[EL] Congressman Weiner

Wed Jun 8 08:57:20 PDT 2011

I have no interest in turning this into a discussion of my personal feelings regarding Congressman Weiner; that's beyond the scope of the list. As for what he did in the past, it apparently wasn't that anonymous.  

From: JBoppjr at aol.com [mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 11:54 AM
To: douglasrhess at gmail.com; Bonin, Adam C.; ruthalice.anderson at comcast.net; paul.gronke at gmail.com
Cc: Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Congressman Weiner

Doug, I can see why.  At least my second post had something to do with election law.

Adam, I certainly understand that Dems/liberals would rather talk about me than Weiner, so I am not surprised with this response. I am just surprised that it took 19 minutes to try to change the subject.

First, I think that candidates should disclose their express advocacy communications by filing reports and by putting a disclaimer on their communications.

The anonymous speech I want to protect is issue advocacy speech by citizens.

Now, back to Weiner, even though you don't want to go there.

    First, he committed a cardinal "reform" sin, so why aren't you condemning him for it?

    Second, it was racist, so why aren't you condemning him for it?

   Third, it was apparently a lie, so why aren't you condemning him for it?

    Fourth, the NYTimes condemned it, so why aren't you condemning him for it?

But I digress.  My point was that character matters. If a politician is willing to violate a sacred oath to the person who should matter to him the most and will lie to his wife, his staff, Pelosi, the press and the world when he thinks it will serve his personal interest, why don't you think he would lie to you and sell you out and your precious liberal policies? I would have thought that Dems/liberals would want a politician they can trust.

So why doesn't character matter to you?  Jim Bopp

In a message dated 6/8/2011 10:06:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, douglasrhess at gmail.com writes:

	Gawker? I am now very very officially and very very sorry that I started this thread. 

	Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone, powered by CREDO Mobile.

________________________________

	From: "Bonin, Adam C." <ABonin at cozen.com> 

	Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:50:22 -0400

	To: <JBoppjr at aol.com>; <ruthalice.anderson at comcast.net>; <paul.gronke at gmail.com>

	Cc: <douglasrhess at gmail.com>; <Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>

	Subject: RE: [EL] Congressman Weiner

	I thought that anonymous political speech represented the height of Madisonian/Jeffersonian ideals and was super-awesome in the moral sphere.  Did I miss some change of heart on the topic?

	[Why Chris Lee resigned? Perhaps, the other shoe which was about to drop -- http://gawker.com/5769037/the-craigslist-congressman-and-the-crossdressing-prostitute ]

	--Adam

	From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of JBoppjr at aol.com
	Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 9:31 AM
	To: ruthalice.anderson at comcast.net; paul.gronke at gmail.com
	Cc: douglasrhess at gmail.com; Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
	Subject: Re: [EL] Congressman Weiner

	    Weiner launched his career with an anonymous hit piece. 

	Click here: The dirty trick that launched Anthony Weiner's career - New York City - Salon.com <http://www.salon.com/news/new_york_city/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2011/06/07/anthony_weiner_1991>  Do you still think that character does not matter?  Jim Bopp

	In a message dated 6/7/2011 7:43:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ruthalice.anderson at comcast.net writes:

		I still don't understand what political or professional explanation there is for Chris Lee's resignation. If that is what his wife wanted - then sure, it makes sense. But there was no other reason to resign. And what about the David Vitter standard? He actually committed a crime and he was re-elected. I think it might just be tougher for NY politicians because they are close. Perhaps it's distance from major media markets that determines who must and who need not resign.  

		RuthAlice

		On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Paul Gronke wrote:

		> Maybe if he used a government Blackberry or web access, though I'm not sure how they'd track the latter.
		> 
		> It's unfortunate, I think, to see a pundit mention the "Chris Lee" standard in the NY Times:
		> 
		> David Birdsell, dean of Baruch College’s School of Public Affairs in New York City, said it would be hard for Mr. Weiner to argue that his conduct was any less damning. “By the Chris Lee standard, these are offenses that merit resignation,” he said.
		> 
		> No comment at all about whether such a standard is a reasonable one?  
		> 
		> ---
		> Paul Gronke   Ph:   503-517-7393
		>                        Fax: 503-661-0601
		> 
		> Professor, Reed College
		> Director, Early Voting Information Center
		> 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd
		> Portland OR 97202
		> 
		> EVIC: http://earlyvoting.net
		> 
		> <Paul Gronke.vcf>
		> 
		> 
		> 
		> 
		> 
		> On Jun 7, 2011, at 5:29 AM, Doug Hess wrote:
		> 
		>> All joking aside, what is the reasoning or grounds behind starting an
		>> investigation of the congressman (or the same with the NY GOP
		>> congressman that had the shirtless pic on craigslist but I guess left
		>> before it was investigated)?  That he sullied the image of congress?
		>> It seems odd to go looking for bigger violations if there is not yet
		>> any evidence of it (i.e., inappropriate romantic entanglements with
		>> somebody that does business with congress, etc.).
		>> 
		>> Doug
		>> _______________________________________________
		>> Law-election mailing list
		>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
		>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
		> 
		> _______________________________________________
		> Law-election mailing list
		> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
		> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

		_______________________________________________
		Law-election mailing list
		Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
		http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

________________________________

	Notice: To comply with certain U.S. Treasury regulations, we inform you that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this e-mail, including attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. 

________________________________

	Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain information that is confidential and protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. It constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, or you believe that you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney/client or other privilege. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110608/8c71ad44/attachment.html>