Patterico's Pontifications

5/31/2011

#Weinergate, Clinton & The Girl Under The Bus

Filed under: General — Stranahan @ 5:27 am

[Guest Post by Lee Stranahan]

Sex scandals are really about everything but sex. They are about the reactions to the scandal. The denials, the cover-ups, the acting and the actors, the defenders, the turnabouts, the exposure, the predicable patterns of response. The way the waves ripple out from the event in the center, crashing into each other and forming other waves.

So there’s no small amount of irony that Rep. Anthony Weiner – a young-ish, ambitious politician on the way up who finds himself in the middle of a currently widening all-American new-media sex scandal – has deep, almost familial connections to the Papa Bear of modern U.S. sex scandals, former President William Jefferson Clinton.Bill Clinton_14

Clinton officiated at Weiner’s wedding less than a year ago…

He’s not exactly the poster boy for matrimony, but former President Clinton got to try his hand at marriage once more this weekend.

Clinton was chosen to preside over the lavish wedding of Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., to longtime Secretary of State Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

According to a source at the wedding, the former president joked "marrying a politician can be tough because it’s ‘easy to distrust them whatever their religion,’" the New York Daily News reported.

And so it’s not hard to assume that Weiner is going to take some direction from the way President Clinton weathered his own troubles…which doesn’t bode well for any women that Weiner may have been involved with in any way.

The ugly reality is that, time and again, the liberal, Democratic strategy is to not just throw The Woman under the bus, but to then also back the bus up and drive over the body a few times to make sure it stops moving. This misogyny can be committed freely, too, because the liberal, Democratic assassins have the sanctimony of being ‘the party of women.’

Whatever your political persuasion, the most brilliant, searing and honest essay on the Bill Clinton sex scandal was written by the late liberal Marjorie Williams. You owe it to yourself to read the entire thing – seriously, it’s a great, important piece –  but here’s how it opens…

OKAY, class, let’s review: The man in question has been sued for sexual harassment over an episode that allegedly included dropping his trousers to waggle his erect penis at a woman who held a $6.35-an-hour clerical job in the state government over which he presided. Another woman has charged that when she asked him for a job he invited her into his private office, fondled her breasts, and placed her hand on his crotch. A third woman conceded to friends that when she was a 21-year-old intern she began an affair with the man – much older, married, and the head of the organisation whose lowliest employee she was. Actually, it was less an affair than a service contract, in which she allegedly dashed into his office, when summoned, to perform oral sex on him. After their liaison was revealed, he denied everything, leaving her to be portrayed as a tramp and a liar. Or, in his own words, "that woman".

Let us not even mention the former lover who was steered to a state job; or the man’s alleged habit of using law-enforcement officers to solicit sexual partners for him; or his routine use of staff, lawyers, and private investigators to tar the reputation of any woman who tries to call him to account for his actions. Can you find the problems with his behaviour? Take your time: these problems are apparently of an order so subtle as to escape the notice of many of the smartest women in America – the writers, lawyers, activists, office-holders, and academics who call themselves feminists.

When news broke that Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr was investigating whether President Clinton had lied under oath about his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky, or encouraged others to lie, the cacophony that ensued was notable for the absence of one set of voices: the sisterly chorus that backed up Anita Hill seven years ago when her charges of sexual harassment nearly stopped Clarence Thomas’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

With very few exceptions, feminists were either silent or dismissive this time. "If anything, it sounds like she put the moves on him," said Susan Faludi, author of Backlash. Betty Friedan weighed in, but only to huff her outrage that Clinton’s "enemies are attempting to bring him down through allegations about some dalliance with an intern… Whether it’s a fantasy, a set-up or true, I simply don’t care."

Because of the liberal Democratic street cred on women’s issue, Alpha Male Liberal Politicians attract wide-eyed idealistic young ladies. When I worked at NBC, Senator Barack Obama appeared on The Tonight Show. I saw him in the hallway, said hello and shook his hand.  Standing next to me was a girl in her early twenties and her mouth was literally hanging open looking up at Obama. She was quivering. Literally quivering. I’ve seen women around some big celebrities. Rock stars, too. I’ve never in my life seen a sober woman so ready to throw herself at someone. (To his credit, I saw no sign whatsoever that his effected Senator Obama in any way.)

monica

There’s something about the musky combination of power, prestige and claims of doing good for all the people (but especially the poor and disenfranchised with voter registration cards) that is irresistible to certain women. It’s primal. And so they flock, and she’s thrilled to become a political insider by just allowing a politician to get inside her. But it’s a snare. As soon as the going gets tough and the spotlight becomes too hot, the woman usually learn they’ve been used like a tissue.

Modern history has taught that if you’ve going to fuck a powerful Democratic politician, keep some DNA as proof. A blue dress, a love child…something. Because he’s going to deny deny deny and make you out to be a crazed stalker, which you’ll have a tough time denying, really. Professional operatives will quietly regale reporters on background with stories of your wide eyed past and after all, you approached HIM. Benefit of the doubt will go to the man in the suit, especially when his slightly stiff (but brilliant!) wife stands by her candidate. But if you have some DNA that you’re willing to produce when it all gets too crazy, he’ll cop. He’ll have to. We’ve all seen too many episodes of CSI.

Right now, even the yet-unproven accusations about Rep. Weiner don’t rise to the level of a physical affair. Maybe none of these caveats and warnings apply to the Congressman or anyone he knows. For their sake, I sure hope they don’t.

But Weiner’s casual denials, disinterest in investigation and his desire to get away from the distractions to focus on important issues A, B and C (good writing – do things in threes) should give some pause. It’s classic Clinton so far and as long as Democrats have dicks. it’s foolish to ignore that pattern.

– Lee Stranahan

31 Responses to “#Weinergate, Clinton & The Girl Under The Bus”

  1. This is just a reichwingnut distraction to avoid talking about how Ryan’s plan will be genocide against seniors, and how Justice Thomas refuses to recuse himself where he has an obvious conflict of interest in the healthcare debate.

    JD (85b089)

  2. Yeah, just like Breyer must recuse himself from any case involving religion, because his daughter’s an Episcopal priestess, who draws a salary from the Church, which has definite opinions on all matters religious. And Ginsburg must recuse herself from any case involving tertiary education, because her husband was a professor at Georgetown.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  3. Good for Obama to pass on a groupie in public, but then again of course Obama has no interest in anyone other than himself. If it was a mirror, it might have taken a few hours to pry him away.

    Darin H (7b9c6c)

  4. This is just a reichwingnut distraction to avoid talking about how Ryan’s plan will be genocide against seniors, and how Justice Thomas refuses to recuse himself where he has an obvious conflict of interest in the healthcare debate. JD

    Wow JD. Yeah, that’s it. Brilliant deduction. This was a well-planned “distraction” by AB. Yup. Give me a break.

    lovedinthekeys (4e2587)

  5. JD. Kept my eye on the other hand as you pulled the card from your sleeve. Well done, my good sir. You truly are a magician. For the children.

    dfbaskwill (ca54bb)

  6. He doesn’t get your sarcasm, JD, he’s new.

    ian cormac (72470d)

  7. Sorry JD. I use the / mark to denote sarcasm and missed yours! Mea culpa. This is just frustrating beyond belief. To be honest, I am still a bit annoyed at the vile crap that spewed at me over the weekend by so called “caring” and “inclusive” people on the left. Sorry again.

    lovedinthekeys (4e2587)

  8. I’m sorry Lee, but “ambitious politician on the way up”? “Alpha Male Liberal”? By whose calculation?

    Alpha Males don’t need to send a picture of their Johnson to potential prospects.
    If Weiner’s “male” were an alpha he wouldn’t be using a camera to stroke his insecurities.

    papertiger (e55ba0)

  9. “Modern history has taught that if you’ve going to f*ck a powerful Democratic politician, keep some DNA as proof.”

    And if you f*ck a republican?

    “Professional operatives will quietly regale reporters on background with stories of your wide eyed past and after all, you approached HIM. ”

    Bloggers will also be harassing any women they think might be involved.

    sabine (c5dc71)

  10. That required no real skill, gentlemen, it was a paraphrase of the Weinerhole’s spokesnozzle statement.

    Sabine is exactly the leftist Lee was talking about.

    JD (29e1cd)

  11. My bad. For the adults!

    dfbaskwill (ca54bb)

  12. “…if you f*ck a republican?”

    Wrong question.

    If you allege or even hint that a Republican made a sexual move the media will attempt to destroy him or her.

    Remember the media actually publishing multiple stories about Sarah Palin and her supposed fake pregnancy. On what planet does a person like Sullivan still work for a “credible” journal?

    Fred Z (38038c)

  13. “If you allege or even hint that a Republican made a sexual move the media will attempt to destroy him or her. ”

    It was Kissinger that said power is an aphrodisiac. Then he bombed Cambodia.

    sabine (378250)

  14. “Sabine” should be familiar to everyone here.

    JD (8e5c0f)

  15. ______________________________________

    With very few exceptions, feminists were either silent or dismissive this time.

    That’s why when dealing with people, before one thinks of any other characteristic of an individual (or group) that is being observed, he or she should always keep in mind the ideological biases of the person in question. IOW, feminists are leftists as much as, if not more than, they’re feminists. So, should the need arise (as it did with Clinton and Lewinsky, Wiley, Broddrick, etc), they’ll sacrifice their womanhood in order to protect liberal politicians and policies.

    The same thing applies to the left-leaning mindset that is rampant in communities associated with race (ie, blacks and, say, Obama versus Herman Cain), religion/ethnicity (ie, Jews and, say, “Islamphobia” versus Israel), and sexuality (ie, homosexuals and, say, bawdy Gay Day Parades versus disquiet expressed by “traditionalists”).

    BTW, some of the mindless liberalism pervasive in certain communities is one reason they’re stereotyped as being noticeable triggers of the bigotry of stereotypical ultra-right people. Pathetic and contemptible, from one end to the other.

    Mark (3e3a7c)

  16. the yet-unproven accusations about Rep. Weiner

    I don’t understand this “yet-unproven” bit. Weiner sent a dirty picture through his Twitter account to 45,000 followers. He has never personally denied it. Rather, a number of people with no first-hand knowledge of the incident have mumbled about a “hacking” (of Facebook) but no evidence of that has ever been presented, and probably never will.

    So Weiner sent the picture. There are some “yet-unproven,” third-party allegations of hacking, but the burden to prove that is on Weiner. As it stands, there’s no serious factual dispute about what happened.

    Northeast Elizabeth (c780a0)

  17. Badge licking authoritarian racists! Denounced, for the chirren.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  18. Has Twitter suspended the verified account that was hacked yet? Has the FBI been contacted abut the security breach where a sitting US Congresscritter had his online social media hacked?

    JD (8e5c0f)

  19. On the “changing history” side of his presidency, Clinton taught us that oral sex is not sex.

    I did not know that and have been wondering what it is ever since.

    I have found it has not made the begging go any smoother.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  20. A ha! You insist on denying revolutionary truth, which is to advance the cause – versus bourgeoisie truth, which is obsessed with “facts”. Those who challenge Weiner or Clinton come perilously close to being labeled a counter-revolutionary!

    Californio (baf76b)

  21. B-but this is just a distraction because you know Clarence Thomas has to recuse himself and you GOPers are playing games with the debt.

    /Flailing Wiener

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  22. Good on the usual media deciders for virtually ignoring this little nugget. There was so much to report over the holiday weekend. Why, BHO went to Arlington! He may or may not have gone anywhere else, though.

    They also had to show respect to our heroes. There is only so much a 22-minute show can do. Of course, there had to be extra time for those who expressed outrage over Sarah Palin, a Blue Star Mother, riding on the back of a Hog in support of troops.

    Ed from SFV (52d4be)

  23. Well said, Lee.

    One of the reasons, IMHO, lefties go to the Dark Side is this obvious hypocrisy.

    Patricia (b717c7)

  24. Weiner sent a dirty picture through his Twitter account to 45,000 followers. He has never personally denied it

    Is NE Liz right? I can’t find Weiner actually directly denying this either. That’s interesting.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  25. I can’t find Weiner actually directly denying this either.

    He hasn’t. I’ve looked everywhere. The strongest statement by anyone was by a spokesman, not Weiner, who said his account was “obviously hacked.” But even if that were true, it’s not a denial that Weiner deliberately sent the picture at a time when the account was not hacked.

    The most Weiner has said is “FB [Facebook] hacked.” Not Twitter, Facebook. He didn’t say when it was hacked, although his staff claimed he received an e-mail from Facebook a week ago warning of some possible problem. But that’s all a smokescreen, because the question isn’t whether any of his accounts were ever hacked, or threatening with hacking, it’s whether he deliberately sent the picture to the woman at a time he was in full control of his Twitter account. He was and he did.

    A hacker breaking into the account of a Congressman with top security clearance and using it to cyber-rape a woman Weiner didn’t know would be a serious crime. Weiner would have called the FBI in one second and held a press conference to announce the arrests of the right-wing conspirators. Instead, he’s all lawyered up and exploring options on how to deal with what he is now calling a “prank” rather than a hack.

    So busted.

    Northeast Elizabeth (c780a0)

  26. They say Cellphones and DDT cause cancer.

    Thanks to these idiots kids in africa are dying of Malaria.

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  27. But that’s all a smokescreen, because the question isn’t whether any of his accounts were ever hacked, or threatening with hacking, it’s whether he deliberately sent the picture to the woman at a time he was in full control of his Twitter account.

    You’re right.

    And not that the other aspects don’t also show this, but the way he’s avoiding the denial is just a too ridiculous not to notice.

    A lot of lefties are so sure Weiner is about to sue Breitbart. They are rubbing their hands together with glee. Yet they aren’t frustrated Weiner isn’t asking twitter to investigate who sent the pic, or yfrog to investigate who uploaded it. They have to realize settling that this would be easy for Weiner to do.

    So they know they are full of it.

    Much like Clinton’s worst defenders who called Lewinsky a deranged stalker while ignoring the many other harassment and assault claimants coming forward.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  28. Now to be on topic Anthony Weiner is a dumbkopf.

    DohBiden (15aa57)

  29. Another feminist that Marjorie Williams could have included: Gloria Steinem, who wrote an op-ed titled “Feminists and the Clinton Question” for the New York Times (bold mine):

    For the sake of argument here, I’m also believing all the women, at least until we know more. I noticed that CNN polls taken right after Ms. Willey’s interview on “60 Minutes” showed that more Americans believed her than President Clinton.

    Nonetheless, the President’s approval ratings have remained high. Why? The truth is that even if the allegations are true, the President is not guilty of sexual harassment. He is accused of having made a gross, dumb and reckless pass at a supporter during a low point in her life. She pushed him away, she said, and it never happened again. In other words, President Clinton took “no” for an answer.

    In her original story, Paula Jones essentially said the same thing. She went to then-Governor Clinton’s hotel room, where she said he asked her to perform oral sex and even dropped his trousers. She refused, and even she claims that he said something like, “Well, I don’t want to make you do anything you don’t want to do.”

    Her lawyers now allege that as a result of the incident Ms. Jones described, she was slighted in her job as a state clerical employee and even suffered long-lasting psychological damage. But there appears to be little evidence to support those accusations. As with the allegations in Ms. Willey’s case, Mr. Clinton seems to have made a clumsy sexual pass, then accepted rejection.

    This became known as the “one free grope” editorial. I remember it well, because it was the first time I posted anything in a web forum under the name “L.N. Smithee.” It was published in the Times on Sunday, March 22, 1998. But don’t bother going to NYTimes.com to find it. It’s been scrubbed. But you will find it here, among other places.

    L.N. Smithee (865874)

  30. The ugly reality is that, time and again, the liberal, Democratic strategy is to not just throw The Woman under the bus, but to then also back the bus up and drive over the body a few times to make sure it stops moving. This misogyny can be committed freely, too, because the liberal, Democratic assassins have the sanctimony of being ‘the party of women.’

    Genette, pay attention. You have already been lumped in with Wiener’s cybersex playmates. This situation has branded your reputation and it will follow you.

    bmertz (d77c52)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3394 secs.