Weiner vs. Ensign: A study in contrasts

By Jon Ralston

Wednesday, June 15, 2011 | 2 a.m.

So when a creepy congressman who has a sexting disorder becomes a distraction and liability, fretting Democrats line up to defenestrate him. But when an even creepier senator has an affair with a staffer, reveals himself to be a world-class hypocrite and importunes supplicants to hire the cuckold, Republicans say nothing.

Because proportionality is so often lost in politics, especially in the 24/7 Web world where every gesture and expression is analyzed in microscopic detail, the differences between Anthony Weiner, who seems headed for resignation, and John Ensign, who has fled the capital ahead of an expulsion, are lost.

It is nothing short of remarkable to see members of both parties, actually, calling for Weiner’s head — Republicans feeling obvious schadenfreude and Democrats fearing electoral carnage. Contrast this with the reaction, especially by GOP leaders to Ensign, who lasted almost two years after he confessed to an affair with a staffer who was the wife of one of his top aides and who was his wife’s best friend.

On the creepiness scale, Weiner is Pee-wee Herman to Ensign’s Bob Packwood. And as much as both men have dishonored Capitol Hill — no mean feat — their treatment by their colleagues, especially their partisan allies, is noteworthy for its moral bankruptcy. Democrats are not so outraged by Weiner’s behavior as they are about his changing the media horde’s focus from their attempts to terrify seniors over Medicare and Social Security “reforms.” His sin was not texting provocative pictures of himself, but interfering in the narrative the Democrats have been constructing to try to win back both houses of Congress.

The coordinated firing squad this weekend, with several top officials calling for Weiner to step down, has been matched by the likes of House Speaker John Boehner and other Republicans, including National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, echoing the Democratic horde. And GOP organizations, such as the National Republican Congressional Committee, have pummeled Democrats for not calling on Weiner to step down.

Seriously?

I am not suggesting Weiner shouldn’t resign, although not for lying or for taking advantage of his position to flirt with young women. If those offenses warrant resignation from Capitol Hill, we would have only two branches of government.

But what I have never understood is why people such as Weiner or Ensign, having been, ahem, exposed, would want to continue in public life after either thoroughly humiliating themselves (Weiner) or proving themselves to be complete phonies (Ensign). Although the Democrats’ behavior vis-a-vis Weiner is sadly comical and the Republicans’ is redolently pathetic, the GOP’s coddling of Ensign after June 16, 2009, and the Democrats’ aiding and abetting is simply sickening.

Let’s review:

After Ensign’s disclosure almost exactly two years ago, he resigned his leadership position and was welcomed back into the GOP fold. Tennessee’s Bob Corker told the Las Vegas Review-Journal, in a statement I’m sure he regrets (well, pretty sure): “From what I have seen in Washington, I think he has been very stand-up about it.”

Tsk, tsk, John. We still love you.

Even after Doug Hampton came on “Face to Face” less than a month after Ensign’s disclosure and made all manner of allegations, including the severance payments later confirmed by Ensign’s attorneys as “gifts,” no one said a word about him resigning. And even after The New York Times exposed Ensign’s possible quid pro quos for hiring Hampton, the Republicans stood mute.

Compare this behavior with the peremptory cashiering of Weiner by Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and Co. on lesser depredations. Proportionality?

Consider, too, the performance of the Republican National Committee chairmen on the two cases.

In January 2010, Michael Steele came on “Face to Face” and waved off the Ensign case, even falsely claiming he wasn’t the party chairman at the time. But Priebus only too eagerly last week called on Weiner to resign, saying in a statement his actions are “unacceptable and he should resign. We do not need an investigation to know he lied and acted inappropriately, we need a resignation.”

No one — not Steele nor Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell or anyone else — said those words during Ensign’s two-year walking corpse period.

Finally, a word about the greater half of Harry Ensign. Reid was very cold toward Weiner and told reporters he should “call someone else” for advice while stopping short of calling for his resignation. All he could ever muster during the Ensign scandal was that this was a “private matter” between his pal and his family, something it never was.

I know what you’re thinking: Hypocrisy and opportunism are hardly new to the political world. But they can prosper when good pundits do nothing, which is what Republicans and too many Democrats did for two years as Ensign continued to be a senator.