Huma May Have Bad Taste in Men, But She’s Not Crazy
Print This Post
Email This Post
In the midst of all this speculation regarding Anthony Weiner’s potential resignation decision and his wife’s role in it, the WSJ’s James Taranto is the only commentator who actually makes sense by pointing out the absurdity of expecting his wife to “talk him into resigning”.
He writes:
House Democrats are anxious to be rid of Anthony Weiner the Tumid Tweeter, National Journal reported yesterday:
They conceded that their best strategy for getting to that point is hoping that Weiner’s wife will persuade him to go.
“We’re hearing he might resign in a couple of days,” said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y. “He’s waiting for his wife to come home. That’s what we’re hearing from his friends.” . . .
A senior Democratic aide said there was much anticipation expressed by members–if not desperation–that Weiner might be talked into resigning by his wife, Huma Abedin, later this week.
Right, just like Mrs. Weiner’s boss, Hillary Clinton, persuaded her husband to quit politics amid a sex scandal.
Why in the world would the Dems expect Mrs. Weiner to press her husband to resign, thereby cutting the household income in half? Even if the marriage fell apart, the prospect of collecting alimony and child support would leave her with a continuing interest in his gainful employment.
Is Mrs. Clinton threatening Mrs. Weiner’s employment or advancement in order to pressure Mr. Weiner to resign? That’s the only way in which this plan would make sense. Though as the Democratic aide suggested, it could just be a desperate hope. And hope is not a plan.

I previously posted about the latest rash of scandalous photos coming out of Afghanistan showing U.S. military atrocities under Obama’s command, and wondering if the media would pick up on it the way they did when it was Bush’s army… Well, here’s a twist I wasn’t expecting: yes, one of the U.S. media, Rolling Stone, [...]
Jeffrey Goldberg, a correspondent for the Atlantic, cast a spotlight on yet another disgustingly overt example of pure bias in the mainstream media, particularly at the anti-Semitic Reuters newswire. He points to a Reuters news item which contains the following despicable sentences: Police said it was a “terrorist attack” — Israel’s term for a Palestinian [...]
In the [sparse] reporting of the Palestinians’ massacre of the Fogel family, several newspapers stand out with their distorted sense of “balance”, i.e., where they feel overwhelmingly uncomfortable describing the barbarity of the Palestinians without at least taking a swipe or two at the Israelis, no matter how patently irrelevant or disgustingly disrespectful it comes [...]