She gave him chance after chance. Always sad to see a politician with real talent brought down by this kind of behavior.

expresses his sexuality is solely between Anthony and Huma. The same way that Bill's proclivities , if consensual, should be between Bill and Hillary and no one else.

Unfortunate though that he included his child in a photo.

he decided to text his proclivities, it became everyone's business - that's how texting works. When are people going to realize that nothing you post is private?

The way you managed to add Bill Clinton's name to a conversation about Weiner's social disfunction, which by the way, has nothing at all to do with the Clinton's. But gather ye tie-ins while ye may, right?

Nice, adroit...might have the desired effect on the casual DU reader.

Mission accomplished.

And the fact that your paranoia results in baseless attacks on other DUers is really sad.

Paranoia? Sure, whatevs.

Adding Bill's or Hillary's name to anything negative that happens in the world is a long used republican technique to muddy the waters and to give people the overall impression, by piling on one implied layer after another, that they are not trustworthy or moral.

I stand by my assertion that this DUer's post tried to do just that.

As this is a site that is meant in theory to be pro-democrats, I will add my two cents to the conversation in the form of a push back whenever a baseless negative about Hillary or Bill is floated, depicted or implied.

That you would call me paranoid for that is curious indeed.

This isn't any stranger than all actresses being compared to Meryl Streep, to all Star Spangled Banners being compared to Whitney Houston's, to Lance Armstrong/Barry Bonds being brought up everytime a big name is caught for steroids in sports, or Michael Phelps/Ussain Bolt being brought up when talking about the most dominant athletes ever.

Though Republicans clearly try to make it a constant campaign issue, there's a reason why both parties still talk about it regularly. He was the freakin President of the United States, cheating on his wife in the Oval Office. It doesn't get any bigger than that when it comes to affairs.

You do something big on the biggest stage, you're remembered forever (good or bad).

So yes, if you're shocked and saddened when his name inevitably comes up whenever someone in politics is cheating, that's kind of paranoid in my opinion.

If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at him for putting that damn baggage on our Party.

Saddened, paranoid, shocked, mad even...seems you read an awful lot into my words that just weren't there.

And then you missed the whole point of my retort.

So I'll write it once more: this is a site that supports democrats. To use a negative story about ANYONE as a way to mention something negative, old hat, unrelated and out of context about the Clintons...well, I'm a democrat and I'm going to push back. He's not running. She's not responsible for his decades old behavior.

That's not anger, sadness, shock, paranoia or any other emotion you might assign to it.

That's me, a democrat, pushing back on a technique that's been employed for decades to smear the democratic nominee for president.

And you can write whatever you'd like to justify using the technique but it's still a republican technique for dragging down the Clintons. There is no justification for bring up Bill Clinton's history when commenting on Anthony Weiner's disfunction. Unless it comes from a republican and then it's expected.

I'm done. Not interested in a battle here. eom

Anthony did is between him and Huma and nobody else. Bill's dalliances were brought up because most on DU believe that whatever his sexual problems are, they are a private matter between a husband and wife. Yet some of those on DU who believe that are the first to denigrate and condemn Anthony. We should all be held to the same standard period. These are family matters and are none of our business.

Sure, it sounded supportive but why even mention Bill Clinton when discussing Weiner? Why even bring his name into the conversation about Weiner? Weiner's troubles have absolutely nothing to do with Bill Clinton.

Even if it's in a sort-of defense of Clinton, you manage to, in a story about Anthony Weiner, discuss Bill's "dalliance", you refer to his "sexual problems" but oh, it's private you say.

If it's so private, why bring it up in a completely unrelated story except to remind the casual DU reader that, oh yes, Bill Clinton...yada yada...(21 years ago).

While not an apples to apples comparison, it's similar to someone saying "it doesn't matter to me where Obama was born." Sounds like a positive, supportive statement but it's not, y'know...

What's the point in attaching Clinton to this narrative at all? That's what republicans do. They find a way to mention the Clinton name with every bad story out there. And it eats away at her favorabilities. And maybe some have become so inundated with the technique as to become immune to it. But you did it in your post.

I pushed back. I'm tired of watching it happen. It's especially unsavory here at DU.

Too bad such a talented guy is such a total narcissist.

his wife is. She evidently finds it despicable. Either way, he needs professional help. He has lost his reputation, job, and wife. Sounds a lot like an alcoholic, which would have been treated differently here. He has a problem.

If that is the case, he needed to have checked him into a rehab (and yes there are sex addict rehabs, Bill Clinton went to one.) He has to understand that not only did he hurt himself, not only did he hurt his family, but that he gave the GOP ammo they used to do damage. He and his fellow sex addict, Eliot Spitzer, were considered such bright lights that spoke spoke of them both as "The first Jewish president." However, while Spitzer and Bill Clinton seem to have their demon in check, it is obvious he has not, and until he does, yes, we do have a right to point fingers, because he knows that every pratfall form this tiem forward is yes, ammo for the gop.

is to admit to yourself that you have a problem. He is not there yet. This might do it, or it may not.

he needs help. Big help. He can't control himself.

NOTHING !!!!!!!!!!!!!

RWers will jump on the opportunity to compare them to wonder why Hillary did not leave Bill at the time.

Recently I participate in a discussion with someone who really really wanted to vote for Trump, who laid down all of Hillary's "vices" but finally decided that he will vote for her because Trump is really unimaginable.

"Hillary is horrible, truly horrible. But Trump is unimaginable. Hillary at least does not have the arrogance of a real estate mogul who achieved his wealth largely through deliberately corrupting others. I fear that Trump truly believes that the celestial system revolves around him. Hillary will probably at least be willing to listen to others who can give good advice, as her run against Obama showed her that she is not infallible and can lose. Trump’s victory might confirm him in an impenetrable self-idolatry and self-delusion."

Like you, I said that it was between the two of them, that no one can, nor should, opine on a marriage; that each is unique. But we cannot escape it. And we'd better realize that this topic will continue to appear.

No, that's not just "unfortunate." He better hope that the law doesn't consider it child abuse to place his kid in bed next to his damn dick in the photo he tweeted out to the world.

on the beach wearing less than that with children in the photo. Let me ask you this: If Beyoncé was photographed on the beach in a string bikini and had a child next to her, do you think she should be arrested?

Photographing his underwear with defined shapes of his genitals, close-up, in bed, with his child next to him, and sending it out on the internet. Bad idea.

This wasn't a cheesecake photo in a public place wearing typical clothing for that public environment. The analogy isn't even close.

Sorry if underwear can define a man's genital shape. Perhaps men should be forced to wear burkas to bed.

Behavior if you want. You seem to have no problem with it, with the context of what he was doing.

I think his wife is right to say she's had enough of him getting intimate with other women via putting his images out for the world to see, especially by putting their son in the photo with him. It isn't a "private" matter between spouses when both were or are in the public eye enough that she feels compelled to put out a statement basically saying she's had enough of his shit.

Not ours.

we have seen the photos of the woman's jugs and legs? Agree that unwanted sexting should be a crime but that is not what happened here.

but he seriously needs to get some help.

That can't be faithful to his wife.

In this case, sex addiction.

Ironically, Huma is working for the wife of another serial sex addict.

Gosh, isn't politica power enought for these guys?
Does something happen where they think are immune to the fallout of their transgressions?

"lots of guys in the same situaton as me have let their indiscretions ruin their positions, but that won't happen to me because .........."

Did I mention denial is a major symptom?

... a political career in ruin, public humiliation (and those are just a start) .... yet, he persists in the behavior.

:smh:

what an asshole.

"The good Lord gave men both a brain and a penis... but some of them only received enough blood supply to operate one of the correctly at a time"

and will never be out of work so get rid of him!

in his perverted habit. I hope she gets complete custody of her son.

Here's the difference between Democrats and Republicans. We call out the miscreants in our party. Yes we were pretty vocal about Bill Clinton, and I still don't have any great admiration for him and we gave Eliot Spitzer, Gary Hart and John Edwards the old heave ho. The Republicans don't; Mark Sanford, John Ensign, Larry Craig, David Vitter, Mark Foley, Newt Gringrich, their Presidential nominee and the list goes on. No public condemnation, and in fact some of them were re-elected and still hold office.

..forgive Democrats, only their own.

It's not just politicians that have this flaw. It's part of every culture and society. Just that we scrutinize politicians , because, for some reason, we assume they shouldn't be human?

... on Tony and his stupid dick, and that is not going to be a fun conversation.

behavior that a physician or teacher is legally bound to refer if they become aware of it.

At a minimum, this is setting a child up as a target for child sexual predators, any one of which would be happy to exploit this man's weakness. There's no sense of boundaries here.

Does he not understand? Is he out of control?

And what does this do to Huma, who is obviously away from home a lot due to the ongoing campaign, and relying on her husband to be the custodial parent? This is not going to be settled by a separation!!!

In the future Huma's going to have to find a qualified (and no doubt vetted by the Secret Service) nanny, because I sure don't see good old Anthony filling that role any more.

It's his own business if he's got a political death-wish, but involving the toddler is like driving drunk with the kid in the carseat. It crosses one hell of a parental boundary.

man in a photo with a child that was sent to a friend of the man.

Minimally, it's kinky. He tweeted a pic of his hard-on with his kid in bed next to him. He doesn't even have the decent judgment to make sure his child isn't in the photo.

It is public knowledge.

That child should never be alone with him again until he is old enough to avoid situations like that.

The man has something seriously wrong with him. Geeze

far longer than most of us to save this marriage. You have to give her that. Weiner is so bright and had such an great voice for Democrats, but he obviously has a deep, deep problem. Huma needs to get her life back on track for herself and her son. No one can say she didn't give it her best.

My thoughts exactly

for as long as she did, but I suppose he convinced her that he would change.

So long, Tony!

Weiner really needs help.

Aaaaaaaaand, Donald just tweeted that.

But the bitter truth is that we're still just another animal - an animal that thinks it's not an animal. There are mutants among our kind - mutants who find pleasure in what we choose to call "deviant behavior". Are Anthony's escapades an "addiction"? How fine a line do we have to walk to not be judged "Whacko"? Who gets to determine who's just goofy and who's friggin' crazy? Some of the folks of history that we revere as genius were whack jobs in their personal realms to those of us who judge ourselves: Normal.
Here's hoping Huma and Anthony both find what makes them happy.

And he IS the one who deliberately involved the kid - it wasn't accidental exposure.

The only reason I read the story in the first place is that I wrongly assumed that it was a "scandal" manufactured for political purposes. It isn't.

This is not a private or personal matter; it's no longer an issue of Weiner's private kink. He is not fit to have custodial care of the child. There are too many red flags here.

Anthony Weiner is just a creepy weirdo, but this is a more sweeping phenomenon than that.

I know two grown-ass adults, one male and one female who have made professional laughing stocks of themselves doing this and I just don't get it.

I have received unsolicited "sexts" from women, virtually all of them I either worked with or knew professionally and the only thing going through my mind was "what the fuck is she thinking?"

Her husband has hurt her again and again. I know it's sometimes difficult to end a marriage, however egregious a spouse's behavior. But when a child is involved, in my mind, that's it. Huma has made the right choice. I just hope the media leaves her alone.

Run from this asshole!

Yes, Huma, dump the chump.

I was rooting for their marriage, if for nothing else than the uniqueness of it. But holy shit, the guy just keeps fucking up. What a waste, he was such a powerful voice while in office. I hope he gets the help he so clearly needs.

girl friends on exhibition saying the things like he said about Marla Maples and and his wives-------------------he really is a narcissistic disgusting person, who "cheated" on almost everyone of them, so he really has no room to speak


And now he has decided all by his little self to inject himself in a very private manner and he really is tiring, to see and hear about and the MSM is just nothing more more than panders, and just want to say his name for a profit

Trump's statement about how scary it is that Anthony Weiner was in "close proximity" to any classified info that his wife might know, is pretty stupid. Trump is saying that douche bag husbands are security risks just because they are...well...because they are cheating, douche bags. Well, Donald Trump IS the ULTIMATE CHEATING DOUCHE BAG HUSBAND. Therefore HE is not fit to receive any classified info. Why have the pundits not pointed this out?

its about the moola, just think of what Les Mooves said that this person was going to be great for the entertainment value and the money.

Then on the other side the right wingers are up in arms that a quarterback sat through the National Anthem, his constitutional right to protest about something that is important to him and thousands of others in this country, and the MSM is trying to make as much moola off this as they can, while deflecting what I am about to say below and ask these panders this............

I just wonder how many of these patriot(s) people would actually read what the national song and what it says, Francis Scott Keys was a bigot, he wrote this song during a war and his family was heavily involved in slavery and other acts against the Native American people.

But if these patriot(s) then were to go to

http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/


and ask themselves how a stadium with the name of Levi Stadium that once great US jean company has over 100 million in moola, in off shore accounts, closed down the manufacturing plants making those jeans and outsourced them, and they owe our treasury over 39.9 million in taxes, and we have this/these right wing hypocrite(s) talking about patriotism.

I want to know what this dumpster thinks about, when "his" republican party operatives with the help from a right wing newspaper reporter, outed a CIA operative, while she was "classified", he wouldn't know what "classified" means unless they gave him crayons, and wrote her name out in big old letters

Don't get me wrong, I have a huge amount of sympathy for the loved ones of the addict, but I also genuinely feel bad for the addict. #empathyisaliberalvalue

think he can help it. He needs help and someone in her position can't be married to someone who is such an easy target.

the man is a certified creep

Seriously, I wish her and her family well, but this is chum in the water for media running out of ways to make the election look like a "horse race."

No chance of privacy at all. None.

I wish it wasn't so.

sadly,
Bright

Even better if she hadn't hooked up with the loser in the first place.

We didn't need to see an underwear shot of the woman at all, let alone side by side with the disturbing pic of Weiner's "package" with his kid in the background. I don't give a rat's @ss about seeing her jugs, but clearly some members of the press felt it was crucial to the story. (And before anyone says "oh but it's proof", if your description of the picture includes the word "busty", it's not about proof anymore so much as salaciousness.)

I'm looking at you, NYPost tweetmonkeys. I'm looking at you too, MotherJones, for reposting it without tearing it a new one.

I get that sex sells and the "busty brunette" mistress makes a nice prop for your headlines, but there is a frakin time and place for that objectifying bullsh*t.

It certainly isn't next to a picture of a kid who is a victim in all this.

want people seeing your jugs and legs you shouldn't be sending pictures over the internet.

that you feel comfortable with a sexually charged image of a half naked woman side by side with one that included a minor who was likely exposed to inappropriate sexual behavior. I found it disturbing and creepy, as apparently most of the DU community that wandered into the comment section found it disturbing and creepy.

Your name looked familiar so I read through the comments again. You stated it was "unfortunate" that the kid was in the photo, but defended their right to sext as it involved consenting adults. Now you've flipped script to "you shouldn't be sending pictures if you don't want the world to see them", which ignores the concept of consent in general. How... strange. You also defended Weiner taking the pic with his kid in the room because he had "g shorts" on, which completely ignores the sexualized context of the photos.

My point was about irresponsible behavior of the media used to generate clicks when a child was present for the adult sexual activity in question. If you want to turn this into a discussion of a woman's attractive bits with a side helping of slut shaming... well... you do you. Preferably someplace far, far away from me.

I didn't see any sexual activity in the photos. I think it was a horrible idea for him to include his daughter in the photo but since he was clothed I see nothing illegal. How does "you shouldn't be sending pictures if you don't want the world to see them", ignore the concept of consent? Obviously both parties were foolishly, but willingly, sending provocative photos to each other.

* There is a difference between fornication and "sexual activity". You don't have to be engaged in sex or masturbation for your behavior to be under the umbrella of sexual activity. You even admit that they were engaged in sexually provocative behavior. Taking a picture of your partial erection in your undies is sexual activity. Posing in that manner in that state of dress, for both of them, is overtly sexual behavior. It is meant to arouse. It accompanied sexual texting. It was a part of the sexual activity. Foreplay is still sexual activity.

People can be in their undies and it not be sexual at all. This was clearly not the case. If you honestly can't tell the difference between Anthony Weiner's lumpy d*ck pics and a Yatta video, there is a serious problem here.

* Experiencing this kind of overtly inappropriate sexual behavior by adults effectively grooms kids for pedophiles. It normalizes adult sexual behavior in a way it shouldn't be.

We don't know what else the child was exposed to and these photos are enough to raise reasonable concern. After all, most people don't do that sh*t and for good reason.

* Engaging in consensual sexual activity is not a free pass for the world to have access to your pics. Saying "don't take the pic" after it is disseminated is a lot like saying to someone "don't wear a skirt" or "don't drink" if they want to avoid being raped. I've heard lots of people on this site make this same sad argument after some celeb's phone or computer was hacked. It existing does not mean you have a right to view or access it- it's just an excuse to oggle and stand in judgement.

Ultimately her picture was released by the press. That wasn't my problem. My problem is they put it next to the picture that had the kid while touting her "assets" in a tweet- distracting from the fact that a frakin' LITTLE KID was present in the photos. It was unnecessary salaciousness meant to attract the attention of people more concerned with a nice rack and a little schadenfreude than the well-being of a little kid or the misbehavior of someone who was once an elected official. Clearly their tactic worked.

Without that, not many (outside of DU) would know who she is.

Or, another question, what purpose does it serve publishing an article about someone else's marital strife. It's none of my business.

Weiner clearly is an addict and needs to be in treatment for his addiction. I hope their child was not harmed in any way. Huma did the best she could and then some. She extended forgiveness to that jerk several times but he refuses to admit he has an illness.

She'll be better off without him. To some extent, I wonder if he was jealous of her and her growing prominence.

than his despicable behavior has warranted. He has some major addiction issues and apparently no common sense. It is sad to see this and tragic on so many levels. Weiner was at one time a major progressive voice. To have involved his young child - even inadvertently - in something that he KNEW would have maximum negative exposure is unforgivable.

I'm sure that Huma is receiving all possible support from Hillary.

Why is any of this OUR business?

Last edited Tue Aug 30, 2016, 01:42 PM - Edit history (1)

He's got no one to blame but himself.

And furthermore, I don't care in the least about his sexual compulsions.

The pics would be considered revenge porn and the media would refuse to publish them.

find whatever solution would most help him overcome it. I am sure Ms. Abedin stayed, in part, because she thought it was something they could work on together. Obviously, that wasn't the case. I wish her and her son well and I hope Anthony Weiner gets the help he needs.

He's out of control.