Spitzer-Take on Sanford

posted at 12:14 pm on June 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Of all the politicians in the country who might have seen the Mark Sanford scandal as a brilliant opportunity to disappear for a few days, Eliot Spitzer would have to top the list.  Unfortunately, Spitzer saw Sanford’s misery as an opportunity for rehabilitation.  The disgraced former governor of New York and a repeat client of prostitution rings declared himself superior to Sanford for treating women like trash.  No, I’m not kidding:

THERE’S a huge difference between what South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford did, and what ex-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer did. “I didn’t fall in love with any of them,” Spitzer was overheard telling LMDC executive director Avi Schick the other day at Solo in the Sony Building on Madison, where they had the $24 prix-fixe lunch. And Spitzer didn’t use any taxpayer money on his trysts, while Sanford is reimbursing the state about $12,000 for travel expenses to Buenos Aires.

I won’t minimize what Sanford did.  He betrayed his wife and his family with his affair, and he abused the trust of his constituents by spending money on junkets as a cover to meet her.  Politicians at that level put their families in the public glare, and the least they can do is to refrain from action that humiliates them in front of the state or the nation.  What kind of father would put his children in that position?

But that pales in comparison to what Spitzer did.  Not only did Spitzer humiliate his wife through the public exposure of infidelities (and allowed her to share that humiliation by using her as a human shield during his press conference, a role Jenny Sanford pointedly did not play), Spitzer broke the very laws on prostitution that he used to build a reputation as a crusader in New York.  Spitzer is right that he “didn’t fall in love with any of them,” although Girl 9 alleged quite a bit of fondness on Spitzer’s part, but is a married man buying flesh for sexual release really more honorable than a married man conducting an affair?

Spitzer had made some noises about a political comeback recently.  If that’s built on the honorable practice of being a john, I think the battle will be a lot more uphill than Spitzer realizes.  Via Michelle, who is not amused, and later today Kevin McCullough and I will discuss Sanford and Kevin’s call for his resignation on The Ed Morrissey Show.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Interesting defense. “I’m a better man because those women were just pieces of meat to me.”

Bet that makes his wife and other women feel great.

Daggett on June 29, 2009 at 12:16 PM

OK… Idiot says somthing stupid in a private conversation.

Blogosphere goes nuts.

His 15 minutes is up… why bother with this?

Romeo13 on June 29, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Mabye he thinks sharia is law by now.

the_nile on June 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM

We all know where his brain is, what a jerk.

msmveritas on June 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM

I’m kind of confused. If his wife can’t trust him, why should anyone from S.C. I don’t hear a groundswell to keep him.
Sanford, as a snake you can go back to being a lawyer in private life. Is that an ambulance siren I hear?

Jeff from WI on June 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM

I didn’t fall in love with any of them

Fail to see how that makes him any better. On tax payer dollars, he’s right, but Sanford broke no laws. Spitzer did, which tips the scale in favor of Sanford especially since he’s paying the tax payers back.

Both are complete hypocrites and should be ashamed of themselves.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM

His 15 minutes is up… why bother with this?

Romeo13 on June 29, 2009 at 12:17 PM

He tries to reenter the circus.

the_nile on June 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Elliot is a maniac. He’s gearing up to get back into politics no doubt. On another note, watch out for Neal Boortz Michelle!

V15J on June 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM

I want someone to explain to me how Sanford resigning would be ‘better’ for his family.

He didn’t break a law. And instead of being an unemployed and disgraced father and husband, if he doesn’t quit he’ll at least be a gainfully employed disgraced father and husband. How does his resigning help anyone?

He didn’t break any laws. Let them remove him if they must, but I don’t see why he should quit in the least.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Bet that makes his wife and other women feel great.

Daggett on June 29, 2009 at 12:16 PM

I imagine it makes his wife feel a little better that he loves her and didn’t love them. But I can’t imagine it’s much of a comfort even then.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:21 PM

spitzer is a scumbag… always will be.

can we ah please not use the name JOHN when referenceing spitzers slimy arse and what he did….

SHARPTOOTH on June 29, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Sanford, as a snake you can go back to being a lawyer in private life. Is that an ambulance siren I hear?

Jeff from WI on June 29, 2009 at 12:19 PM

IIRC, I think he was a realtor and developer before getting in politics.

txsurveyor on June 29, 2009 at 12:23 PM

That Spitzer said that “argument” out loud is proof that his thirst for getting back into power has destroyed his mental faculties.

myrenovations on June 29, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Slitzer is a disgrace to ny

blatantblue on June 29, 2009 at 12:24 PM

I imagine it makes his wife feel a little better that he loves her and didn’t love them. But I can’t imagine it’s much of a comfort even then.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Is cheating on his wife with what he considers hooker-meat consistent with loving his wife? Forsaking all others is part of the vow.

Daggett on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

I want someone to explain to me how Sanford resigning would be ‘better’ for his family.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM

It would take them and him out of the public eye.

As to him being unemployed, I doubt that would last long. He’ll have to look for a new job in a year or so anyway.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

I suppose the argument goes . . . ‘if his wife can’t trust him, how can the people of SC’?

But that implies that most people here trust politicians. . . you know, the most honest profession in history. I’d say straying from marriage vows is a step up in credibility from being a politician.

I doubt Romney would ever cheat on his wife, but I don’t trust him to tell me the truth on anything. I expect Romney to tell me whatever he thinks will make me vote for him.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

I see no difference, whatsoever, in what they did.

Same thing. Same difference.
Men with zero integrity. Go away!!!

bridgetown on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

DON’T GIVE ME THAT, YOU SNOTTY-FACED HEAP OF PARROT DROPPINGS! SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!

Shy Guy on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

can we ah please not use the name JOHN when referenceing spitzers slimy arse and what he did….

SHARPTOOTH on June 29, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Maybe HA was thinking about the John Edwards sex tape.

ChrisB on June 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Is cheating on his wife with what he considers hooker-meat consistent with loving his wife? Forsaking all others is part of the vow.

Daggett on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

People show love in many different ways. If sex is just meaningless “feel good” time for him, then having sex with his wife isn’t how he shows her he loves her. It’s certainly not the way you show your wife you love her, but having sex with someone else isn’t proof that he doesn’t love her.

I know what the vows are, having made them myself, but we’re talking about perception more so than reality when evaluating whether or not a wife would feel better knowing “it was just sex” rather than an affair.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM

I doubt that would last long. He’ll have to look for a new joba in year or so anyway.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

I doubt all of this. I bet he could win the R nomination. He’ll win the primary in SC. And I’ll bet he could win governor again too. He just has to be a fiscal conservative. It’s not his fault that the media is trying to sell ads. They can cover whatever they want. But before this, most people didn’t know Sanford.

Being a governor in an early primary state gives him an advantage to the R nomination. I think all the pundits that say he’s ‘done’ politically now are overpaid. . . even if they offer their opinions for free.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM

What are they putting in the drinking water in New York these days?

First we have to listen to Letterman apologize for calling the wrong Palin daughter a whore, now we have Spitzer saying he’s a better husband than Sanford because he never fell in love with his whores while he was banging them.

Are we all to be judged now by some kind of Whore Standard?

fogw on June 29, 2009 at 12:29 PM

I see no difference, whatsoever, in what they did.

bridgetown on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Well, one guy did actually break a law he’d built a name enforcing. Sanford is slimy, but he didn’t do anything illegal.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:29 PM

For I don’t know how long the Left has told us that hypocrisy is the greatest sin. Here we have a wealthy, formerly powerful man brought down by a vice crime that made his name crusading against wealthy, powerful men committing vice crimes.

By the left’s own* (stated) standards Spitzer should be ostracized.

* I know, whatever the left may say, there is nothing they enjoy more then indulging in rampant hypocrisy.

18-1 on June 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Ann Coulter on Hannity Last night:

they’re all nerds who could never get a girl to kiss them in high school. I mean, look at these guys! From Bill Clinton to this guy? They’re not exactly a hunk of burning love here.

so true..lol

bridgetown on June 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:29 PM

There is no law against using the people’s money to take trips? There is no law against abandoning your post as Gov?
There is no law against adultry?

Laws confuse me.

bridgetown on June 29, 2009 at 12:32 PM

But before this, most people didn’t know Sanford.

In his own state? Doubtful. Besides, this is his second term already. He can’t run for governor when his term is up.

Being a governor in an early primary state gives him an advantage to the R nomination. I think all the pundits that say he’s ‘done’ politically now are overpaid. . . even if they offer their opinions for free.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Maybe, but the man used tax payer money for an affair while people were looking for him and couldn’t get in touch with him. I’d never vote for him based on that alone, even if he hadn’t had an affair and was just on a writing trip.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Spitzer seems to forget he also Broke the Law on atleast 2 counts.

Rbastid on June 29, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Who the hell paid for the $24 prix-fixe lunch?

I’m having a couple of ballpark franks and some curly fries.

jay12 on June 29, 2009 at 12:35 PM

would you vote for Obama over him Esthier? How about McCain? The way America goes, doesn’t this make Jenny the most qualified for Secretary of state in 10 years?

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:35 PM

If Sanford had paid $4000 for each trick, Spitzer would have said he was a better man because he paid $4001.

pedestrian on June 29, 2009 at 12:36 PM

There is no law against using the people’s money to take trips?

That he can make right and seems to be doing so now. You can’t undo sleeping with a prostitute.

There is no law against abandoning your post as Gov?

I don’t know but haven’t heard anyone even mention this as a law he broke, not even those who seem to agree that he did that.

There is no law against adultry?

That seems to be up for debate.

Was he having “habitual carnal intercourse” if he only saw her a few times a year?

Also, under that law, fornication is illegal as well. Which just shows you how much that law is valued.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Spitzer comes from the Norman Oswald school of personal relationships:

Norman Osborn: A word to the “not-so-wise” about your little girlfriend. Do what you need to with her, then broom her fast.

lorien1973 on June 29, 2009 at 12:45 PM

While married men who fall in love with other women should either divorce their wives or not allow the Other Woman into their lives, we at least have some sympathy for that position. Marriage can be incredibly difficult and humans know that we are just that – humans. Many otherwise decent men (and women) have started affairs because they wanted love and affection that was lacking in their marriages. The goals aren’t bad, but we criticise them because the manner of obtaining those goals causes a tremendous amount of pain to innocent people.

Spitzer is mistaken if he thinks that there is any good part of human nature that would cause someone to treat a woman like a dick receptacle. Yet, he is just expressing the logical conclusion of the Left’s beliefs about sexuality and morality: that there is absolutely nothing wrong, ever, with screwing. Sex is, according to them, a morally neutral act, so the only thing that could ever go wrong is to give one’s affections, not one’s body, to another.

Roxeanne de Luca on June 29, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Spitzer should talk…

Lets see Sanford had an affair… not multiple ones and didn’t use the money of the People to get off, in ways none of us really want to know about.

upinak on June 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM

would you vote for Obama over him Esthier? How about McCain? The way America goes, doesn’t this make Jenny the most qualified for Secretary of state in 10 years?

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:35 PM

Thacker, there are few people I wouldn’t vote for over Obama, but that’s not saying much. I wouldn’t vote for Sanford in the primaries. If it was him or Obama in the general, I’d get drunk and vote.

I agree that it’s messed up Hillary is where she is because of Monica. Still, the way Jenny is handling this, in my mind, is admirable. She’s not being the “stand by her man” woman at the press conferences, but she hasn’t ruled out working on their marriage either.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Somehow, the idea of mud wrestling comes to mind…..

Star20 on June 29, 2009 at 12:52 PM

What a twisted way of trying to rehab. I am sure the MSM bought it.

d1carter on June 29, 2009 at 12:52 PM

ALL OF THESE GUYS USE PUBLIC MONEY FOR THEIR AFFAIRS! The very fact that they are public officials going out for sex means that money or time that belongs to their constituents is going toward getting sex instead of their proper duties.

Speedwagon82 on June 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM

The very fact that they are public officials going out for sex means that money or time that belongs to their constituents is going toward getting sex instead of their proper duties.

Speedwagon82 on June 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM

I’m not sure I understand how that’s different than when they have sex with their wives. What do you mean exactly?

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:57 PM

I think we should embrace polygamy. I bet Jenny would even like the Argentina girl. And the kids would probably like her, and she’d probably like the kids. Seriously, I’m not kidding. I think Sanford deeply loves his wife and kids, and I think that they deeply love him.

I see no reason why his having an affair with another woman would prevent him from continuing to deeply love his wife and kids. He didn’t throw it in their faces. He was trying to be discreet about it. Not that it makes it better, but he even sought permission.

He just wants to love and be loved. And he does and he is. . . by two women.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:57 PM

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:57 PM

I’m intrigued and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

My wife, on the other hand, wants to kill you.

lorien1973 on June 29, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Spitzer: “I pay for it, so I’m better.”

Vashta.Nerada on June 29, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Is cheating on his wife with what he considers hooker-meat consistent with loving his wife? Forsaking all others is part of the vow.

Daggett on June 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Spitzer has family wealth of over a billion. What came with his vow was something more than other vows. In addition to wealth, his wife was marrying the prestige that his career would bring. Spitzer recklessly tossed away the 2nd part.

However, his wife is still with him. Maybe it is easier to work on a marriage that has a problem with the sexual component than on that has a problem with both the sexual and emotional components.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:03 PM

I bet Jenny would even like the Argentina girl.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Dude, no offense, but that’s a very ignorant thing to say. Maybe she would have liked her before all of this, but no woman who believes in monogamy can ever like the other woman, no matter how nice she might be.

She’ll see pictures of that woman, and in her head it’ll be pictures of that woman with her husband.

I’m not against polygamy but only if all parties agree. And with Jenny saying she wanted him to stop the affair, it’s highly unlikely she would ever have agreed to allowing her husband to have two wives.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Spitzer, “It’s different when you pay for your ho’s.”

Geronimo on June 29, 2009 at 1:05 PM

Should Spitzer really remind us that he had to pay for what Sanford got for free?

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:05 PM

He just wants to love and be loved. And he does and he is. . . by two women.

ThackerAgency on June 29, 2009 at 12:57 PM

He just has so much love to give; one woman cannot contain it all./

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Like Obama, I automatically dismiss anything that comes out of this shameless crypt-keeper’s mouth.

marklmail on June 29, 2009 at 1:09 PM

When trust is broken between a wife and a husband, love is either erased, or so damaged it is difficult to overcome. Prostitutes versus single lover makes no difference to the one who has been cheated on, and Spitzer is so twisted as to no realize this.

Spitzer is still whoring. If not with prostitutes, he is whoring with his ego.

As an aside, just how many STDs did Spitzer possibly pass along to his wife because his perversion is so much better than Stanford possibly falling in love with his mistress?

freeus on June 29, 2009 at 1:13 PM

People show love in many different ways. If sex is just meaningless “feel good” time for him, then having sex with his wife isn’t how he shows her he loves her. It’s certainly not the way you show your wife you love her, but having sex with someone else isn’t proof that he doesn’t love her.

I know what the vows are, having made them myself, but we’re talking about perception more so than reality when evaluating whether or not a wife would feel better knowing “it was just sex” rather than an affair.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM

So … he loves her, but not enough to save her from the risk of STDs, public humiliation, violation of trust, and myriad other problems? Sorry, not buying it.

Both love and actions are choices. You make them or you don’t.

TheUnrepentantGeek on June 29, 2009 at 1:19 PM

If Marion Barry can sucker democrats to keep voting for him, even after everything he’s done, then Spitzer has a chance to get back into office.

Clearly he’s angling for a comeback, and judging from the enormous stupidity and lack of moral fiber in the average democrat party voter, it could very well work.

Rebar on June 29, 2009 at 1:25 PM

They’re all turds that need to be flushed.

No man should ever abuse their wife with such betrayal and get away with it.

LimeyGeek on June 29, 2009 at 1:25 PM

Whew, what a relief that Spitzer “didn’t fall in love with any of them.” We all feel a whole lot better about what he did.

And Mrs. Spitzer looks really happy about that in the photo, doesn’t she?

UltimateBob on June 29, 2009 at 1:27 PM

BTW, has anyone ever seen Allahpundit and Spitzer in the same room at the same time? Just wondering.

andycanuck on June 29, 2009 at 1:28 PM

Should Spitzer really remind us that he had to pay for what Sanford got for free?

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:05 PM

He certainly could get it for free. He was paying to try and keep it out of his family life and the press. Apparently, he wasn’t too smart with his transactions and wasn’t using a particularly high-end service.

I’m surprised so many guys in public office don’t realize that part of the deal is to stop screwing around.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:29 PM

He was paying to try and keep it out of his family life and the press.

How noble of him./

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:32 PM

He certainly could get it for free.

Yeah, but what would it look like?

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Has anyone noticed The State is hinting that Sanford had more than one affair? More like 3 other women…stay tuned for more embarrassment and nauseating biblical proclamations of being like King David.

beekiller on June 29, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Having claimed the high ground, Spitzer can now write a New York Times best-seller about fidelity.

whitetop on June 29, 2009 at 1:41 PM

How noble of him./

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:32 PM

It’s an attempt to keep it away from the family and a fairly common approach in many cultures. An affair, and possible illegitimate child, offer much more complex problems for the family than a few minutes of stimulation that might not be much different than masturbation.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:42 PM

None of those women ever loved Eliot either. Judging from his attitude/behavior, even his own mother didn’t love him. What an ego to create more trouble in an already troubled world! Such a loveless excuse of a man – shame, shame, shame.

redwhiteblue on June 29, 2009 at 1:43 PM

It’s an attempt to keep it away from the family and a fairly common approach in many cultures.

Cultural relativism doesn’t impress me much.

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:46 PM

An affair, and possible illegitimate child, offer much more complex problems for the family than a few minutes of stimulation that might not be much different than masturbation.
dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:42 PM

Then maybe he should have just masterbated.

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:48 PM

Yeah, but what would it look like?

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Yeah, in NYC there are legions of girls looking for a sugar daddy–or at least a place in the Hamptons. He’d be sought-after. However, most girls would also be trying to ultimately pry him away from his wife.

It’s the way you see so many guys over 50 with second wives about the age of their kids.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:48 PM

Congrats, Spitzer. You still managed to blow (no pun intended) $80,000.00, you putz.

Roc on June 29, 2009 at 1:49 PM

Then maybe he should have just masterbated.

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:48 PM

The effect would be much the same, and he’d still be governor.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:50 PM

Cultural relativism doesn’t impress me much.

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:46 PM

No, but if you look at the US Congress apparently guys looking for something on the side is a big part of our culture.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:52 PM

“Stupid is as Stupid does”………..

DL13 on June 29, 2009 at 1:55 PM

No, but if you look at the US Congress apparently guys looking for something on the side is a big part of our culture.

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:52 PM

Guys looking for something on the side has always been part of all cultures, but then so has any number of inappropriate activities.

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:59 PM

dedalus on June 29, 2009 at 1:50 PM

Bingo

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 1:59 PM

I don’t know if this has already been mentioned on this thread, but this adulterer was on MSNBC this morning – giving us his expertise on everything.

He’s already been embraced by the media. Great job, huh? Just like Fox News embraced Dick “I Sucked The Toes Of Prostitutes” Morris.

The media make me want to vomit. There is nowhere for me to turn.

OhEssYouCowboys on June 29, 2009 at 2:06 PM

So … he loves her, but not enough to save her from the risk of STDs, public humiliation, violation of trust, and myriad other problems? Sorry, not buying it.

TheUnrepentantGeek on June 29, 2009 at 1:19 PM

I do think it’s possible to love someone and be unfaithful, especially if he wanted something really freaky that he thought only a paid woman would go for.

That doesn’t mean I believe he loves his wife, but maybe she does, and that was my only point. If she had thought he was in love with that hooker, then it might have hurt more than if she’d thought it was just about getting a specific orgasm. Or rather, I think it’s one small thing to hold on to, whether or not that’s realistic.

Esthier on June 29, 2009 at 2:09 PM

Dick “I Sucked The Toes Of Prostitutes” Morris

Now there’s a mental image I could have gone all day without.
:)

Disturb the Universe on June 29, 2009 at 2:09 PM

There’s no comparison. Taken at their respective words, Sanford got caught up in a romantic affair. It was an impulse buy. Spitzer went on a shopping spree. At Costco. Repeatedly.

As for Spitzer’s claiming that Sanford used public money, didn’t Spitzer use campaign cash? He certainly didn’t pay for his own trips to D.C. That’s hardly legal. In any event, Sanford (wrongly) used public money for a legal purpose (flying to Argentina is legal). Spitzer (wrongly) used money for a patently illegal purpose (hookers).

DailyDanet on June 29, 2009 at 3:09 PM

…by the way, the irony here is that politically and romantically, I think the impact should be 180 degrees. A politician who gets nabbed in a romantic affair (Sanford and Ensign) usually come out okay. Affairs of the heart are somewhat involuntary and we’re all human.

Getting caught with hookers, however, is usually a sign of moral turpitude and spells the end of a politicians career. And rightly so. It’s a crime and it’s infidelity.

On the romantic side, a spouse is more likely to forgive an affair of the flesh with no romantic connection (a one night stand or a prostitute) than a romantic affair. Interesting dichotomy.

DailyDanet on June 29, 2009 at 3:13 PM

I forgot. Is his name Eliot or Dick?

Mr. Grump on June 29, 2009 at 3:17 PM

a. That whole, “it meant nothing, I don’t love her, I only love you, darling” BS only works on wives (ones with problems). Infidelity is infidelity to the rest of us that are non-emotionally involved. Bill cheating on HRC with an intern, Spitzer cheating with a hooker, Sanford cheating with a ‘love’…its still the same breaking of trust.

b. Clinton didn’t break the law by sleeping with Monica, Edwards didn’t break the law by sleeping with Whats-her-name, Sanford didn’t break the law by sleeping with Ms. Brazil…Spitzer broke the law by sleeping with a prostitute.

c. Just for the sake of argument, which do you think you’d rather hear if you were their wives…
– The intern had a crush on me, I’m the most powerful man in the world and I’m weak…she gave me a BJ…please forgive me.
– I’ve fallen in love with another woman, I’m sorry honey but its over between us.
– I thought so little of our bond that I’d break that trust with a whore…repeatedly.

Personally, I think Spitzer needs to take a huge cup of STFU. Spitzer talking about Sanford is like Marion Barry chastising Courtney Love about her drug use.

Moron.

Geministorm on June 29, 2009 at 6:01 PM

Awesome! This blast almost makes me like Spitzer a little bit.

Sign of the Dollar on June 29, 2009 at 6:11 PM

Only can a philandering liberal feels entitled to give advice to a wandering husband (forget the party differences).

More like a liquor salesperson selling the ware or giving advice to a room full of AA members.

MSGTAS on June 30, 2009 at 10:45 AM