Perjury Charges Looming? Run Weiner's Weiner Story!

a reply to: introvert

Nor do I care what people do between the sheets, and of course military folks cheat - except if caught they get demotions and potential brig time unlike civilians.

I guess my counter point in the case of these two political operatives is it does matter. Folks that seek office or advise on office holders - such as one running for president - should not dictate policy or ethics that is opposite to their personal belief systems. The 'do as I say, not as I do' dictation doesn't cut it for free thinking people.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Nope. I couldn't care less.

a reply to: BlueJacket

The President having sex with an intern is definitely up for public scrutiny

Only if you care about those sorts of things.

just as a congressman having sex with a page boy, or a college professor with a student.

As long as they are consenting adults, I really don't care. If it's rape, molestation or underage people involved, then we have a serious problem.

a reply to: Deny Arrogance

She said that at a time when she had placed her faith and trust in a man who it turns out didn't deserve either.
Low to make her the focus of your post. Also not the subject.
The thread is about whether this story is a diversion away from other matters.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: facedye

So when you said 'misleading articles like these' you were not referring to Weiner's wiener?

I certainly was - I think the intent behind running that story, especially TODAY, has an ulterior motive. You don't even know who this person is that "came forward." The pieces are already in place for a "he said-she said" debacle should anyone start poking around.

Anybody else remember the articles over this weekend stating they'd like the state department/Clinton's camp to outline how they were going to provide these 15k e-mails by Monday the 29th?

It's interesting to me how congress set the expectation to continue this discussion STARTING TODAY, and we wake up to this.

a reply to: facedye

So how is it misleading then? He has a history of d-pic'ing and got caught again. How are you misled?

a reply to: Jason88

I guess my counter point in the case of these two political operatives is it does matter. Folks that seek office or advise on office holders - such as one running for president - should not dictate policy or ethics that is opposite to their personal belief systems. The 'do as I say, not as I do' dictation doesn't cut it for free thinking people.

A politician should not try to dictate ethics, only listen to their constituents and form policy based on their needs and rights.

We are all human, We are sexual creatures.

What you want is to be represented by robots.

a reply to: Gazrok

Look it up. It's right there on the internet. Along with video proof of Hillary's illness and no one ever makes stuff up on the internet .

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: facedye

So how is it misleading then? He has a history of d-pic'ing and got caught again. How are you misled?

Sorry Augustus, but what are you getting at?

If you were following a huge story that seems to be garnishing everyone's attention for weeks, only to face clear diversion and blurring of the truth, wouldn't you feel misled to be sideswiped about something so close to her camp, and at the same time so out of narrative?

Misled, redirected, deterred, being taken for a ride, purposely confused - whatever you want to call it, the originating nature of this story and its intent was not to blast weiner for sending nude pictures of himself. like many of you are saying here - nobody really cares about that.

originally posted by: facedye
If you were following a huge story that seems to be garnishing everyone's attention for weeks, only to face clear diversion and blurring of the truth, wouldn't you feel misled to be sideswiped about something so close to her camp, and at the same time so out of narrative?

Uh, no, because I can, amazingly, follow multiple stories at one time. Clinton's emails and all her other issues are still in the news.

a reply to: introvert

Come on, Introvert.

You know darn well that politicians use the bible, ethics, and 'family values' as platforms to appeal to voters. These sexual creatures should have only one wife or husband, and only have sex to procreate. People vote for that sh*t.

My argument centers on this being public information because it precludes these political characters from using those hooks to appeal to voters.

As for Hillary's right-hand-wife, the divorce is newsworthy since the administration is cutting off a loose cannon as it nears the White House. This is literally house cleaning. And, I really did put Weiner in the dead pool for it.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: facedye
If you were following a huge story that seems to be garnishing everyone's attention for weeks, only to face clear diversion and blurring of the truth, wouldn't you feel misled to be sideswiped about something so close to her camp, and at the same time so out of narrative?

Uh, no, because I can, amazingly, follow multiple stories at one time. Clinton's emails and all her other issues are still in the news.

So first you're critical of me bringing up the overturning of Smith-Mundt, then never bring it up again to agree/disagree with me on that point. (did you seriously think anybody here was making that up?)

Then I give you an example of how the mainstream media is attempting to drive this story to the top of the headlines today (which is obvious), to which you respond rather arrogantly with "what's the big deal? I can go on CNN, MSNBC and Drudge simultaneously."

Seriously it looks like you're sitting there waiting for the most opportune moment to blurt out "nothing to see here, move along."

Get it over with

a reply to: facedye

I support your OP, Facedye. But releasing news in the last week of August is pretty poor timing. Everyone is on vacation leading up to Labor Day in the US. Everyone that is a mover & shaker that is....

It's not a distraction, it was planned for a dead week since it's shameful news.

As AugustusMasonicus pointed out, the other items are still in the news.

originally posted by: facedye
So first you're critical of me bringing up the overturning of Smith-Mundt...

Actually, I was not. They are unrelated as far as I am concerned. ,

Then I give you an example of how the mainstream media is attempting to drive this story to the top of the headlines today (which is obvious), to which you respond rather arrogantly with "what's the big deal? I can go on CNN, MSNBC and Drudge simultaneously."

The fact that I can go to several media outlets and read all about Hildog's issues kinda disproves the point you are trying to make that they are taking a subordinate role to Weiner's wiener. Can you not keep track of multiple topical stories at one time?

originally posted by: Jason88
a reply to: facedye

I support your OP, Facedye. But releasing news in the last week of August is pretty poor timing. Everyone is on vacation leading up to Labor Day in the US. Everyone that is a mover & shaker that is....

It's not a distraction, it was planned for a dead week since it's shameful news.

As AugustusMasonicus pointed out, the other items are still in the news.

Well you'll certainly find no fear mongering here on my end - just callin' it like I see it. The timing of this entire story is nothing short of peculiar.

I hope you're right!

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: facedye
So first you're critical of me bringing up the overturning of Smith-Mundt...

Actually, I was not. They are unrelated as far as I am concerned. ,

Then I give you an example of how the mainstream media is attempting to drive this story to the top of the headlines today (which is obvious), to which you respond rather arrogantly with "what's the big deal? I can go on CNN, MSNBC and Drudge simultaneously."

The fact that I can go to several media outlets and read all about Hildog's issues kinda disproves the point you are trying to make that they are taking a subordinate role to Weiner's wiener. Can you not keep track of multiple topical stories at one time?

Do you really think that 300 million americans take to interpreting the news as descriptively and closely as you, or I, or anyone on this site do?

a reply to: facedye

I think the majority of them concerned with current events can process multiple news stories at once.

Not everyone gets all overwhelmed and 'misled'.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: facedye

I think the majority of them concerned with current events can process multiple news stories at once.

Not everyone gets all overwhelmed and 'misled'.

what an answer. you should fill out an application for the state department.

you know exactly what it is that I'm asking you. you know that the MSM and the powers that be care less for the public's access to specific information than they do for how that information is presented and received as a general consensus.

the only thing I saw this morning were headlines for this ridiculous, nonsensical, nobody-cares story. it was completely out of context and made me laugh in furious condemnation.

if you don't think that's worth looking into, I'm not going to race to change your mind on that.

a reply to: Jason88

You know darn well that politicians use the bible, ethics, and 'family values' as platforms to appeal to voters. These sexual creatures should have only one wife or husband, and only have sex to procreate. People vote for that sh*t.

That makes them hypocrites. Nothing more.

My argument centers on this being public information because it precludes these political characters from using those hooks to appeal to voters.

As for Hillary's right-hand-wife, the divorce is newsworthy since the administration is cutting off a lose cannon as it nears the White House. This is literally house cleaning. I really did put Weiner in the dead pool for it.

It's just my personal opinion that it's none of my business and I don't care about it.

originally posted by: facedye
if you don't think that's worth looking into, I'm not going to race to change your mind on that.

Nope, I do not think it is worth looking into.

If you can only handle one news story a day maybe you should do something to improve your news processing capabilities.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: facedye
if you don't think that's worth looking into, I'm not going to race to change your mind on that.

Nope, I do not think it is worth looking into.

If you can only handle one news story a day maybe you should do something to improve your news processing capabilities.

You've been dodging my point pretty noticeably.

This has nothing to do with "not being able to pay attention to one news story."