Not an "odd prosecution"

The man prosecuted prostitutes & sex rings.

Proof?

Just an educated guess here but he never prosecuted a prostitute for prostitution and I have no idea what kind of "sex ring" prosecutions he was involved in and neither do you.

Spoodles,

I can't read another moralist's screed. You have no idea what you are talking about. Turn off MSNBC. Go back to college.

I am not saying there are not balanced individuals out there with healthy sex lives.... -- sajwan

Can anyone really believe, at the beginning of the 21st century that there's actually something which we can describe as a healthy sex life? I'd have thought that by now we'd have all understood that where our sex lives come from isn't exactly a temple of the Enlightenment, and that moral hygiene is as quaint a concept as the celestial spheres. Mortification of the flesh won't call it forth, nor draconian laws, let alone a sunny disposition.

And Aycharaych, what you're wrong about has nothing to do with your understanding of injustice, which is very keen and very insightful. What's more, such wrongness as I see isn't germane to the discussion. It was kind of underhanded of me to mention it at all. I apologize.

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!

-- Rambling Rose 22

Paraphrasing what Dersh just said on CNN... I wish I could be 35 years old again, like this woman, trotting the globe and making 5000 dollars an hour. If that's victimization and exploitation, exploit me, please. What isn't a racket?

But nothing compares in ickiness to the thought of bucky and tina bumping uglies while doing the horizontal bop.

Can anyone really believe, at the beginning of the 21st century that there's actually something which we can describe as a healthy sex life?

My prescription for a healthy sex life:

"The best husbands stay bachelors; they're too considerate to get married."

Finley Peter Dunne

The fact of the matter is, Spitzer knew he was breaking the law. Regardless of what he thought of the actual law (which, it sounds like Spitzer upheld it against OTHERS, so he must have been for it), it was the law at the time that prostitution is illegal. Yet he didn't think twice about that. In fact, I don't think this was his first time. You don't just all of a sudden up and decide to pay $1000 an hour to a prostitute to travel to you for sex. It's clearly something he's done before.

The point is, how can we expect someone with that little respect for the law to uphold the laws with sincerity? Doesn't his personal hypocrisy then become a public hypocrisy, with someone who actually broke a law so non-chalantly sitting at the helm and ordering others to abide by them? It's not just hypocritical of him to break up sex rings and then hire a prostitute, it's hypocritical of him to break a law and then order others to follow them.

If you are against a law, there are ways to change it. But no court in the world will accept the explanation that you broke a law because you were against it. Then where would it stop? For the posters who think it's not such a huge deal, what happens when your governor breaks a law you DO agree with? Then it's not ok anymore, is it?

Anyway, I don't think that's what he's arguing. If he had had an affair, that would have been between him and his family. But he broke the law. That law is in place because most Americans believe prostitution is immoral, and had decided to make it illegal. If you can't follow the law, you should not be in charge of upholding them.

rollotomasi: "Are you saying that may just be passing time here, that it is not really a big deal? You are confusing us with your seven or so pages of posts on this thread since last night. Your online worshippers breathlessly await your answer; I don't think we can hold out until Day 3 or 7."

I am not sure what your point is in relation to the original argument, but I am very curious what "online worshippers" you might be referring to. If I have worshippers, I'd like to meet them and persuade them to give me cash money. Or at least to watch "L.A. Confidential" with me while eating ice cream.

I couldn't help but notice how whenever the story was reported, they stated that he was 'involved in a prostitution ring'. Makes it seem like he was a pimp rather than a john. What is it about this case that made him 'involved in a prostitution ring' rather than 'arranging to meet a hooker'?

(chuckles) I love it how my post is instantly painted as a "moralist screed" and you can't offer up any rebuttals about my morality and law connection point and dismiss me as being some MSNBC hound (which I never watch BTW).

What, can't come up with any valid, logical arguments? Of course not, which is why you take the lazy way out. Typical.

"You have no idea what you are talking about". Really? Prove it. Can't? Thought so.

What responsibility does a public official have to uphold the law?

Given that the police are part of the executive branch and the governor is head of that branch then a governor is the highest law enforcement official in a state,

If a governor does not have the responsibility to uphold the law, then who in your view does?

I don't really mean to be insulting but I learned this stuff in sophomore civics class in high school in 1966 and have no problem remembering it.

I'm aware that many schools do not have civics classes any more but anyone who is interested enough in politics to read GG's blog really should have absorbed this stuff by sheer osmosis. It's not rocket science or even brain surgery.