Posted on 06/09/2011 2:39:25 PM PDT by NonZeroSum
Well, well.
So I’ve been looking around on the Intertubes to see all the denunciations of Anthony Weiner’s prevarications by members of his own party. And there are a lot of them.
Tim Caine, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, declares that he should resign:
Lying is unforgivable … Lying publicly about something like this is unforgivable and he should resign.
Allyson Schwartz, head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has a similar opinion:
Having the respect of your constituents is fundamental for a member of Congress. In light of Anthony Weiner’s offensive behavior online, he should resign.
Democrat representatives and Weiner colleagues Nikki Tsongas and Joe Donnelly also think he should step down. Over on the north side of the Hill, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy is of a similar view.
Weiner has been trying to reach out, even calling Bill Clinton, who officiated at his wedding (less than a year ago) to his (now-pregnant) wife.
Am I the only person who thinks all of this a little bizarre?
Can someone explain to me what Anthony Weiner did that was so much worse than what Bill Clinton did that he is being asked by his fellow Democrats to resign?
For those unfamiliar with the history, let us review the two men’s transgressions, in context.
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
These people are the scum of the earth and Yet ask someone else to leave!!
We know its hard but Weiner does have to go even though some say he is a “stand up guy!”
Because Bubba Klinton was abortion sugar daddy número UNO and if you are a loyal democrat you don’t mess with the man who gives you what you want to enforce upon humanity.
Little Weiner doesn’t have the army of dirty tricksters (or the FBI files) that the clintoons did!
Bill Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security.
Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.
To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?
What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?
Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.
Moreover, on two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:
• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.
Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: “...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development.” Kroll Associates, one of the world’s most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: “When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.
Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.
•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: “We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended.”
Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.
The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours — once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.
Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam’s missile program has been set back by at least a year.”
Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachment. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.
Of course, it is because the political party’s function is to gain and wield power. Clinton had the most power you could acquire as an individual on earth and so that power had to be retained—hence, resignation was to be avoided at all costs. Weiner’s power has diminished and potential for greater power greatly dimmed, therefore, the party will want to quickly replace him with someone of similar hard left orientation but with more potential for power acquisition.
It is very straightforward if you think about the primary goal of the party.
Weiner alienated his RAT colleagues with his obnoxious personality. Clinton didnt.
cause Bubba held the Presdency and pencil necked geek Weiner boy is nuthin’ NUTHIN’
She probably did.
It's easy: Bill Clinton - by his words and actions - brought more democrats to power. Anthony Weiner is about to do the exact opposite.
Regards,
TS
One big difference is that Weiner often sent these shots to women who were not expecting them and did not want to see them. In that sense he was like a flasher in the park.
Lewinsky on the other hand actively sought out Clinton.
Double standard for Clinton and Weiner and yet another standard for Republicans.
This would be funny if it didn’t involve lies, perjury, and destruction of America.
Shhh! We know logic isn’t their strong suit.
But when Clinton was lying, all we heard was how clever he was and how “everybody does it” and “it doesn’t affect his job” and yada yada yada.
“Am I the only person who thinks all of this a little bizarre?”
Probably. Ted Kennedy (D-HELL) was a murderer and got re-elected for life. What’s bizarre about this? The left has an agenda ... end the American way of life. Everyone 50+ knows this and is complicit in letting it unfold in front of our very eyes. Why feign outrage? Give in to your inner conservative and fight them, insult them and agitate against them every minute of every day, encourage ytour children and your friends to do the same.
They are against you and their quest for dominance knows no ends.
Fight them or flee. Don’t ever be surprised or underestimate their ability to screw everyone. Literally, physically and emotionally, but most important, they want your freedom.
Time to fought back was when Joe “McCarthyism” spelled it out for us but we let them shame us out of doing anything for 60 plus years. We are now reaping the harvest of inaction. Time to put them to rout - or else.
Lying is unforgivable … Lying publicly about something like this is unforgivable and he should resign.
Allyson Schwartz, head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has a similar opinion:
Having the respect of your constituents is fundamental for a member of Congress. In light of Anthony Weiner’s offensive behavior online, he should resign.
Those are 2 quite different opinions.
I live in New York city, have all my life (since 1962), and it’s curious to me how nobody in the media is mentioning how this kind of BS goes on all the time with the Democraps here. If it isn’t sex perverts, it’s rip offs artists and con men, EVERY single freakin year. Yet the morons here will once again vote 99% Democrap come election day. That’s why I don’t think Weiner should resign. The people want a psycho as their Rep? They deserve him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.