We are witnessing an interesting phenomenon going on right now – the first phrase that comes to mind is “selective indignation,” but that really doesn’t cover it. The focus on Anthony Weiner is not merely hypocritical. It’s indicative of the selection system for high office. Weiner has been found unqualified, and it has nothing to do with his sexting.
First, the supposed “crime:” I’m speculating based on personal experience here, but Weiner is young and attractive. Monogamy is not in the nature of a man – it is a learned behavior. He’s in a new marriage, and is slowly coming to grips with the notion that he is confined to one vagina for the rest of his life!!! It’s the first year of marriage, and not the seventh, that is hardest for most of us. But also, for most of us, there are not a lot of alternatives. We’re happy that even one woman wants us.
But Weiner has other options. He’s in Washington, DC, a sexual playground. Like Hollywood, it is hard to maintain a normal relationship with all the distractions. He is either going to settle into this marriage and find out its true meaning, or he’s going to Clintonize. He might also go through a divorce, which is unfortunate when a child is involved.
All of that is none of our business.
The drumbeat that is going on now is not natural. It’s contrived and reserved for special cases. This is the “many could be called, only a few are chosen” phenomenon. On any given day, maybe a hundred members of Congress could be caught in flagrante delicto, but are not. (How do I know this? It’s elementary: Washington is a place where there is power, money, women, lobbyists, and intrigue. Duh.) The media, directed from above, can either focus our attention or allow it to naturally dissipate regarding Weiner. No matter the public’s interest, which is directed by television coverage anyway, Weiner’s indiscretion could easily fade into the background. But instead it’s being showcased, the ‘other’ party wants his scalp, and his own party is abandoning him.
Consider this: David Vitter was caught paying for sex with prostitutes. We know about it, but it was not put in our headlights, and he’s still in office. Without media focusing our attention on the matter with incessant coverage, the matter withered and died. Newt Gingrich is famous for serial affairs, but he tends to marry his concubines. Orrin Hatch is said to be a wild-hare penis on a perpetual scent trail. John McCain’s marriage is rocky at best, his wife the philanderer as his appeal diminishes with age. George W. Bush was a cocaine abuser and drunk who sponsored at least one abortion. These are some of the few we know about, and I only mention them because the media backed off, and no resignation was demanded of these powerful men.
Chris Lee did something similar, and quickly stepped down. Don’t know what to make of that, as I know nothing about him other than that he was new in office and not powerful.
My only questions are these: Given that so many could be called, why are so few chosen? And why, with Gingrich, Vitter, McCain, Hatch and Bush and so many others, does the dog not bark?
____________
Footnote: Media managers (both in government and the media itself) are known to use stories as a distraction to avoid covering other stories, even to invade a small Caribbean island that grows nutmeg, for example, to distract the media from marine deaths in Lebanon. (The Obama White House used this tactic in December of 2010, inviting Bill CLinton to a press conference to deflect attention from House Democrats rebelling against his tax deal.) So the Weiner story could be a mere distraction, in which case the question becomes: What else is going on? Yemen is the only story that comes to mind. It is big, but not as big as the Weiner story, obviously.
Piece of Mindful 
Party dogs are supposed to be on timers. Wiener took the Weinermobile out for a spin, everybody noticed, distracting from the orchistration so carefully constructed for our entertainment pleasure. Obama is the only dog that is supposed to be barking at this critical moment in his political career. Weenie waving during the sermon will get you escorted to the door every time. Weiner has discovered how real top-dog power works the hard way. This Munchkin is definitely not from Munchkin City!
LikeLike
You are most likely right. But part of it is the fact that the Internet is involved. Politicians having extra-marital affairs is not unusual, rather its kind of expected. I imagine that They are secretly proud of getting away with such behavior for so long.
Wiener is a bit different. The fact that he didn’t actually “seal the deal” and kept it in the realm of the Internet makes him look like a creep. The association can easily be made with the likes of ” to catch a predator” simply because he was trolling the depths of the Internet for his kicks. Had he had a normal affair he would probably still be in congress, but because we can label him a creep because of his behavior he has to go.
LikeLike
If Weiner would have came out immediately and admitted his indiscretions, not lied to the press or us, lied to his colleagues and his boss (Nancy P) he’d could’ve have keep his job.
LikeLike
How can you know this? Psychic? I love that you put up conclusions that cannot be proved or disproved, and feel validated somehow. That’s so …..right wngy.
LikeLike
That’s funny, because it’s the prime method in the school of Tokarski foreign policy analysis – come up with a theory, ask an unanswerable hypothetical question, and confidently answer it in a way that supports your theory.
But RE Wiener – such indiscretions seem to be indicative at very least that he’s not serious about any goals he had in Washington. John Perkins chronicles exactly what you’re talking about; however, if the people we send to Washington to fight on our behalf can’t control themselves even when they must know that any indiscretion makes them vulnerable to forces that would derail their careers, then they are not really serious about representing us.
LikeLike
I’d be interested n a specific instance that demonstrates your idea of my “foreign policy analysis”. I’m no seer, but think that now and then I have a good grip of what is being done and why, for instance, invading Iraq to take control of the oil. Duh. The only reason it sounds mystical is that foreign policy has to be mystified and glorified for the American public, who do not understand how power works.
LikeLike
Ok, the specific instance in which you predicted that Al Gore as president would have also invaded Iraq.
LikeLike
I stand on the same ground as those who say he would not have. My reasoning is a bit different however – presidents do not make these decisions.The forces at work there are stronger than the office of president. The pressure to invade Iraq was exerted on Clinton too, and he tried, but there was not enough public support. After 9/11 there was enough public support to invade Canada, so Iraq was a no-brainer, and for that reason I posit that Gore would have pretended the be the decider as the invasion to place, just as Bush did. It is important for the public to believe that the president is in charge.
That’s my reasoning. But you are right. We cannot ever know.
LikeLike
At this point I’m convinced that there is institutional knowledge of sufficiently damaging information that Weiner just decided it was better to resign.
Otherwise there is no good reason for him to resign.
LikeLike
That is interesting. He could have stuck it out despite the incessant drumbeat. so another fighter bites the dust. the boring ones hang on forever.
LikeLike
Don’t put flowers on the grave yet.
He’ll be back.
LikeLike