Weiner can't escape scandal
NEW YORK — New York City mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner met with Superstorm Sandy victims Friday on Staten Island as he tried to move past the sexting scandal threatening to derail his political comeback attempt.
The former congressman toured the ruined home of Joseph Cardinale, a 14-year resident of a beachfront neighborhood still hurting from the storm's deadly tidal surge. The house, stripped to the studs, will have to be torn down; Cardinale is upset about how difficult it has been to rebuild.
Weiner said he visited the neighborhood because he wanted to bring attention to the plight of storm victims.
“One of the reasons why we're here today is that I knew that now, you're gonna come with me. And you should see this,” he told reporters. “There is this notion because the cameras had left, because some of the headlines changed, that the problem was solved.”
But even in that setting he couldn't escape the scandal. After walking through the ruined house and meeting several neighbors who shared their Sandy horror stories, he was confronted by Peg Brunda, a retired schoolteacher.
“I don't quite understand how you would feel you'd have the moral authority, as the head administrator in this city, to oversee employees, when your standard of conduct is so much lower than the standard of conduct that is expected of us,” said Brunda.
Weiner asked whether she would vote for him. Brunda said no.
“I want to let your neighbors make their decisions for themselves,” Weiner said, telling reporters he intends to stay in the crowded mayoral race.
Some news outlets continued to heap ridicule on him.
AM New York ran an illustration of Weiner wearing a clown nose, next to the headline “3-Fling Circus.” Even The New Yorker got in on the act: Next week's cover will feature a cartoon of Weiner astride the Empire State Building.
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 â 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.