I am appalled by the Spitzer thread a ways down this board.

[jsmirman]

Come on folks, please. You can't be the law and order governor and get caught having a longstanding practice of paying prostitutes for sex. You sure as hell can't be involved in transporting women across state lines for purposes related to prostitution.

This is not pearl clutching, and this is not ankle grabbing - in another world, or another time, perhaps we're better off with legal prostitution. I'm not sure if that would be a better thing or a worse thing.

But he was our freaking governor. You can't hold that office and show brazen, continuous, repeated disregard for the law.

I don't doubt that the percentage of New Yorkers in favor of his resignation was very high. I was one of them. It was over. He was cooked. Any attempt to disregard the political reality would just lead to further damage. Do you think it's a good thing, for ANYONE, that Sanford is hanging on like a bloody lunatic? Please be serious.

Spitzer is an enigma - probably a troubled man with certain motives that were good and valuable. He's always been a man of contradictions, though - the man's career was bankrolled by his father's rapacious real estate practices, and this guy was supposed to be the people's champion of New York? I was involved on the tenant side of a rough real estate battle in New York City, and let me tell you, we had hopes for what Spitzer might intend, but we were sure as hell wary.

My brother-in-law went to high school with Spitzer. He says that the guy brought a briefcase to class every day for four years. Relevance? The guy is a weird cat. A smart guy, a very able prosecutor, and a guy with some demons.

Really though, I made this post because of dem. underground. This place is in serious trouble. You want to turn on me for this sort of post? You want to turn on someone who has sacrificed a significant portion of his life for the right part of the Democratic Party and for social justice? Someone who is an actual New Yorker, an actual former constituent of Spitzer's, and someone who just might know a thing or two about Spitzer and how he was perceived by those of us in New York CIty? Keeping in mind that if you are Spitzer and you've lost NYC, you have for damn sure lost the state.

I could list more reasons that I'm on the side of being educated, and being sane, and telling the truth, and being fair, and not insulting our collective intelligence and all those things we fought so hard for over eight years - and now we're indulging in this crap?

Sure you can point out why certain interests would have wanted to see him fall, but when you're walking into political fire, do we really think that holding a house account with an illegal prostitution ring isn't reckless and irresponsible, and doesn't ultimately show selfish disregard for the causes you claim to champion?

There is way too much rationalization around here these days. And I understand why. We're under siege in almost every way. The opposition is terrifically dishonest and will play this game with no guilt whatsoever about playing dirty and immorally.

But we have to own our shit. I didn't go into living rooms many hundreds of miles away from my home so that I could look people in the eye and tell them that we could promise a new way of politics, knowing that we were going to pull the same bullshit that the other side pulls, crying bloody murder when one of our own is shown to be deeply flawed, in essence, pretending we don't notice the empty cup of hemlock that has tumbled from the "victim's" hand.

There's so much more to say, but it's late, or it's early, and I've yet to go to sleep. But I had to post, because I'se regusted.

I'm embarrassed by stuff like this on this site. What's the big announcement? That politics is a rough business and that when Spitzer opened his veins, his enemies were more than happy to help him bleed out?

If we don't own our shit, then we're full of it.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. He was a client of a prostitute. I don't even think that is a crime.

Obviously you are outraged that people want sex and pay for it and that other people provide sex and are paid for it. Oh my!

[Captain Hilts]

4. Worse thatn being a crime - it's blackmailable. So, it was reckless and irresponsible. nt

[jsmirman]

19. And you would be completely wrong.

Your ignorance on this topic is stunning, and your smug confidence in such ignorance is disturbingly reminiscent of a group of people we rightfully take to task on a regular basis. Solicitation of a prostitute is a violation of the New York Penal Code, and is a criminal violation in virtually every other state.

Your lack of reading comprehension ability is also distressing.

"in another world, or another time, perhaps we're better off with legal prostitution. I'm not sure if that would be a better thing or a worse thing" = "Obviously you are outraged that people want sex and pay for it and that other people provide sex and are paid for it. Oh my!"

You can be a message board hack, you know. Your post is a message of thoughtless message board hackery. Do better.

[Number23]

68. This really bears repeating since some like to pretend that they don't get it

Solicitation of a prostitute is a violation of the New York Penal Code, and is a criminal violation in virtually every other state.

Once more for the willfully clueless:

Solicitation of a prostitute is a violation of the New York Penal Code, and is a criminal violation in virtually every other state.

[katkat]

83. some day in a just world

The police will arrest the clients and not just the prostitutes.

At least as long as it's a criminal offense. I have no opinion on whether or not it should be decriminalized, because just when someone almost convinces me it's a free will situation, more comes to light about force, runaways, mental illness and/or drug addiction, etc. (Yes, drugs should be legalized, then they would be much less expensive and crime would plummet and we could use the money wasted on the "drug war" on something useful or even save it unless Obama has decided to invade Iran this week.)

[jsmirman]

88. Yep - it makes this pretty simple

When you are the governor who is a former attorney general who prosecuted prostitution, don't break the law, particularly by paying for sex.

[cherokeeprogressive]

45. I'm fairly certain that in the eyes of the law, it is a crime.

So what you think would pretty much be irrelevent.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. The OP is 'appalled' so the topic is OUR OPINIONS

I don't really care that Spitzer got sucked into a honeypot sting. Yes of course prostitution is illegal, it is just (again in my opinion) stupid that it is illegal and nobody has yet explained to me what the crime is that damages people or property that would justify a law against mutually consenting adult behavior.

But go ahead and join in with the OP in vast moral outrage over who is fucking whom for what sort of financial arrangement. Teh stupid is strong here as well.

[jsmirman]

89. Yes, this is sheer genius. In the State of Warren Stupidity, it is not a crime

of course, if this poster actually wanted to express this thought, he should have said, "I don't even think it SHOULD be a crime." Of course, this is not what was said.

But this poster obviously has a lot riding on perceiving everyone else as stupid, so he'd like to inform us that this is all about his super meaningless opinion.

And of course would like to pretend that this is about some moral outrage I've expressed over Spitzer's sex life. Of course, this doesn't resemble what I posted, but hey, once again, let's just plow ahead and bloviate, right Mr. Stupidity?

Prostitution's merits are a topic for another place or thread - but Spitzer violating the law while serving as Governor, paying for prostitutes after ardently prosecuting prostitution as Atty Genl, coming into office on an anti-corruption mandate and then participating in his own troopergate - these are the issues.

No one cares, Mr. Stupidity, if you don't think it's a crime. Back here in the real world, we had a Governor/Former Attorney General violating the law of his state and of other states.

[girl gone mad]

65. Prostitution is definitely a crime in New York.

I don't know, but maybe one should keep the fact that they like to purchase human beings for sexual gratification to himself. It isn't exactly progressive.

[Warren Stupidity]

70. all of you are just sharp as tacks. I don't think it is a crime.

Same as I don't think smoking pot is a crime. I have a whole list of private behaviors that are against some stupid law or other that I do not think are crimes. Having a short term sexual relationship for money is one of them.

But thanks for filling me in on the fact that short term sexual relationships for money are illegal in New York. Who knew?

[girl gone mad]

73. Smoking pot..

doesn't expose a person to deadly viruses. I've never heard of a desperate person smoking pot for money or of a young person being trafficked between countries for the purpose of smoking pot. That's just a dumb analogy. Prostitution is a dirty business, full of victims, whether you choose to see that or not.

I think prostitution is a form of slavery and there is no genuine need for it in the modern era, where willing sex partners are plentiful and easy to find.

[Warren Stupidity]

77. prostitution prohibition prevents rational regulation for disease control

how stupid can people be about this?

If your concern is in fact the spread of disease, which I doubt, then you should be for complete legalization and regulation. But no of course you think 'prostitution is a form of slavery', unlike a career at, for example, dunkin donuts.

"there is no genuine need for it in the modern era, where willing sex partners are plentiful and easy to find" - did you really write that and do you actually believe those words?

[jsmirman]

94. Hey, swifty, Spitzer wasn't participating in some "hypothetical magically antiseptic prostitution"

He was paying for prostitutes back here in the real world, the one, you know, that counts.

And btw, your hero, Elliot Spitzer, was all about prostitution prohibition when he was our Attorney General. Whoops!

Back here on planet mother *&%### earth, Spitzer was participating in REAL prostitution, like, the dirty kind, like the kind that hasn't passed through your magical corrective.

You seem to have trouble understanding how what ACTUALLY happened, here in the real world, is what matters.

Elliot was up to his high socks in the kind of prostitution that doesn't come disease-free, so you seem to have the wrong activity if you're seeking to post something actually relevant to what Spitzer was up to.

Please stop calling people stupid, seeing as you don't necessarily seem likely to summit Mount Einstein any time in the near future.

[geek tragedy]

86. You know nothing about what prostitution actually is.

It is an extension of the patriarchy that grinds women up, traumatizes, and destroys them so that piggish men can ejaculate into them.

But, your smug "I have a right to buy women's bodies" attitude is really progressive.

[me b zola]

80. The only problem I have with Spitzer and the prostitute is

that he convicted people based on them visiting prostitutes. Had he not done that I would have no problem with his private conduct. Much like Larry Craig, had he not advocated and legislated against gay rights, I would have spoken up for the bs sting in the men's room.

[Skittles]

81. buying people to use them as semen receptacles

:puke:

[geek tragedy]

85. Johns are pigs. They think they have the right to buy women like they

were pieces of meat.

Fuck the johns and fuck their indecent apologists.

[napi21]

2. &es Elliott was wrong in what he did. He apologized and resigned.

He deserves some credit for that. I'm not willing to completely disown him for mistakes he made in the past. I like his politics and although I don't live in NY, I would vote for him again. My guess is that 90+ % of politicians especially in DC are crooked in one way or another. I don't think you can ever get elected and have a completely clean record.

[jsmirman]

30. Spitzer owned what he did, although he did need to be pushed off the cliff.

Left to his own little echo chamber, he probably would have fought on and on against the inevitable.

But as a factual matter, at least up until now, he has owned it more or less.

Now we need to do the same.

[Turbineguy]

3. The lesson to me is

that you are better off taking on The Mob than Wallstreet.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. Spitzer was reinvented by the NYS party... sometime in the late 90's, I'm thinking.

>>>>>>>He's always been a man of contradictions, though - the man's career was bankrolled by his father's rapacious real estate practices, and this guy was supposed to be the people's champion of New York? I was involved on the tenant side of a rough real estate battle in New York City, and let me tell you, we had hopes for what Spitzer might intend, but we were sure as hell wary.>>>>>>

I've always been very skeptical for the same reasons.

I remember working in a primary campaign in the early 90's ... '94 (? ) for Karen Burstein for State Atty General. Elliot was one of two or three other candidates. His first go-round in electoral politics, as I recall. Elliot had little going for him other than his dad's $$$ ( above)and the influence with the party apparatus that that bought.

Judge Burstein was a liberal-lefty, openly gay former elected official and won the primary rather handily... as I recall. The apparatchiks sat on their hands and their wallets in the general, however, and Burstein lost to a conservative republican in the general.

Elliot went for a ( most likely very expensive) pr remodeling job thereafter and reemerged 4 years later to win the state atty gen race... primary AND general. And the rest is... well, some of it's history and some of it's DEM mythology. He was never what he seemed to be. At least, not after '94.

Good post.

[jsmirman]

21. Thank you for sharing that

I think the divide between New Yorkers with some familiarity with Spitzer and other people on this board is probably fairly sizable. And seeing as we're the ones who were his actual, you know, constituents, I'm thinking the less knee-jerk in the crowd, might, like, take note of that.

[the other one]

6. Blackmail is not legal.

My point is that threatening a sitting leader with blackmail is a farworse crime than solicitation.

Which of these blackmailable dems should I disaprove of more:

John Edwards - extra-marital affair
Bill Clinton - ditto
JFK - ditto
FDR - ditto

[asjr]

7. SC Gov. Sanford is a whole other ball game. He

is Republican so his affair does not matter. Spitzer "owned his shit".

[babylonsister]

8. And Vitter is someone's senator; that double standard

stinks to high heaven. Oh, and add Ensign. Do the crime, do the time and get sleazed on the way down? Seems that only works for one party.

And DU is in serious trouble, because of debate that goes on here? Isn't that what this place is about?

[jsmirman]

26. There was NOT debate in that other thread.

Raising the issue is one thing; a monolithic response in favor of such a viewpoint, and the shouting down of those who have the temerity to take the non-ridiculous and morally consistent viewpoint does not equal debate.

The response to people who think Spitzer's flouting of the law is a real problem is disturbing both in its thoughtlessness AND its moral bankruptcy.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. Unprotected Sex With Prostitutes For Years, Not Telling His Wife

Marvelous.

[jsmirman]

27. Yep. Glossing over the problem with that because he's a Dem

equals sucking as much as the other side does.

[lillypaddle]

10. I agree with your OP

And personally, I think prostitution should be legal. It's really not anybody's business.

and your line "If we don't own our shit, then we're full of it" is priceless.

[jsmirman]

34. Thanks - as I said, I'm of two minds on prostitution

my little head says... I'm just kidding.

I think it probably should be legal, although having been in certain countries where it is, I'm not sure that currently available evidence suggests that would be a good thing. But I think it may be the typical "Amsterdam immediately-post legalization of drugs" problem. Because it is the exception rather than the norm, it flourishes in a overripe, seedy, out of control sort of way. If it was legal everywhere, the few places where it is currently legal might be less of a nexus point for all, including the depraved to descend on, and might be a little more appealing.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

11. you've got to be joking!

[jsmirman]

32. Eleanor would be disgusted by your thoughtless and content-less nonsense

Here are three representative quotations from that great lady that I found in a first brief search:

If someone betrays you once, it’s their fault; if they betray you twice, it’s your fault.
Eleanor Roosevelt

It is not fair to ask of others what you are unwilling to do yourself.
Eleanor Roosevelt

Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both.
Eleanor Roosevelt

[ElsewheresDaughter]

59. 1 He did NOT betray me ....no faults there

2 how the hell does that relate?
3 I believe he knows that.

and what was the context....to whom and of what was she speaking/writing about at the time Elenore made those quotes?

you are smug.

[jsmirman]

90. Eleanor was a no nonsense lady, that is the point.

She would not approve of the rationalizations, lack of accountability, and unwillingness to bite down on the bitter pill that are involved in any sort of bunk that lets Spitzer off the hook for what he did. Spitzer's behavior was a disappointment, and is something that we, as New York Democrats, had to deal with.

[katkat]

84. jsmirman

I seriously doubt Eleanor said "If someone betrays you once, it’s their fault; if they betray you twice, it’s your fault." That's an old old saying, missing the third part which is if it happens the third time it's both your faults.

[classof56]

12. The most shocking thing to me is--Spitzer took a briefcase to HS every day

For four years! Clearly, that makes him a "weird cat" with "demons". Trust me--I'll never look at briefcases the same way again! Oh, and I'se regusted, too!

:eyes:

[ThomCat]

13. Oh come off it.

What he did is no more or less horrible than the blatant bribe-taking that most members of senate and congress do every day that everyone is required to ignore. It is no more or less horrible than what Vitter did, and he's still in office.

Spitzer's positives far outway his negatives. It's just that his negatives deal with sex, and people have irrational levels of hostility to any issue or controversy dealing with sex.

He should do some community service, get some counseling, and get back to work. He is too talented and has too good a track record helping the people of this state to be thrown away over this.

If you want to throw him away, that is your opinion. You are free to express it, but it is Just your opinion, and I'm free to dismiss it as weirdly over the top, melodramatic, judgmental, and vindictive. :eyes:

[Overseas]

50. I agree that Spitzer's positives outweigh his negatives.

He explains the need to re-regulate the financial sector very well. He explains the nature of the financial malfeasance that bankrupted our country very well. I look forward to learning more about our recent financial history from him. His commitment to well-regulated capitalism is of great interest to me.

That means more to me than his having patronized a prostitute, although of course I get very sad when brilliant politicians allow their sex drives to overcome their common sense and impede their more important missions.

Just as I agree with the poster that our so-called Democratic legislators allow the piles of campaign cash to overrule their mission to represent their constituents. It has been revolting to me to hear some Democratic legislators talk about "making things fair" for the private insurers who have defrauded all of us for decades. And pushing overly modest reductions in US carbon emissions in the face of a global emergency, probably due to lots of Old Energy campaign cash.

In terms of the gravity of the offenses, financial firms bankrupting millions of us by creating loan bundles they know are shoddy and swapping them several times over until they need a bailout or the economy will crash, is far more serious than going outside of marriage for sex.

But sadly, in our country, we allowed the hypocritical prudes in the Republican party to push the impeachment of a president for consensual sex but allowed a team of torturers to proceed with their business as usual, including rampant war profiteering, and still hesitate to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

[hlthe2b]

14. You are "appalled, just appalled" at a thread discussing...

whether or not Spitzer can make a comeback. You are embarrased by the discussion, because you don't believe in second acts for those who commit the unforgivable offense of paying for sex and being foolish enough to give theirr enemies the ammunition they need to destroy them.

Well, if we establish such a black and white standard vis-a-vis "foolishess," "no second acts," and sexual misconduct, we would never have benefit of a JFK, a Clinton, an FDR, or many many more, whose indiscretions or foolish incidents have become less public.

Spitzer actually has "owned his own shit," as you say and we did as well with his public disgrace, the investigation that charged him with NOTHING, and his voluntary loss of the governorship. I never saw Democrats rallying around Spitzer to defend him from nor to try to stop his political downfall. Yes, democrats DO pay a price. Repugs? Almost NEVER.

Oh, it was the paying for the sex that so offends your sensibilities so as to chalk Spitzer off forever? Well, ok.

If we don't own our shit, then we're full of it, as you say. If we excoriate all of our own and NEVER allow for a second act for those who are fallible, the we become sanctimonious for sure...... sanctimonious LOSERS.

Flame away, OP, if you wish. Sorry, I don't cotton to such black and white thinking.

[jsmirman]

23. I'm still interested in what Spitzer has to say. I think he's a bright man with a lot of experience

in governmental affairs and criminal and civil prosecution.

I have no problem with him participating in the public discourse, in fact, I welcome it and think he has a great deal of value to add.

I just think he's done as an electable official in New York State, for at least the foreseeable future.

[hlthe2b]

38. So, why are you opposed to a thread discussing the issue?

:shrug: You excoriate DU for even discussing whether or not he is done in politics and accuse those who debate of sharing in his hypocrisy?

[jsmirman]

39. Read my response elsewhere in this thread

sorry - not guilty of the hypocrisy you seem to want to pin on me.

There is a danger of people with balanced views being shouted down and marginalized here - and I will always stand up against that.

The debate wasn't about whether or not he was done in politics - it was about Spitzer's "victimization." There's nothing wrong with questioning the motives of those who were waiting for him with knives - there's everything wrong about portraying him as something other than a fallen figure guilty of hypocrisy and violations of the law from his seat at the head of our government (as New Yorkers) and as someone who was our former attorney general.

[hlthe2b]

40. You seem to be the most inconsistent poster I have encountered

lately.... You argue a point, then argue against your point, the clarify with the same point, then deny it. Whatever. Enjoy the day. I don't find this productive.

[jsmirman]

43. No. You apparently can't follow a balanced, reasoned viewpoint

that advocates fairness and precision in identifying criminal and moral issues.

Have fun screaming into your closet.

[hlthe2b]

48. Excuse, me jsmiraman... You do not get to misrepresent what

I have posted, though you seem to have difficulties with your own. Your rudeness and malicious comments, aside, that only underscores your hypocrisy, given your scathing comments towards what you claim "DU is rapidly becoming."

[BootinUp]

71. no flames from me

I agree.

but this type of prudish holier than though thinking is not new here.

[spanone]

15. 'this place is in serious trouble' bwahahaha fuck off

[Cha]

60. Brawawawawa..we've come through

worse than discussing Spitzer's Pros & Cons..is that what you're sayin?:P

[TexasObserver]

16. Why is it only Democrats who have to leave office for screwing around?

[jsmirman]

20. This place's understanding of "two wrongs don't make a right" is obviously on the fritz

Children learn to understand this. Why can't you?

[Overseas]

55. Oh yeah. Golly gee. Total Purity or Nothing !!

Guess we are not children any more.

[TexasObserver]

57. You can get back to teaching your Kindergarten class now.

We're adults. We don't need your "inside voice" shit here.

Either answer my question or stop annoying me.

[Phx_Dem]

17. I totally agree, and mostly because he was the one who was actively

prosecuting OTHERS for prostitution. This is a victimless cime that rarely gets much attention, much less prosecution by a high-level Attorney General.

I always liked Spitzer, and still do, but I think he's a HUGE HYPOCRIT. I don't feel a big sorry for him. And, frankly, I can't imagine why anyone would feel sorry for him since he seems to be doing just fine.

[jsmirman]

35. I think that

I probably agree with everything you said.

[Better Believe It]

18. So if he solicited prostitutes in Nevada you wouldn't have a problem with him. Is that right?

[jsmirman]

25. I'd feel a heck of a lot different about it

does that answer your question?

I think there was a moral component to his past prosecution of prostitution, so I still think there is some hypocrisy there, but the absence of a repeated, large-scale disregard for the law as a public official sworn to uphold the law? Yes, I think that would make some difference.

[Better Believe It]

76. This conduct wouldn't even raise an eyebrow in France and most of Europe

[jsmirman]

95. Criminal conduct - that violates laws that are actually enforced - tends to raise eyebrows ANYWHERE

understand that this is what is at issue, and you'll be back on topic.

We're not dealing with a hypothetical country or France or the rest of Europe.

Spitzer was the Governor of New York State, not any of those places. And HERE - well, it's a crime.

Something he had to have known, considering his spirited prosecution of prostitution from his position as Attorney General, the post he held until he became Governor.

That just won't fly.

[Honeycombe8]

44. It is illegal everywhere in the country to take women across state lines...

for the purpose of prostitution.

Then there's the issue that he used other than his personal checking account to pay for his pleasure. Also illegal.

No matter where he was located, he broke some serious laws.

[invictus]

22. K&R

[RetroLounge]

24. Your concern is noted

:puke:

RL

[ElsewheresDaughter]

63. Xs 2

:puke: :puke:

[bertman]

28. I recommended this thread and I appreciate your perspective on this. It's been valuable

to me in understanding more about Spitzer. Watching him last night on Bill Maher I got the impression that he was a really pushy, arrogant, asshole who thinks he's the center of the universe. But I still like what he had to say about a lot of things.

You're right about a lot of things, but I wouldn't bash DU so unilaterally. There are many categories of Democrats on this site. I disagree with many and agree with many others. Sometimes it's frustrating.

One comment I appreciated: he brought a briefcase to school every day for four years. That is indeed very over-the-top geeky for high school. But that's fine with me if he's getting the right info and making good decisions, which I thought he was in dealing with New York's financial excesses.

Too bad he got caught up in the traditional American politician-trap: extramarital sex for money.

Cheers.

[jsmirman]

29. Thank you

And the briefcase was just one thing - apparently he was a very weird guy, in general. I think it's also safe to say that he is a very intelligent man.

And I appreciate what you are saying about DU as whole - it's true that different threads take off in different directions - it just seems like a recent thread has been repeated instances of hypocrisy on our part, as Democrats, and a distressing lack of self-awareness. We ARE better than that - and, at least for me, to continue to have any involvement in politics means continuing to believe that there's nothing to stand for if we are not better than that. We had our collective intelligence insulted and spat upon for eight years - I won't participate in any politics that makes us complicit in that brand of bullshit.

[bertman]

53. I would argue that SOME of us Democrats are better than that. There are still plenty who

share the old "whatever it takes" philosophy with our Republican brethren and sistren.

We need more folks like you and I who won't tolerate the double-standards. We also need to realize that someone who has done something illegal and been caught and paid the price--as Spitzer did in spades--deserves a second chance, especially if he/she is intelligent, knowledgeable, and committed to Democratic policies.

I don't want to see us fall into the Republican mode of IGNORING the behavior of the Vitters and Ensigns for the sake of political expediency.

[jsmirman]

96. That seems to be true

as I said elsewhere, I actually believe that the moral high ground is within our grasp, because we are a party based on more than selfishness, greed, and hate.

We must be honest when one of our own does wrong.

As to whether Spitzer deserves a second chance - maybe, somewhere WAY down the line. I can tell you that it will be a loooong time before he is viable as a candidate for anything in New York. I think that sometimes the solution is that someone can continue to provide a voice that is worth listening to - they just may not be the right choice for public office.

One thing I've also said is that Spitzer's failings haven't rendered me unwilling to listen to what he has to say, or uninterested in his opinions and knowledge.

But I also have to admit that, for the foreseeable future, I'd be unlikely to vote for him to represent me.

[Hamlette]

31. across state lines? Why is that so bad? Should he step down for speeding?

Oh for gawds sake, we're talking prostitution here. And he wasn't a "family values" republican telling the rest of the world that the dems don't have any values because we don't hate gays.

[jsmirman]

33. It's a particular crime

Now he's probably less the guilty party there than the people who ran the ring, but he paid for the transport and was arguably guilty of the violation for that reason. And he was a "moral order" prosecutor when he was our Attorney General, so despite being consistently gay-friendly, he cannot be absolved of hypocrisy.

[Beacool]

36. As usual the problem with these types of issues is the hypocrisy of all involved.

And in this case there's plenty to go around. Spitzer garnered very little sympathy from all quarters because he was not a nice man and was very hard on others who had committed his same crime. He was tough and unyielding. So, when it was his turn to fall from grace, very few within the party spoke up for him. He was thrown to the curve and shunned.

Outside the party he was hated by the corporations he went after without mercy. I remember reading that at some Merrill Lynch office they opened bottles of champagne to celebrate his political demise. The company had been fined 100M. Although I don't think that Merrill is celebrating much lately.

I wonder how AIG celebrated since they had paid a 1.6B fine and the legendary CEO, Hank Greenberg, had to resign. Unfortunately for AIG, the next CEO (Martin Sullivan) is the one who almost ruined the company by listening to the a-hole in the London office who sold him on the idea of getting involved in the credit-default swaps. Most higher ups at AIG didn't understand what this guy in London was doing and they gave him far too much leeway, bringing down the largest international insurance company in the world.

[jsmirman]

41. Thank you, Beacool and Uzybone

these are the kind of thoughtful, balanced responses I'm worried are being shouted down by a too ready willingnesss to point fingers at the other side without being willing to turn our examination inwards, where necessary.

[Beacool]

58. You're welcome!!

:hi:

[Uzybone]

37. I 100% agree with you, no matter how good a Dem he is

Spitzer had to fucking go. And I am glad he did.

[Prophet 451]

42. Here's the thing

Spitzer was railroaded out of office over sex. Now, was he a hypocrite? Sure. Did he break the law? Of course. Did he do some really stupid, immoral stuff? You betcha.

But... But pretty much every major politician has screwed around on his wife. Bill Clinton and JFK are the most obvious but you could easily add a stack of others to that. Ben Franklin was fond of the ladies and the dram too. Were all of them unfit for office? People lose track of their reason where sex is concerned so let's make it another minor crime. Let's say Spitzer got caught out as a habitual pot smoker. Should his undoubted skills have been drummed out of office because he liked a toke? Yes, he broke the law but it's a f'ing stupid law (yes, I'm in favour of legalising prostitution and cannabis both).

Look, Spitzer should have resigned because, the US being as hung up on sex as it is, his position became untenable after the hooker habit came out but should we disregard his skills and abilities for all time because he was a dumb git who thought with his johnson? No, I think that would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Imagine if all the other politicians who thought with their johnson had their careers ruined by it.

Fact is, succeeding at politics in the modern age requires a level of commitment and ambition far in excess of the normal person. Should we really be surprised when their methods of release are also excessive?

[jsmirman]

46. The problem is that this is not just a matter of sex. It's about repeated criminal violations

We don't get to choose which laws we like and which laws we don't when we're the leading political official in the state.

You're 100% right about the untenable position and how it made it obvious what he had to do.

And just as Bloomberg, who has gone so absurdly hard after marijuana possession would be called out specifically for any marijuana-related offense, Spitzer had to face the music for his involvement with prostitution.

[Prophet 451]

49. Don't we?

Apparently, we don't prosecute crimes against humanity any more if you've got a note from your tame lawyer saying it's ok.

Yeah, I know. Totally different issue but the disparity makes my blood boil.

[jsmirman]

51. The list of things that are prosecuted selectively

drives me nuts, as well. Unfortunately, prosecutorial discretion is a fundamental element of our criminal system, and can only be dealt with through the political franchise.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

62. self delete

[NNadir]

78. Oh please...

...every major politician?

Abraham Lincoln?

George Washington?

Ulysses S. Grant?

I am convinced that the current President of the United States is purely a family man whose marriage is defined by faith and trust.

How do I know?

Because my marriage is defined by faith and trust and I know what it looks like.

A politician should evince higher standards than the rest of us. That they don't is not something to be rationalized.

I like Bill Clinton. But he knew they were gunning for him because of his inability to control his zipper, and he did great damage to his country because he couldn't control it. I am hardly a moralist, and I didn't support the impeachment, but Clinton deserves to have his reputation damaged by what he did.

[Prophet 451]

87. Obama, maybe

Lincoln had affairs ( http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9507EFDD1E3EEE3ABC4A52DFB5668389639EDE ). There's some evidence Washington did too (if banging one's slaves counts). Grant, I have no idea about. Is it true of all major politicos? No, hence the use of the word "virtually" but it is extremely widespread.

I'm glad you have a good marriage, I really am but not everyone does.

[NNadir]

99. There is no evidence whatsoever that Lincoln had affairs.

The New York Times is full of shit.

Lincoln's life is one of the most examined lives in world history.

Most major historians indicate that while Lincoln told bawdy jokes and had a frontier personality, he was extremely awkward with women except for his wife, who he clearly loved a great deal, as volatile as she was. Mary was, in fact, quite a catch, and Lincoln knew it and respected it.

She was witty, intelligent, hard working and often misunderstood. The evidence is quite clear that while their relationship had some loud disputes, Lincoln loved his wife very much and honored her. There is zero serious evidence that Lincoln was a womanizer or was ever unfaithful to her.

If he had been unfaithful to her, Billy Herndon - a somewhat suspect biographer even though he knew and worked with Lincoln as his law partner - would have been all over it. Herndon hated Mary Lincoln and went out of his way to minimize and demonize her. (Most historians are undecided about the veracity of the story of Lincoln's romance with Anne Rutledge, but even were it true, Miss Rutledge died long before Lincoln met Mary.) Herndon wasn't squeamish. He went out of his way to discuss how Lincoln thought his (real) mother was what was then called a "bastard."

[RollWithIt]

47. I agree... he broke the law and he had to go

He should have known better. Politics is dirty business and if you're going to be the "Law & Order" leader you sure as hell better not be flying hookers in and out of town.

Not to mention, his wife is hot.

[TankLV]

54. Whereas the reuke party has made it's WHOLE REASON FOR EXISTENE claiming IT is the "moral"

and "virtuous" one, the democrats mind their own business - except for the fucking hypocrite EDWARDS!!!

So we really usually don't care about the sexual proclivities of a person.

Now, Elliot made his career about going after similar crimes, and he was brought down by a similar crime - it's the HYPOCRISY that did him in - and rightfully so...

[whistler162]

56. To me the whole prostitute incident was just the final straw....

what with New Yorks version of Troopergate, State police ordered by Spitzer to follow the twit Bruno, to his poor working relationship with the legislature, didn't see him using Paterson for a liason, and then his mea culpa tour just to name a few.

As a AG he was good as Governor he was abismal. Now they expect me to vote for AG Cuomo instead of Gov. Paterson or some one else.

Sorry but my name isn't Charlie Brown!

If it comes down to Cuomo v. Guilliani I will have to thinkk about not voting or voting a third party.

[dolphindance]

61. I think sex workers provide an important service.

Sometimes men need to have the kind of "fantasy" sex they may not be getting at home. If this can be obtained with an agreeable price, I see no problem.

2 consenting parties == fun!!!

[girl gone mad]

67. Nobody "needs" unprotected anal sex.

Paying someone to let you do gross and dangerous things to them that they would never let you do if they weren't financially desperate is a Republican value, not a Democratic one.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

64. You come off as such a smug self righteous twit.

:puke: :puke: :puke:

[jsmirman]

93. And you come off as a dishonest disgrace to our party. When you prosecute people for prostitution

it's probably a good idea not to have a house account at one of the local prostitution rings.

When you come into office with a stated desire to eradicate corruption, you probably shouldn't abuse your office by using your resources to run an improper investigation.

These are, you know, the simple things.

Spitzer embarrassed his wife, his family, and his party, and let down everyone who devoted a day to his election because they believed in the things he said he believed in.

This isn't about me being self-righteous - although we all can tell that you would rather point fingers any which way you can to avoid - gasp - any sort of accountability - this isn't even about the moral questions surrounding prostitution (for me, at least, it is not). Personally, I am amply flawed. I am not, however, anyone's Governor, or anyone's Attorney General, and I have never prosecuted anyone for a crime I later commit (keeping in mind that his criminal activity was repeated and took place over a substantial period of time.

Unlike you, I actually think we're better than this. Unlike you, I actually believe our party can occupy morally higher ground than the other party can; by being the party that believes in things other than selfishness and hatred, I actually believe such ground is within our grasp.

We don't deserve the votes of the American people if we don't believe that what Spitzer did was a massive violation of their trust.

[boppers]

66. More than a few posts to this thread seem to equate adult consent and prostitution.

Citing JFK, MLK, Clinton, (etc.) in the same breath as Spitzer hardly makes sense, as consenting adults who have sex are *not* the same thing as running, or hiring a profitable business where the trade is in sex.

Thanks for the OP.


edit:typo, grammar

[Number23]

69. Thank. You. DAMN there are some idiots posting in this thread

What Bill and what Spitzer did are two completely different things. And damn, it's really not all that hard to figure that out.

[girl gone mad]

72. I tend to think the responses are coming from people who have very limited real world experience..

with prostitution. It's hardly the shiny, happy business they would like to pretend it is. I've seen the dark side, and it is immense.

Eliot Spitzer was asking this woman to put her life and health at risk for a few hundred dollars. He was happy to use her like a piece of human Kleenex to be discarded after he essentially masturbated into her anus. I wonder if the people minimizing his actions would feel the same if it was their daughter, sister or wife being used in such a manner?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

74. She was an adult women and made her own choices...don't try to make it out as if she was a sex slave

[boppers]

75. I didn't know the details of this one, in specific...

..but if that was the case, that's a potentially lethal fluid exchange, along with the usual working risks (Hep, HIV, HPV, Herpes, etc.)

And yes, folks who are quick to minimize the field often aren't very educated on the topic.

[foo_bar]

82. to be fair it was more than "a few hundred dollars"

The club's Web site shows a fee schedule of $1,000 per hour for a three-diamond prostitute and $3,100 per hour for a seven-diamond prostitute. Members of the exclusive Icon Club could reach restricted areas of the Web site and schedule appointments with the highest prostitutes, whose fees started at $5,500 per hour, the press release reads.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336493,00.html

The customers are said to pay $1,000 to $5,500 per hour for the services of the ring's "Spokes Models" . Spitzer was allegedly among those clients.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1721095,00.html

I know it doesn't change the basic economics of the "exchange", but I didn't see anything about Spitzer "essentially masturbat<ing> into her anus" (I even checked FOX).

[Hekate]

79. KnR, with thanks for some sane input from jsmirman, an actual New Yorker...

Things are getting weird at DU ... again.

Hekate

[jsmirman]

91. Things are getting weird

at DU... again - no doubt.

It's like I'm being reminded why I tend to duck out of here between election cycles. Every time, I'm like, "I wonder why I stayed away during this last year." I think I'll remember this time.

Freed from the reality of facing theAmerican people with something we can believe in, but that still has a remote chance of success, and freed from the accountability that comes with election cycles, it seems like a lot of people are free to feed themselves their own bullshit.

[Stephanie]

92. I'm an actual New Yorker, and I agree with you

I don't know what other thread you're referencing, but Spitzer was cooked as soon as the news was out. There was no defending him. They set out to get him and they caught him red-handed. End of story.

[jsmirman]

97. It was the thread about the Bush Administration "Watergating" Spitzer

You would have to read the actual comments in the thread, though, to get the flavor of what I was responding to.

I think this is just it - those of us who were actually *there* know exactly what the reality was. I think you've described it accurately.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

98. I'm a New Yorker also and it was my thread that appalled him...try reading it

[Stephanie]

100. I did

It doesn't change my opinion. As I said, they set out to get him. Well, they got him. We all knew it was a politically motivated hit on him at the time. Personally, I believe Joe Bruno was likely involved as well. But it doesn't change the fact that he was busted with no possible defense for his actions.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

101. and where is Bruno now?.."INDICTED.....Bruno embraced Paterson who used TAX $'s for his whore. WHY?

Paterson sucked up to Bruno and the NY State Repubs, because he knew what he had done and was afraid of them. Paterson LET the State Repubs use him out of fear.

Paterson needs to go!

[Stephanie]

102. I am not supporting Paterson

At all.