Gloria Kaminer argues that cultural analysis is needed in the Weiner case. I have been struck that this is needed. Some say that the women who got his messages felt 'special not sleazy.' They would add that they were only angry when they found other women were getting them. Peggy Noonan has called his actions 'pornographic. ' Megan McArdle objects to them in that he was 'cheating on his wife.' I suppose this does imply that there was some (perhaps wanted) intimacy between Weiner and the recipients of the messages. Someone commenting on the TNC blog said* 'Weiner's ability to be such an effective attack dog for Democratic causes was deeply tied to the same arrogance that led him to make such huge mistakes.' The 'attack' in his twitter messages strikes me as putting the recipient in a sleazy relationship with Weiner and like the 'first rule of picking up girls which is to put them down' (so that they can then move on to recovering their virtue in your eyes). In that sense it would bear an analogy to the political attack, e.g. 'You're a racist, homophobe' unless, of course, you agree with what I say. But, to go back to the beginning, were the messages pleasing or not?