New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, who rose to power on his reputation as a crusader against white collar crime and lax ethics, has been implicated as a client of a high-end prostitution ring. My reaction? Here we go again.
One more time, a man in high political office is caught with his pants down. One more time, we cluck-cluck about how unforgivably stupid he was to behave in this way knowing - as on some level he must have - that his chances of being caught were high. And one more time we note the strange, lopsided standards that hold sway in the US, and how often the context of bad behavior - the fact of it - is worse than the bad behavior itself.
Of course Spitzer should have known better. Politicians have to be aware of the need for impeccable personal behavior, both legally and morally. Their careers depend on it more than most people's. That's because the American press, and a portion of the populace, demand that politicians be as pure as clergymen. (Okay, maybe not clergymen - bad example.)
Yet time and again, the politicians fail. Perhaps with power comes a false sense of invulnerability, but I'll leave the psychology to the psychologists; my point is that every time this happens, we talk about our foolish standards for politicians, about how their personal lives shouldn't suffer such scrutiny or bear so heavily on how well we judge their job performance - yet nothing ever changes.
To make a somewhat extreme analogy, do you actually know anyone who thinks marijuana should be flat-out illegal in every circumstance? I'd wager most of us know very few, if any, such people. Yet politicians continue to believe that that's what their constituents want. There may be some areas, some constituencies, that back the federal government's zero tolerance policy for marijuana even for medical use, but it's not most of the country. Yet nothing changes.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - El Bicho
Spitzer has to go. I don't need nor expect politicians to remain monogamous, and don't care what happens in the personal lives of consenting adults, but being involved with an illegal prostitution ring opens the politician up to potential blackmail and all types of shenanigans. The people of NY are lucky the FBI found him first.
Asking our public servants to put their job and the people's trust ahead of their own desires doesn't seem like a potentially high standard. He shouldn't have pursued and accepted the job if it was more than he could handle.
2 - El Bicho
Correction : Asking our public servants to put their job and the people's trust ahead of their own desires doesn't seem like a[n impossibly] high standard.
3 - Bennett
Personally, I want my politicos well fucked. I want them to be relaxed, and able to focus on getting on with their job of running whatever they have to run.
I don't want them sexually frustrated and unless they break the law in doing so (as in this case), I don't give a rats ass how they get their rocks off.
It's none of my, or anybody else's business.
4 - Jon Sobel
I agree with you, El Bicho, Spitzer should go. But it's because he was stupid, and because of the implications and likely effects of that stupidity. And fundamentally, and in general - still not knowing the exact circumstances of this case, of course - it's sexual Puritanism that makes opportunities for people to be so stupid.
5 - Pablo
Nice article Jon,
I too have no sympathy for politicians that get caught with their pants down. That being said if prostitution was not a crime, and being the world's oldest profession it is never going to disappear (thank god), he would not have to give up his job as I believe he will, perhaps without his wife.
As to your reference of marijuana, (of which I am a lover of and not for medical purposes, strictly recreational)mimho the reason that it is not legal has nothing to do with the will of the people, and what they want. The politicians in Washington, and most state legislatures gave up serving their respective constituencies years ago. Frankly the work for vested corporate interests, particularly the pharmaceutical industry, which loathes pot for obvious reasons. I have commented on numerous posts as well as written an article on why I think that the voting system in this country is rigged from the ground up.
6 - Bennett
Jon, I should have mentioned in my comment that I enjoyed reading this. Please keep up the good work.
Bennett
7 - Jon Sobel
Thanks Bennett, and I agree with you that politicians who have satisfying personal lives are probably better for us as a rule. How many of us secretly (or not so secretly) thought, when the Monica Lewinsky thing happened, "Well, he shouldn't be cheating on his wife, but at least we have a President who isn't an uptight robot - he actually has a sex life."
8 - Clavos
I'm curious, Jon, as to why you omitted Spitzer's political affiliation in your otherwise fine story?
Interestingly, many in the MSM (including ABC, NBC, and the AP) have done the same.
Equally interestingly, I can't remember a single story omitting Mark Foley's political affiliation when that story broke...
9 - Jon Sobel
Clavos, it didn't even occur to me that his political affiliation was relevant. Also, probably because I live in New York, I didn't think about people who don't live here and wouldn't necessarily know Spitzer's party.
But you raise a good point. The Republicans have been the sex-scandal party lately, and the press certainly points it out with relish. That's because the press loves to point out hypocrisy, and it's the Republicans who typically campaign on "family values."
10 - Clavos
Thanks, Jon. I take your point.
I only mentioned it because usually, when a politician is mentioned in print, his/her affiliation is appended onto their name, so it's remarkable that it's omitted in so many of the stories.
In any case, Mr. Spitzer certainly seems to have joined the ranks of the "hypocrisy challenged."
I would imagine there's a lot of celebrating taking place on Wall St...
11 - Matthew T. Sussman
His real crime, is that he didn't shop around for a better price.
He got scre....
...stif....
...overcharged.
12 - Allan
This guy was angling for the prez job one day. Guess that's not a career option anymore.
13 - Dr Dreadful
Isn't it ironic that only this morning - I think it was about 27 seconds before the story broke - someone on these threads was seriously floating Spitzer's name as a possible running mate for Hillary.
Well - he certainly got himself noticed!
14 - Baronius
I'm sure not complaining about the "strange, lopsided standards" in America. The problem isn't with our standards, it's with the people who fail to live up to them. Do you really think that not transporting an individual across state lines for the purpose of prostitution is an impossble standard? I'd guess that most of us live up to that standard every day. (Most of us also don't smoke marijuana.)
I want to say that even if we don't agree with the laws against prostitution, we should expect politicians to obey them. But you know what, that's crazy. Prostitution is wrong. It should be illegal. Spitzer should be ashamed, and he should be prosecuted.
15 - Dave Nalle
Prostitution is not wrong. What's wrong is the exploitation that goes with it because it's illegal. What's wrong is someone like Spitzer who prosecuted many a prostitute and many a John hypocritically supporting laws against prostitution while being one of those who helps to exploit women in prostitution who are indeed exploited no matter how much they charge, so long as it remains illegal.
Wouldn't it be refreshing to see Spitzer turn around and argue for the legalization of prostitution in the aftermath of this. But keep hoping - it will never happen.
Dave
16 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I dunno....
Spitzer is supposed to have been a smart Jewish lawyer. According to his bio at the state of New York, he was not religious and did not have a bar mitzva.
If he had ever recited "Shma Yisrael" and the associated lines from the Torah, he would have come across this from b'Midbar/Numbers 15:37-41.
And Hashem said to Moses saying: "Speak to the Children of Israel and say to them that the are to make themselves fringes on the corners of their garments, throughout their generations....And it shall constitute fringes for you that you may see it and remember the commandments of Hashem and do them; AND NOT CHASE AFTER WHAT YOU DESIRE IN YOUR HEART AND LUST AFTER WITH YOUR EYES."....
This is recited twice daily.
The fringes, called tzitzít in Hebrew, function as a string around one's finger, reminding one of his obligations to G-d.
I'm not saying that all religious Jews are moral saints. Far from it! But of the "religious" Jew who cheats, steals, lies and abuses G-d's laws in other ways, one need only point at the tzitzít as condemnation saying, "you should know better, dummy!" If the fool tries to brazen it out after that (and there are many who do), he only digs himself into a bigger hole of dishonor.
Spitzer, the smart Jewish lawyer from Riverdale, had nothing to remind him not to follow what his eyes lusted after. So he arranged for an hour with a high priced whore and boy, is he paying now....
Whether he quits or not doesn't matter. His career prospects are severely damaged. And his wife, smelling blood, might decide to charge him $5,000 per hour in the sack retroactively.
Let's hope for Spitzer's sake that he has indeed learnt his lesson, and that the woman he married does not turn vicious on him.
17 - Pablo
Very well said Dave.
Baronius prostitution is wrong? You see thats what i love about you conservatives who when push comes to shove are as hypocritical as they come. All the talk about freedom, and the rights of the individual, is all meaningless crap outta your movement Baronius. Last time I checked a person's body belongs to him or her, and what they do with it, excluding violating another human beings rights is their own damned business. One could very easily argue that marriage itself frequently is an act of prostitution, particularly when the girl marries the guy for dough, and the guy marries the girl for her sweet pussy, dont you think Baronius? I certainly do.
You also mentioned Bill Bennett as on of your heroes, I cannot recall a bigger slimeball hypocrite than him. From his days as the drug czar when he began to see that everyone not just drivers and pilots have to submit to random urinalysis to prove to the state that their blood was pure enough, to his compulsive gambling and losing 6 million bucks. I will dance on that fuckers grave when he kicks the bucket, you can rest assured. Conservative? I call it fascism Baronius, Bill Bennett my ass.
18 - Clavos
There's no such thing as a free lunch...
19 - Maurice
Contrast Barney Frank with Larry Craig. They both like to get a blow job from a guy. For one of them it is career ending; the other it is career enhancing. I think politicians can represent whatever walk of life they want to as long as they are consistent in their views and actions.
One thing I have to point out. Most of our politicians (including Sptizer) are lawyers. Does anyone have high hopes of high standards for these jerks? Their approval rating is lower than Bush's for a reason....
20 - The Obnoxious American
I'm jewish, not religious, I think it's a sin to have sex with a prostitute when you are married. Not only disrespectful to the wife, but you could give her a disease god forbid. That said, I think prostitution should be legalized and regulated, like in Vegas. It can be done, and it would be a better alternative to the slavery that exists today in the sex trade. Plus, we could tax it!
In terms of spitzer, I want to relate my personal spitzer story.
I was a dot commer, I amassed a large amount of stock options during my work in those days. Enough to conceivably strike out on my own and be independent. Then the bubble burst. There were stocks that were recommended to me, stocks that shouldn't have been recommended. Thanks to the magic of the AMT, and my own lack of experience trading, I lost virtually everything. I licked my wounds, I picked myself up and started over again. I was sad at the lost opportunity.
I read about Spitzers suit against the brokerage houses. He collected 1.3 billion dollars as part of a deal for some of the trading shenanigans that were going on. Great I though, perhaps I could get something back. No such luck, upon deeper inspection of the numbers, most of that money went straight to the state coffers. But I was one of the guys who lost money. It turns out only a small portion of that 1.3 bill was returned to investors, 90% went to the government.
That's not justice, that's called a payout. From that day forward, I saw Spitzer for what he was. I would have been fine just losing in the market, it happens. But this so called fighter for the people, celebrated in the media for taking down goliath was really working for us, wouldn't I see something? A penny? A couple of stamps? I didn't even get that much.
21 - JustOneMan
Jon...
So if "Republicans who typically campaign on "family values." They are therefor vilafied by the MSM for having sex and/or being gay...
The "Dumbocrats who tyoically campaign on undermining family values get a pass??
And in my opinion the reason you left out Spitzers politcal affilation is because you and he are both DUMBOCRATS!
JOM....
22 - Jon Sobel
Dumbocrats... Dumbo... heh, that's funny. The elephant is a GOP symbol, isn't it? Anyway, enough silliness... if #21 is a typical JOM comment, I say let JOM say what he wants - it just reflects badly on you, JOM, if all you can come up with is "I know you are, but what am I?"
23 - The Obnoxious American
JOM's comments aside, this is a clear case of partisan reporting. Not by the author of this piece, he may be a democrat, but this piece isn't overly partisan.
It's not just family values situations, it's any case where any transgression by our elected leaders occurs. Did everyone know that that case of the congressman stuffing money in his freezer was a Democrat? It wasn't as clear as Mark Foley being a republican, that's for sure. You can always expect to see the R after the name if they are republican, and nothing if they are a democrat.
24 - Dr Dreadful
Maurice, #19: Well said, especially your first paragraph.
Jon, #22: Unfortunately that comment is all too typical of JOM. Just try to pin him down on exactly what he means by 'Democrats working to undermine family values' and see what happens.
[sigh]
25 - The Obnoxious American
I can see why some would suggest dems are anti family values. Support for gay marriage is a prime example, IF you happen to believe that gays can't ever have a real family. I know too many gay people. A monogomous gay couple is about as boring as a hetero couple. No reason why they can't be even more boring as a married gay couple in my opinion.
I think the dems real offense against family values is the socialism stuff. Hard to have good family values when everyone is standing on line for toilet paper and potatos. In fact it's the Dems' socialist stances that are an offense on everything in my opinion. And if you think I am being facetious, just take one look at the CEO pay rhetoric by both dem candidates, or the gap between rich and poor rhetoric. I won't fall in line comrade.