http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23561606NEW YORK - Gov. Eliot Spitzer has told senior advisers that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, the New York Times reported Monday.
My tax dollars at work!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23561606NEW YORK - Gov. Eliot Spitzer has told senior advisers that he had been involved in a prostitution ring, the New York Times reported Monday.
hehe, gotta squash the competition!In 2004, he was part of an investigation of an escort service in New York City that resulted in the arrest of 18 people on charges of promoting prostitution and related charges.
Nick wrote:Now, if he investigates prostitutes and pimps and claims they are evil, while going to a hooker, well....if that's the case, then he's a fucking moron politico who gets what he deserves.
I don't think it's irrelevant at all. They are "sworn to uphold" certain laws, but if those laws are bullshit, who better than the man in charge to point it out by leading by example? I'm being silly of course, but the point remains, maybe if people consider the laws instead of the dramatic headlines something useful could come out of it. I personally don't give two shits about the man in question, it doesn't affect me at all either way, but I still think its interestingWulfran wrote:The way I see it, and all you Bill Clinton Haters should be agreeing with me, the legality of prostitution is irrelevant. I agree with the statement that prostitution should be legalized (are there any states aside from Nevada where this is the case?), I also think that sodomy laws and adultery laws are BS too. The issue is an elected official willingly betraying the public trust by breaking the laws they are sworn to uphold. If the laws are that stupid then they should be working to repeal or replace them.
His career is based on being a hard nosed moral crime fighter bent on cleaning up crime, corruption and "vowing to continue his no-nonsense approach to fixing one of the nation's worst governments. "Kristen collected $4,300 from Client 9, according to the FBI affidavit. She said that the appointment went “very well” and that “she liked him and did not think he was difficult.”
The problem is that he did not try to change the laws, he broke them. If he had been fighting to have the laws changed, I bet the reaction would be much different. He instead went for the "moral crime fighter" approach that Knarlz mentioned, while he was doing the exact opposite in office.Nick wrote:I don't think it's irrelevant at all. They are "sworn to uphold" certain laws, but if those laws are bullshit, who better than the man in charge to point it out by leading by example? I'm being silly of course, but the point remains, maybe if people consider the laws instead of the dramatic headlines something useful could come out of it. I personally don't give two shits about the man in question, it doesn't affect me at all either way, but I still think its interesting
We've touched on this before. The Republican party likes to think of itself as the leader in morality in this country. When you take that sort of stance, you take more flak when you get caught breaking those same moral codes and boundries that you claim guide you and make you a better person.Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:If it was a Republican they'd be trashing him and asking for his resignation. Blatant hipocracy. It's crazy.
That part is true. If not for the mention of the "Drivers License for Illegals" thing I wouldn't have known this guy from Adam.Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:This man was a big morals guy. Huge! All they do is apologize for him. It's pathetic. Plus, in many news stories they didn't even bother to mention which party he was from. If it was a Republican....the title Republican would have preceeded his name every time it was mentioned and typed into the ticker.
That being said, he's probably going to end up in prison for the shuffling of money to pay for this - it'll be interesting to see where he got it. That's the real story to me, why were the IRS and banks interested in the means this money was moved? Hopefully we'll find out... the sex is probably just a red-herring here on top of the real criminality. My guess - campaign and/or government money was laundered into this.In a wiretapped conversation after the encounter, the prostitute, Kristen, called her booker to inform her that the session had gone well, and that she did not find the client “difficult,” as other prostitutes apparently had, according to the affidavit.
The booker responds that he, in an apparent reference to Client 9, sometimes asks the women “to do things that, like, you might not think were safe.”
I'm not looking for an argument here, but what coverage are you referring to? The coverage I've been watching, mostly MSNBC and CNN, have mentioned his party repeatedly, and have not been in anyway apologetic for him. The news anchors have covered the facts, and most of the opinion guys have been pretty critical of him.Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:This man was a big morals guy. Huge! All they do is apologize for him. It's pathetic. Plus, in many news stories they didn't even bother to mention which party he was from. If it was a Republican....the title Republican would have preceeded his name every time it was mentioned and typed into the ticker.
You guys really have to be able to acknowledge the liberal bias is major media.
I personally am all for regulated, legal prostitution. That's just a small thing in play here.
He's extremely rich and not by being a governor and not from tapping into the campaign funds. It's not your tax dollars that are funding this kind of thing. Personally, I could care less that he did this kind of thing but when you're trying to be a stand-up kind of guy, the hypocracy is irratating.rhyae wrote:It bothers me that he also cheated on his wife. He not only uses tax payer dollars to get his rocks off, because I bet some of those whores were written off as a business expense, transportation, dinners, hotels, gifts, but he was also married. I don't care how old fashioned that makes me. Why is a little integrity too much to expect?
If you're single and using your own money, screw anybody you want.
Sylvus wrote:Setting aside the moral implications of him being a married man, why is prostitution illegal?
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:The new Democrat party line has been changed to "At least we are banging women." And I am betting you can include Hitlery in that too.
The LT Governor is taking his place.Sylvus wrote:Who becomes Governor in that case?
And does he lose his status as a DNC Superdelegate?
Paterson will become the state's first African-American governor, and the first blind chief executive of any state.
Sylvus wrote:Who becomes Governor in that case?
And does he lose his status as a DNC Superdelegate?
Correct, i should have been clearer earlier.Sueven wrote:Paterson is also a Clinton supporter, but because he was already a DNC member, he was a superdelegate prior to his ascension to governor. So it's still -1 for Clinton.
I tend to believe that what he was paying for was discretion. Apparently, this has been going on for years without any of the prostitutes spilling the beans. He got what he paid for.Fairweather Pure wrote:He was paying upwards of 3k for a couple hours? That better have the best sex of his life.
I understand why he had to pay for it given his high profile, but christ almighty, 3 thousand dollars?!? Pussy is free, free, free! You can't walk down the street without tripping over it, and lord knows every woman over 25 is throwing it at anything that has a job and a pulse. Crazy!
Agreed. He was a fine governor, and he did a lot as Attorney General. Maybe it will raise the question why prostitution is illegal.Nick wrote:I don't think it's irrelevant at all. They are "sworn to uphold" certain laws, but if those laws are bullshit, who better than the man in charge to point it out by leading by example? I'm being silly of course, but the point remains, maybe if people consider the laws instead of the dramatic headlines something useful could come out of it. I personally don't give two shits about the man in question, it doesn't affect me at all either way, but I still think its interesting