I don't think it is asking too much for the public to expect law-enforcers to not break the very laws they are charged to enforce. We are then lowering the bar to meaninglessness.

The bar is already so low a planaria couldn't limbo under it.

It is the somewhat unusual law enforcer who doesn't break the very laws he is charged to enforce.

I say this as someone who is related by marriage to a law enforcement family. I've heard too much unguarded talk to have many illusions.

I think there often is a victim In prostitution: the prostitute. ...The whole business is about as nasty and sleazy as anything can be...-- Bibblesnæð

It's because culturally we need the "act" to be nasty and sleazy. I don't know why, but unfortunately it seems a good part of the allure is that it is naughty, it is dirty. It doesn't have to be, but culturally it is. Looking at porn on the net, most of it is ugly, misogonistic, at least 180 degrees removed from erotic and at worse bereft of anything resembling any kind of humanity. Look at the boob tube, the innuendo is all about being naughty or "forbidden". I am not saying there are not balanced individuals out there with healthy sex lives, but overall as a culture it is pretty sick. Hence most prostitution falls in line with the greater culture and is also sick.

As far as how he was caught. Glenns article suggests he may have been targeted, but more worrisome and more likely is that we all have the same level of monitoring on our transactions and our banks and other financial institutions work hand and hand with big brother.

I fear privacy will be a word that drops from our lexicon, as it continues towards having no meaning.

are by no means necessarily the same thing. If Spitzer could not obtain equal or greater sexual stimulation by just holding hands with a schicksa than even the most ardent ministrations of all the courtesans in the seraglio could provide, he is one sad customer. Yes, I am aware that seraglios are usually habitated by wives or concubines who make up the harem, but who am I to deny Spitzer any extra zest he needs.

Eliot, stick with the schicksas, leave the prostitutes alone.

When I say law enforcement I meant in the political arena, not the cops.

I am not sure what your point is actually can you clarify it for me? What responsibility does a public official have to uphold the law?

"The idea that these women -- $1,000-$3,000/hour -- are some sort of exploited quasi-slaves is laughable and absurd. Have you ever talked to any? Read any literature about the prostitution business? You really have such a low opinion of adult women who choose this as their career that in your imagination, they are deprived of agency and choice?"

This quote was from GG a few dozen pages ago, and I certainly hope someone has rebutted him on this point already. But it just goes to show how men in general have NO idea of the concept of prostitution ... only from their gender's POV (they just cannot think outside that perimeter, sadly). He is basically equating the $ amount with a lesser degree of "quasi-slave exploitation", i.e. hey, they're getting paid big bucks per hr so how on earth are they being exploited??

The definition of exploitation is not (and should not be) based solely on financial terms. Unfortunately, GG seems to look at it that way.

Also, a while back he mentioned (in a reply to "Blue Meme") that this Spitzer character should be treated as the "average citizen" in terms of his illegal behaviour. Uh, no, you idiot. He lost all "privileges" (if you will) of being an "average citizen" when he was elected to office. You can't choose when you want or don't want to be considered just an "average citizen" when you choose to be an elected politician. There are higher standards according to the higher degree of power you hold, period. I mean, there is such a thing as standards still, is there not? (shakes head disgustedly).

And ... to those who have argued that there should be no discussion of morals/morality when it comes to the law and legal/illegal behaviour, sorry chumps, doesn't work that way. The most basic laws out there, in any country on this earth (for crimes such as theft, murder, fraud, and yes, prostitution) ARE based on morals, universal morals, whether you choose to connect it your own religion/faith (ex. Ten Commandments) or not, or whether you choose to be connected to a discussion of morality or not.

To go to the very core of morality is, basically, this: You are protecting your fellow human being, as well as yourself (animals too, for some laws out there) from harm, pain, hurt, etc. There is always going to be the concept of "right and wrong" associated with morals and, therefore, the law. And yes, there is always going to be some degree of judgment by "average citizens" upon their elected reps in office, because they damn well better be held accountable to some basic, decent, standards. To me (and I hope most others, otherwise it really is the Decline of Western Civilization), what Spitzer did falls under basic, decent standards that he failed to uphold.

Yes, Bush and his organized crime gang have done far worse (and have the blood of thousands of Americans and Iraqis to show for it) and should be charged for war crimes and such, but just because they're (apparently) off the hook, does that mean Spitzer should be too?

What haunts me most is seeing his wife by his side as he gave his crap speech of "atonement" ... she looked like she had been dragged there, haggard, drawn, aged 20 years, completely devastated but trying hard to be the composed "dutiful wife" and not collapse. This from a guy who has 3 daughters too ... just unbelievable.

1. His wife.

2. His daughters.

3. His mother and father.

4. The rest of both families.

5. The who uphold the laws.

6. The public he serves.

The laws may change some day, but until they do, Spitzer is guilty of engaging in a racketeering business as the pimps who own it!