Late Night Horrorshow Open Thread: So Weiner Is A Dick — Why Is That “Our” Problem?

Dave Weigel, in the Washington Post, “What kind of tragedy was Anthony Weiner?“:

The Anthony Weiner saga — which, if not over, has finally been officially demoted to a farce — has been with us for five years. Weiner tweeted a photo of his packed underwear to a West Coast fan on the sleepy weekend around Memorial Day in 2o11. Huma Abedin, his wife since 2010, announced that their marriage was over at the start of the lead-up to Labor Day in 2016, another news doldrum. Plenty of politicians make crippling personal mistakes. Few have been cursed with Weiner’s timing.

Today’s Weiner story is really about Abedin, and whether (to the relief of friends) she can finally shed a cad who threatened to be a political liability. But since 2011, when he resigned from Congress after news conferences hijacked by Andrew Breitbart and “The Howard Stern Show,” Weiner has become an irresistible subject for counterfactuals…

Josh Barro (in no sense a Democrat or a liberal) at Business Insider, on “the Ted Cruz of the Left”:

… The thing is: Weiner’s congressional career wasn’t exactly brought down by the sexting scandal. It was brought down by the sexting scandal and by Weiner’s status as a terrible coworker…

When Weiner became embroiled in scandal in 2011, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she’d like him to resign, as did Steve Israel, the congressman who ran the campaign committee charged with electing Democrats to the House…

In one instance, Weiner threatened to hold up the Affordable Care Act in committee if he was not allowed to offer an amendment to replace it with a single-payer plan. This would have burnished Weiner’s left-wing credentials. But it would not have led to the enactment of single-payer — it would have forced Democratic colleagues to take another politically difficult vote. And if the amendment had passed, it would have led to the ACA being defeated in Congress.

Weiner gave up his demand to offer the amendment, but The Times reported he got a concession in exchange: a prime speaking slot on the night of passage, and the vote-tally sheet, which he held up on the cover of The Daily News.

In a way, Weiner was his party’s Ted Cruz: He made a lot of noise about ideas like single-payer healthcare that turned on his party’s ideological base, but he had few actual legislative accomplishments, and he made the hard work of enacting his party’s achievable goals more difficult. This annoyed Weiner’s colleagues, and it’s no surprise that when a scandal had his career teetering over a ledge, they chose to push him…

Sounds like the Democratic party can get along just fine without Weiner’s talents. And while the NY Post seems to have been sitting on their “scoop” for over a year, no doubt hoping for maximum anti-HRC impact, it’s clear their preferred candidate is the least qualified person to take advantage of this.

Hell, it’s not even Labor Day yet!






24 replies
  1. 1
    sdhays says:

    I was shocked when I saw he was being used by the Clinton campaign as a surrogate a couple of weeks ago. Someone should have listened to W.: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…won’t get fooled again.”

  2. 2
    EconWatcher says:

    You gotta give Abedin credit for trying to stick this one out for so long, most likely for the sake of their kid.

  3. 3
    greennotGreen says:

    @sdhays: Being used by the Clinton campaign or inserting himself in the Clinton campaign? The man does love exposure.

  4. 4
    Mary G says:

    This will blow over within a week. Poor woman has had some bad shit thrown at her. I hope she has some support. He is a dick.

  5. 5
    Aimai says:

    She is in a difficult situation. He could get full custody and child support if he has been the full time, st home parent while she is working. Despite what people may think the courts are very father friendly at this point and the fact that he is a lousy husband and even the pictures with the kid in thdm msy not be enough to let her control custody. many states are so stringly 50/50 custody that even domestic violence doesnt count agsinst custody.

  6. 6
    sdhays says:

    @greennotGreen: I saw him on one of the late night talk shows. Probably Colbert. I just saw a clip (clicked through because I was very surprised Anthony Wiener was allowed out of the house, let alone allowed to speak in public), but the way he was talking, he seemed to be a Hillary surrogate because I couldn’t imagine why else he would be there – if the Clinton campaign didn’t want him out there talking about Hillary, I figured he wouldn’t be allowed to.

    That was a mistake that could have been avoided. What a shithead.

  7. 7
    Origuy says:

    @sdhays: If he isn’t an employee of the Clinton campaign, how could they stop him from going on TV? He’s perfectly free to appear and talk about Hillary or anything the show wants him to talk about. They could get an injunction, but on what grounds? “Your Honor, he’s a slimy asshole who will make us look bad,” The judge would say, “So?”

  8. 8
    Patricia Kayden says:

    @sdhays: Clinton surrogate or Clinton supporter? I really doubt he had any connection to the Clinton campaign beyond his marriage to Huma. In any case, Clinton doesn’t need his surrogacy.

  9. 9
    msdc says:

    @sdhays: He was on Colbert the week of the Democratic convention. In other words, they booked him because all the real campaign surrogates were busy that night.

  10. 10
    one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer says:

    @Aimai:

    In my courts, his half hard cock shot with the kid in it would lead to sight and sound supervision (probably in a visitation center) for no more than an hour a week while he underwent treatment and presented a positive assessment and report. Figure at least 18 months before he could even think about unsupervised contact, and about 6 months beyond that for overnights.

    We don’t fuck around.

  11. 11
    Pogonip says:

    That guy really needs to change his name…

  12. 12
    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet says:

    @one_particular_harbour, fka Botsplainer: I’m no expert, but I find it hard to believe that he would get custody. He obviously has a “thrill-seeking” aspect to his personality that he has not been able to control – even when it destroyed his political career once already.

    He probably doesn’t want exclusive custody, either. Someone who’s willing (via his actions) to throw away his marriage doesn’t seem like someone who wants to be a full-time dad.

    But we’ll see (whether we actually want to or not…).

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  13. 13
    Denali says:

    FYI, I refuse to feed the media click machine and read anything about this story. It is none of my business.

  14. 14
    low-tech cyclist says:

    In a way, Weiner was his party’s Ted Cruz: He made a lot of noise about ideas…

    That’s so much bullshit. Each party has a fair number of Congresscritters who are bigger on making noise than accomplishing anything. Are they all their party’s Ted Cruz, Josh? Gimme a break.

  15. 15
    Glennis says:

    @sdhays:

    if the Clinton campaign didn’t want him out there talking about Hillary, I figured he wouldn’t be allowed to.

    Um, what? How do you think the campaign would “not allow” him if he wanted to go on TV?

  16. 16
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @sdhays:

    he seemed to be a Hillary surrogate because I couldn’t imagine why else he would be there – if the Clinton campaign didn’t want him out there talking about Hillary, I figured he wouldn’t be allowed to.

    That makes no sense.

  17. 17
    low-tech cyclist says:

    @Pogonip:

    That guy really needs to change his name…

    Well, he did use the pseudonym ‘Carlos Danger’ for awhile when sharing his dick pix. (Insert Firesign-related joke here about Carlos Danger’s third eye.)

  18. 18
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    What got Weiner in so much trouble the first time was lying to Nancy Smash about this. Once that was revealed, it was so long, Anthony, bye BYE!

  19. 19
    Hob says:

    There are two possible security risk scenarios, equally serious.

    1.

    BORIS BADENOV: Give us your state secrets, or we will ruin your husband’s reputation again by revealing that he’s sending dick pictures again!

    HUMA ABEDIN: Oh shit. Well, given that he’s able to go about five minutes without publicly incriminating himself… how many state secrets are five more minutes of not-yet-humiliated-even-worseness worth? How about I just give you all my passwords and you owe me one.

    2.

    ANTHONY WEINER: Hey honey, you know what I’d really love is if you’d take this Sharpie and write something really interesting on my penis. Like, something that’d be a huge surprise if you read it. Well, not if you read it, because you already know all these things, but supposing that somehow someone else could read it. Why? I don’t know, it’d just… make me feel pretty.

  20. 20
    Hob says:

    Aw, my super important comment is stuck in moderation. I don’t know which bad word I used.

  21. 21
  22. 22
    Seanly says:

    @Hob:

    Can’t tell if being a troll or being droll?

  23. 23
    Hob says:

    @Seanly: Uh… you’re wondering whether my comment was intended as a serious factual statement? No. No, it was not. I’ll try to be more obvious next time, somehow.

  24. 24
    sdhays says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I realize this thread is dead, but I would think that being the spouse of one of Secretary Clinton’s closest advisors would mean that if you want to go on TV and talk about the campaign, you’re expected to run that idea by the campaign, and if you don’t, you can expect to be in a lot of trouble. There are other loser former Congressmen that the Colbert show could scrounge up to come talk about the campaign, but none of them are married to one of Hillary’s closest advisors. He was clearly there because of his connection to Hillary, and how many viewers of Colbert’s show sweat the difference between “supporter” and “surrogate”?

    Obviously, they couldn’t physically stop him from doing the show, but still, I don’t see how it’s unreasonable to expect that the campaign had some influence over whether he was willing to go on TV or not and talk about the campaign. I think they should have used that influence to protect Hillary rather than allow this jackass an opportunity to try boost his profile and coast on his connection to Hillary to reboot his dead political career, which I think is what he was really all about.

    Not a huge deal, but I hope someone in the campaign learns from this that you should not throw crumbs to assholes who embarrass the party and their families so much that they get kicked out of Congress. Let them plot their political comeback on their own time.

Comments are closed.