Did you guys notice the extortion?

It wasn't a request. It was a demand. If he didn't comply with the demand, the picture would be released.

Weiner complied and Brietbart didn't keep his word. He went around showing the picture to everybody and it 'accidentally' was all over the Internet within two days.

Fritz, I know you don't understand anything that I typed so I'd just like you to think about how strange it was for Breitbart to take the stage right before Weiner did. What are the odds of that? Originally Posted by Longermonger

So what? I think it was classic. Good for Breitbart.

Did Breitbart apologize to Shirley Sherrod? Nope. I guess it's okay if Breitbart lies...

Rep. Weiner does have license to lie, even if Breitbart lies. Congressmen are expected to tell the truth (Insert joke here).

Nevermind, Congress telling the truth? Not going to happen. Sorry, move along. Nothing to see here.

I am sure that Longer Monger tried to make the point but I think some people missed it. If I may, let me try to clarify. Anthony Weiner made himself subject to extortion by his actions. Now Longer is being clever by using Breitbart as the foil but any woman he mailed his photos to could approach him in the name of an organization, business, or individual and ask for his cooperation or else. Now if a Congressman wants to wack his weinie and so it to the world, well okay. The lying is to the public is a problem because it shows he didn't want it revealed and was willing to go to some length to avoid disclosure. So he could be black mailed into supporting or be missing in action on his job.

JD, where do you get off coming here and being reasonable!? We aren't here to discuss issues, we are here to call each other names and to question each other's sexual orientation. How dare you offer a rational explanation!

LOL! Thanks, JD, you hit the nail on the head. I am going to call you a thoughtful man and a blatant heterosexual!

I am sure that Longer Monger tried to make the point but I think some people missed it. If I may, let me try to clarify. Anthony Weiner made himself subject to extortion by his actions. Now Longer is being clever by using Breitbart as the foil but any woman he mailed his photos to could approach him in the name of an organization, business, or individual and ask for his cooperation or else. Now if a Congressman wants to wack his weinie and so it to the world, well okay. The lying is to the public is a problem because it shows he didn't want it revealed and was willing to go to some length to avoid disclosure. So he could be black mailed into supporting or be missing in action on his job. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The Congressman did something stupid that made himself exploitable. But Breitbart is the exploiter. What he did sure looks like it was illegal. Don't speculate and attempt to shift blame to women that could have, but didn't, blackmail Rep. Weiner.

Unlike Vitter and Ensign, Weiner didn't do anything illegal.

At this point, Weiner should offer to leave Congress on the condition that he walk out hand-in-hand with Senator Vitter. That type of "balls in your court" move would make me smile.

Well, I guess I was wrong. You were not making a valid point, you were just being mean. Okay, Vitter. A one time visit to a escort seven years earlier. The statute of limitations has expired so get over it. Vitter's actions were the opposite of Weiner. When it came out, he admitted the indescretion and did not lie. No cover up.

Once again the Clinton defense; this is not about sex, this is about lying and leaving yourself open to blackmail. No, I'm not talking about Breitbart. Breitbart was open and transparent. I listened to his explanation and it made pretty good sense. This was his ace in the hole if the democratic attack machine went after him or the women making the charges.

Well, I guess I was wrong. You were not making a valid point, you were just being mean. Okay, Vitter. A one time visit to a escort seven years earlier. The statute of limitations has expired so get over it. Vitter's actions were the opposite of Weiner. When it came out, he admitted the indescretion and did not lie. No cover up.

Once again the Clinton defense; this is not about sex, this is about lying and leaving yourself open to blackmail. No, I'm not talking about Breitbart. Breitbart was open and transparent. I listened to his explanation and it made pretty good sense. This was his ace in the hole if the democratic attack machine went after him or the women making the charges. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Blah, blah, blah. The only thing I am getting from your post is it is ok when a GOP member breaks the law over sex, but it is not ok for a Dem sex scandal when the law wasn't broken. Same old usual GOP nonsensical rhetoric.