Anthony Weiner, after losing badly in the New York mayoral primary Tuesday night, bid farewell to the campaign in a manner befitting the foul-mouthed candidate -- by flipping the bird after delivering his concession speech.

The timeless image, showing the disgraced former congressman giving the middle finger to a New York reporter, was captured by NY1 News and posted to Twitter Tuesday night.

The picture quickly surged across social media, putting a bow on the entire wild ride of Weiner's failed attempt at a political career comeback.

Though Weiner once led the pack as he asked voters for a second chance on the heels of his sexting-while-in-Congress scandal, that advantage quickly diminished after he admitted to another bout of sexting after he left Congress.

He finished with just 5 percent of the vote. Public Advocate Bill de Blasio was in the lead, with about 40.2 percent of the total vote, which puts him a whisker above the 40 percent threshold needed to avoid triggering an automatic Oct. 1 runoff.

If he cannot maintain that, he will face former city Comptroller Bill Thompson, who has 26 percent, for a potentially grueling three-week, one-on-one showdown, with the winner advancing to face Republican nominee Joe Lhota in the general election.

But it may take a week or more before it is known whether that battle will be fought at all.

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, the early front-runner who was hoping to become the city's first woman and openly gay mayor, finished third at 16 percent, followed by current city Comptroller John Liu at 7 percent. Weiner was last.

De Blasio, more than any other candidate, benefited from the rapid fall of Weiner, who was leading in the polls before he was felled by his old demons.

A gossip site revealed that Weiner used the online handle Carlos Danger to continue to send X-rated messages to women even after he resigned from Congress in 2011 for similar behavior.

His ill-fated campaign had two final embarrassments in its last minutes: One of his online paramours, Sydney Leathers, tried to crash his primary night rally and then Weiner was caught making the obscene gesture at reporters as he was driven away.

NBC affiliate reporter Shimon Prokupecz tweeted that he was the target of the gesture. "Just had the pleasure of getting the middle finger from Anthony Weiner after his security staff pushed us out of the way," he wrote. He later added: "He drove away smirking."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/11/anthony-weiner-caps-failed-comeback-bid-with-obscene-gesture/#ixzz2efKzGdK1

This guy is a real POS, and good thing voters saw through this hot tempered pervert!

seems the voters showed some sense for a change!

Last place at only 5% out of several candidates.

Just hope no libel suit is instituted.The language of conveyance is too caustic,guess the moderators are still asleep?

I think the real story is "How could 5% of ANY population vote for a loser like this?"

Guess it's gonna stay parked!

Nope! I bet he stays in "Public Service".

you really need to expand on your cryptic posts!

Carlos Danger never "pulls Out"!

You got to see this!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU3Yl5DbcfM

Conrad,thanks.But every discerning mind should understand what i meant.The sarcastic expression of the poster painted the man he was talking about in a very bad light.That amounted to character assasination in civilized society and could attract libel charge in court against him.We should be discreet in our choice of words in open forum like this.Hope i've made it clear now?

Exactly what are you calling libel?

you can't paint him any worse,he is the Ultimate Louse!

How you assassinate the Character he ain't got?
Besides,the truth is never libelous!

Public figure doctrine (absence of malice)

Special rules apply in the case of statements made in the press concerning public figures, which can be used as a defense. A series of court rulings led by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) established that for a public official (or other legitimate public figure) to win a libel case in the United States, the statement must have been published knowing it to be false or with reckless disregard to its truth (also known as actual malice).[31]

Under United States law, libel generally requires five key elements. The plaintiff must prove that the information was published, the plaintiff was directly or indirectly identified, the remarks were defamatory towards the plaintiff's reputation, the published information is false, and that the defendant is at fault.

The Associated Press estimates that 95% of libel cases involving news stories do not arise from high-profile news stories, but "run of the mill" local stories like news coverage of local criminal investigations or trials, or business profiles.[citation needed] Media liability insurance is available to newspapers to cover potential damage awards from libel lawsuits.WIKI

He hasn't got a leg to stand on!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation


libel

1) n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation. It is a tort (civil wrong) making the person or entity (like a newspaper, magazine or political organization) open to a lawsuit for damages by the person who can prove the statement about him/her was a lie. Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion. While it is sometimes said that the person making the libelous statement must have been intentional and malicious, actually it need only be obvious that the statement would do harm and is untrue. Proof of malice, however, does allow a party defamed to sue for general damages for damage to reputation, while an inadvertent libel limits the damages to actual harm (such as loss of business) called special damages. Libel per se involves statements so vicious that malice is assumed and does not require a proof of intent to get an award of general damages. Libel against the reputation of a person who has died will allow surviving members of the family to bring an action for damages. Most states provide for a party defamed by a periodical to demand a published retraction. If the correction is made, then there is no right to file a lawsuit. Governmental bodies are supposedly immune to actions for libel on the basis that there could be no intent by a non-personal entity, and further, public records are exempt from claims of libel. However, there is at least one known case in which there was a financial settlement as well as a published correction when a state government newsletter incorrectly stated that a dentist had been disciplined for illegal conduct. The rules covering libel against a "public figure" (particularly a political or governmental person) are special, based on U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The key is that to uphold the right to express opinions or fair comment on public figures, the libel must be malicious to constitute grounds for a lawsuit for damages. Minor errors in reporting are not libel, such as saying Mrs. Jones was 55 when she was only 48, or getting an address or title incorrect. 2) v. to broadcast or publish a written defamatory statement.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1153

In order to be Libel,the Statement needs to be false!


libel per se

n. broadcast or written publication of a false statement about another which accuses him/her of a crime, immoral acts, inability to perform his/her profession, having a loathsome disease (like syphilis) or dishonesty in business. Such claims are considered so obviously harmful that malice need not be proved to obtain a judgment for "general damages," and not just specific losses.

I don't remember that particular chapter in "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

Careful with that finger! You don't know where it's been!

He should move to California. If they'll Jerry Brown, they'll vote for anyone.

They would probably give him his own TV show!