We see Anthony Weiner’s penis, in this “if it seeds, it leads” media era, remains big news. The New York Representative’s lewd but (so far as has been revealed) legal tweets have many pols calling for his resignation, and rightbloggers enjoying scandalicious multiple orgasms.
The ever-developing story you can get anywhere. So let’s see who rightbloggers are hating on besides the Congressman. Outraged as they are about Weiner, they seem equally mad at whoever fails to display or feed similar outrage — including Weiner’s Twitter correspondents, his wife, and the voters in his district.
Last week Weiner admitted that one of his Twitter correspondents was 17 years old, but said that their conversations hadn’t been inappropriate. This briefly jacked up the collective rightblogger heartrate (“Breaking: Police Visit Home of Weiner’s Teen Tweet-Heart“), but police in the teen’s jurisdiction investigated and seem to have found no reason to take action.
Such tireless Weiner teen text sleuths as Patterico were left with tenuous linkages which the police apparently don’t see the same way they did.
“Then again, the use of the word ‘Weiner,’ when Ethel clearly said she loved Rep. Weiner, does not necessarily sound entirely like an accident,” Patterico reported. (“Ethel” is Patterico’s cute nickname for the 17-year-old, building off Tommy Christopher’s aliases for other young Weiner correspondents, “Betty” and “Veronica.”)
“And,” Patterico added, “there is no evidence that she ever told Rep. Weiner it was not a reference to him. And it’s his state of mind that matters, not hers.” Patterico also repeated some sexy lines Weiner used on adult women to prove… we’re not sure what; maybe that Weiner is capable of anything (we mean anything).
Patterico’s blog wasn’t done chasing down Weiner’s Twitter correspondents, though; special correspondent Aaron Worthing had an online conversation with Gennette Cordova, the previous Person of Interest in this case, who defended herself with aplomb. (Worthing kept up pretty well, even assuming that he used both hands for typing.)
Seeming displeased with Cordova’s answers, though, Patterico himself jumped in at the end: “‘I have a live in boyfriend of three years,’ says Ms. Cordova. Yeah, what could she possibly have to gain by denying flirting with Weiner?” Later: “Gennette has appeared in comments and seized on a random comment from a random commenter as an excuse not to answer my questions. Now there’s a shocker!” Obviously some people just aren’t worth talking to.
“Reading everything she said,” reacted Robert Stacy McCain, “taking it all at face value, it is impossible to escape the conclusion: Gennette Cordova is a liberal Democrat and her chief regret of her role in this entire episode is its negative political impact for Democrats, Weiner included.” McCain was also suspicious of the 17-year-old: “I doubt the cops there got subpoenas for her Twitter records… Absent a thorough law-enforcement investigation, we have only a partial record of the evidence, and are left to wonder about everything else.” Look on the bright side, guy — your wonderment may ultimately be more satisfying to you than the truth.
Ace of Spades followed up by asking his followers to show some decency and “please don’t harass [Cordova] when she’s actually answering questions with an interviewer.” He also referred to Cordova, for the hundredth time, as “The Comely Coed.” Maybe these guys have three hands.
Weiner has, in addition to sext partners, a wife, and while prominent Republicans were pretending to feel sorry for her, rightbloggers mainly noticed that she had not denounced her husband, and was therefore fair game.
“Will Weinergate Blow ‘President’ Hillary’s Lesbian ‘Cover?'” asked Uncoverage. If you follow the link, you will need some patience and perhaps a gas mask; it includes, along with the usual salacious rumors, lines like “Huma Abedin’s expensive tastes and lifestyle have been questioned considering her plebeian salary from Hillary,” and ends with “Weinergate may end up being the prelude to President Hillary Clinton,” for some reason.
The Mad Jewess agreed that Abedin must be gay. “This is why Anthony’s pecker was all over the net,” she deduced. “…A straight man can’t get too much love from a Lesbian, now, can he?” Suddenly it all makes sense! If only Mark Sanford had thought to subpoena his wife’s phone records.
Angry White Dude went so far as to imagine Weiner’s interior monologue: “It used to bother me a lot about Huma and Hillary being lovers…but then I thought about Huma and Hillary in front of the fire…drinking a glass of wine…with some Kenny G on the stereo…mmmmmm..Hillary holding Huma in her strong, muscular arms and kissing her neck, whispering in her ears….licking her face all over….mmmm man, that gets me so hot!” Actually, maybe that wasn’t Weiner’s interior monologue.
Meanwhile Government is Not God asked the question of the hour: “Did Congressman Anthony Weiner, who is from a Jewish background, actually convert to Islam when he married his Muslim wife Huma Abedin?”
When traditional rightwing hate-object Janeane Garofalo defended Weiner with the argument that everyone lies about sex, rightbloggers reacted as you might expect. “I HATE this bitch!” cried Snooper’s Take Our Country Back. “How’s a washed-up comedian make a living?,” asked Douglas Ernst. “‘She didn’t look 17!’ is now an acceptable excuse with Garofalo — coming from a fellow progressive, anyway,” said Vodkapundit. “Have you noticed how all the liberal women defending him are butt-ugly?” wrote Kickin’ and Screamin’ under the headline, “CORRUPT C**TS DEFENDS A PERVERTED PR**K.”
Some were more far-ranging in their anger.
“Whatever the outcome of ‘Weinergate,’ I blame the women,” said TownHall’s Ashley Herzog. She compared Gennette Cordova to Monica Lewinsky, and blamed them among others for the problems young, female operatives such as herself have facing the “pressure to prove you’re not a bimbo or a ‘skintern’ — Washington slang for underdressed, flirtatious interns.”
At American Thinker, Kyle-Anne Shiver denounced “Morally-Schizoid Liberal Women and Their Weiner Husbands.” All the liberal women she knew, Shiver declared, had “given away their female V-card over and over and over again,” and “all the while scour their host of intimate ‘trial runs’ searching for that mythical, Hollywood-construct, Mr. Right.” They were also constantly “running to the OBGYN with neurotic frequency, to make sure their alley-cat lifestyle has not resulted in any of the dreaded, fertility-destroying sexually transmitted diseases.”
Shiver hoped that her perhaps imaginary liberal girlfriends would take a lesson from the Weiner case, and a very harsh lesson it was: “Any woman,” she declared, “who still believes that males are naturally monogamous and that a wedding ring is anything more than a little band of gold, needs to take a long, hard look at the sham of a marriage on display between Congressman Weiner and his wife of less than one full year. Afterwards, if said woman still does not see the lifelong value in chastity before marriage and a pair of shredder scissors in the kitchen drawer afterwards, she needs to take a very large bucket of ice cold water and dump it upon her own head.”
When they learned of polling that showed most of Weiner’s constituents were still backing him, rightbloggers (who on special occasions pretend to feel otherwise) found a new reason to proclaim their hatred of New York all over again.
“New York Voters Support Anthony Weiner; What’s Wrong with Them?” headlined Kelly Boggs of something called The Baptist Press. Boggs, who thinks Weiner “represents New York’s 9th District which encompasses the Big Apple,” found it “troublesome” that “a significant number of New Yorkers don’t seem to mind that a man they elected to represent them has exhibited poor judgment, lied to them and engaged in perverse behavior.” As Boggs normally concentrates his distaste on gay people, we doubt he had a high opinion of New York in the first place.
“56% of Weiner’s District voters want him to stand tall and erect, hang in there, and stick it out until the end of the term and be himself and don’t go soft because of the scandal,” said TeaParty.org. Sorry, all the good dick jokes were already used up.
“I haven’t seen the breakdown of the poll… but, it is Queens, so it might well be truly reflective of how mindlessly Democrat Weiner’s constituents are,” said Mark Noonan of Blogs for Victory. (PS to Noonan: Weiner’s district also includes parts of Brooklyn, asshole.)
Nick Gillespie, representing those rightbloggers who like to call themselves libertarian for reasons lost to history, actually pulled a 9/11 angle, pretending not to recognize that Weiner’s early joke about the “point of Al Qaeda’s sword” (hint hint penis) was in fact a joke. In the future, said Gillespie, “it’ll be worth remembering that an elected member of Congress, from the very city that suffered the greatest terrorist attack in U.S. history, was willing to trade in the worst sort of bullshit to buy himself a few hours’ respite from the truth.” Cue up Toby Keith, Free Marketeers!
Some found New Yorkers’ lack of Weiner outrage a reason to restrain the power of government.
Columnist Star Parker said it was “all the more reason to recall why America’s founders designed a constitutional republic with a federal government of limited, enumerated powers.” She then complained about “Obamacare,” and asserted that “our only possible protection from the many Anthony Weiners is limiting the power of government.”
While her readers were wondering what one thing might have to do with the other, Parker waxed indignant that former OMB Director Peter Orszag and his girlfriend had a baby, and only got engaged afterward. Plus Orszag has two children from a previous marriage! Then she tore into Weiner’s wife: “I guess we’re supposed to shed crocodile tears for her,” sniffed Parker. “But she’s part of the Weiner culture, working for years as an aide to Hillary Clinton.” We guess the lesson, such as it is, is that extramarital sexting is just another reason to hate Democrats generally.
At Andrew Breitbart’s Big Government, Frank Salvato also took a bizarre limited-gummint angle. “Two moments in time,” he said, “lead me to insist that the country hold the voters of New York’s 9th District accountable for their vote to place Mr. Weiner in a position of power: the 17th Amendment and advancing federalism.”
Slavato bitched awhile on these seemingly irrelevant themes before swinging back to the putative topic: “Now, normally I would stand in defense of a constituency being able to elect who they want to office… But today I have deep concerns about the ability of the electorate to intelligently select those who are meant to serve them.”
By this he meant you, New Yorkers, for not only did you re-elect the corrupt Charlie Rangel, Salvato explained, you also elected a Democrat in the recent NY-26 election. There was no sex scandal involving the candidates in that race — though there had been one involving the Republican whose resignation forced the election — but the un-Republican result merely reenforced the point Salvato finally got around to articulating: “But We the People, really should start pointing fingers at the people – the voters – who routinely send liars, thieves, cheats and sundry ne’er-do-wells to federally elected offices.” “We the People,” in this case, seems to mean irate, New York-hating rightwingers, whom we doubt ever needed any encouragement to finger-point.
The general idea that Weinergate is an argument for a change in government seems to be spreading among the brethren (“[Weiner] typifies Congress, because he is human. And for that reason, we must move rapidly to restrain his ilk from the dangers posed by their restless, reckless, covert humanity… There’s nothing like a Constitutional Convention to convince men of the need to check the power of government…”). It’s amazing what you can do with some dick pics and a fertile imagination.
At The Daily Caller, Bob Reccord did not limit his displeasure to the reaction in New York; he extended it to all America. While “baffled” by Weiner’s local support, he found it “shocking” and was “deeply troubled” that “the prevailing sentiment seems to be that while it was wrong for Rep. Anthony Weiner to send photos of himself to women he met on the Internet, the worst part is that he lied about it.”
On the contrary, said Reccord, the worst thing about Weiner was that he had betrayed “the sacred trust of the marriage vow… there is a vast difference between contracts and covenants.” (This is apparently part of Reccord’s spiel when he officiates at weddings; he reported that people often come up to him after such ceremonies and tell him, “That was so enlightening. Why haven’t we heard that before?” “I would give anything if that had been included in my wedding,” and “If only I had understood that before my own marriage crashed and burned!”)
Reccord closed, “if the violation of truth and trust in a marriage is not seen as more tragic than the violation of truth to the media and trust to constituents, could it be that our society is close to being so broken that it is beyond repair?”
Clearly the investigations into Weiner are too limited, but it is doubtful that our fellow citizens would enjoy having themselves dragged into the limelight with him. Yet they may be, if they don’t accept the sweeping generalizations rightbloggers have drawn from the story. It’s all good fun at present but if the scandal, which must end sometime (and perhaps sooner than later), fails to excite the country against all Democrats, the brethren will surely be disappointed, as they were when Monicagate failed to produce the expected revolution. Post coitum, the old saying goes, animal triste. And Weiner’s downfall may not be the money shot these guys were hoping for.