Oh my. How the mighty have fallen. I mean me. I don't generally write about salacious sexual issues... Honest, I don't-- even though I might read about them :) So this week-end when I first saw the articles on Anthony Weiner, I didn't remotely think I'd end up writing about it. I mean it's icky.
I can handle an affair, even a Gingrich level affair, better than this. The idea of men or women sending sexually explicit photos to strangers to evidently entice them, why it's just plain icky and not something I'd like to think any politician I respected would do. It's kind of a twisted ego thing that is beyond me.
Years ago I was exploring people profiles on Yahoo. Maybe you've done it. Maybe not. But anyway it said want it to include adult profiles? Now that didn't even occur to me what that would mean. I thought I am an adult; so I said yes, give me those too. Good Lord... ick and double ick. What on earth would make a man or woman want to put out such photos of just one part of their anatomy. I might add these were not clothed which the one supposedly of Weiner was-- barely.
Anyway I have always found the very idea of such to be as I said-- icky. It's not sexy. It's not free spirited. It's just plain weird to think people value one part of their anatomy more than the rest. Let me say that it's not just men who did that. (making my keyboard feel unclean to even write about it).
So why would I write about it? Well because it's beginning to look weirder and weirder. If you have avoided the story and don't want to know more about it, quit reading right here.
The gist of it is that supposedly he was sending this bulging underwear photo to one woman but goofed and sent it to all 40,000 of his followers on Twitter. Incompetent to say the least. It was quickly taken off the site but not before a Weiner critic had conveniently seen and saved it. What a convenient happening and of course, that guy, who was looking for just such a thing to happen, sent it right to Breitbart (who is also high on my ick factor) and who pretty much guarantees to the left that this is a set up.
Except, not so fast. Why is Weiner not going to the police with what he claims is a hacking? This is serious stuff and yet he hasn't done that. He says he doesn't want to talk about it and his denials are looking a tad strange about now. Why does he follow these young women which includes evidently a porn star?
And what the heck is wrong with men today? *Okay I am laughing*
Anyway the last word on this was Stewart which I didn't see last night but found this link online with a video of Stewart's take on it. Very funny but the photo is there if you really didn't want to see it.
Okay basically I don't vote in New York. If I did, well I have to admit that him doing this, if he did and lying about it, might impact my vote depending on who was running against him.
You know, it's not just the ick factor but the ego thing that would get me. How blindly egotistical would he have to be if, knowing how these things come out (even if it had only gone to the one woman it supposedly was intended for), he'd done such a thing? It doesn't really seem to me he's that kind of person from all I have seen... but then how much do we really know about any of these people?
If it's him in the photo (Stewart doesn't think it can be given he has a long term friendship that went back to being young adults and swimming together), I would guess a divorce might not be too far behind as one person knows for sure who it is...
And there's more-- now Weiner is saying he can't say the photo wasn't him... So he has such photos (who on earth would want to take or have such pictures), but just didn't send it this time to that woman?