So . . . guess who gets a lot of attention in the Tuesday Morning Jolt?
Sometimes, Under Intense Heat, Weiners Split Open
So, did anything happen today?
Perhaps nothing for the rest of the year, will equal Andrew Breitbart strolling up to the podium of Anthony Weiner’s confessional press conference before it began and, in classic Breitbart style, vehemently denying the absurd ‘hacking’ accusations from the Daily Kos folks; revealing he had more photos of Wiener that were much worse than what we had already seen and that he had no intention of revealing that photo . . . so long as Weiner admitted that Breitbart had not hacked him.
But after the Mother of All Embarrassing Press Conferences, the news for Weiner got worse Monday night.
For starters: “House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Steve Israel, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, have called for an investigation into Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) over the series of sexually explicit conversations and lewd photos he exchanged with a half-dozen women during the last several years. ‘I am deeply disappointed and saddened about this situation; for Anthony’s wife, Huma, his family, his staff and his constituents,’ Pelosi said in a statement released on Monday night. ‘I am calling for an Ethics Committee investigation to determine whether any official resources were used or any other violation of House rules occurred.’”
At least Weiner can rely on the Last Line of Liberalism, the editorial board of the New York Times, to get his back, right? Er, not really: “If it shows that he did abuse his office, he should resign. But if he chooses to run for re-election next year, voters in Brooklyn and Queens will at least have a chance to decide whether they want a man like Mr. Weiner representing their interests in Congress.”
Cheer up, Congressman, you’ll always be able to count on the single most dedicated hack on MSNBC, the unequaled Ed Schul-HOLY SMOKES! “Fresh off his suspension, MSNBC host Ed Schultz is turning heads by calling for the resignation of Anthony Weiner.”
Megan McArdle makes the case of why we should care, and why the Clintonian “it’s just sex” line isn’t working as well as it used to: “Even if they’re eighteen and completely legal, a middle-aged man who is sufficiently indifferent to social convention as to start sending suggestive photos to high school seniors is deeply creepy, in a way that I, as a voter, would kind of like to know about. I don’t think there’s much danger that finding out about it would have deprived us of the next Churchill . . . What he actually did is bad enough: sexting from work? With strangers he met over the internet? As with Clinton, this is strange and reckless behavior for a public figure whose inappropriate behavior could be used to blackmail him. I don’t think it’s somehow out of bounds to point it out . . . Maybe it’s because I’m older and tireder but these days, the ‘not our business’ school of sex scandal seems to function as a get-out-of-monogamy-free card for powerful men who want to behave badly.”
One of my readers offers an assessment of how this scandal could tie into a broader theme of 2012: “Peggy Noonan has it right: the best slogan against Obama will be ‘he made it worse.’ The message is simple. ‘Look at these people, see what they have done to us . . . the economy, the taxes and the whole works. And for themselves, who are they? Frat boys, or man behaving badly . . . and yet after they get caught, they hang on . . . for what . . . pay nothing for their irresponsibility? They say they’re doing the work for the people — yeah right, look what have they’ve done. They’ve done more than enough. They make things worse…time to clean house, get rid of these people, and have a fresh start.’”