<p>Did you see the spin the wheel game on Colbert last night?</p>
<p>Vulgar and hilarious!</p>
<p>Nice try, cardinal fang, but you know where you can go to argue such points and it ain’t here! I didn’t make any such claims and I don’t stand by any of the issues you’re talking about, I merely said, " Not giving specific details of why I think that, as I don’t want to irritate and annoy too much, just my personal quickie impression." I’ll give you credit for trying to argue a point I never claimed in the first place, though.</p>
<p>Here is the good part: it looks like there was nothing inappropriate in the message exchange with the 17 yr old. The bad part is that the creep gets a pass out of jail.
[Anthony</a> Weiner admits he sent messages to teenage girl but denies wrongdoing - Yahoo! News](<a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110610/ts_yblog_theticket/anthony-weiner-admits-he-sent-messages-to-teenage-girl-but-denies-wrongdoing]Anthony”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110610/ts_yblog_theticket/anthony-weiner-admits-he-sent-messages-to-teenage-girl-but-denies-wrongdoing)</p>
<p>If I were his wife, I’d probably, maybe, remotely possibly forgive him this cybersex with adult women mess, but if there were any minors involved in it, I’d discard him like a bag of garbage in a flash.</p>
<p>There’s an old ditty:</p>
<p>“Say it with flowers,
Say it with drink,
But always be careful
Not to say it with ink.”</p>
<p>I guess some people haven’t yet figured out that “ink” now includes email, chat rooms, IM, forums (like this one), facebook, texting, and for gosh sakes, Twitter.</p>
<p>The only one saying there was nothing inappropriate about the communication with the 17 yo is Weiner, and he has been full of lies. It remains to be seen whether it was inappropriate or not. It will be interesting to see what the exchange was and decide for ourselves on that matter. And a politician who texts naked pictures to his fans ought not to be texting 17 year olds. Period.</p>
<p>Well said, sunnyflorida!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not that I want to defend Weiner, but the article linked in post 403 depicts that the girl and her family, as well as investigators, did not find inappropriate or illegal types of messages in their online exchange:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>AGREED!!!</p>
<p>Here is one exerpt from Weiner’s contact with 17 yr old…</p>
<p>But the girl and Weiner did exchange a handful of private direct messages, and in one he described himself as a superhero and wrote: “I came back strong. Large. Tights and cape. …”</p>
<p>Now, on face value, without any other text to provide more insight,this can be somewhat harmless…BUT, knowing how Weiner has ‘played along’ with others, i would not be surprised if this was a ‘phishing’ type text,waitong to see if he got a reply in which he could take the converstaion in another direction…follow me here,this is what i think could have happened</p>
<p>AW-’ i came back strong.Large…Tights and a cape…</p>
<p>Poster- strong and large in tights? that must be a great picture</p>
<p>Aw- better then you can imagine</p>
<p>Etc, etc…the phrasing he uses is peculiar…particularly the word large,and how it is setoff from the other phrases…</p>
<p>Is guy needs to go…and if this were his only message,i would never read this much into it,but his reputation precedes him</p>
<p>He should not have been talking to a 17 year old. That exchange has some innuendo but nothing they can really make a case over. But you are right that since he did have exchanges with older women of a sexual nature online, he has a tendency to be looking for that kind of titillating conversation. It wasn’t like they were chatting politics.</p>
<p>^^^very true^^^ nothing to prosecute over…not sure how he would evn know if she were a minor,how anyone would know who is or is not a minor…still i fully believe he was trying to elicit a response from his message,maybe didn’t get one…and moved on</p>
<p>"But the girl and Weiner did exchange a handful of private direct messages, and in one he described himself as a superhero and wrote: “I came back strong. Large. Tights and cape. …”</p>
<p>Even if there was no sexual innuendo…wow. What an egotistical freak show this guy is. Would any of us here, male or female, say those words unless it was a complete joke? I would take an educated guess that many of us have actually done heroic things, saved others lives, put ourselves at serious risk and been actual superheros in our own universe. But is there any way you would ever describe yourself like that? What a moron, still looking for people to pat him on the back. Which is where I think his true problem lies, an overly grandiose view of self, needing constant idolization. He should have been a rock star.</p>
<p>Make your own determination. ME: He was careful. But, clearly, given the author, there were sexual overtones there.</p>
<p>I agree with sunnyflorida. This message seems to me a feeler - depending on how the female responded, the exchange could have quickly deteriorated. The 17-yo was too innocent to pick up on this. </p>
<p>At least he seems not to have subjected random women to obscene messages, without an indication that they were interested.</p>
<p>I agree that the exchange had sexual innuendo. I just meant that the investigators didn’t find that exchange with a minor to involve any criminal activity. But yes, it was a feeler.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I had seen no indication that the college student to whom he tweeted the bulging underwear photo had indicated she was interested in anything like that. And he did know the 17-year-old was a minor since it was via her high school class that she first had contact with him. I hope he did not send anything inappropriate to the 17-year-old, but what struck me was knowing that he also sent “superhero, cape, tights”-related texts to the blackjack dealer in Las Vegas, and his texts to her (and hers to him) certainly became very vulgar.</p>
<p>Agree with sunnyflorida and everyone else: the egotistic narcissist was probably testing the waters. Even though there was nothing criminal in the tweets to the 17 yr old, the whole conversation was creepy and inapropriate. There is no way on the planet I would trust my kid to a guy like him. I hope his wife does not hire him for the babysittig job.</p>
<p>He likely went fishing with that superhero text to see what he would catch with multiple women. Some took the bait, some not.</p>
<p>I think he falls into the category of “Gross lack of judgment” with an emphasis on the “gross”. In his field, that of a politician, it is important. When does he come up for re-election anyways? It might be cheaper to let him stay in there, unless his constituents want him out. I wouldn’t want someone like him representing my area. His effectiveness is across the negative line, but otherwise, who wants to spend the money to pry him out?</p>
<p>New York is loosing two congressman based on the 2010 census. My guess is that they will let him stay, and just redistrict him out. Not just my guess, either <a href=“http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/weiners-seat-could-be-scrambled-in-redistricting/[/url]”>http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/08/weiners-seat-could-be-scrambled-in-redistricting/</a></p>
<p>I’m sorry, but if my 17 year old daughter was texting back and forth with a 46 year old Congressman for no apparent reason other than because he wants to, I’d be showing up for a face to face with that dude. </p>
<p>This is just not appropriate, no matter how legal it is. He obviously lacks the ability to tell the difference between “legal” and “a good idea”, which makes him an odd choice to be given the responsibility of representing other people.</p>