Congress buzzing over racy pictures of Weiners on twitter.

[tyven]

But why male models?

did you vote for him?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43425216..._central_asia/

[ZarakiKujata]

Why does diaper Dave Vitter get to stay in Congress but Weiner has to get circumsized from the body?

[Elvis]

did you vote for him?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43425216..._central_asia/

Could you at least try to make a cogent one-liner when you insult me?

PS: yes, I voted for him.

[aurik]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sa...marital_affair

Flying to Argentina using taxpayer money to see your mistress: no big deal.

[Dimmauk]

Regardless what anyone thinks of him, he should not resigned over sending pics to other women. That we know of he didn`t even have sex with these females. This is such a non story. Democrats have no backbone.

And also posting links is used to back up a claim someone makes. Read any social science book( Index bibliography) hell any online article worth it`s salt has links. <.<

Yeah cause links on the internet are as credible as a book

[Kuya]

This link explains why the dems are dumping weiner:

At a basic level, the drive to push Weiner out is smart politics for Democrats. After all, before his troubles began to come to light Memorial Day weekend, they were on something of a roll. Opposition to the Medicare plan championed by Republicans had unified their caucus, provided a winning issue in a special election in upstate New York, and was looking more and more like a ticket to gains in next year’s House elections. But no is talking much about Paul Ryan and Medicare now. If Weiner would just go away, maybe they could get back to their "all Medicare, all the time" strategy.

The explanation for this is simple: Rangel had a lot more allies and a lot more clout within the House Democratic caucus than Weiner has.

Weiner has no similar cover. And he really has himself to blame. In 13 years in the House, he’s developed a reputation as a showman who’s uninterested in hard work -- or in cooperation. For the first decade or so of his tenure, he focused more on New York City politics than on the national scene, positioning himself for a mayoral bid. Only in the last few years, when his planned 2009 campaign for mayor was ruined by Michael Bloomberg’s campaign to overturn the city’s term limits law, did Weiner become a prominent figure in Washington, mainly through colorful House floor speeches and appearances on cable news.

But this new profile irked his colleagues, even those who should have been his allies. For instance, Weiner made lots of noise advocating a single payer program during the 2009 and 2010 healthcare debate. But his crusade did not go over well with longtime single payer advocates in the House, who concluded that he was more interested in using the issue to make himself more appealing to liberal voters than in actually making progress on it. As the Washington Post’s Jason Horowitz reported last week:

"Anthony wanted to go to the House floor to present a single-payer bill," [Rep. Henry] Waxman said in an interview.

That was shocking news for some of his liberal colleagues in the House, who said they had worked for years on single payer without hearing a peep from him. It was also unwelcome.

"To call a vote in that environment would have damaged single payer for the future," said one representative involved in the negotiations. "We were trying to protect it from a vote because we saw the handwriting on the wall."

In other words, while Weiner plays a progressive hero on television, most progressives in the House see him as something quite different -- and aren’t about to invest whatever clout they have in defending him.

Weiner’s fans argue that he's a valuable House member because of his skills as a television communicator, even if he’s never authored any legislation that became law. But it’s clear that his fellow Democrats in the House -- particularly those in influential positions -- do not share this view. To them, Weiner has long been an annoyance, and now he’s a political liability too. And there’s nothing compelling them to bite their tongues.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/w...age/index.html

In other words, the democrats aren't being cowardly in this instance, but they just find weiner annoying and they want him gone. Apparently, all Weiner does is hop on tv rather than help with legislation.

[Kuya]

Yeah cause links on the internet are as credible as a book

Usually if you aren't a moron, you're fully capable of checking the source to see where the information comes from. A book is no more legitimate than some guy posting in a website, especially if the guy making the book is a quack, and the guy in the website is an ivy league professor.

[Headspace]

As opposed to the rest of Democrats who don't do either.

[aurik]

Usually if you aren't a moron, you're fully capable of checking the source to see where the information comes from. A book is no more legitimate than some guy posting in a website, especially if the guy making the book is a quack, and the guy in the website is an ivy league professor.

To be fair, lots of professors are quacks.

[Kuya]

To be fair, lots of professors are quacks.

Oh, then heaven forbid a quack professor writing a book and dim taking it seriously because he is dumb.

[tyven]

This link explains why the dems are dumping weiner:
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/w...age/index.html

In other words, the democrats aren't being cowardly in this instance, but they just find weiner annoying and they want him gone. Apparently, all Weiner does is hop on tv rather than help with legislation.

this made me roflcopter my balls off. lets hope bernie sanders never lets a dick pic slip or they will drop him too.

[tyven]

BAZINGA

[Dimmauk]

Oh, then heaven forbid a quack professor writing a book and dim taking it seriously because he is dumb.

I only read fucks not ducks

[Boyiee]

Was in a Bagel shop the other day and there was a paper with absolutely huge text taking up the front page saying "OBAMA BEATS WEINER"

[Talint]

This link explains why the dems are dumping weiner:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/w...age/index.html

In other words, the democrats aren't being cowardly in this instance, but they just find weiner annoying and they want him gone. Apparently, all Weiner does is hop on tv rather than help with legislation.

So, his colleagues are pissed because he went out and acted like a democrat without telling anybody.

Granted, it's probably more nuanced and I'm being glib, but that's a real fucking problem with the majority of democrats: They're afraid of being democrats in public.

-edit-

As I reread the article and analyze it more, this sticks out to me, in reference to the 9/11 responders bill:

According to the representative, Democrats worked for months with GOP Rep. Peter T. King (N.Y.) to bring more Republicans on board. Then, when the bill had a procedural setback, Weiner, who had not been especially active behind the scenes, took to the floor to lambaste his Republican colleague.

I've often said before nobody holds the republicans accountable for anything, and this really kind of confirms it. If the republicans don't want to be on board for giving health care to the 9/11 first responders, then make them explain why and make them prove their case. Some shit should just speak for itself. Why should the democrats give a shit about how it looks for republicans, especially when a bill like this is supposed to go beyond politics?

Which I believe was part of what Weiner's floor rant was about.

[Correction]

Not sure how happy the Democrats should be about ceding all the soundbites from the floor of Congress to the Republicans. I thought part of the failure of Democrats to properly rally support for their cause over the last 3 presidents was not seizing on the communication tactics from across the aisle, something Weiner did quite well. Oh no, the New York fella never helped write legislation none of the rest of us had a backbone to fight for, the horror.

[aurik]

At least this scandal has been good for entendres galore.

[Olo401]

Why does diaper Dave Vitter get to stay in Congress but Weiner has to get circumsized from the body?

This all fucking day. That scumbag did shit 100 times worse than what Weiner did and not only has he gotten a WALK, he hasn't gotten anywhere NEAR the press attention because he's a fucking corporatist Republican.

[bigrougabagel]

At least this scandal has been good for entendres galore.

Agreed, but after two weeks, I don't think i can take another dick

Edit: joke

[Atreides]

in the end, it's all about politics. David Vitter's scandal was happening back before the 2010 elections when people didn't know if the Republicans would take the Senate or not, they needed every seat so they stuck with a candidate that people knew instead of opening the field.

Anthony Weiner isn't particularly valuable to the Democrats beyond his value as an attack dog in the media, and his district is safe (assuming it even survives redistricting). Dems wanted to get rid of him so they could get back to talking about the issues leading up to 2012. I think the fact that the leadership so adamantly called for his resignation really shows how afraid they are about which way 2012 is gonna go, they really don't want Republicans to be able to use Weiner for any sort of political leverage so in the end, the political calculation just didn't work out in his favor.

edit: The fact that Vitter's scandal didnt get anywhere near as much press coverage is also a really big part of it too