Rachel Maddow And Bob Herbert Argue About Anthony Weiner (VIDEO)

Rachel Maddow and Bob Herbert had a disagreement about the Anthony Weiner scandal on Maddow's Monday show.

Maddow began the segment by running through a long list of stories that the scandal was crowding out, and she brought on Herbert to discuss it. In her view, Democrats calling on Weiner to resign are making a big mistake.

"Why are Democrats turning on Anthony Weiner like this?" she asked.

Herbert essentially said that two wrongs don't make a right. "We should want higher standards in government," he said. "I do believe that Weiner's behavior has been egregious. In the first place, it's profoundly disrespectful to women. And if the photos that he sent, if they were uncensored, he'd be gone now. I mean, he sent some hideous stuff."

"But isn't that just rewarding the disproportionate coverage of him?" Maddow said. She pointed out that the John Ensign scandal, which she has devoted a lot of time to, received "marginal coverage" in comparison.

"For somebody like the president...to be stepping in and saying this is the standard that Democrats are held to while that is manifestly untrue for the other side, to me seems like a form of unilateral disarmament."

Herbert said it was simply about maintaining certain standards in a political party.

"As a person who is really foursquare for progressive values, i would very much like to see democrats have a higher standard of behavior than the Republicans."

"I am absolutely flummoxed that Democrats are throwing him under the bus for this and not just screaming 'double standard, double standard,'" Maddow concluded.

WATCH:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Comments

[llstudent]

02:56 PM on 06/17/2011

Timothy Bladel, NO you tell me "What are THEY trying to do"? You ?

[Alyfox3]

10:32 AM on 06/17/2011

I think another way of putting what she was trying to say is this:
Let's say both parties accuse each other of murder.
Then, in one week, Dem X kills a hobo, then Repub Y kills a hobo.
The next week, the Dems call for Dem X's resignation. That same week, the Repubs do nothing at all to Repub X.
What happens is, NOW the Repubs can point to the Dems and say "See? THEY are the party of murderers! They cast out their own people!"
I think that's what Rachel was trying to say. That if the Dems don't call out the Repubs for hypocrisy, it empowers the Neocons with more ammo.
I think I got that right, right?

[Bootoomee]

12:36 PM on 06/17/2011

I cannot make any sense of your "hobo" analogy.

[Alyfox3]

02:42 PM on 06/17/2011

Bootoomee, I am going to reply to you with the assumption that you are serious and that I confused you with my analogy.
1) I used murder as an example, purely to use an extreme crime we can all agree is heinous.
2) My interpretation of the interview is that Rachel was trying to make a point to her guest, and I don't think the guest was truly understanding that point. My analogy was my attempt to translate my GUESS as to what Rachel was trying to say.
My analogy was suggesting that we all expect both parties to have the same standards, and while Dems tend to actually adhere to those standards, it looks bad when Dems don't fight harder against the opposition for committing the same offenses.
To use Rachel's analogy: both Weiner and Vitter embarrassed themselves, and while BOTH sides may have felt that they should BOTH resign, only the Dems banded together and threw their own under the bus. A good decision? Maybe, but I think Rachel was saying that the Dems should have used the same gusto in getting Vitter to resign, because Weiner going and Vitter staying makes the DEMS LOOK BAD.
The Repubs can now point to the Dems and say "there's proof they are immoral, just look what they did to Weiner!" And Dems are not pointing back at Vitter enough, in her view.
I think now I have confused myself . . .

[Clamver Annelet]

10:20 AM on 06/17/2011

Rachel you have done a brilliant, incredible job on your newscasts in your non-stop defense of Anthony Weiner while exposing the Republicans for what they are. I am in complete agreement with you. I wrote Anthony Weiner twice supporting him and begging him not to resign. I've never done that before. You've been a hero. Your show is hands done the best on MSNBC. (and I do watch a couple of others who run a tight 2nd.)

[froidytoidy]

10:08 AM on 06/17/2011

I agree with Rachel, it was over the top, constant, media coverage. The press yelled obscenities at him during press conferences as if they lived their lives as Saints. What Weiner did was sickening, but other Congressmen and White House Staff have been just as sickening and far more illegal.

This should have been between Weiner and his wife, and second, his constituents.

The Democratic Party turns on their own - they act as if Congress has morality - and it does not.

[Judann]

10:04 AM on 06/17/2011

There is a lesson here to be learned - a teaching moment. When someone is caught with their pants down so to speak and that person happens to be a Democrat, then Republlicans can and will manipulate the willing press - both main and lame stream - to continue the coverage thus increasing the pressure on Democracts to do as the Republicans want them to. And the Republicans with the willing press will keep the issue in the forefront. Why else do you think Weiner's photos were leaked slowing!

On the other hand, when it is a Republican caught, they circle the wagons. The Democrats don't or don't know how to manipulate the press or keep the coverage continuous.

Bottom line, the Republicans with the malleable Democrats and the eager media decide what the issues of the day or week or month will be based on what is politically expedient for them.

[icon22]

10:02 AM on 06/17/2011

Sorry Rachel, but Sen Vitter had made a mistake and apologized to his wife and God and all is forgiven. Oh, by the way, he won a statewide election in November and that's that! Weiner, on the other hand is a big mouthed, liberal pervert and got exactly what he deserved..........LOL

[solarman44]

10:01 AM on 06/17/2011

I agree with Rachel. Let the voters decide if they want him, not some lame Dems in Congress.

[JeffKolakowski]

09:59 AM on 06/17/2011

The hypocrisy on the Weiner situation is too much to bear. Maybe what he did was a little disgusting, but so what. If it wasn’t for the media attention, it would have just went away.

We have politicians on both sides of the aisle that continually fund and prosecute illegal wars of aggression that have killed over a hundred thousand people. We have president orders extrajudicial assassinations every other day through drone attacks, killing more innocent civilians than terrorists, by the way. Where is the outrage over that, Rachel?

Does anybody know what’s going in Fukushima, as radiation continues to spew in the air and water around the area, and around the globe, as researchers are finding hot particles in car air filters are far away as Seattle. We have a president who continues to laud the virtues of nuclear power as the death of newborns on the west coast of the U.S. has gone up by 35% since the earthquake and meltdown. I am not saying, of course, that these deaths certainly related, but they could be. Who is on that story while we continue to see lewd shots of Weiner on our television?

[lbrillante]

09:34 AM on 06/17/2011

I completely agree with Rachel and Cenk on this one. The dems in congress are patsies to the republicans. Rep Weiner was a strong voice like Alan Grayson. He should not have resigned this.

[Mafdet]

09:08 AM on 06/17/2011

There is no double standard. Vitter is more the parallel to Weiner than Ensign is. The leadership of the Republican Party called for Vitter's resignation too, while Louisiana Republicans distanced themselves but didn't condemn him. Just like Weiner. Vitter has just waited it out and continues to wait it out. And Vitter's scandal probably continues to affect his job, but luckily for him, the citizens of Louisiana don't expect anything from their elected officials whereas those in NY really do. And his Party just values him for his vote. The Republican Party is backing off Ensign because (a) hes has resigned and (b) his case is criminal. When charges finally come down against him, the colleagues who helped him use public and campaign funds to conduct and cover up his strange "life-style choices" will be criminally culpable too and will end up testifying against him. Apparently very senior people in the Republican Party helped Ensign, so that's a huge problem for them. The question there is not why the Republican Party is not invoking Ensign's name every day and spitting; the question is why aren't the Democrats? As for the press, Ensign's scandal has been covered in every detail. For a couple years now. And THAT is what the Democrats prefer to spare themselves in shutting Weiner out. But to draw out the comparison between Vitter and Weiner fairly, Vitter was outed for having been a customer of the the DC Madame one day, and the next day he took full responsibility and apologized. Weiner lied for a week. Now maybe Weiner lied because the full extent of his deeds have not been uncovered or reported and maybe he has done something illegal or even more shocking... while in VItter's case, the statute of limitations had run out on any charges that may have been brought against him. Who knows. FInally, the Republicans have about twice as many sex scandals as Democrats do. Of course they're better at going on with business as usual - they're more practiced at it.

[Bootoomee]

09:04 AM on 06/17/2011

I am a big Maddow fan and don't really care about Herbert but I'll go with the latter on this.

If the republicans, who are highly reputed for hypocrisy, accept child molesters to continue to represent them should we do the same?

I suspect things would have been a little easier for the former congressman from NY if he wasn't as vocal (and visible on cable circuit) as he was. In my opinion, he is more guilty of stupidity than anything else. For someone as vocal and supposedly smart as Weiner, his action is just absolutely unacceptable. I am just a lowly high school teacher and I guard my privacy tenaciously; that a high profile politician with innumerable political enemies would what he did is just plain r3-tar-ded.

I can live with human weaknesses like adultery in my representatives (provided they did not abuse their office in the process) but I cannot accept stupidity.

[Katherine Guidry]

08:11 AM on 06/17/2011

I agree with Rachel on this subject. We have as our pool of candidates humans that are going to be fallible and he did nothing illegal.

I hope he runs again and is elected to fight for his constuents.

[the left is insane]

07:52 AM on 06/17/2011

Wait!.....I don't believe it! Maddow finally realizes that she NEEDS A WEINER!

I don't care who you are....that there's funny.

[nana41]

09:37 AM on 06/17/2011

now I know why you have -0- fans..

[Louie69]

09:52 AM on 06/17/2011

No one cares who you are, either.

[willy e]

07:38 AM on 06/17/2011

Doesn't anyone see the difference between what Weiner did and what the others have done? A lot of people succomb to the temptations of illicit sex. It is human and people can forgive and forget. What Weiner did was more than that, it was creepy and wierd.

[rejoyce5]

01:00 AM on 06/17/2011

He's out because of his immoral behavior. Sending lewd pics of yourself is perverted and this man doesn't belong in Congress.