WTF? Weiner was warned his tweets were being scrutinized for lewd content and he kept on doing it!

[ClarkUSA]

Ethics Case for Weiner? Maybe One of Psychiatry
The New York Times
June 8, 2011

Less than a month ago, he told a reporter for The New York Times that he knew that his own behavior was bound to be scrutinized.

In fact, conservative bloggers, led by an individual identified as @PatriotUSA76, were tracking his Twitter account so carefully that they sent warnings to women who were being followed online by Mr. Weiner to be wary of him.

Mr. Weiner was copied into those warnings.

Even so, knowing that he was being watched, he kept up his stream of lewd communications with strangers, people who identified themselves as women.

A longstanding political friend of Mr. Weiner and his wife, Huma Abedin, said on Tuesday that he was trying to come to grips with the congressman’s recklessness.

“If you look at the sin — is it public or is it private — it’s private,” said the friend, who did not want to be identified. “But you go beyond sin, this is mental illness. It’s strange.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/nyregion/punishment-or-therapy-for-a-fool-in-queens.html?hpw

Wow. That is f*cked up.

[Maru Kitteh]

1. I saw it posted that he continued even after it first broke. I admit I haven't' gone looking

for verification, so I don't know that. But at this point I sure wouldn't be a bit surprised.

[ClarkUSA]

79. That's right, he did. --> "Weiner -- Yukking It Up with Porn Star During Scandal"

Rep. Anthony Weiner didn't just offer porn star Ginger Lee some emergency PR help once the scandal broke -- he even sent her underwear-inspired JOKES ... mocking his penis bulge predicament.

The messages were exchanged while Weiner frantically scrambled to give Ginger media lessons -- three days after he accidentally posted a picture of his erect wang on Twitter.

Amid the coaching sesh, Weiner tossed in a laugh-banger to lighten the mood -- "Btw, I'm sponsoring a line of twitpic ready undies. I need a name."

Ginger played along, writing back "I want twitpic ready undies. Hook a bitch up, I never get cool sh*t. Just sayin'. "

Nothing like some old-fashioned comic relief when your career is spiraling out of control.

http://www.tmz.com/2011/06/08/anthony-weiner-porn-star-ginger-lee-joke-photo-twitter-scandal-laughing-yukking-it-up-twitpic-undies

All this, while he's lying to his pregnant wife, to his liberal supporters, to the Democratic Party, and the media. Is he crazy?

[adigal]

121. This man was going after Clarence Thomas, and he did damage

to himself, and this cause. I am very upset about that, more than anything else. If you are going after a powerful conservative Republican, you had better be clean. So now Thomas wins, Weiner goes away, and we become more and more corporate every day.

[librechik]

2. gee, I don't know ANYONE who is compelled to post online unreasonably as if it's an addiction

Do any of you long time DUers know anyone who can't stop posting online even though it wastes time and can get them in trouble? I'm sure we all know that this never happens and adults can easily control such compulsive behavior.

:sarcasm:

[frazzled]

6. But is such reckless, compulsive behavior acceptable in someone ...

elected to the public trust?

As you said, it wastes time and can get them in trouble. As opposed to trouble with the wife (newlywed wife in this case), it could be trouble with spies, blackmail, or any number of things that could affect the government.

Having a private affair (in real life) is probably not that dangerous. Being addicted to Internet sexting could be very dangerous.

[librechik]

7. yes, it's worth seeking therapy. But should you lose your job over it?

When your job performance has been exemplary, like Weiner's? IMO, No.

[Maru Kitteh]

8. I hope the DU ethics committee doesn't find out. SHIT! I can't even remember taking an oath!

Because some adults have addictions, AW should be given a pass on poor impulse control and really bad judgment?

[seabeyond]

9. bah hahaha... how we twist and turn to make this all ok. jeezus, lets see

any difference. tough one.

ridiculous

[aquart]

89. Difference between what and what?

Have you managed to find a crime other than your outraged sensibilities?

[seabeyond]

106. posting on a political forum and putting out picture of penis and phone sex. nt

[DevonRex]

27. Posting about politics = exposing erect penises to strangers?????

OMG. :rofl:

[aquart]

91. Well, in some places it's a lot more likely to get you killed.

In others, even steven.

[namahage]

83. Really? DUers post pictures of their naughty bits?

Where?

[Love Bug]

3. They don't call it "the dumb stick" for nuthin'...

[meow mix]

4. doing it... while lying about it.

how did he think this would go unnoticed lol.

[DevonRex]

16. Seems to me that he wanted the entire world to praise his member.

That's obviously not the behavior of someone wishing to keep his private life to himself. It's like he flashed the whole world at one time.

[targetpractice]

24. He even said to Rachel Maddow...

She asked, "Is the photo of you?"

He replied with a giggle, "Can I say 'I wish'?"

So, yeah... there's something narcissistic going on.

That said... I'm sad that we may lose his voice for a while.

[DevonRex]

31. Oh dear. He needs some serious counseling.

That's the saddest part is that he has silenced himself on real issues.

I know about addiction. Addicts have to own up to it and do the work and make amends. And even when they do all that, there is no guarantee that everyone will forgive and forget. They have to accept that, too. Weiner may have to make himself useful in some other capacity. If he does the work he can.

[aquart]

92. Yes, Anthony is the only narcissistic politician.

LOL!

[targetpractice]

125. Yes, and I have the world's only narcissistic mother ;-)

Seriously... The more I learn about narcissism... the more concerned I get about who's in charge.

[ladjf]

40. The man is the quintessential "e-flasher". nt

[HipChick]

5. a friend? unamed sources? journalism at it's best...

[RandomThoughts]

10. That can be looked at a few ways.

I would have suggested he spend hours thinking why he does it.

There are some that like risk, and the excitement from risk.

It could also have been that deep inside, he did not see it as wrong.

It could also be that he was setting a trap, for some challenge, going against a big challenge can be rewarding.

It could have been self destructive, maybe trying to find some meaning.

Lots of reasons why.


Maybe he likes attention and pretty ladies, and felt the computer was a harmless way to do that.

Maybe he believes in privacy, and wanted the debate on if his private issues are valid for public scrutiny.



Honestly, if you are going to change the world, peaceful civil disobedience to some tradition is a way to do that. especially a tradition that has been used wrongly against society by societies desire for gossip.

Maybe he was doing civil disobedience against smear merchants, and the weak people that love to gossip about sex for the exact same titillation, but with self righteousness while they are in what they call the same sin by liking to talk about it. And for a claim to peoples right to privacy.

Really how different is him talking about sex on a computer, and all the excitement in the media talking about his sex scandal. Think about it


http://vimeo.com/1764428

Billy Idol - Eyes Without A Face
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OFpfTd0EIs




Brothers in Arms - Dire Straits
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5JkHBC5lDs

Bonnie Raitt - I Can't Make You Love Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW9Cu6GYqxo

Bonnie Raitt - Nick Of Time
http://www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=407128

Dire Straits - Walk of Life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CknuCTRAW_I




And becuase those smear merchants are sexual sadist that like to humiliate people to try and break them.


Constantine - Bring me to life (Evanescence)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx8d3K_hngw

[sabrina 1]

48. Excellent post. Very good points made.

Mostly, that why would he stop just because the repressed juveniles on the right couldn't stop themselves from prying into his personal life? If he doesn't see anything shameful about sex, why would he feel the need to let the prying eyes of the up-tight rightwinger, hypocrites stop him?


I also agree that all the talk about it, the juvenile need to post every photo and every salacious detail, is not much different from what he did, online.

Maybe even on the left there are a lot of people who are deeply conflicted about sex, and use these stories as an excuse to talk about something they actually do feel is taboo.

[lbrtbell]

60. Sex isn't shameful. Infidelity & lying are. n/t

[sabrina 1]

66. No, in this country there is an element that has been taught that

sex is shameful. That is why people attempt to hide it. There would be no need to lie if that was not the attitude.

As for infidelity, well, that's not my business, he's not my husband, lucky for him. His wife may feel differently and I am not in a position to judge other people's relationships. Too bad so many people believe they are.

[CTyankee]

76. Of course his sex life isn't any of your business! It isn't any of mine, either!

If it is private, damnit, it's private! so am I at fault if Weiner makes his private life public?

[sabrina 1]

85. He didn't make it public. The scumbag, Andrew Breitbart

made it public. And we are helping to empower that criminal organization whose whole goal in life is to destroy Liberals forever. They thank you for your help, in fact they counted on it.

This is a war for them, a war on Liberals, and minorities and when you are under attack, as we all are from them, you don't hand them a victory when you don't need to.

If all Democrats were to publicly make fun of BREITBART for his prurient interest in the sexual lives of Democrats, apparently he has none in his own life, we could put a real dent in their armor. But instead, we want to be patted on the back for appearing to be 'fair' and slamming one of our own, as if they will ever pat anyone on this side of the aisle on the back.

The real problem here is Breitbart and those backing him, because they won't stop until they ARE stopped. And so far, with Democrats caving to them each and every time they pull something like this, why should they stop?

[CTyankee]

101. sabrina, he DID make it public. Look at the media he chose. He WANTED more

from his public. He asked for it, sought it constantly. And his, and our, enemies Breitbart, took advantage of his weakness. You simply cannot deny that...

[PeaceNikki]

111. He sent a pic of his pee pee to the entire Twitterverse. He made it public.

[aquart]

11. Ice road trucking. Mountain climbing. All extreme sports.

Sky diving. Bungee jumping. BEING A NAVY SEAL.

Blowfish eating. Smoking.

Risk taking is part of the personality profile. Much as we'd like to believe it's an illness....and wouldn't we prefer it if the photos were bungee jumping? It's not. It's a requirement.

This is an assassination. In other countries they leave the mutilated body by the side of the road. Here, they ferret out your trivial sins and post your private words on the internet. BUT THE GOAL IS THE SAME: to destroy an effective voice for the people.

The personality that takes the risk of being utterly destroyed is the one to vote for. But it is also someone who gets a thrill from the risk.

If JFK had had a cell phone camera, I shudder to think.

This is a targeted, planned assassination.

[William769]

12. +1.

:thumbsup:

[DevonRex]

13. Oh good grief. More like political suicide.

[meow mix]

15. shooting himself in the foot with a bazooka... "oh noes why are they attacking him?!?!"

:rofl:
as if our side wouldnt do the same

[DevonRex]

21. Yep we would do the same thing and we already have, many times.

And dear lord, the image I just got with your shooting bazooka comment. :rofl:

[latinaliberal]

23. Weiner

It sounds like he has poor impulse control. COULD be a symptom of something else. If it is true that he was warned and he continued the behavior, then I would say he should resign.

[Common Sense Party]

25. -1,000,000

Assassination, my ASS.

Weiner made his choices. Erections have consequences.

[CTyankee]

26. I agree with you on the assassination.

But I am assuming that Weiner wants to keep his job and I am assuming that you and I want him to keep his job. Why then would we want him to do something that, if his enemies got hold of it would doubtless make a HUGE stink and might just result in his losing his job and, therefore, his effectiveness, which is why he and we WANT him in the job in the first place. That makes me crazy.

Even if his enemies weren't aware of his activities, surely he knew that with all of the women he enjoyed his chats with there was a risk of one or several taking the opportunity to turn those chats into trash for cash. We can say "it's private behavior and none of our business" and on a basic level I agree. Where this argument breaks down, tho, is he MADE it public with his tweeting and sending pics.

[marions ghost]

42. Absolutely he knows

the risk he was taking and that only heightened the thrill he got from it. If he were not doing this on the internet, he would be doing it in the back alley in a trench coat. Compulsive exhibitionism is hard to stop. See my post #52 below.

It's public in that he has an illness affecting his job performance.

If he would seek treatment, I could still vote for him.

[CTyankee]

44. I'd still vote for him, too, altho I'd like to know if he had thought a lot harder

about where his behavior was leading. At a certain point, he has to ask himself "Can I get past this place in my life where I find myself?"

[marions ghost]

49. Right

he has to confront the demons now. They may be very old demons that he has tried to bury in the deep dark dungeon. The obsessive-compulsive self-sabotage factor has to be acknowledged. This kind of deep self-analysis and recovery needs help. Can't be done alone. Getting treatment could be seen as dealing effectively with a serious but beatable problem. He has nothing to lose. But will he?--people are stubborn when it comes to admitting and dealing with behavioral addictions, especially sexual.

IF he takes remedial action and shows honest effort, I think perhaps his supporters could get over it, but it all depends on what he does now.

[CTyankee]

104. I cannot speak as any kind of expert on this kind of psycholgical situation.

I try to only discuss how this thing affects his ability to get out the message that so many of us here at DU hold dear. Weiner was a spokesperson for that and very valuable. He has been taken down several notches, I hope not forever, but it is a down turn. I want him to be strong for all of us. I don't want him to be weak and ineffectual and that is what I am seeing now. This is sad for all of us liberals...

[marions ghost]

110. I don't think all is lost yet

but it does depend on how hard he fights now. 51% OF NYers support him still. Maybe he can hang on.

[CTyankee]

112. Well, let's give it a bit of a rest and see what happens...

I am hoping for the best...

[aquart]

51. Thomas Jefferson. Benjamin Franklin. FDR. JFK. MLK, Jr.

Dick problems every fucking one of them.

So you would be prepared to toss FDR and Social Security if you found out about that woman on his knee?

STOP BEING DISTRACTED BY STUPIDITY. This behavior is a side effect of behavior WE WANT. Deal with it.

And for god's sake, don't run around trying to cure them.

PS: Anthony is not the one who made it public. That was a targeted right wing assassination plot and you should amble over to The Smoking Gun and check it out.

[CTyankee]

72. Weiner made it ;pretty easy to get caught...he even knew that ahead of time.

I'm not trying to cure him, even if I could. He just needs to ask himself something I've asked myself plenty of times: is what I am doing the best thing for me right now? A wise woman once told me that the only way people change is when they get a kick in the pants. She was right. I've seen it in my own life. Those kicks are painful but boy, do they ever bring home the point!

As for Jefferson, et al, every one of these men lived in different times. If they dallied, they didn't have a press converging on them or, if they did, it was pretty well covered up. Why? because the press were mostly men who wanted to protect the famous man, not expose him. Closing ranks and all that. This is a different ball game. And to play it, we've gotta be smarter than the right wing. Right now, it's not lookin' too good...we had a valuable player...it would be great not to lose him...

[aquart]

86. So getting caught is a crime even if there is no crime?

Now there's a brilliant precedent to set.

[CTyankee]

100. No, but what is the consequence? You are falling into the trap of asking the wrong question.

What is the right action for this circumstance should be the practical question to ask. To ask a theoretical when it doesn't matter in the debate, is simply not to face the reality of the situation.

Of course, there is no crime. Who said anything about a crime? This has never been about a crime...(unless one of Wiener's chat partners is a minor).

[snooper2]

30. you are comparing driving an 18 wheeler

to sending images of your cock to random people :rofl:

[DevonRex]

34. Up thread, posting on DU was equated to sending erection pics to strangers.

[aquart]

61. Guess you've never seen an overturned truck.

[snooper2]

67. Only when Rick's been driving

:rofl:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

82. Nobody forced him to take or send those pics.

He's an idiot for doing it just as much as Chris Lee was.

[adigal]

122. In our society, with our "morals," this is not a trivial thing

I grew up after the 60s, during the 70s, I'm not a prude, but I do have common sense, and if he had simply had an affair with a woman, I would agree that it is not our business. But he gave the other side the gun with which to shoot him, putting pictures on a public site. It is stupid and arrogant, and now we lose his battle against Clarence Thomas. We lose his voice, because he has trivialized himself and made himself a figure of mockery, which means the other side has won. He did it to himself.

And agreeing that he should resign is not agreeing with the republicans. He is not going to be able to battle for us for quite a while, if ever. He has damaged his effectiveness himself. We need to be honest about this, and wonder why these guys have so much arrogance that they act like they are stupid.

[blm]

14. It's called ADDICTION. No way was he giving up the high his behavior gave him.

Same with the women who engaged in that behavior with him.

Facebook and Twitter abound with internet addicts, especially internet sex addicts.

[HipChick]

18. Sex addicts were around before Internet..it's just the medium now

I recall same issue when BBS's were around..

[blm]

58. Sure, before they just went to discos. ; ) Seriously, the internet itself is addictive and when you

add the proclivity to expose oneself sexually, it really takes the bad behavior to new heights.

[seabeyond]

35. the obvious. but we all like to pretend it is just not a reality. as people destroy

their lives.

[marions ghost]

41. RIGHT---the behavior produced a "high"

IMO Weiner needs medical help. And people who have afflictions that destroy their otherwise admirable careers deserve some sympathy, especially if they are willing to accept treatment.

Weiner fits the profile of the compulsive exhibitionist. This is why he seems unable to stop himself even when risking his career & marriage. Compulsive behavior may be organic in part. Although he knows intellectually it was beyond stupid to give fodder to his enemies, he couldn't stop himself. This is how serious this problem can be. It is a form of sex addiction, and he may have deluded himself that this was "safer" than an actual affair. On the 4-point scale briefly defined at this link, I would say his case is severe.

http://www.minddisorders.com/Del-Fi/Exhibitionism.html

From the link:

Description: Exhibitionism is described in the DSM-IV-TR as the exposure of one's genitals to a stranger, usually with no intention of further sexual activity with the other person. For this reason, the term exhibitionism is sometimes grouped together with expression, "voyeurism," ("peeping," or watching an unsuspecting person or people, usually strangers, undressing or engaging in sexual activity) as a "hands-off" paraphilia. This contrasts with the "hands-on disorders" which involve physical contact with other persons.

In some cases, the exhibitionist masturbates while exposing himself (or while fantasizing that he is exposing himself) to the other person. Some exhibitionists are aware of a conscious desire to shock or upset their target; while others fantasize that the target will become sexually aroused by their display.

For Causes and Symptoms: See http://www.minddisorders.com/Del-Fi/Exhibitionism.html

[Laura PourMeADrink]

71. Hi MG...haven't talked to you in ages ! I agree 100% and to me

it shows his extreme narcissism. Worst than even Clinton or Vitter - at lease what they did, they did in secret.

[marions ghost]

78. hey LauraPMAD

:hi: well you know, I'm always around for political psychoanalysis ;-)

Narcissism + compulsive exhibitionism + sex addiction = Weiner.

Clinton didn't have the exhibitionist factor so much but he sure had the narcissistic sense of entitlement and the sex addiction. The diaper fetish made Vitter's similar profile and addiction...interesting.

Clinton and Vitter stuck it out and I wish that Weiner would too. IF Weiner gets into therapy --he should do it quick and publicly. He needs to admit to a true disorder --which I think it is and his level of denial also tells me what a deep & shameful addiction it is). He'd get sympathy that way and have some chance of repair. But his enemies have struck fast and hard. He may not have the time, but I hope he weathers it and I hope his wife sticks by him.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

118. Agree with all except the "quick" therapy. IMHO, he's too deep

into it. Enough to continue it all despite promises to his new wife, risk to losing the honor of his office, etc.....

It's funny, I read she "had reservations" about him before marriage. Duh.

But, I am pessimistic about full recovery and of his colleagues embracing him from here on out. Although his
cyber-exhibitionism is "closed"...unless he switches to "anonymous" which he should have done in the first
place (which is also why I think his recovery will take too long)."

Guess, bottom line, I have to disagree....think we can get someone more stable in this safe district.

[marions ghost]

119. More stable =

...maybe.

I just don't think he should be hounded out this way and I do think the Dems are resigned to letting them do it. Too passive.

His wife had reservations--not surprising. Well here's the real test. My bet is he'll be so supplicating to her she'll feel she has a LOT of power. But it will still be stressful for them both. Maybe the baby can be a plus. One would hope.

[seabeyond]

123. i agree

i am watching one young couple go thru it now. actually three years of it. promised before married. two years in she walks out with kids and he promises he will stay off all social networks. another year, he is out again. he comes to my house and oh... he loves her so, loves the kids, wants his family, but....

like with any addictive issue, there are steps. but it is a tough road in trust

[flamingdem]

17. Dude suffers from an illness, but no an uncommon one.. not sure it means he's incompetent nt

[HipChick]

19. It's more common than people are willing to admit..

because it's not 'technically cheating'..that's the rationale

[marions ghost]

46. agree

it is an illness that may not affect his job performance otherwise. We don't really know the degree of it, but IMO he should seek treatment & maybe he could pull out of it. The lies really hurt him, but people do protect shameful secrets--and this is shameful in our culture. Voters don't always give "perverts" the benefit of the doubt, even when the behavior is a more minor form of acting out. Voters would have to see him as making significant contributions despite his illness.

I'm not excusing the behavior. I am just making the case that he is an obsessive sex addict, which may not affect his ability to effectively govern as long as he seeks treatment.

Clinton hung on and I say Weiner should, but he has to go the therapy route.

[kentuck]

20. I think maybe there is a sickness here?

An addiction of sorts? Perhaps a sexual addiction?

But, regardless, it is a sickness and he needs to get some help for it.

Just my opinion.

[Common Sense Party]

28. He likely has some sort of addiction...

I can't really consider him a "victim," though.

I'm not a victim of overeating. I do it to myself.

[tblue37]

114. The Broussard woman who turned the pics over to Breitbart said that when she

sent the message that she thought his speech was "Hotttt," he instantly replied to her. That suggests to me that he was rather compulsively monitoring his site to see whether potential sex-chat partners were available there.

[CTyankee]

120. "the Broussard woman"....god, that sounds so French, so 19th century....

Emile Zola would love it...

[Name removed]

22. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[formernaderite]

29. thanks for posting this... I'm seriously baffled

it's not only strange but creepy and immature. Though there seems to be a cadre of people trying to defend him on DU... it does strain credulity and puts even his job performance in a negative light. An affair is something of the heart... this is not.

[KittyWampus]

32. NYTimes white washes what the rightwing freaks were doing. THEY WERE STALKING!

[HipChick]

33. I agree Kitty..and people don't understand how Twitter actually works..

[DevonRex]

36. And Weiner knew it and STILL did it. Stupid man.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Lewd!!! Gasp! Pass the smelling salts!!

[girl_interrupted]

39. "He spoke brazenly against Republican plans and icons, taking swings at people like Ryan & Bachmann

The "He" is Weiner. And apparently the author (Jim Dwyer) of this article, didn't like Weiner doing that. And he goes on to "quote" a friend who is so eager to share personal info about another "friend", but refuses to identify himself. Why is that? After reading that article, I notice the author (Dwyer) didn't mention one republican when it comes to scandals. Not Vitter, Not Ensign, Not Craig, Not Sanford, Not Gingrich, Not Hyde, Not Livingston, et al. No, he only uses the names of Democrats. Interesting. If not totally hypocritical. Perhaps partisan? And of course, he doesn't bother to identify his "source". Yet he does mention: "He spoke brazenly against Republican plans and icons, taking swings at people like Paul Ryan and Michele Bachmann." And I'm suppose to take this article as gospel? Posting this on DU is like doing a republican's job for them.

[ClarkUSA]

43. Don't blame the messenger, who happens to be reporting facts.

Dwyer isn't mentioning "one republican" because his article is purely about Weiner.

Stop conflating and casting blame on everyone but the sociopathic sex addict who lied like a rug for a week and managed to turn Democrats' post NY-26 victory lap into ashes.

[marions ghost]

50. Sex addict--yes

"sociopathic?" I don't think quite that far gone.

[ClarkUSA]

54. His behavior warrants that description.

Read this:

"The Inner Triangle helps you understand sociopaths, psychopaths, addicts and alcoholics"
http://www.lovefraud.com/01_whatsaSociopath/Inner_Triangle_explains_sociopaths.html

[marions ghost]

59. Read your link

and I still think you're dead wrong about sociopath label. Read the last paragraph from your article:

1. "There are people who are rather cold and generally lack the ability to love," Dr. Leedom says. However, these people have impulse control and moral reasoning and can be 'good people.'

2. "There are also people who can love and have moral values, but are very impulsive," she continues. "These people do impulsive things, then experience deep regret. These people try to change because they are disturbed by their own behavior.

3. "Lastly, there are people who did not grow up in an environment that allowed them to learn society's rules. These people break rules out of ignorance and can improve with moral education."

"It is ONLY the emotionally callous, impulsive person with no guilt, shame or moral values who is a true sociopath."
-------------------

I say Weiner has No 2 above--impulsivity. I see NO evidence of 1. lack of ability to love or 3. lack of moral values. His voting record says otherwise. He must have all 3 to be called a sociopath.

It's an important distinction.

[ClarkUSA]

65. That's a matter of opinion.

I said he's a sociopathic sex addict. To do what he did while in the midst of being engaged and then newly married does indicate a lack of ability to love and a lack of moral values. If one really knew the meaning of love, one would not do this to their fiancee and then, bride, much less get married. And the lack of moral values should be obvious.

[marions ghost]

69. I can see that (like many people)

you've never met a sociopath. The behavior is very different.

People DO bad things EVEN WHEN they love others. People DO bad things EVEN WHEN trying to be "good", ie. moral. It does NOT mean they are a sociopath.

Weiner's political record tells me that he has high ideals and values, & feels love and concern for others. Clinton loved Hillary, Edwards loved Elizabeth. They are all Narcissists but not Sociopaths. Very important distinction. Weiner has a serious sex addiction and that makes him seem callous. He is conflicted, but he is not an unfeeling monster.

Cheney = Sociopath. Check out the differences.

[ClarkUSA]

80. I respectfully disagree.

I have met and known sociopaths in my life. Not all of them are homicidal maniacs.

As for Weiner's political record, it is as thin as sliced bread. He's big on rhetoric, that much I'll give you. But we all know he's fully capable of telling whoppers to advance his ends, whether it's a CYA or to advance his political career (his overweening ambition was to be NYC mayor). With him, words and appearances are very deceiving. Fool me once...

<< Clinton loved Hillary, Edwards loved Elizabeth. >>

I disagree. Whatever they felt, it wasn't love as I know it to be. And whatever Weiner feels for his wife, it sure doesn't sound like love to me:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1256216&mesg_id=1257889

In fact, I'm inclined to wonder whether he swept a woman 12 years his junior off her feet and married her in two years time in part because Huma Abedin happens to be very close to the Clintons (Hillary in particular) and that strong connection would be priceless to a man with his oft-stated political aspirations in NYC and beyond.

[marions ghost]

87. We can disagree

good discussion. :thumbsup:

Trust me, I KNOW the insidious type of closet sociopath you are talking about. Weiner's not one. His intentions are self-aggrandizing, but not evil, destructive, maniacal. You can't use that word sociopath lightly. It means a monster. Incorrigible. Not salvageable.

ALL politicians deal in rhetoric and are full of ambition in our crazy country. ALL of them. And everyone in public life considers what a marriage means in terms of advantages. (It could be argued that Hillary might have stuck with Bill after Monica, because of those advantages).

Weiner has a problem, an obsession with displaying his dick. Exhibitionism is deeply rooted and a sad compulsion. He does not want the complexity of real affairs IMO. He wants the cheap thrills. It does not mean that he is not also hugely in love with his wife. But like Bill, he needs the "good girl" and the "bad girls" to feel complete. He CAN get over this disorder, now that it has been revealed. He can't hide any more. In some ways he even may feel relieved at some point down the road, that he is no longer protecting the dark little secret that could undo him. He's facing his worst nightmare.

I believe from everything I have seen that BC and JE absolutely love(d) their wives, with all that implies. Absolutely. But it is also a part of their (not admirable) personalities that they must always have "more." They were both pathetically vulnerable --easy prey. It is a failing, a weakness. No doubt about that. But I think they could do this and also love their wives. It seems like a contradiction. Not saying it's always the case, but in those I think it is, so I'm hoping that Weiner can hold his new marriage together.

[girl_interrupted]

56. Suggest you go back and read your own article

Dwyer does mention other Democrats besides Weiner. Go reread. Yet no republicans mentioned at all. I don't know how you could have missed that. I really don't...its as clear as the nose on your face. And "Facts" what facts? From an unknown source who claims to be a friend? Really? Sorry, I need more proof than that. If the "friend" was so willing to talk he should have also been willing to give his name.

[ClarkUSA]

68. Email the NYT if you're that outraged about it. I'm not. The reporter stated the facts re: Weiner.

I assure you that the New York Times has spent plenty of ink excoriating John Ensign, that bathroom toe-tapping Republican and Vitter without mentioning Cisneros, Clinton, or Edwards in the same articles. Ditto for their coverage of Eric Massa, who was a Democrat, no less.

If you want the name of Weiner's unnamed friend, go ask. I understand your consternation about unnamed sources, but really, that's not what is the most important revelation in the article, so I'm not that concerned. I happen to agree with whoever said it, though, but I felt that way since I first heard Weiner's initial non-denial and his refusal to ask the FBI and police for their help in tracking down the "hacker".

Of course, I always though John Edwards was guilty, too.

[girl_interrupted]

93. Nice dodge, sorry it doesn't work

First you say no democrats were mentioned, because the article was only about Weiner. And you were wrong.

I'm sure the NY Times has spent plenty of ink excoriating both democrats and republicans, but definitely not in this article. Only democrats are named, as if to point out to the reader, that only democrats were involved in these kinds of scandals. And if that was not so, why not include republicans? I found it to be very partisan, you chose to leave out all republicans but not Dems? Come on. So you're wrong about that too.

If I want the name? Shouldn't everyone? How can you call it "facts" when there is nothing but an unnamed unsubstantiated source? If someone printed something about Obama, I'm sure you'd want to know their name or would you just take their word for it? You wouldn't be concerned? You would just assume its true? How did that work out for you with all the false statements of him not being born in America, and the ridiculous hunt for his birth certificate? Because why? Because someone said so. And they had "proof". Except they didn't. It's called heresay.

I also thought it very curious that in the article Dwyer points out how Weiner went after republicans in general & Bachmann & Ryan in particular. He didn't go after them for their family values stances, but for their god awful political agendas and I must admit I was very happy with Weiner when he did that. Apparently, Dwyer not so much.

Maybe I'm not hysterical as you, running from post to post and especially in this thread, calling Weiner a sociopath with "facts" you got off a site called "Love Fraud.Com". Sorry but that reminds me of Bill Frist making his "diagnosis" about Terri Schiavo having all her marbles, by just looking at a video. Sorry, not buying it. I'm not a shrink and neither are you.

So I'm not at all outraged by the article enough to email the New York Times. My issue isn't with them but with Dwyer, and I am familiar with his writings, so his attitude doesn't surprise me. I doubt he'd care what I think and the feeling is mutual.

As for Weiner, being from NY, of course I am disappointed in his behavior. But I'm not as ready to hang him in Times Square, as you are. I think about a lot of public figures who have strayed...Clinton, the Kennedy's, MLK, they all have something in common...they are adulterers, whether they lied about it or not. They still committed the acts. But on the other hand, they all did something to help others in this country and it would have been a loss if it would have precluded them.


As far as Edwards was concerned..you and probably thousands of others thought he was guilty...for that you deserve no medal.. I always thought that marriage was a little strange to begin with. I'm always a little wary of all that "lovey dovey" bs that politicians have to project for their public persona. Personally I could care less, I'm electing them to do a job, not be the couple of the year. So I'd have to say to your "Of course, I always though John Edwards was guilty, too." So what? And who cares? Call me when you get the right lottery numbers...then maybe I'll be impressed.

[ClarkUSA]

97. You're wrong. I never said that. I will repeat what I said and provide a link so you can check it.

"Dwyer isn't mentioning "one republican" because his article is purely about Weiner."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1256216&mesg_id=1257114

I also said this: "Stop conflating and casting blame on everyone but the sociopathic sex addict who lied like a rug for a week and managed to turn Democrats' post NY-26 victory lap into ashes."

[girl_interrupted]

99. And once again you are wrong

The article isn't only about Weiner. Don't you read the articles you post? Try reading it again and you will see Democrats mentioned in scandals but not one republican. Maybe you need to get your eyes checked?

No one is turning NY-26 into ashes. we gained a seat and no one is taking it away from us. Republicans sure can't say that.
And no one is blaming anyone but Weiner for his problems. But it's you running around calling him a sociopath with "facts" you got from a site called "Lovefraud.com" Honestly thats just too funny! You so remind me of Bill Frist! He looks at a video and you look at some ridiculous site and you both make a "diagnosis". Just plain silly.

Again, I say this.I don't approve of Weiners behavior, but not enough to want to see a repub take his seat.

And just what would you call Ted Kennedy or Martin Luther King? I'd call them adulterers, they did the deed, lying or not. But I'm sure glad they remained, and their accomplishments outweighed their faults. Unlike you, I'm not into people being perfect in every aspect of their life. It's going to be a rude awakening for you when you realize that. I feel sorry for the people you expect that of.

[ClarkUSA]

113. lol! Now you're moving the goalpost because I proved your claim wrong.

Your reply to the OP in Reply 39: "... I notice the author (Dwyer) didn't mention one republican when it comes to scandals."

I said to you in Reply 63: "Dwyer isn't mentioning "one republican" because his article is purely about Weiner."

You then said to me in Reply 93: "First you say no democrats were mentioned, because the article was only about Weiner."

You. Are. Wrong. I never mentioned "democrats" in my original reply to you, as I have demonstrated.

The article is about Weiner. See the headline? As with any news article, any information contained therein relates to his predicament, including the very brief historical mentions of the other lying amoral fools in his own party. To infer bias on the part of the reporter is ridiculous, considering the focus The New York Times has conferred on Republican sexual FUBARs during the past few years.

[sabrina 1]

105. I remember people saying exactly the same things, and worse,

about Clinton. You seem to think people care about other people's sex lives, OUTSIDE of the inner circles of politics where apparently they are all, left and right, hypocritically of course, residing in the fifties.

The American people have a lot more on their minds than this non-story and everyone I know in RL is far more disgusted with the witch hunt, and that even includes Republicans, atmosphere in the media, as was the case with Clinton, than they are with Weiner, who did what exactly? He likes sex! Stop the presses! :eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

116. Really? People then said "exactly" what I said? Prove it.

I said, ""Stop conflating and casting blame on everyone but the sociopathic sex addict who lied like a rug for a week and managed to turn Democrats' post NY-26 victory lap into ashes."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1256216&mesg_id=1258412

Quote a news article where there were "people saying the exact same things" about Clinton.

<<You seem to think people care about other people's sex lives >>

Wrong. Where did I say that?

[sabrina 1]

45. Maybe because he's a liberal, he didn't have the same attitude towards sex

as the average, Fundie rightwinger who view all sex as a sin, and saw nothing wrong with it.

I'm just sorry that when he was asked about it, he didn't look directly at the newly empowered intrepid 'journalists' who appeared to be in shock over the fact that men like sex and a politician cheated on his wife, sort of, and say 'yes, the rumors of my sexual prowess are true, now I would like to speak about something that I think will of more interest to the American people'.

What would Dana Bash, a woman who turned into a rabid tabloid paparazzi 'journalist' over this, have had to say say at that point? And Breitbart, in a more mature society, would have been laughed at for his grade-school behavior of spying on someone engaged in sexual activities, believing he had the biggest story of the century. HE is the one people should be disgusted with.

Why do people on the left play into the rules laid down for them by the right? Do Liberals really believe that sex is something to be ashamed of?

[cali]

52. He is an electoral politics. He knows how the game is played

and what happens to pols who do this stuff and get caught. He had, as a very recent object lesson, Rep. Lee. His behavior was pathological. And the rules aren't just made by the right. Acting like Weiner did and lying his ass off, is not an effective way to change those rules.

[sabrina 1]

57. The people will decide if it is the way to change it.

The people made a decision regarding Clinton and his persecutors on the right and in the end, they decided that whatever anyone though of Clinton's behavior, Starr and his mob of rightwing, sexually repressed hyocritical, voyeurs were by far the creepier characters in that scenario.

I have a feeling that if Weiner stays in office and runs again he will win. Why do Democrats always fall apart over these things? Why has not one of them stepped forward and spoken out against these kinds of filthy, dirty tricks that by now no one should do ANYTHING but laugh at?

I am sick to death of Democrats pretending they too agree that sex IS something to be ashamed of because not one of them has the courage to just laugh at the very idea that our media has spent, going on two weeks now, hours of precious airtime on the private sexual preferences of a public figure.

This country badly needs to grow up. I wish I belonged to a party that did not allow the right to bully them all the time. But, if there was such a party, this vile behavior, this prurient, childish obsession with sex, would long ago have been dealt with and Weiner would not have compelled to feel shame about something that is NO ONE ELSE'S business.

Too many wagging fingers in this country! They should take a look in the mirror and see what they find there and how it would hold up to the same kind of persecution from a gang of sick thugs whose goal is to destroy this country.

[cali]

70. Maybe. Maybe not. Personally, I believe he'll resign.

[sabrina 1]

81. Well, it's NY and if there's anything NYers do not like

it is this kind of witch hunt conducted by the right against Democrats. They didn't like it when it was Clinton, and I doubt they like it anymore now. I hope he does not resign and lets them decide. In my Dist. after the Clinton affair, we had a moderate Republican, Forbes, in office. If he had stayed out of it, he probably would have been reelected, but he didn't and he lost the next election and hasn't been heard of since. That was the East End of LI, not nearly as Liberal as NYC but people don't like peeping toms prying into the private lives of others.

Weiner should stick it out, next week they will be on to another non-story, because god forbid they should cover the actual news, and he will not even be mentioned.

[ClarkUSA]

115. I'm a born & bred New Yorker who lives in NY and I disagree with your characterization.

[seabeyond]

53. you are saying he is either so damn stupid or socially incompetent not to comprehend

the repercussions.

that is really your argument.

little johnny didnt know better to not pull down his pants in public.

[sabrina 1]

64. No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that he was doing

something that is perfectly legal. And considering that, what was there to worry about unless you're dealing with people who actually do think sex is something to be ashamed of.

[seabeyond]

seriously? this goes along with the "its private" on the fuckin net. he knew damn well

what the repercussions were. he is not a damn moron. and believing he has the right to do it, he also knows the results of doing it and chose it. he promised his wife before marriage he would stop. sounds liek a condition in marriage to me. he apologizes to his PREG wife now. KNOWING damn well, what he did, hurt her. a preg woman. at 35. beginning of her pregnancy.

creep

[sabrina 1]

88. His marriage is not my business. I would not presume to

know anything about it. Nor is it anyone else's. And what he did online was legal and no one would know about it if the sexually repressed, voyeurs from the right, those out to destroy this country, had not been peeking in his virtual window. THEY are the scum in this story. Amazing how little anger there is towards them. If this had been real life, what they were doing would have been a crime and someone could have called the police. Being a peeping tom IS a crime in RL. Maybe it's time we made it a crime online also.

[Nye Bevan]

47. Never underestimate the power of the horny penis.

On some level he probably knew he would be likely to be caught eventually. Just like smokers know that their habit will probably kill them. But they keep on smoking and Weiner kept on pornotweeting.

[Peacetrain]

55. Ish Kabbittle.. what next

:argh: That is just totally self destructive or self delusional..

[Gin]

63. and to use his real name was absurdly juvenile....he needs help

was he asking for help subconsciously? Time to grow up!

Is brightfart gay? why would he keep that pic of a penis on his phone? maybe both of them can go to sex rehab together.

[PeaceNikki]

94. Not only that but he used his position as his hook to woo the ladies.

idiot

[chrisa]

62. This has nothing to do with mental illness, unless if

feeling bullet proof because of hubris and arrogance is a mental illness.

I don't care about his sex life, but at the same time, I don't feel sorry for him because he fell on his own sword.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[seabeyond]

74. i agree. now wife is preg and people say... dont care. WTF? nt

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PeaceNikki]

75. I suspect Weinergate has just begun.

[TheKentuckian]

84. I suspect he was advised if he didn't play ball, leave Thomas alone, stop being so outspoken about

Medicare and various issues that the "activities" would come to light.

[Sportsguy]

90. That Is Obvious

I agree.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

95. We are not cut out for modern day "politics"

Not only do we refuse to smear the likes of Vitter when we have the chance, we are apparently unaware that the other side WILL play dirty.

Fucking stupid.

[Bake]

96. Who are you talking about???

DUers virtually unanimously have crucified Vitter over and over and over again. Search, e.g., Diaper Boy on DU ...

Bake

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

107. We don't have anyone who'll do it on a national level

We do it on the internet. Guys like Breitbart, FAUX, Limpballs air it out in public. We might as well be shouting out a window.

[Bake]

108. Let's see ... Lawrence O'Donnell ... Rachel Maddow ... just for starters

They've been screaming about Vitter for a long time, and revved it up again with Weinergate.

Bake

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

109. I have yet to hear anyone bring up the diaper part of it

Holy shit.....Vitter should be walking joke if that part of the story was aired on the Nightly News......but no, we won't go that far.

But thanks for equating them to Breitfart, Limpballs, etc.

[ClarkUSA]

117. Are you kidding? Rachel Maddow had a field day with that part! So did LO on Scarborough.

It was hilarious. You ought to check the archives of shows around that time.

[XanaDUer]

98. The "dumbfuck" factor magnifies exponentially

:eyes:

[Raine]

102. WOW, it sounds like he really needs professional help

he has a big problem. I almost wonder if he wanted to get caught.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PeaceNikki]

124. He was just trying to prove that Democrats have balls. Now if you want to see Dems with spine

look towards Wisconsin.