Re: Anthony Weiner — The Bill Clinton False Analogy

Lawrence O'Donnell tonight re-enacted the Jennifer Flowers v. Bill Clinton episode —which must have really thrilled Hillary and Bill and, I thought, was a low point for Jonathan Alter, who seemed to be having trouble dignifying the "Back To The Future" theme of the segment. Apparently, the point of Lawrence's PASSION PLAY is that a consequential sex scandal was survivable for the next president of the United States. Therefore, the cyber-sex Anthony Weiner episode is equally survivable.

Perhaps. I'm even willing to concede that Anthony's constituents will re-elect him to Congress. Lawrence hates the hypocrisy of moralizing Republican politicians, who have been the worst sex offenders in Congress, and frequently seem to get away with a lighter sentence. Either that, or they're cut loose by their leaders and fall on their swords before further damage redounds to their party: Chris Lee; John Ensign, among them. Joan Walsh reminded us over at the Ed Show that we Democrats are "different." We don't pass summary judgment on our people until all the facts are in. "Hear, hear," piped in Bill Press. We don't throw our people under the bus.

Well, I beg to differ. Yes we do. Or we should.

To Joan's point that Bill Clinton LIED to us, then survived impeachment, as the indispensable president — rather than Democrats' best-ever REPUBLICAN president — who is "stronger today" that he didn't resign, I heard a SLAM-DUNK response to this line of argument on the Stephanie Miller show. It came from one of her brainiac sex slaves: Had Clinton resigned, the MORE LIBERAL Al Gore would have succeeded him. Gore would have continued most of Clinton's policies, except he would reject any "fast track" NAFTA free trade agreement which lacked strong environmental controls, and would have vetoed the repeal of Glass-Steagall, which repeal, SIGNED by Clinton, eventually led to the economic collapse of 2007.

Then, PRESIDENT GORE would have contested the 2000 election as the INCUMBENT with the HUGE SURPLUS wind at his back, blowing the IMBECILE George W. Bush out of the water. Imagine if you will: No Bush tax cuts. No Iraq war. Bin Laden cornered and killed at Tora Bora in 2002. Saddam Hussein boxed in by a strong UN-sanctions regime, as a counterbalance to Iran. President Gore would concentrate our substantial military assets on wiping Al Qaeda off the face of the earth. He would have forged strong international alliances, leading us far down the path toward energy independence. Finally, Social Security and Medicare would have been fixed well into the next century with the surplus savings. And we would have had universal healthcare by now.

Can you say, Bubba's "survivability = HUGE missed opportunity" ... anyone?

But, instead, I represent the generic "electorate" that is in DEEP SHIT as a result of what our elected officials have done, or failed to do, mostly stabbing us in the back: Beginning with the ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY, a LARGE PART OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, and much of the media, including Dana Milbank, Michael Steele, and Heilemann-Halperin (borderline plagiarists and SMUT peddlers, who are in their element RIGHT NOW) as fixtures of the CNN-ization of MSNBC. (I've seen the same numbers MSNBC Corporate is looking at: 62% audience growth for CNN, 26% for MSNBC, while Fox's ratings atrophy — so CNN is the new emerging competitor.)

No one — NO ONE — is indispensable. Big Eddie got it immediately: Sometimes you just "gotta take one for the team." Oh sure, I love Anthony Weiner, the liberal attack dog. But not at the expense of what we're fighting for. We cannot afford to get sentimental about this jackass's prospects of survivability — not when he can take the entire party down with him.

To use the old baseball analogy: It's Game 7, top of the fifth. You're the Manager. Your team is ahead by two runs, and your ace pitcher is on the mound. Suddenly he loses it. His control is gone. Runners on second and third with no outs. What do you do? Do you hope he gets his control back and manages to get three outs without giving up two or three runs just so he can notch that WIN on his resumé? Or do you tell yourself: "I've got a 100 mph short reliever I was saving for the ninth, I've got a rested bullpen, AND I've got the whole DAMNED PITCHING STAFF to get the next fifteen outs, because THIS IS IT, THERE'S NO TOMORROW."

What DO YOU DO? Me, I'd yank the ACE in a NEW YORK MINUTE and never look back.

It's a team sport. No one's indispensable. Not even your ACE. And if he can't find the plate, he's OUT. With all due respect to Lawrence and Joan Walsh, Bill Clinton is a really poor analogy. In the first instance — Jennifer Flowers — it was Bill's word against hers, and the voters decided the Governor's word carried more weight than a slutty publicity seeker's who received unspecified funds for hurling her accusations. The 'caught-'im' lying came later. I rather doubt that after more than a week of arrogant LIES, Anthony Weiner has a prayer of turning his fortunes around by doing 60 Minutes with his wife. Furthermore, he's no Bill Clinton.

Starry-eyed, bleeding heart, hand-wringing, compassionate principle is what makes liberals sexy and cuddly. But it's a character flaw when it comes to winning elections. Rachel, there's nothing we can do about Republicans; not even your little "friend" Michael Steele can help you understand them. They're monsters, weasels, cowards, guttersnipes, scumsucking, bottom-feeding ratbastards, an alien subhuman hive ... and I'm only warming up.

So forget it. Democrats, and only Democrats, can control their message, their strategy, their fundraising, and the voter appeal and electability of their candidates. So when a Democratic rock star named Anthony Weiner becomes a SERIAL LIAR about his creepy, reprehensible personal behavior, sucking all the oxygen out of the Party's PRINCIPAL goal, which is to retake the House and re-elect President Obama, then, please, allow me, the generic Democratic voter (not of his district and state) to cut him loose and THROW HIM UNDER THE BUS! Oh sure, ultimately it's up to him and the voters of his district. But he should know how we feel. And then decide whether he wants, for self-serving reasons, to TRAMPLE on our message of HAMMERING THE REPUBLICANS RELENTLESSLY FOR VOTING TO KILL MEDICARE.

And I'll tell you who agrees with me: Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi. She can't say it publicly, but reports are she's furious with Weiner, and I believe, wants him to resign. Nancy's no bleeding heart. She's one tough lady and a proven winner. She knows how to win elections. That's what it's all about. Especially in 2012, which is a PIVOTAL YEAR for our country.