Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

736
Letters
Monday, March 10, 2008 12:00 AM

Who cares if Eliot Spitzer hires prostitutes?

What accounts for the intense moral outrage from all corners over this private, consensual act between adults?

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:32 AM

Tina

LWM

Timberland's post is there for all to see. Maybe you shouldn't try to speak for him either.

-- tina schrier

I'm not the one putting words in his mouth. I read what he wrote. It was pretty much exactly what I've been saying, also from first hand experience, although I confess I wasn't doing what William was. He's older and hornier than I am. He's a randy, dirty old man!

You, my dear, are a bit of a kook. But we like kooks around here. We just tease them mercilessly.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:36 AM

Missing the point

There are two glaring reasons that Spitzer should resign:

1) The funds came from his re-election campaign, not his personal bank account.

2) He used money-laundering strategies to hide the funds.

Excluding these facts from the article is sloppy. Spitzer has had some issues in his past as well (the way his 1994 campaign was financed, using state troopers to go after a political foe) to indicate that he is ethically challenged in general.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:37 AM

Sauce for the goose?

Sauce for the gander.

We can't jump up and down screaming about the rule of law when the president violates a congressional statute (FISA), then just look the other way when a governor violates his oath of office. The nature of the particular offense is much less important than the fact that he swore to uphold the law. If he were a private citizen, then the furor would be unwarranted. But, he had a special obligation, and his primary crime is STUPIDITY. If he's stupid enough to try to pull something like this, he doesn't belong in any office of consequence.

How many times, Glenn, have you reminded us that we are a nation of laws? If you think prostitution laws are stupid, CHANGE THE LAW. But, don't try to sneak around the law, then ask for clemency because the offense was trivial in the first place.

Time for Eliot to take his medicine like a man. He was asking for this.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:38 AM

@ Phoenix Woman

Actually, when I was dating, I went out of my way to pay my own tab.

Thank you. What century does this guy live in?

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:39 AM

Phoenix Woman

Hmmm -- sounds like somebody hasn't been laid recently. ;-)

LOL, I didn't say all women were that way, just the majority of those who are "in the market" so to speak.

I'm a grandpa three times over and I have health issues due to heavy metal poisoning. My wife's brother basically died from complications of heavy metal poisoning from his lifelong career as a machinist working with things like rhodium, palladium, platinum, gold and so forth for the microchip industry.

No, the insurance wouldn't pay up..

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:43 AM

What century does this guy live in?

LOL again..

I started to write 19.. on something a few months ago.

The better question is: What *millenium* am I living in?

My oldest granddaughter is seven, has six pack abs and is in the 98th percentile height wise.. She's going to be at least as tall as my wife, who is 5'10"

She is going to do very well on the barter system.. ;-)(

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:44 AM

Expenses?

I'm not much interested in the blah blah about Spitzer's morals, prostitution, etc.-- Huey Long anyone? I AM interested in whether he expensed his parties to the NY State.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:45 AM

This is just a typical Republican presidential campaign launch

and should be treated as such. Also a good foil to deflect comments on torture. How can you even think about the fact that the United States may by some estimates have tortured between 15,000 and 27,000 people since 2001 when the Democrat Governor who prosecuted Wall Street tried to pay for sex?

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:45 AM

I think many of our generation live in both

Thank you. What century does this guy live in?

-- SusanMc

Especially now that things really were better in the good old days.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:48 AM

Hmmmm

Are we talking about William Timberman? (Not "Timberland"?)

(waves to William) Nice to see you, Bill!

Speaking of all things sex: Where does purchased phone sex fall on the list of wickednesses?

Which makes me think of something else:

Undocumented workers, sellers of recreational drugs (the most popular of which are less harmful than tobacco or booze), and sex workers.

If they could work legally, they could have legal protections under the law (wages/working conditions/unions/etc.) and be sensibly regulated (no sales to minors, etc.). (In the case of undocumented workers, at least, it would probably reduce employer demand for them, as the whole point of hiring undocumented workers is to have people who you can cheat and underpay and who can't fight back; if they have the same rights as native-born workers, then the economic justification for hiring them disappears and employers are forced to hire the native-born jobless instead.)

But of course, keeping their livelihoods illegal makes exploiting them extremely easy. (And keeping drugs illegal means that the kingpins make big, big bucks, because they can justify a huge markup by saying "it's illegal, you know".)

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:48 AM

It's the hypocrisy, stupid.

Nobody cares about consensual sex. But when you crusade as being squeaky-clean and it turns out you're not, then you should expect a double-barrel load of comeuppance.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:54 AM

To Glenn and DCLaw1

Why is prostitution different from porn?

Because we have all agreed that, for most criminal matters, the majority rules. Our legislatures, representing us, have seen fit to draw a distinction, and codify it in the law.

If we don't like the distinction, then we have one and only one choice. Elect different representatives and eliminate the distinction by changing the law.

Democracy is messy and it doesn't always make perfect sense, but it's all we have. If our Chief Executives can't follow the law, they don't belong in office. Period.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:55 AM

Yes we are, Phoenix Woman

Hmmmm

Are we talking about William Timberman? (Not "Timberland"?)

(waves to William) Nice to see you, Bill!

We call him Timbaland, like the rapper. Sometimes.

I should have suspected a fellow Arizonian like William would frequent your fine blog.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008 06:57 AM

L.W.M

and you, my dear, are an apologist for one of the most damaging practices that can be carried out against society's most vulnerable women.

You also select out what you want to address and ignore 95% of what everyone is saying--in other words, reality.

And you are not teasing me. You are calling me a name because you have nothing left to throw at me.

If I am a kook than Andrea Dworkin is also a kook, and she worked as a prositute and she knows of what she speaks.

But go ahead, select your reality to be any way you want. Don't let what us kooky women say deter you.

Most Active Letters Threads

374

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
206

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
123

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
108

How dare you criticize wasteful defense spending!

So you think it's only terrorist-appeasing lefties who are down on Pentagon profligacy? Think again
54

Police to talk to Woods

Early morning crash raises questions, and revives tabloid speculation

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon