More Thoughts on Weinergate

Yesterday Anthony did a good job of breaking down the Weinergate scandal.  At the risk of being redundant, I couldn’t resist the urge to add a few of my own thoughts and observations to the discussion...

First let me say, I never liked Weiner.  I always found him smug and arrogant.  And even though he’s certainly one of the more liberal voices in the U.S. congress, he’s also one of the most pro-Israel (and by “pro-Israel” I mean “pro-occupation”), and that’s saying a lot.  In the United States Congress the members practically climb over one another to get to the nearest microphone so they can spout their unconditional love for Israel whenever that country comes under fire from the international community for another flagrant breach of international law.  Even among this crowd, Weiner stood out.  Most recently he voiced his vigourous support for Israel’s brazen execution of 9 unarmed civilians riding in a ship, which Israel illegally invaded in international waters in order to protect its illegal siege of the Gaza strip.  Given Weiner’s politics, I was slightly gratified by his abrupt downfall this week.  But at the same time, I can’t help but feel that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime.

The only thing that even comes close to an ethical transgression in this story is Weiner’s apparent betrayal of his wife.  But like Anthony said, that’s between him and his wife.  And even then, I don’t know that the congressman’s online flirting truly rises to the level of “cheating.”  Unless you and your partner explicitly agree to an open relationship, then having physical sexual contact with another person is certainly wrong.  But if Weiner only engaged in sexual conversations and sent a few racy photos, then this is little more than a thought crime.

This might just be my personal bias, but I always felt like a relationship should be predicated on total consent.  You remain faithful to someone because you choose to, not out of obligation or fear of some social penalty.  No matter how much you love your spouse, you’ll always be attracted to other people.  Maybe I’m naive, but I think it’s so much more virtuous, and life-affirming (and relationship-affirming) to acknowledge and accept those feelings of extramarital lust, and to know that you always have to freedom to act on these impulses but you choose not to.  I feel like a lot of the people that are sanctimoniously chastising Weiner in the media, are angry at him for even having the desire to engage in (non-physical) sexual exchanges with someone other than his wife.  Much worse than the cheating, I think, is the indiscretion.  By conducting his affairs in such a sloppy manner, he exposed his wife to the embarrassment she is no doubt experiencing at this very moment, and that is probably his biggest violation.

But I do respect the fact that Weiner didn’t drag his wife up onto the podium to act as a political prop during his mea culpa like so many other high-powered politicians have done in recent years.  I suspect it was probably a joint decision by both husband and wife, and I think they should both get props for it.  There’s no reason why she should be punished further than she already is, just to soften the blow to his political career and maintain the facade of a strong union.  It’s way more dignified to be able to stand up to the scrutiny of that moment on one’s own, given the fact that the “cheater” alone is the one responsible for this predicament, not the couple.

There’s also the question of whether Weiner used government resources for any of his online trysts.  Frankly, I don’t see why it matters.  If he was doing his job and he never broke any laws (so far there is no evidence to suggest he did), then he should be entitled to use his office phone for the occasional personal call.  As far as the public is concerned, I don’t think this is any worse than if he had used his office phone to order a pizza after a light night of debating on the House floor.  Both acts constitute “personal” business, but neither hurts the American public in any way.

But if there must be a guilty party in this fiasco, then that party is the mainstream media.  Since the confession, the media has cast themselves – as they often do – as the victims.  They were just trying to get to the bottom of the story, and they were repeatedly stonewalled and deceived by the evil congressmen.  Bullshit!  The media deliberately framed this story as one of national importance so that they could hound the congressman with inappropriate, sensationalist questions and drive up ratings, all under the auspices of upholding their civic duty to the public.  In reality, this story was of zero national importance, and the repeated questions about whether the image in the photo was actually Weiner’s package were supremely tabloidesque.  This only became a story because Weiner was driven to lie in responding to questions that he shouldn’t have had to answer in the first place.

So there is no question that Weiner handled the situation horribly form a strategic standpoint, but I don’t see where he did anything unethical as far as the public is concerned. 

<rant over>