Yes, I was, and I felt I had every right to be. Jesus, Glen, I might be a son of a bitch (opinions vary on this), but I would never, never do to my wife what he did to Hilary

Isn't that between them? How could you possibly think you're in a position to sit in judgment on how spouses whom you don't know treat each other, what their obligations to one another are, what agreements they have, etc. etc.?

Why do you want to think about the Clintons' private lives and their marriage and start forming judgments about who did what to whom? How could you possibly know enough to do that, and why would you want to try?

...maybe I'm just extraordinarily risk averse, but I think if I were a politician, I'd just worry about getting caught. I.e., I'm the kind of person who holds onto receipts and at least considers how I could document my deductions in the unlikely event of a tax audit. I just cannot imagine being in such a situation and not living in mortal fear of being subject to scrutiny and destroying my career.

I admire much of Spitzer's work, but anyone who has created that many enemies has got to know that he's being watched for the slightest misstep. And yes, my default assumption is that the whole investigation was driven by politics. Clearly if there was a hint of an opportunity to dethrone a prominent politician on either side, someone is going to take it--and control of the executive branch provides plenty of opportunities. That doesn't prove anything. I guess it could just be a lucky coincidence for the GOP.

Wikipedia claims Spitzer scored 1590 on the SAT, so I assume he's intelligent enough to understand the risks involved. I think a lot of prominent politicians really just have a screw loose somewhere. It does anger me that more mud has to be slung at my party just so Spitzer could indulge his hobbies. In a rational world it should not matter, but facts show that it does matter.

based on past behavior.

To me Elliot Spitzer's problem is far worse than Bill Clinton because he's so sanctimonious. His is first. Bob Barr, David Vitter and other Republicans are next on the list.

Bill Clinton is near the bottom. My problem with him, and again not saying everyone has to have this problem, is that he literally made a career on seizing on any minor problem any of his opponents had and using it to literally tear them to pieces. Hence I did not feel that sorry for him when he continued his behavior, almost pathologically, and finally got caught for it.

While I blame Republicans far more than him for the resulting insanity our country underwent, he also has to assume a large portion of the responsibility.

I've never understood why that's a crime

so long as it's consensual, non-exploitative and non-coercive. The fact that SOME (silly) people object to such acts on a moral basis should not be sufficient to make something a crime. Same as with private recreational drug use. Way too many criminal justice resources wasted on persuing "crimes" that hurt no one but possibly those who "commit" them. I'm totally a libertarian on such things. Especially since most of today's pols have probably done vastly worse (e.g. promoting certain policies in return for campaign donations).

But, today's political and media climates being what they are, and such stories so easy to cover and great for ratings, no doubt we'll be hearing about this for days and weeks, while continuing to ignore boring stuff like the war and telcom immunity.

This is so insane. You can legally pay someone to massage your butt and thighs, but if they touch a part of your body just inches away, you've both committed a grievous and morally reprehensible crime for which you must both be publically censured and put in jail.

Simply unreal.

There is and ought to be a distinction between public and private life. When a person's private life becomes the subject of headlines, the rest of us ought to have the decency not to adopt a holier than thou attitude. The people who moralize and condemn will have their turn on the wrack: Vitter, Livingston, Gingrich, Craig to name but a few. Public life is one thing. Private life is another.

I was trying to formulate the words to make the same assertion. It's not YOUR wife, YOUR family, YOUR life so it's pretty much none of your business if that's the reason you're sticking your nose in.

It's just too easy to be all horrified about sex and blase about the stuff that really matters.

The magic word here is felony. Spitzer, governor of New York, has committed one. Whether you agree with a given law or not, you should certainly agree that it is a serious matter when an elected official has committed a felony.

Surly, Glenn, you don't think that politician can choose not to obey laws he does not agree with. That standard would get the Bush administration off the hook for all kinds of bad business, wouldn't it?

If the rule of law is to mean anything, politicians should surely be held accountable when they commit serious crimes. The fact that the Bush administration has managed to largely escape legal accountability is no argument that other politicians should be excused as well. The consenting adults argument does not apply at all here. Consenting or not, the adults involved committed a crime, which was decidedly not the case with Bill and Monica.

Whether or not Spitzer should be prosecuted is not clear to me. Such a prosecution would be selective but not completely out of line. The fact that this, apparently, was a Bush Justice Department sting operation is troubling to say the least. However, there is no question that Spitzer must and will resign. A politician who has clearly committed a felony is by definition on political life support. For Spitzer to stay in office would only give yet more fodder to the Republican attack machine than he has already.

An earlier commenter was quite right to be angry and disappointed that Spitzer would have such hubris to expose himself in this way. Glenn asked if the commenter felt the same way about Bill and Monica. In fact, the the two situations are very different. Spitzer's behavior, being criminal, is much more serious. That said, I personally was extremely angry and disappointed in Clinton. Who wouldn't have been? My God, the man gave the Republican party the greatest gift they received in the entire 20th century. And I, a regular reader of Daily Howler and this very column, am as far from one of those anti-Clinton conspiracy buffs as a person could be.

Clinton's behavior did not merit resignation and he was right to fight back. Spitzer's behavior was far far worse and his position is untenable. Immediate resignation followed by a long term (possibly lifelong) hiatus from public life is his only option.