MrRain422 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Also importamt to realize the difference between cheating on your spouse, and spending $80,000 to cheat on your spouse with multiple prostitutes. Might make a difference to the person who shares his bank account, but doesn't matter an ounce to me. But Spitzer isn't accused of just flings on the side. This is money laundering and prostitution. I dont think a governor (or AG) needs to be perfect, but he/she needs to find a way to obey the law, no? I don't get it -- your problem is his hypocrisy? Politicians are hypocrites all the time. You make it sound as though I've defended hypocrisy from politicians in other instances. Yes, politicians are hypocrites all the time, and it's a problem every time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mrs. Peel Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Is it certain that the money was out of his own pocket? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 His flings on the side are not relevent though. The fact that he's a big hypocrite is. If he had never said a word about prostitution or worked to fight it then this would be a completely non-story as far as I'm concerned. I don Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 The folks that are arguing that cheating on his wife is irrelevant are ignoring the fact that while his private life may be a nonissue for you, the state still has laws that need to be followed by its citizens. You may not agree with this law in particular, but it's a law that would be enforced against you if you were busted under it. And once you start distinguishing between the laws you agree with, and the laws you don't agree with, you are sliding down a very slippery slope. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Might make a difference to the person who shares his bank account, but doesn't matter an ounce to me.If you were married, and your spouse's (illegal?) indiscretions threatened you or your children's well being, financially or otherwise... you might have a diffferent take on it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 One key difference between Spitzer and Bush is that Spitzer didn't get Congressional approval of his affair. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 And once you start distinguishing between the laws you agree with, and the laws you don't agree with, you are sliding down a very slippery slope. there it is. One key difference between Spitzer and Bush is that Spitzer didn't get Congressional approval of his affair. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I don Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 judges rule that point given on the "Bush Administration Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 There's relevence in his hooker-izing. It's illegal activity. There's the hypocrisy, too. But Doesn't it also speak to his ability to effectively run the state if he's busy acquiring broads on the side? I think it does. It also speaks to his inability to distinguish between right and wrong on some level. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Spitzer was also in a bad spot because his popularity had pretty much evaporated. Dude wasn't really a that much of a people person, and he lacked the power base to make the other Albany power bases do his bidding. Now, if I can only get some legislation before Gov. Paterson, then we could get some things done around here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 judges rule that point given on the "Bush Administration Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chendizzle Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 And once you start distinguishing between the laws you agree with, and the laws you don't agree with, you are sliding down a very slippery slope. What? Why shouldn't I do this? I break plenty of laws that I feel comfortable with breaking. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
EL the Famous Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 What? Why shouldn't I do this? I break plenty of laws that I feel comfortable with breaking. using the same rationale, what's to stop others from breaking the ones you don't feel should be broken? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 What? Why shouldn't I do this? I break plenty of laws that I feel comfortable with breaking.Violation of the social contract will get you removed from society. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Kinsley Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Dude wasn't really a that much of a people person...... unless you charged $5,500/hr. BTW - What do we know about Paterson? Does this change anything superdelegate-wise? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Kinsley Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 So this is "her." Not bad, but $5,500/hr? Really now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I don't have the heart to go back through this thread, but one of the things I find truly disgusting is Spitzer dragging his old lady out with him for these press conferences. That can only compound the poor woman's humiliation imo. What would be just is to have him giving his sorry speech with a split screen of his wife leaving the courthouse with a team of lawyers, holding up divorce proceeding papers. Fuck the 'stand by your man' philosophy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Paterson was not really a notable legislator. I have no idea what he will be like as governor. Interestingly, Spitzer's nemesis, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, a Republican. now moves up to be lieutenant governor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Paterson was not really a notable legislator. I have no idea what he will be like as governor. Interestingly, Spitzer's nemesis, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, a Republican. now moves up to be lieutenant governor.Yeah, Bruno was on CNN tonight and although he said this whole thing didn't make him feel good it appeared to me that he could barely contain his joy. Sweet revenge indeed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 If you were married, and your spouse's (illegal?) indiscretions threatened you or your children's well being, financially or otherwise... you might have a diffferent take on it. Right, that's exactly what I said. If I shared his bank account, it would matter to me. But I don't, so it doesn't. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I don't have the heart to go back through this thread, but one of the things I find truly disgusting is Spitzer dragging his old lady out with him for these press conferences. That can only compound the poor woman's humiliation imo. What would be just is to have him giving his sorry speech with a split screen of his wife leaving the courthouse with a team of lawyers, holding up divorce proceeding papers. Fuck the 'stand by your man' philosophy. I read some blogs speculating about this earlier. I don't really understand why the wives are always next to these guys at their press conferences. I don't think anyone would think they were wrong to not show up for that particular event. The best explanation I've heard is that perhaps they do it so that the press doesn't come seeking them for comment later. Like, if they show up and stand with their husband for the press conference, they're less likely to be hounded into commenting afterward. Sort of makes sense I guess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 And once you start distinguishing between the laws you agree with, and the laws you don't agree with, you are sliding down a very slippery slope. Anytime anyone breaks a law, they run the risk of facing legal consequences. But that doesn't mean that every law is equal, and it doesn't mean that I should be equally appalled by every law broken. Some things are just bigger deals than others. I didn't complain that Spitzer may face consequences for going to prostitutes. He broke the law, and he knew that that was a risk he was taking so I don't feel sorry for him, but that doesn't mean I especially care about what he did either. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I read some blogs speculating about this earlier. I don't really understand why the wives are always next to these guys at their press conferences. I don't think anyone would think they were wrong to not show up for that particular event. The best explanation I've heard is that perhaps they do it so that the press doesn't come seeking them for comment later. Like, if they show up and stand with their husband for the press conference, they're less likely to be hounded into commenting afterward. Sort of makes sense I guess.Or to show some decency in the face of indecency. I used to think the same thing as to why the wife would stand there like a fresh corpse while the busted idiot prates about how sorry he is. My perspective has changed a little as I get older and I see the move of the wife standing there less as a support system for the shamed husband and more as a message to her kids, friends, family, whoever that she's bigger than the issue. We all know it's gotta be humiliating. To hide from the public or not be there for the resignation might show weakness? I don't know, I may be way off on this. Maybe the women are pushed/persuaded by advisors/spin doctors to appear. One thing's for sure is that it's got to be difficult to stand there. It would be apt if she filed for divorce soon,though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Or to show some decency in the face of indecency. I used to think the same thing as to why the wife would stand there like a fresh corpse while the busted idiot prates about how sorry he is. My perspective has changed a little as I get older and I see the move of the wife standing there less as a support system for the shamed husband and more as a message to her kids, friends, family, whoever that she's bigger than the issue. We all know it's gotta be humiliating. To hide from the public or not be there for the resignation might show weakness? I don't know, I may be way off on this. Maybe the women are pushed/persuaded by advisors/spin doctors to appear. One thing's for sure is that it's got to be difficult to stand there. It would be apt if she filed for divorce soon,though. agreed... my wife and I talked about that last night. Maybe she can get past the fact that he cheated. However, could she get past the fact that he was spending $5k a pop to do so? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.