Sorry, I’m still writing about Anthony Weiner. His personal life isn’t of concern to me, nor is the fact that he lied about his personal life, but harassing women concerns me greatly. There is another side to Nick’s piece that I linked to in the open thread that “female members of the House Democratic leadership, as well as the female members of the rank-and-file, are actually personally upset” with his conduct. Namely, Democrats are the party of everyone gets a seat at the table, and as such we have more women in leadership and the rank and file, so more of our leadership and rank and file have got harassing nonsense at work or, for participating in politics, and are less likely to forgive it.
I’ve been thinking about what isn’t a good excuse for such behavior. So here’s a partial list of things that aren’t a good excuses for sending nude pictures of yourself or other harassing email/tweets/Facebook messages without consent:
- It’s the Internet, what do you expect?
- Other people cheat
- Other people are doing/have done something worse
- It was a joke
- Don’t you have a sense of humor
- It’s not a big deal
- He’s a good Congressman
- One of them was a Porn Star, so it’s OK
- Come on
- He’s taking on corporate crime, and that’s worse
- You’re playing into the hands of the GOP
- You’re playing into the hands of Breitbart
- You’re playing into the hands of corporate crooks
Um… The last three would seem to be your idea of invalid reasons to complain about it, not excuses for the behavior.
It comes down to the fact that the GOP circles the wagons, re Vitter and others. The Dems want to claim they have a larger ‘guilt gene’ than the pubbies. It never works as the GOP with the backing of larger donors are ‘more respectable’.
Memo to Ann Coulter: “It was a joke” isn’t a good excuse for public advocacy of throwing liberals in concentration camps and executing them, either. I mean, some nutjob might take you seriously, ya know? See, e.g., Congresswoman Giffords and six dead people (including a nine-year-old kid) in Arizona, for example.
@2 GOPers haven’t been respectable since Eisenhower left office, and even his respectability is questionable, given that he tolerated having Tricky Dick as his veep.
We don’t tolerate sexual harassers in our party. The GOP has to, or they wouldn’t have anyone in their party.
@5
Except when we do. Like when a whole bunch of folks on HA tried to use every excuse in the book to say Weiner should stay.
I reposted a few of the comments calling me a prude, a puritan, and like, for my insistence that Wiener step to down my Face Book page. My friends and family got a real hoot out of those.
A Taylor Swift song speaks to Weiner and all the pathetic bastards that try to defend his douchebag actions!
The voters should decide, not Bratbart and his well funded claque.
@3. Roger Rabbit spews:
Memo to Ann Coulter: “It was a joke” isn’t a good excuse for public advocacy of throwing liberals in concentration camps and executing them, either. I mean, some nutjob might take you seriously, ya know? See, e.g., Congresswoman Giffords and six dead people (including a nine-year-old kid) in Arizona, for example.
———————————————
Finally a good point from you. Such decisions are nothing to joke about and should only be based upon valid national security grounds.
LOL! She had right wing trolls in mind.
@6 There were three camps: Those who thought he should leave, those who didn’t condone his actions but thought would leave it up to his constituents, and those who wanted to trade Weiner for Vitter (why reward Republican obstinacy by giving them a voting advantage they didn’t earn at the polls?). There are reasonable arguments for all of those positions.
@9 “Such decisions are nothing to joke about and should only be based upon valid national security grounds.”
This is a fucking joke, right? If rounding up people can be justified “upon valid national security grounds” then let’s start with your ilk.
@12 – Who do you think you are, FDR?
@Carl: Have any of the women complained? Note: not saying that it’s okay if no one complained, but at least the one transcript we’ve seen suggests that the woman literally asked Weiner for the pictures. If that was true of all of them, would your outrage diminish? I’m not okay with sexual harassment (and indiscriminate distribution of crotch shots counts as sexual harassment), but have we seen any evidence that he ever sent them out indiscriminately?
To put it another way, if it was an attractive woman sending pictures to random men and all of them enjoyed the pictures, would you be as outraged?
Roger DUMB Rabbit, the nutjob was a leftist who didn’t think Giffords was leftist enough. Man you are really taking the stupid pills today.
NOW onto Weiner. Apparently you missed how the Brooklyn/Queens NOW Chapter had no real issue with WeinerSchnitzel.
So can some HA leftist explain the benefit of the doubt part.
There’s no doubt he sent to women across the country images of his naked stupid self, yet we see how the elitist NOW is a leftist organization with that last sentence!
Corrected!
It’s easy to give the benefit of the doubt to grown man acting from time to time like a 14 year old boy.
Not so easy to excuse a grown man-child who is DRIVEN to keep women in shackles..
Like the typical right wing nutjob.
Once again yelling lost beta copies his alpha.
The evidence proved beyond the shadow of a doubt Jared Loughner was a leftist.
But yelling lost beta keep being a dope alive.
Lt. General Russel Honore pegged you long ago: “You’re Stuck on Stupid“.
He knew you before he met you!
BTW left wingers, Anthony Weiner has not submitted his resignation letter.
Talking about yourself again eh yelling loser beta… lover of sha’ria law!
20 – Talking about you and your ilk dummy!
I believe women should have the same autonomy as a man and that means reproductive freedom.
You’re always going on and on about some lunatic conspiracy. If you don’t like reproductive liberty and freedom – don’t exercise it – just let nature take its course for you and yours. I could give a flip.
Just don’t tread on me and mine right wing nutjob.
Yawwwwnn… Projection..
Cain is already backing away from that bullshit.
Imagine that – he has just a pinch more sense than you do.
Heh. We’ve already discussed “the audacity of dopes”.
YOUR ILK!
Yep, a unbalanced lust for gold and Ayn Rand’s “We the Living” being the preferred reading material of both Loughner and Paul Ryan.
PERFECT description of Puddybud blather here over 30-35 THOUSAND comments since late April 2005.
Was a cogent thought delivered between #21-25?
Nope it was from the HA databaze dope!
See ya!
We all could do just fine without that, thanks for nothing.