Look at Weiner. Seriously, why didn't their family drop the first "e" in the name?

Because then he what be a W(h)iner??

People are more interested in scandal than actually getting something accomplished! And, as they say, sex sells.

Oak, it's so funny you wrote this today, I do agree with you, they carry it way too far, I believe the broadcasters now use the media as a very self serving tool and the politicians too. I use to record both the Today show and GMA to catch up on the news each day and got so tired of them using the platform for their own personal agendas I stopped watching. They ALWAYS have to have someone to throw under the bus, don't they?

Another thing I find to be so terrible is we no longer have unbiased news. The media has gotten so terrible about pushing their own agendas and there are only a handful of reporters who refuse to do that like Brian Williams for example. Yesterday for the first time in months, I flipped on GMA to get a quick glimpse at current issues. George Stephanopolous was interviewing some congress woman who had just announced she was running for the Presidency at a Republican debate. She wanted to talk about her announcement and the issues she feels are important such as the debt and jobs, and George kept pushing for her stance on gay marriage. Every time she'd answer, he'd twist her words and push some more. His whole agenda was to put her in a bad light. I didn't care what her position on Gay marriage was, or if it was even different from my own, what really irked me is she was not given the same equal voice that other politicians the station favors are given. After the interview, he turned to Robyn and he gave her a snide look like, "we got her didn't we?" and she smirked back. Robyn and Sam are both gay and I respect that they would have an interest regarding this issue, but I felt it was so inappropriate the way the interview was handled. It was all about their agenda and nothing more.

Clinton was the President, and he slept with a staff member in the Oval office and lied about it at first, if I remember the facts well;
so I think his gaffe was a valid one to be made public and beaten to death.
He recovered and life went on.

As for others, you're right Oakley, we hear way too much about it but at the same time, these people place themselves in the public eye and are only too happy to be there so it stands to reason that those scandals make the news.

We also don't watch the news per se, we read on the internet to keep abreast of things and that's enough.

"Another thing I find to be so terrible is we no longer have unbiased news."

VERY true Lukki -- and something that concerns me greatly. But it seems people want to read/hear only what they already believe to be true. They don't *want* to hear someone tell them that their beliefs are wrong, so the most "saleable" news is 'news' that reinforces a particular point of view - whichever end of the political spectrum people fall on...

But getting back to the original question -- Yeah, I wish the press would shorten the news cycle of the disaster-de-jour.

OMG Terriks!! I love your response, so hilarious! LOL
He is a whiner though! Ha!

Sweeby, thanks, yes, I think you have a point. I feel old saying this but I miss the old fashioned way of reporting. When it was just the facts. It just seems like the media no longer reports facts instead they report perspective.

oakley

Couldn't have said this better. My thoughts exactly. Why do we need to know this. I never even heard of him before this.

You kind of wonder if having to endure all those weiner jokes growing up shaped him into the kind of brash guy that he is.

I had never heard of him before either but when I first heard about it and saw how he went on the defensive saying he was going to get a lawyer and fight the accusations, I thought, well good for him. I liked that he was going to fight back against the bullies, hackers or whatever. Then when I heard it was all a lie, that instead of fessing up, he was accusing innocent people, that he is also a newlywed and expecting father, I thought wow, what a creep. Truth be told, he probably deserves whatever he has coming to him.
I don't feel much empathy just because his last name is what it is. After all, even as an adult and someone working in a public arena, he chose to keep the name.

I really feel for the wives in these situations. Although I think Hilary and Maria are "tough cookies", it must be extra painful for it to be so public. I don't know anything about Weiner's wife. I agree that he's a creep!

Rep. Weiner did not have an affair. He sent photo texts tweets, FB messages with attachments. While I think anything untoward done behind the back of your spouse is totally wrong, he didn't actually ever meet these women face-to-face. He hid behind social media outlets.

Anthony Weiner got himself into a load of trouble when he went at the reporter from ABC (can't think of his name at the moment). Happened as soon as this story broke. During the interview with this particular ABC journalist, he was accusatory toward the media stating that the whole story is being blown out of proportion when he was "hacked". He was the victim. Same thing when interviewed by Luke Russert of MSNBC. A good reporter will keep asking the same question over and over until the interviewee answers. Weiner's answer was that he could not deny with "certitude" that the pics sexted were not of him. Had he not gone to so much trouble to raise further flags by running his mouth more than he should have, perhaps this would have not become what it has.

I don't see how using the name Winer rather than Weiner would have given this whole story a different outcome.

Rep. Anthony Weiner is a known media hog. Thrives on the attention. He constantly behaves dramatically on the floor of the house which does attract attention.

Sadly, I do believe Anthony Weiner was a good representative for his district. However, his self destructive behavior and continued charges that his Twitter account had been hacked, lead to more questions, more investigation.

Yes, in a perfect world these types of issues would remain between the couple. However, I am not positive, but I believe there is now an investigation into Rep. Weiner's use of governmental equipment to put out his Twitter, FB and sexts. In fact, I believe one of the more inflammatory pictures was taken in the Congressional Gym. Apparently, only members have the privilege of using this facility. He screwed up big time. More importantly IMHO, his lovely, newly pregnant wife has to deal with the fallout from his actions.

Some very good points made in the previous responses. The thing that irritates me the most, and it seems to be with the female republican candidates, is that they never answer a question posed. They seem to have a script that they repeat over and over regardless of the fact that it has nothing at all to do with the question posed.

If you want news, you need to watch BBC America, and other SERIOUS news outlets, who report actual news. They do not report this silly stuff. Check out BBC, Korean or Aljazera. They are doing news-worthy stories and are NOT talking about sexts by a U.S. Congressman. What we have here in the US is slanted in one of two directions depending on what channel you watch. There may be a total of 5 minutes of actual news in a 30-60 minute air time.

This country is in serious trouble, and it is very scary.

"This country is in serious trouble, and it is very scary."

I agree completely. My DH is a Swedish citizen and is reluctant to get his citizenship here because he says one day we may need it.

work, I totally agree with your last two paragraphs. We have been woefully shortchanged for the past three decades, and sadly many don't seem to notice or care. Thankfully, the internet provides access to thoughtful international journalism and to a lesser degree so do cable and satellite tv.

I know I now have to filter the bias in our media, but it infuriates me that substantive coverage is practically non-existent and instead we're fed either salacious nonsense, inaccurate info or commerce driven pap packaged as news. We've become a celebrity obsessed, ill educated nation.

I'm less interested in someone else's infidelity as it really is not my business. What is my business is whether these elected officials have a clue that we have faltered gravely and now score behind many of the developing nations on quality of life issues, and whether they can focus in a non-partisan manner on moving this country in a better direction.

While I agree that the media runs a story into the ground, if I were a constituent of Weiner's, I would want to know about this. Especially if he was doing this on work time or in the workplace. If I'm not mistaken, and I haven't followed the story well, but I believe there are questions that at least one of the women is underage? That is just wrong. I know it is perhaps wishful thinking/hoping that one we elect to office would be of moral character, but he is an embarrassment to his office, his wife, and the people who voted for him. He lied about what he did and tried to put it off on someone else. It is also rumored that he was in line as the next mayor - so yes, I think the public (at least there in his area - not national) has a right to know. His wife works for Secretary Clinton, has for years. She seems a class act and I hope this does not hurt her career. At least she has an understanding boss!

I agree with whoever mentioned that Clinton's acts should have been made public. What he did was an embarrassment to our country, to the american people.

And lastly, I do believe anyone can make a mistake. It's what you do after the mistake that shows what you are made of. Both Weiner and Clinton could have told the truth and taken responsiblity for their actions. To lie about it, IMHO, makes it worse and I do not have any respect for someone in that situation.

tina

I cut Weiner a bit of slack in the beginning when he went on the defensive because he was pretty much caught off guard and he hadn't really had time to think about it.

Apparently when he sent the pictures out, he accidentally hit the wrong key or something, and it went public instead of to the individuals. lol.

What gets me is, why did he have to resign and not Clinton? Clinton had "sex" in the Oval Office for pete's sake, Weiner just sent dirty pictures. Both gross, but I find it appalling that he had to quit and not Clinton.

Anyway, HAD the media backed off the first week, he probably would have learned a hard lesson, and been able to keep his job. Supposedly his district likes him and wanted him to stay in office.

Let the upcoming elections decide his fate, not the holier than thou stone throwers burners at the stake.

Everyone lies ... why should politicians be any different? From the time we're young children our first instinct when confronted with something we did wrong is to lie.

Clinton joined a long list of presidents who dallied while in office. It was nothing new.

What sickens me are hypocrites like David Vitter who preach "family values" while sleeping with prostitutes. And worse continue to serve and even get re-elected.

There is a valid concern for integrity, ethics and discernment as standards which we all should uphold.

Unfortunately, long before Ensign, Vitter, Clinton, Weiner, or the any other au courant politico's indiscretion, there have always been in this country and elsewhere philanderers. It is naive to think that there hasn't, and that our founding fathers were any different than those who have held power in other cultures and past times. It's the nature of the (powerful) beast, perhaps.

Again, IMO, their inability to confine their libido to the marital bed is not nearly as significant as their ability to perform as effective civil servants and put the good of the country before any partisan or personal gain.

There used to be a higher journalistic standard, upheld as the fifth column, before our greed driven media took control (sanctioned by our government's turning a blind eye toward monopolies in recent Republican administrations) which better served this country. Sadly, those ideals have long slid.

natal, I missed your post while writing mine. Yeah, hypocrites are the worst.

I think the private lives of our elected officials need to be above reproach. Suppose the information on Clinton and Weiner was not leaked to the press, but was used for blackmail to influence their votes on important issues for our country. Only with their backs against the wall did either of these two admit to any wrong doing. Would either of them had had the moral fiber to to stand up to blackmail and let the truth be told. I doubt it. I don't care what party they belong to, but if elected officials are going to engage in behavior that could possibly jeopardize national security, they need to go.

For those who didn't watch this fiasco unfold on television, perhaps that was necessary, so as to get the full effect of Weiner's lies and false accusations. One thing you cannot do is lie to the media - which after all is expected to report the truth to the nation - and expect them not to come after you when the truth is revealed. Weiner called a CNN producer a j*ck*ss to his face. Did anyone expect CNN to then back off the story? He invited a series of anchormen from all the big networks to his office individually and lied to each of them, one after the other, forcefully. And, just as bad, blamed someone else! He talked to just about everyone except the Food Channel's Bobby Flay. Were those guys going to lay off afterwards? Don't think so. Worst of all, he lied to Nancy Pelosi - someone whom one does not deceive. Already not popular with his own party, that was IMO the last straw. Much of the decision by a political party as to who stays and who goes has to do with how well-liked the person and what the party is hearing from its constituents. Look at Charlie Rangel. Up to his ears in corruption, but he is liked on both sides of the aisle, so he gets to stay. Anthony Weiner - not so much.

About Clinton. I am not a Bill or Hillary hater; in fact I rather like Hillary. I've followed the career of Weiner's wife, Huma Abedin, who is Hill's body woman and most important aide, with interest over the years. She's a fascinating woman, born to Pakistani parents and raised in Saudi Arabia. She is highly intelligent and unusually talented. Both Clintons adore her and regard her almost as a daughter.

Anyway, back to Bill. When he had his affair with Monica, it was not a private matter. He broke every federal sexual harassment regulation in the book. I am a retired federal employee and DH still works for the government. Between us we've been, over the years, to literally dozens of fed. employee workshops about sexual harassment. Had Clinton been anything but president, IOW an employee of even slightly lower rank, he would have been fired for what he did. The problem is that there was no one higher than he to fire him. Harassment, according to federal standards, is not about what is done, or who is married, or about consent. It's about the power ratio between the two people and the problem of morale if the affair becomes known. Clinton was the most powerful person in the world and Monica was a lowly intern - the power gap could not have been greater. The highest-ranking federal employee of all, he was expected to be above reproach in his behavior, with all the rest of us sitting through those interminable workshops which claimed that saying "You look nice today" could be an insult and was therefore forbidden. I remember the looks on the faces of people around me as we sat through those workshops (which, BTW, were mandatory; if you didn't attend, your pay could be docked) after Monica. The vast majority of federal employees are Democrats, but there was considerable resentment in those rooms. If someone would ask "What about the President?", the workshop leader would reply "We're not going to talk about him" and that was that. Everyone understood for whom the rules applied. Had Clinton's story been about an affair with a family friend, it could well have gone unmentioned, as other presidential affairs have. E.g. FDR. His ongoing affair with Lucy Mercer Rutherford was well-known. People knew when he went out driving with her and knew when she came to the White House. But since people loved them both, and there was no law-breaking, no one said or wrote a thing. Then a wretched cousin of FDR's told Eleanor immediately after Franklin died, thereby breaking what was left of Eleanor's heart, and giving her permanent sadness for the rest of her life. Sorry - didn't mean to wander!

At this moment in time, Weiner is headline news on the Today Show because he and is wife went to the store together, and now one of "the women" is on the show getting ready to talk about it. Apparently she had an "intimate relationship" with him.

What type of woman goes on TV talking about this?

And why do these women run to Gloria Alred anyway? Why do they need an attorney?

Anyway, I agree with all of you all. And if he'd had kept his trap shut to begin with, we wouldn't be hearing about it today. Oh, who am I kidding?

I want to know about the economy, stupid! lol

The thing about sexual harrassment is that someone has to feel harrassed. The "harrassee" makes a complaint about the alleged harrasser.

Monica never did any such thing. In fact, from what I recollect about the affair, she was the instigator, showing Clinton her thong.

The affair was made public when Monica's "friend" Linda Tripp recorded their phone conversations, and then sent the recordings to Ken Starr.

And then began the expenditure of over 39 million dollars of public tax money to investigate and attempt to impeach Clinton. If Monica had made the complaint, and had felt she had been harrassed, it would have been a whole different story. But she didn't, and so it was another abuse of public funds to fuel a Republican lynch mob, headed by some who had committed the same "offense" as it turns out, that Clinton was being accused of.

Lucy Mercer was employed as a secretary by Eleanor when the affair began. She was lucky not to have a "friend" like Linda Tripp. FDR had plenty of enemies who would have loved to use the knowlege against him.

To get back to the subject at hand, I agree that our news in this country isn't news. DH and I often listen to one of the major channel TV news with dinner, and then switch to the BBC. The difference in what is covered and the depth with which it is covered is immense. I also listen to NPR which I gives the best of the US news coverage.

it must have been 'hail' growing up with the name weiner!!

i hate how we are all becoming desensitized to all the sexual, etc.,etc. indiscretions of celebrities, political figures, athletes, etc.
rep. weiner did not have an affair, just as clinton did not have intercourse...semantics!

we live in such a greedy and gossipy society---the woman who goes on tv talking about that is one who either smells easy $$ or wants some celebrity herself! ugh! it's just such a shame that the media has such a willing audience!! if 'the people' didn't want to buy/watch all the indiscretion/trash, i don't think it would be so abundant! i just think of all the trash on regular tv!!! there are people watching it!!! yuck!
not so surprising that the media runs with real live stories!

what AMAZES me is that some of the rich and powerful keep making such stupid choices!!!!!!!!!!!

Tina, just to clarify, yes he sent messages to an underage person on Twitter, but from what I've read, it was before all this scandal, the tweets were not offensive, just normal conversation about government (I think) and the only reason it was being investigated was to ensure it was on the up and up and no crime had been committed with an under age person.

To me, people who cheat on their spouse have a serious self serving character flaw. Thinking it's okay to then lie about it and even point a finger at someone else is another serious flaw.

I believe people who choose a career serving the public, should be held to a higher standard. They make the choice to live a life serving the public and being held accountable for bad decisions is part of the package. If they are representing the public, forming our laws and governing our communities, why shouldn't they be? Even though I hate the way the media runs a story into the ground, to some extent, I'm still interested in how our government officials conduct their lives. I have a very difficult time trusting or believing in someone who has let the people they "supposedly" care about the most down. If you can't be honest and loyal to your own spouse how in the heck can you be honest and loyal to your constituents?

I'm still amazed at how Clinton survived and has prospered after his affair with Monica. I've always felt that after it was all said and done, he really tried to make it up to Hilary. At least he's doing good and positive things. It seems a lot of people felt that the whole investigation went too far, but he is another one I had a hard time trusting after I saw what he did to his wife.

John Edwards is another creep who's affair has been widely publicized. I'm so glad he's being held accountable for anything he did that was illegal, being a lawyer he claims it was all legit, but he has shown no real remorse for what he's put his family and the people working for him through. His late wife may have been a lot of things but his indiscretion's and subsequent lies afterwards are a real indicator who he really is. I wouldn't want someone like him in office.

Barb5, all good points! I listen to NPR/BBC almost every day too.

The media did aggressively pursue the Weiner case, but why didn't Mr. W seize the opportunity to come clean when he had the chance? Being rude and dishonest when talking to reporters only further tainted his character.

He was given a chance, imo, to show the world that while quite human, imperfect and fallible, he would commit himself to righting his wrongs. He would emerge a better person after admitting his transgressions and dedicate himself to addressing his "addictions."

I don't expect anyone to be perfect. How someone handles their imperfections speaks more to their character than their weak points do. Nothing is more appealing, respectable, or admirable to me than a person who can take responsibility for their poor judgement, errors, and misteps.

Why can't men in leadership roles get that?

I'd rather the MSM stop ignoring the wrongdoing of politicians they like. Charles Rangel was/is as corrupt an old grifter as is possible, and got a free ride for years. Weiner's poor judgement and semi-accomplished lying about his actions were also ignored--this is what NY taxpayers want in an elected official?
Don't want your junk (literally and figuratively) on the front page of the paper? Don't mess up.

Another public servant here, and I must say that we (public employees in Oregon) are expected to act in the most highly professional capacity at all times. Our use of government equipment is monitored, especially electronic media; we're accountable for all our actions; and we face disciplinary action if we don't toe the line.

I get very angry when a public official can act like an ass and get away with it...but if I send out a joke email, even something as innocuous as 'Why did the chicken cross the road', I can be fired!! For this reason, I side with the media.

When you take that oath to serve the public, you are putting your every action out in the public eye. You are REPRESENTING your constituents, and you are expected to act with decorum and do our bidding. Not take pictures of your privates and send them out to cyberspace or impregnate the maid and lie about it for over a decade.

Frankly, it's no wonder our society has decayed so much, if our leaders can 'get away with it' why shouldn't the rest of us?

Shheeesh! I sound like a fogey!

Public service demands a public trust, and when one behaves dishonorably and exhibits extremely poor judgment in the course of public duty, that trust is destroyed. It was unbridled arrogance and sheer stupidity that brought Weiner to where he is now. Good riddance.

Barb5 - I am well aware of what the federal guidelines are; I had to read them in mandatory workshop after workshop. Workshop leaders (for whom I felt sorry, because everyone hated those sessions), however, consistently embellished them, making it crystal clear that if you messed with someone not of exactly equal rank, although consenting, you would be in trouble. A couple of male teachers were placed on leave for overstepping the boundaries. One, however, was eventually reinstated, and married the girl student whom he'd been romancing. That had been a genuine love affair and his colleagues supported him.

Pesky - Glad you wrote about your own experiences as a public servant. You know what I'm talking about. DH is painfully careful about what he emails to his colleagues; you are absolutely right about "the chicken crossing the road" kind of thing. BTW, one of our sons is also a public employee in Oregon, loves the job, loves the state. He had a few ripe comments about Rep. Weiner, along the lines of "wow, if I did that..."

Public service demands a public trust, and when one behaves dishonorably and exhibits extremely poor judgment in the course of public duty, that trust is destroyed.

Well said, and sums it up precisely.

The scenario I describe above, the vision that I put forward that would be redeeming, is contingent upon one thing: remorse. A sincere and authentic regret for one's actions, coupled with a real desire to apologize and make significant changes in one's life, is key.

I don't think that any remorse was evident in Mr. W's response, but I think there are people for whom "being found out" very much serves as a wake up call, a turning point, a catalyst for transformation.

Without true remorse though, a trip to rehab and the requisite public apology is a staged event intended to bolster an image. No real change ensues.

When I asked why men in leadership don't get the transformative power of accountability, I think I just answered my own question. Because if they don't really regret the acts they were involved in,but merely regret getting caught, there is absolutely no potential for a meaningful turnaround.

Someone who wakes up and turns a corner is a hero in my eyes. We don't see that happen often in the public-service arena.

But Stinky, we don't really know how Weiner feels, he could be very remorseful in private but can't show it when he has 50 cameras in his face.

Here's another story regarding the media beating up on people. I hardly ever watch 48 Hours (it could have been Dateline NBC), but I got hooked on a story they were telling last night.

A young lady was murdered years ago in Las Vegas. She was a businesswoman, not a dancer. They focussed the entire show on her ex-boyfriend as maybe being the killer. All during the show I thought he was the culprit since they showcased him so much. Nope. Not one piece of evidence pointed towards this guy. He was never arrested.

Now his life is probably ruined. He may be guilty, I don't know.

What I'm hoping is he signed a clearance for them to use him in the story. If not, I am livid.

Speaking of crimes, I don't watch any type of crime show unless it's a movie. What is the public's fascination with crime?

And have you seen the public RUN to get seats for the Casey Anthony trial? Laughing all the way?

It reminds me of Old England where the public stood around the person getting their heads chopped off and cheering! lol

I just read that Weiner will get a $1.2 million pension. Now that's where I want our tax money to go!

Oakley, I think a genuinely remorseful person behaves with humility. Someone who sees the error of his ways and truly wants to turn over a new leaf doesn't keep lying or doing image/damage control. That's a contradiction in terms. Part of remorse and making amends is admitting the futility of the path one has been on. It's saying, "I've been a jerk, but don't give up on me...I want to get help for this."

I'm not being critical of him. He's just not in that sort of place, imo. That is very sad for both him and his wife. I just don't think the necessary maturity is there yet.

He strikes me as very narcissitic. The internet addiction fed his need to feel powerful. That need seems to be more important than almost anything else to him.

Hopefully, at some point, he will do some growing up and change. Sadly though, he may not. This personality type is resistant to change and unresponsive to therapy from what I've seen and read. But one can always hope, and I do always hope that every person becomes the person they were created to be, and is able to use their gifts and talents for the greater good.

Sable, yes I think your workshop leaders were over-zealous. Federal guidelines are quite explicit in defining sexual harrassment as UNWELCOME sexual behavior on the part of one party towards another.

I have linked the guidelines below.

Here are the relevant definitions:

Title VII does not proscribe all conduct of a sexual nature in the workplace. Thus it is crucial to clearly define sexual harassment: only unwelcome sexual conduct that is a term or condition of employment constitutes a violation. 29 C.F.R. � 1604.11(a). The EEOC's Guidelines define two types of sexual harassment: "quid pro quo" and "hostile environment." The Guidelines provide that "unwelcome" sexual conduct constitutes sexual harassment when "submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment," 29 C.F.R � 1604.11 (a) (1). "Quid pro quo harassment" occurs when "submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual," 29 C.F.R � 1604.11(a)(2).1 29 C.F.R. � 1604.11(a)(3).2 The Supreme Court's decision in Vinson established that both types of sexual harassment are actionable under section 703 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e-2(a), as forms of sex discrimination.

A. Determining Whether Sexual Conduct Is Unwelcome

Sexual harassment is "unwelcome . . . verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature . . . ." 29 C.F.R. � 1604.11(a). Because sexual attraction may often play a role in the day-to-day social exchange between employees, "the distinction between invited, uninvited-but-welcome, offensive- but-tolerated, and flatly rejected" sexual advances may well be difficult to discern. Barnes v. Costle, 561 F.2d 983, 999, 14 EPD � 7755 (D.C. Cir. 1977) (MacKinnon J., concurring). But this distinction is essential because sexual conduct becomes unlawful only when it is unwelcome.

2) Isolated Instances of Harassment - Unless the conduct is quite severe, a single incident or isolated incidents of offensive sexual conduct or remarks generally do not create an abusive environment.

So, saying "You look nice today" does NOT constitute sexual harrassment. And because there is NO evidence that Monica felt that her relationship with Clinton was unwelcome or a condition of future employment in her job, it did NOT meet any criteria of sexual harrassment.

I am not defending Clinton's behavior. But there was NO basis for impeachment. It was a very expensive partisan witch hunt, lead by the oh so holy Henry Hyde riding in to save the country. So indignent was he when his own behavior hit the news. What a bad bad joke.

To set up a system that you have described where any sexual behavior in the workplace is prohibited and can reported on by fellow coworkers who then sit in judgement as to whether the relationship meets their criteria of a "genuine love affair" is frightening. It is also open to tons of potential of abuse of the kind of "hey, I want your job so I'll accuse you of having a relationship, even if both parties feel it is consensual." Oh wait, that is actually what happened to Clinton. The Republicans wanted his job, lol.

Here is a link that might be useful: Federal guidelines for sexual harrassment

When politicians do bad things in secret they become targets for blackmail. Then it does become our business what is going on in their private life. They could be talked into passing on government secrets or voting a certain way in order to keep information from being revealed. A foreign govt for example could control a politician if s/he is that afraid their secret will come out. It is a matter of national security that guys like Weiner be removed from office.

I just read that Weiner will get a $1.2 million pension. Now that's where I want our tax money to go!

That's not correct. He will get a monthly pension based on his 12 years of service starting when he is turns 56. He is in his 40s right now.

Well, I just read on USA Today that he has now received a job offer by Larry Flint to work at Hustler and a producer of the show Entourage to appear in that show. ugh...

Barb - I have no wish to argue back and forth with you about what government workers must contend with at work, but those of us who have been in public service know what has happened in the public sector, and in much of the private sector as well. I had a conversation today with DS, without mentioning this conversation; he served for a year on the Diversity Committee for his state. It was not a pleasant job, but he went through training in preparation for it and managed to remain on good terms with his colleagues while he served. I asked him if he would tell a woman that "you look nice today" and he LOLed. No, because it is inappropriate. Anything regarding personal appearance is off limits, whether it's "on the books" as a reg or not. The workplace rules are a slippery slope, with the definition of what is acceptable ever tightening.

Here's another story which actually happened to me a few years before I retired. I had a female black student in my class whom I wanted to recommend for a military commendation. In order to do this, I had to discuss the issue with an officer. At some time during the nineties our entire workforce had been informed that we could not refer to a person's race, even if we were teaching physical descriptions of people (this is a foreign language school). So the officer asked me who she was; he knew the students in the classes but didn't always attach names to faces, he dealt with hundreds of students coming and going every year. I tried to describe her, but couldn't get through; I had five female students. Finally I leaned closer and said, "She's the African-American woman." He lowered his voice and whispered "Why didn't you say so?" and I said "I'm not supposed to" and he replied "I know, I didn't hear a thing." Think that's silly? It's what's happening out there.

The problem with Weiner - aside from what so many have written here about a leader betraying the public trust - is that we must confront a new technology that will rewrite the rules of appropriateness and harassment. Weiner's case is the first. Although there was one this past February, which did not make screaming headlines; the case of Chris Lee, who craig-listed a photo of his naked chest to a woman. He was forced out of office by the House Republican leadership before his "indiscretion" even hit the news. A. W. didn't want to go, which made everything worse.

And just for what it's worth - I loved my job, adored my students, liked my colleagues a lot, and was fine with paying the price of excruciating political correctness. It was challenging and exciting work!