WEINER'S WAYWARD WAYS---HIS OR OUR PROBLEM?

You know you've been busted, when your picture shows up on the news---and you're in your underwear. Congressman Anthony Weiner, that's "e" before "i" in this case and pronounced, unfortunately, the same as that which is found in hot dogs. Mr. Weiner has more than his name to blame for this latest escapade in phone hanky panky---or "sexting", as they call it these days. Why, oh why do these politicians, think they can play in the sand box and not get sand all over them? Do they really think they won't get caught, and is this a huge sign of arrogance---as in, I'm too big to abide by every day rules of decent conduct? Weiner seems to not only have thought this, but continues to think he still deserves to be kept on the job as a paid government employee. "I'm not resigning", he staunchly proclaimed. The troubling thing is, some polls show a good number of people standing behind him---but not Nancy Pelosi, who is ready to self righteously hang him out to dry in front of the Ethics Committee---and well she should, so as not to appear the definition of major hypocrisy, given the Democrats past record of nailing Republicans who have been caught with similar sins. But is this for show, and will he be asked to resign as so many Republicans have? Somehow the knife of party criticism doesn't cut quite as sharp both ways. One cannot help but remember a Senator from Massachusetts whose car accident left his young female passenger dead in the waters of Lake Chappaquaddick, and it was the next day, before he notified the police. Though given a suspended jail sentence, he never served time, was quite forgiven by his party and went on to be highly respected and revered as a "lion" in the United States Senate. What's in a name? A lot and in this case, it meant everything to the life and political future of the now deceased Senator Edward Kennedy. Justice is never completely blind, nor is it always applied in black and white terms--human subjectivity always enters in, rightly or wrongly. We are after all, human, and see everything through our own limited wisdom ---and prejudice.

For now, it's again the Dems who must endure the embarrassment of their own---enter another sinner, John Edwards, a very close runner up to the last Presidential election. Mr. Edwards in an appalling display of indiscretion, dishonesty, and lying, now faces even more serious charges than Weiner. He has been charged with spending campaign money to keep his mistress and now mother of his child, hidden from public view while still campaigning for the presidency. He could go to jail for a number of years, which in of itself will be another tragedy in this unending sad saga, as he will leave his children without a parent. Elizabeth,his wife, died of cancer while all this was going on. Edwards' lack of judjment, integrity and character are astounding---but should he go to jail for these crimes of immorality? Yes, he may have spent the campaign money---but would it not be sufficient for him to pay back these monies and perhaps lose or have his bar license suspended, but then continue to live his life, in shreds of past glory? I harbor no sympathy for this man and what he did to himself and his loved ones, but it is my opinion that the public humiliation and financial payback, perhaps with additional fines could be enough. Our jails are overcrowded with crimes much more egregious, and it would seem that this man would better serve his time at home raising his children. In this case, at least, it would seem an act of societal grace to not punish the children further by taking their father away. Is that any worse than the sentence given Edward Kennedy?

If you still think this too generous, think back to President Clinton and his antics with the inglorious Lewininsky lady. Did I want him impeached at the time? It was tempting, butI did not. And neither did the Senate who gave him a pass, though the House did vote for impeachment. I could not condone or excuse his behavior---it was a lasting scar on our national pride and a denigration of our moral code. It made a mockery out of the most respected and venerated position in the world---but impeachment at that time, it seemed, would have been far more damaging to our stability as a country than allowing Clinton to serve out his presidency, bowed and chastened, and unlikely to repeat his sins---at least not while in office. I happen to think the Senate made the right call at that time. President Richard Nixon,however, had not been so lucky---the winds of public forgiveness did not blow his way. Maybe it was the way he excessively perspired while on TV.

Punishment for crimes need to be assessed and measured out,and certainly not ignored when our trusted officials lend themselves to dangerous vulnerabilities and even blackmail,as could have been the case with Clinton and many other politicians who have stepped over the line . But it would also seem that we are leaning over backwards to completely destroy the accused and with it the symptoms of an increasingly immoral society, rather than to address the problem. We don't tar and feather the wayward social misfit anymore, or brig them in the town square, but the complete stripping of dignity is hard to watch---humiliation is not a fun or healthy spectator sport, even if deserved. But "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone" may not apply to our attitude toward our elected officials, for we demand accountability for one's actions, both personal and professional-- and very few second chances. They are supposed to be who we want them to be---squeeky clean and without any skeletons in their closets. Is that getting to be too much to ask??

The incidents of inappropriate behavior seems extreme and out of control lately--but is it beyond the norm? Even Thomas Jefferson was guilty of having an affair with at least one of his slaves. John F. Kennedy, one of our most beloved Presidents was unbelievably indiscreet---but the media was incredibly protective at that time, and turned their eyes away from his numerous and indiscriminate affairs. It seems that today, however, with our more open, relaxed attitudes, there is less personal discipline and more tolerance towards it---unless it happens to our national leaders--and then it depends whose party is in power, or how liked they are by the media. Recent case in point would be ex-Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican whom the media seemed to adore, perhaps because of his Kennedy ties and very moderate ways. He seems to have gotten off fairly easily compared to Weiner and Edwards. How much of his government salary was used to support his mistress and child?? The media and some of us feign utter shock and awe---as if we'd never expected anything different from what we see all around us in our more tolerant society. To hear the wry comments, the talk show jokes, and observe an almost gleeful "gotch'a!" response to the naughty boys in Washington is a nice distraction from other much more serious issues in our government, but do we need constant running of the same scandal to the point of overkill? Yes, we should hold them to a higher standard as our representatives, but are they not unsurprising reflections of the society we live in--and are our scales of justice evenly weighed when there is such disparity between political preferences?

Perhaps we, as a country, are naively puritan in our insistence that our political officials be somehow immune from the temptations that power and money bring to many. There are those who demand extreme separation of church and state, proud that we do not inflict the mores and morals of religion upon the citizens of the country---but then act horrified and dismayed when suddenly it seems immorality is rampant among our leaders. Though it may be worse now, the frailties of our human condition have always been there---we just didn't have the means to see them. Technology now gives us much tranparency--a blessing to some, and a tattle tale monster to others. Mamas don't let your children grow up to trust their cell phones with their secrets.

Perhaps in the end, those who would betray the trust given them by the people of the land, will finally learn the value of a more virtuous and disciplined life--and we will also learn that it isn't enough to condemn, shame, and punish those who trespass against our moral code, which is changing all the time, for they will keep coming. It would seem we must first nurture a culture that puts emphasis on ethics, character, and professional responsibility. For "they" are us and we are "they". Left to our own devices, without a religious framework to guide us, is it possible we will never see the end of our parade of sinners? But to be religious, especially Christian in the USA today, is to be scorned and thought narrow minded. We instead worship secularity and mock those who would use religious morals to guide our national conscience. And so, perhaps it follows that we should also separate personal failings from professional competency, unless the latter is seriously compromised, in order to be consistent.

Anthony Weiner's fall from grace was unbelievably stupid, ridiculous, and almost sadistically riveting to watch--as Jay Leno, talk show host, remarked---'what are we, nine year olds?' But perhaps the real shame is that our outrage is focused more outwardly than inwardly.Our leaders are only as strong, honest, and moral as the people from whom they are borne, raised, and cultured. To joke about Weiner and his childish pranks is tempting, and part of the way we deal with things, but perhaps we should wonder whether we are reaping what we've sown--excuse the Biblical reference. Do we really want secularity to be our God vs. for example,the Ten Commandments? Or would that be way too Biblical----surely there's something else. Maybe David Letterman could come up with the ten best ways to behave,per his 10 Best list every night.

One final bit of unsolicited advice to those out there who think Weiner's photo shoot of himself is the new way to flirt and attract---here's a news flash--- your chesty, ripped six packs and your whatevers aren't really " the turn on" you seem to think ---struttin' your stuff has never been particularly attractive to most of us women. We still like to be romanced the old fashioned way, and it has nothing to do with "sexting" or graphic pictures --not cool--kind of creepy, in fact. So, whether you twitter, text, or sext---be nice, and for heaven's sake---zip it before you click it!