Share This Page

Weiner: Penchant for sexting not addiction

| Thursday, July 25, 2013, 5:30 p.m.
Anthony Weiner, a New York mayoral candidate, sought on Thursday to dispel suggestions that his repeated sexting represented an addiction.

NEW YORK — Anthony Weiner said on Thursday that he'd traded racy messages with as many as three women since similar sexting forced him out of Congress. But as he tried to tamp down questions about his behavior, a poll suggested the disclosures were taking a toll on his mayoral prospects and the House's top Democrat excoriated him.

Weiner said he is still “working with people” to get help dealing with his admiration for X-rated online flirting, but he disputed any suggestion that it's an addiction.

Facing a third day of renewed queries and criticism of his conduct as he continued campaigning, the married Democrat said he supposed he'd had sexually charged exchanges with six to 10 women while serving in Congress; he'd said there were about six.

Weiner, the former congressman who resigned in 2011 after the first batch of sexts surfaced, is running for New York mayor and had been competitive in most polls of the Democratic primary race until the latest furor over his behavior began this week when the gossip website The Dirty posted explicit messages that a woman said she and Weiner sent each other starting in July 2012.

The scandal got seamier on Thursday when The Dirty posted an unredacted crotch shot that it said Weiner sent to a woman last year.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.