Bye Bye Elliot

Status
Not open for further replies.
.....he spent somewhere around $4,500 plus transportation and an extra hotel room for 3 hours of fun.

1) Hey, she was probably a bargain compared to his wife.

2) Perhaps the NY Times has somwhat redeemed themselves after the attempted McCain smeer.
 
I doubt that this is the first time that the world's oldest profession has brought down a member of the world's most useless profession, but every time it happens I laugh.

At least he has better taste than Bill. According to yahoo news she was a 5'5", 105 lbs brunet.;)

Do you suppose his wife will run for governor in 8 years and somehow expect "liberated" fem-nazis to vote for her? Nah, that would never happen in America!:D
 
Ah, come on guys!

I think we are all are being too harsh on this fine gentleman. When the dust settles, it will turn out, sadly, that he was having an affair due to a disheartened marraige. However, the rest just would never be true! He was seeing this fine lady as a girlfriend and the money was just because he is such a nice man, he wanted to give back to the community and others that are less fortunate than he is. Furhtermore, the costs of the hotel were paid for by taxpayer's money, but in reference to helping a lower income person out of despair, it will be deemed fiscally responsible behavior and he may even have a chance of running and being elected as the next President.
 
FYI, Spitzer is a Super Delegate who was supposed to support Hillary... The Lt. Gov. is a legally blind black man who from everything I have heard has no major points against him (other than normal NY Dem/Liberalism).

Aside from the gun issue, David Patterson is a first class man. He showed me nothing but inspiration. When I met him, I was going through a difficult time with my own vision and he offered sincere words of courage and inspiration. He is head and shoulders above Eliot Spitzer. I hope that the impression he gives is one that will be realized in executive action.


Spitzer is also essentially the head of the Democratic Party in NY.

Now it's back to Sheldon Silver.
 
Aside from the gun issue, David Patterson is a first class man. He showed me nothing but inspiration. When I met him, I was going through a difficult time with my own vision and he offered sincere words of courage and inspiration. He is head and shoulders above Eliot Spitzer. I hope that the impression he gives is one that will be realized in executive action.

He may be an honorable man and gentleman, but I'm not too sure you will like his stance on guns and self defense. It was reported he wanted to prosecute police officers that killed a person in a shooting - he advocates only shoot to wound, not kill. Imagine how this could be extended to a civilian in a self defense situation??
 
Copenhagen - You're way off base on this one.

Just sick of sex scandals.

Copenhagen, I'm afraid you miss the point. This one isn't as much about tabloid TV (which I agree with you about), it's about character.

His behavior speaks directly to his character.

You're letting your interest in promoting moral ambiguity inhibit your reason.

The guy's a hypocrite who denigrated his office and his family. That stuff SHOULD matter...and the press should report it to the electorate.

Character matters.

I am not changing my mind that I think sex scandals and Brittany's child take up too much of our valuble air time. I do however think that you made a good point here.
 
You can tell he's a Democrat because the hooker wasn't a guy.
If he wanted to pay for sex, at least have the decency to film it and sell it so it magically becomes a legal act.

You mean like
James McGreevey former Democratic Governor of NJ, who hires his gay lover to be chief of Homeland Security in NJ.
 
He may be an honorable man and gentleman, but I'm not too sure you will like his stance on guns and self defense.

I probably won't like his gun positions. Speaking of which, is there any website listing state politician's gun control ratings?
 
"These are private family matters and should remain as such."

Private? This isn't some dinky NYC law he broke. Wait until they charge him with conspiracy to violate the Mann Act. That's a Federal charge by the way. The young lady traveled from NY to DC to see him and he paid for the ticket according to the Washington Post and others. And that's a Federal violation.

John
 
2
73 Jock said:
) Perhaps the NY Times has somwhat redeemed themselves after the attempted McCain smeer.

zukiphile said:

1) They reported a career ending scandal on a liberal Democrat.

2) They reported a political scandal that was actually true and vetted.

Although, as others have pointed out, they foolishly tried to dismiss his political affiliation, so maybe they're only half redeemed.
 
I don't see the redemption in part becuase the McCain story was fabricated [edit - by which I mean based on innuendo intended to indicate a known falsehood].

I've followed the NYT for a while. They would have to be a more brashly conservative version of Fox News for about a half century to balance out their past performance.
 
I've followed the NYT for a while. They would have to be a more brashly conservative version of Fox News for about a half century to balance out their past performance.

QFT!

The most redeeming feature of the NYT is the size of the pages when unfolded. They are perfect for housebreaking.
 
As far as Eliot is concerned, the only tears I’m shedding are of laughter and joy.

But as for comments like these:
1) Hey, she was probably a bargain compared to his wife.
and
Do you suppose his wife will run for governor in 8 years and somehow expect "liberated" fem-nazis to vote for her?
I hope I’m not alone in thinking such comments about his wife are uncalled for.
 
I have less and less concern for the wives of these politicians. You can't tell me this is a surprise, at least his straying and attitude, when the NY papers are now reporting this has been going on for SEVERAL YEARS!!!! (Like when he was still AG?)

I feel bad for his daughters.
 
As far as Eliot is concerned, the only tears I’m shedding are of laughter and joy.

But as for comments like these:


1) Hey, she was probably a bargain compared to his wife.
and


Do you suppose his wife will run for governor in 8 years and somehow expect "liberated" fem-nazis to vote for her?
I hope I’m not alone in thinking such comments about his wife are uncalled for.

I don't believe that either is out of line, and observe that neither is specifically a comment about her.

The first notes the high expense involved in being married. Crass people might explicitly equate that expense to the quid pro quo with a prostitute, but the gentler observation of expense is also present.

The second comment is about the politics of a specific slice of the democrat party, not Spitzer's wife. That people of that ilk can abandon their feminist outrage to support a man whose behaviour ranges from sleeping with a subordinate young enough to be his daughter to alleged rape is a matter of historical record. It is fair to not take that stripe of feminism too seriously.
 
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

To me, when it comes to publically mocking the wife, it's irrelevant whether she knew or not, provided she hasn't put herself into the political process in any significant way. What's a significant way? Hillary leaps to mind, with her ranting about a Vast Right Wing conspiracy and actively running a team of people to seek out and destroy Bill's conquests. But so far, I haven't seen or heard that Spitzer's wife has injected herself into this story.

Did she know beforehand? Probably. Is her hubby a scumbag who is getting his just desserts? Definitely. Has she attacked anyone? Not to my knowledge. Has she engaged in criminal behavior? Not to my knowledge. Is she responsible for this scandal? Not to my knowledge. Has she done anything that warrants public humiliation? Not to my knowledge.

I don't see any harm in people cutting her a little slack, and I don't see anything positive about mocking her. But like I said, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top