Once A Weiner, Always A Weiner.

Let's start with me showing some restraint...a nephew of a sweet friend of mine from years ago was part of a team that won a fricking Sundance award for their documentary on serial reprobate Anthony Weiner, and I'm not going to ask on Facebook how they are all dealing with this latest news that the rest of us were right all along and HE IS A SCUMBAG!!!!

He's at it again. I am sick of the apologists. He has been able to continue being a predator because of the Democrat party and his connections to Hilary Clinton. Sick. Read the story, see how this girl actually admired him. Pathetic. Her father allowed this because he didn't want to mess with her already fragile mental state? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. People putting politicians on pedestals allows this mentality, this idol worship, this cult of personality. It sickens me.

I wrote what I think was an exceptional short post about this asshole a few years ago.... I linked it last time his name came up, because he's a SERIAL SCUMBAG.

What I find most disturbing is that the parents of the High School girls that are a part of all of this willingly parroted the Weiner Talking Points, same as given to the former porn star.

Politics over morals and family, I guess. Disgusting. Yet, it happens every time. Chandra Levy's family loved Gary Condit who, while not a murderer, was involved inappropriately with their daughter. Monica Lewinski's parents just looooved Bill Clinton (well, at first). Yuck.

Wonder what those parents are saying today?

Let's see who defends him this time.

Don't Read The Comments?

I did. I read some comments on my congressman's Facebook (you'll have to look for his post explaining why he voted against the Manchin-Toomey bill), on The New Yorker, and I always ask my self "why did you do that?"

If this is the level of discourse in our country, we may be doomed.

Occasionally, there are bright moments, like this one from the vapid New Yorker piece linked above:

"..were a stark reminder of how anti-democratic and dysfunctional our political architecture is..." Actually, No. The system works as designed. The majority shall never tyrannize the minority. Don't forget, we are a Republic not a democracy. In the strictest sense of the word, the system of government established by the Constitution was never intended to be a "democracy." This is evident in the wording of the Constitution itself which declares that "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" (Article IV, Section 4). Moreover, the scheme of representation and the various mechanisms for selecting representatives established by the Constitution were clearly intended to produce a republic, not a democracy. To the extent that the United States of America has moved away from its republican roots and become more "democratic," it has strayed from the intentions of the Constitution's authors. Whether or not the trend toward more direct democracy would be smiled upon by the Framers depends on the answer to another question. Are the American people today sufficiently better informed and otherwise equipped to be wise and prudent democratic citizens than were American citizens in the late 1700s? By all accounts, the answer to this question is an emphatic "no." "There are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice and truth can regain their authority over the public mind" Madison(Federalist No. 63).

It's amazing that The New Yorker published a piece that was so stupid. A bullet point called "The Tyranny of Small States?" Really? Complaining that the Senate gives equal weight to every state? That's not "democratic?" What a dumbass. Seriuously. If you whine about the Senate not being just like the House, you are an idiot and I am finished listening to you.

Brief Weiner Thoughts

What I find most disturbing is that the parents of the High School girls that are a part of all of this willingly parroted the Weiner Talking Points, same as given to the former porn star.

Politics over morals and family, I guess. Disgusting. Yet, it happens every time. Chandra Levy's family loved Gary Condit who, while not a murderer, was involved inappropriately with their daughter. Monica Lewinski's parents just looooved Bill Clinton (well, at first). Yuck.

Wonder what those parents are saying today?



here's the longer version submitted to the Graph:

One observation about the Rep. Weiner scandal that I have yet to hear anyone else make, and one that disturbs me the most is the behavior of the parents of the High School-age girls involved in the initial release of information.
As was covered in great detail, to his credit, by Tommy Christopher at Mediaite, Andrew Breitbart didn't start this, but Christopher got everything else wrong because he believes in Weiner, just like the parents of these girls, the girls, and the rest of the media. Piers Morgan, interviewing Ann Coulter on his show on June 7th, showed the bias and proved her points when he said without irony that the reason the MSM was doing stories about hacking Twitter rather than investigating Weiner's claims was because Weiner was "believable" in his statements. This symptom of 'politics first' is frightening to me as an American, as a parent, and as a thinking human! (good luck finding the video, CNN didn't post that part of the show).
Read these statements from Christopher's article from the girls and the parents, and compare them to what emails with former porn star Ginger Lee say about Wiener's attempts to quell the story.
"When Rep Weiner followed my daughter the one and only message he sent her was welcoming her to his twitter followers and suggested he go to his website for more information. My husband and I were delighted with this message as it furthered our daughter’s interest in learning about government. We were very grateful to Rep Weiner for this and saw nothing wrong or inappropriate with this message.
This was the one and only message that Rep Weiner sent our daughter. Our daughter sent a message thanking Rep Weiner for following her and thanking him for the welcome message. This was the one and only message our daughter sent to Rep Weiner.
We would also like to express our disgust at the harassment of Rep Weiner and hope that everyone remembers this man did nothing wrong.
And concerning a certain adult actress, we would like to add that this girl did nothing wrong. If you actually read her blog it is about politics and chronic illness. My husband and I read it together with our daughter."
"I followed Rep. Weiner with the permission of my parents. I sent a request to Rep Weiner using his WEINER YES hashtag and he followed me back. He sent me one welcome direct message that said to visit his webpage. I sent him a message thanking him.
Rep Weiner never tried to contact me beyond his welcome message.
Rep Weiner is a good person and it’s so mean what everyone is attacking him without any proof."
Emails from Weiner suggest Ginger Lee say this:

"The key is to have a short, thought out statement that tackles the top line questions and then refer people back to it. Have a couple of iterations of: 'This is silly. Like so many others, I follow Rep. Weiner on Twitter. I don't know him and have never met him. He briefly followed me and sent me a dm saying thank you for the follow. That's it.'" and:
"I have nothing to do with the situation involving Rep Weiner. I follow his twitter feed. And for a brief time he followed me. Much has been made of the fact that I have posted about my admiration for Rep Weiner and his politics. All I can say about that is that I'm a fan of his. Rep. Weiner sent me one short direct message thanking me for following him. I have never met Rep. Weiner and he has never sent me anything innappopriate (sic) ..."
So, it seems clear to me, at least, that words were given to all the players here by Weiner or his people. What this tells me is that we have yet another set of Democrat parents willing to sacrifice the truth, theirs and their daughters' credibility for a skeezy congressman that they "admire" and think "has done nothing wrong." Does anyone else remember all the support the parents of Chandra Levy gave Gary Condit, even though, while not a murderer, he had been engaged in an inappropriate relationship with her? Monica Lewinsky's parents?
While it is much more rampant among liberals, this cult of personality isn't just for Democrats, either, as Lisa Baron says about sleeping with Republicans in her new book "The Life of the Party,"
"'To be able to say, 'I'm with the such-and-such campaign,' or 'I work for Senator So-and-So' is to us political junkies what "I’m with the band" is to Pamela Des Barres."
I can't speak for you, but this all disgusts me.

Wind Turbines are Killers! Panic! wait....Where's the Panic?

Well, it's well documented that wind turbines are actual wildlife killers, so why bother reporting it, if you are a journalist in the US? Wouldn't want to get people all riled up when there are Green stories to write, after all.

Thankfully, the UK press is all over this one:

"California's attempts to switch to green energy have inadvertently put the survival of the state’s golden eagles at risk.
Scores of the protected birds have been dying each year after colliding with the blades of about 5,000 wind turbines.
Now the drive for renewable power sources, such as wind and the sun, being promoted by President Obama and state Governor Jerry Brown has raised fears that the number of newborn golden eagles may not be able to keep pace with the number of turbine fatalities."

so, with the perceived Bogeyman of Environmental Disaster, we slaughter wildlife to save what, exactly?

Reason #eleventythousand i will never be a liberal democrat

This brief editorial from the Wall Street Journal is touching and pointed.

"This is the story of how my husband's circumcision saved my life.


It's a personal story, but let it also serve as a public health rebuttal to the proposed ban on male circumcision that will be on the San Francisco ballot this November. 

San Francisco's ballot initiative would prohibit circumcision on all males under the age of 18. It would allow no religious exemptions, and it apparently gives no regard to the numerous studies demonstrating that male circumcision can substantially reduce—by more than 50%—the transmission of the HIV virus during sex."


Sooooooooooooooo, San Francisco, it's okay to terminate a pregnancy for any reason, but no family can choose circumcision for their boys, even though the health benefits to the sexual partners are documented?