans had ever heard of, bigger than the average librul’s wildest dreams and every good conservative patriot’s worst nightmare, and America barely had time to say even one word before that stimulus was pushed through.

    And if that wasn’t satisfying enough for him, suddenly he carries through with Democrats’ long-time fantasy of having Obama take care of all our health needs. And no matter how many times American conservatives stood up and screamed how we would never ever let it happen, Obama followed through with his plan, and so with health care reform the biggest most complicated legislation ever seen was squeezed through.

    And now, thanks you your dear leader and all his smooth talk, he now has a firm hold over the biggest, juiciest part of our entire economy. But just you wait — just when he’s least expecting it, America will rise up and throw off the chains tying them down.

    So you people make all your snicker snicker sex jokes and your double entendres, because somebody out here has to push back against your Great Leader and his savage desires to rule over us.

  135. 135
    Church Lady says:

    He’s a Congressman and, as such, nothing any of them do surprises me. As sex scandals go, this is about as milquetoast as that other guy sending a picture of himself shirtless to some woman he contacted on Craigslist.

    Embarrassing for Weiner? Yes, whether it’ true or not, and I’m leaning more towards true. Resignation worthy? Nah. The only thing he really needs to worry about is how his wife will react.

    I look forward to the FBI investigation of this matter.

  136. 136
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    @Spaghetti Lee:

    Thank you for your reply.

    So do you consider it “trolling” for a commenter to occasionally remind fellow readers of a blogger’s past credibility issues, or to mention past lapses in judgement that may cast light or lend context to something the blogger is writing or saying now?

    Also, in what way is BJ a “Democratic” blog? Is there an official designation?

    Is it fair game to call attention to JC’s former hard core Republicanism as a healthy reminder when considering his current hard core Democratic party affiliation? As a matter of judgement/character, or is that trolling?

  137. 137
    karen marie says:

    @eemom: +1

  138. 138
    AxelFoley says:

    @General Stuck:

    Since Obama’s poll numbers seem solid right now above the 50 percent mark, while grannies across the land are forming squads to jihad the GOP for fucking with medicare, the wingers need something to pound.

    I see what you did there.

  139. 139
    AxelFoley says:

    @MikeJ:

    Why are they shoving this down our throats!?

    Well played, sir.

  140. 140
    Roy G says:

    Well, when you’ve got Santorum all over your Breitbart, what’s the first thing you do?

    Yell, ‘hey, look at that big Wiener over there!’

  141. 141
    karen marie says:

    @Tim, Interrupted: I’m wondering why you’re here if you are so concerned about John Cole’s “credibility issues.”

    Or perhaps you’re drink-addled and have him confused with Breitbart?

  142. 142
    muddy says:

    @lllphd:
    I don’t think it was that, doesn’t that come in through Safari? I use Firefox. Dunno, it’s gone now and good riddance. Thanks for the link though!

  143. 143
    GregB says:

    Republican men are infatuated with cock. They have been talking about Bill Clinton’s cock for almost two decades now.

    One conservative co-worker once mentioned the rumor that Bill Clinton had a curved penis.

    I then pointed out how often Republicans and conservatives talked about Bill Clinton’s cock and how weird it was that a supposedly straight guy was talking about another dude’s cock.

    He stopped talking and walked away quickly.

    It was a direct hit on his psyche.

  144. 144
    brad says:

    I follow Weiner, and in case there’s anyone with a non-concern trollish curiosity as to why he was following a 21 year old girl, it’s very, very simple. A few weeks back he tweeted to say that he would follow anyone who asked him to.
    http://twitter.com/#!/RepWeine.....8388290560
    It still shocks me how stupid some people are, sometimes.

  145. 145
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    @karen marie:

    I’m wondering why you’re here if you are so concerned about John Cole’s “credibility issues.”

    Do you associate only with humans who will echo back to you exactly what you already think and say? Do you have any familiarity with shades of grey?

  146. 146
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @Tim, Interrupted:

    So do you consider it “trolling” for a commenter to occasionally remind fellow readers of a blogger’s past credibility issues, or to mention past lapses in judgement that may cast light or lend context to something the blogger is writing or saying now?

    At the minimum, I’d like an explanation of how the credibility issues, such as they are, significantly affect the topic at hand, because I think what’s going on now is basically ad hominem. Yeah, John used to be a Republican. He’s also spent the last 4-5 years ripping into the Republican Party with all the fury he can muster. To wildly accuse him of relapse because you think he’s being insufficiently passionate, on one post out of hundreds, strikes me as kind of silly.

    Also, in what way is BJ a “Democratic” blog? Is there an official designation?

    The vast majority of people who post here regularly are Democrats, and the site has done fundraisers for Democratic congressmen and Democratic issues in the past. I don’t think such an “official” designation as you’re searching for, which I assume would involve the Democratic Party itself, exists for any political blog.

    Is it fair game to call attention to JC’s former hard core Republicanism as a healthy reminder when considering his current hard core Democratic party affiliation? As a matter of judgement/character, or is that trolling?

    Well, I think focusing any real amount of energy on scolding people who haven’t been Democrats their whole life is counter-productive regarding things that Democrats and liberals actually hope to achieve, so I’d say no from a big-picture perspective.

    I haven’t been here for all that long, but from what I’ve seen of John’s posts, he’s a pretty solid Democrat at this point, and has basically nothing but contempt for the Republican Party. If it’s all a put-on, it’s a pretty good one, to the point where it defies any rational belief that someone could keep it up so well for so long.

    And even if he did, the implication would be that if he disagrees with popular Democratic opinion on one issue (not even disagreeing, more like waiting for all the facts to come out) then suddenly he’s not a Democrat and 5 whole years of blogging are suspect. That’s counterproductive at the very least, and it’s basically ideological fundamentalism of the sort that liberals should seek to avoid. If you think that his conservative past might have left him with a few blind spots, and you have a logical argument as to why, then by all means bring it up, but the sorts of claims people are making are just foolish.

  147. 147
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @GregB:

    One conservative co-worker once mentioned the rumor that Bill Clinton had a curved penis.

    Is that some kind of wingnut code for something? I guess everything has some secret meaning to them, so maybe it’s better that I don’t know.

  148. 148
    karen marie says:

    @Tim, Interrupted: Yes, I am well familiar with “shades of grey,” but I do not frequent sites that I find to have credibility issues. I consider it a waste of my time.

    Now go concern troll somewhere else. You’re taking up bandwidth that could otherwise be more profitably used to show internet kitteh videos.

  149. 149
    electricgrendel says:

    I know that half the people in this thread hate DailyKos for some reason, but this nontroversy has been pretty thoroughly debunked. The picture Breitbart has posted is (surprisingly!) faked.

    This guy is toxic. Why on God’s green earth anyone, anywhere would EVER take seriously anything he tells them is beyond me. He’s a sleaze pipeline. Only sleaze comes from him.

  150. 150
    brad says:

    Also, if anyone’s as much of an insomniac as I am, and bored, #weinergate on the twitters is proving to be quite fun. Asking simple questions like why a tech-savvy congressman would post such a pic on his public twitter feed is getting the #tcot morans all worked up.

    Yes, I know, I need a life, but this will do in the meantime.

  151. 151
    Larkspur says:

    @Tim, Interrupted: Oh, Tim, do whatever you want, but I will not listen to you any more, because you smell like troll, and life is too short.

  152. 152
    eclecticbrotha says:

    @electricgrendel: Doesn’t matter if ts true or not. Having a Representative who’s last name is also a euphemism for the male anatomy is more than enough to keep our juvenile, shiny-object obsessed media stoked for weeks. Weeks, I tell you.

  153. 153
    eclecticbrotha says:

    Fascinating reading a progressive blog and seeing so many people leaning toward believing Weiner guilty simply because 1) he’s a member of Congress and 2) they saw something bad about him on the internet.

    I blame Bush. No pun intended. I blame the former president because I’m old enough to remember that before 2000 we weren’t this cynical.

  154. 154
    Lojasmo says:

    John: stop. Full stop.

  155. 155
  156. 156
    Modusoperandi says:

    aisce “what is it about the male mind and camera phones that leads automatically to dick shots at every turn?”
    What’s the point of a camera if it’s not for taking pictures of one’s package? For further info, send me your email address.*

    Alex S. “She’s a 21-year-old journalist with a crush on Weiner…”
    Is that like a pinchcock?

    DonBoy “@Martin: Actually, this will put Stewart in a bind, since he and Weiner are old friends—roommates when they were first out of college. His reaction, if any, will be worth watching.”
    So, he can vouch whether or not that’s Weiner’s weiner (because, you know…”Dude! I’m in here! Knock!”)

    * Note that I don’t have a cameraphone (my cell phone is old enough that it’s got a rotary dial. And a cord). I do, however, have a graphing calculator, so you’ll get an email with my parabola (which isn’t naughty, but sounds like it is. “Parabola”.

  157. 157
    El Cid says:

    @eclecticbrotha:

    Fascinating reading a progressive blog and seeing so many people leaning toward believing Weiner guilty simply because 1) he’s a member of Congress and 2) they saw something bad about him on the internet.

    For a number of people it seems to be because he says agitated stuff in Congress and is liked a lot by people who are considered too leftist or too hyperactively anti-Democratic, so a guy like that needs to be taken down a few pegs to show those types what’s what.

  158. 158
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    @Lojasmo:

    Shut it.

    Hmmm…you have issues with words that delineate sexual organs, and how those words sound? Or you just have issues with me as you imagine me to be?

    Either way, fuck you and fuck off, dipshit.

  159. 159
    Tim, Interrupted says:

    @El Cid:

    For a number of people it seems to be because he says agitated stuff in Congress and is liked a lot by people who are considered too leftist or too hyperactively anti-Democratic, so a guy like that needs to be taken down a few pegs to show those types what’s what.

    It is simple: About 3/4 of the commenters at BJ are Obama Democrats, which is roughly equivalent to being a Reagan Republican. Looked at thru that lens, this makes perfect sense.

  160. 160
    RalfW says:

    Anthony Weiner has a knack for spouting off in ways that piss off rich, politically connected people like the Koch brothers, health care profiteers, etc.

    So they paid or enticed Brietbart to engage in a smear campaign. It’s so friggin’ obvious.

    Brietbart is a fraud. A man on the make. Everything he does is tainted, as if he’s sniffed so much Santorum over the years that it’ll never get off his nose entirely.

Comments are closed.