So I was sitting in class yesterday when I caught the Spitzer news on the NYTimes front page.
I immediately decided to write a quick diary, full of sarcastic snark, on whether Hillary would reject AND denounce Spitzer's endorsement Previous Diary
I decided to write this diary due to the number of comments that involved the following responses -
- This type of behavior is 'private' and thus none of our business (and thus, by logic, lets give Spitzer a pass).
- Why should only Dems have to resign in the face of scandal when the Republicans get a free pass? (and thus, by logic, lets give Spitzer a pass).
- Talking and advocating for the resignation of Spitzer in the face of his lawbreaking is hurtful to Dems in general (and thus, by logic, lets give Spitzer a pass).
I won't even go into the responses that called me an Obamananiac who is fueling the fires of anti-Hillary hysteria just because I was using this situation to highlight how ridiculous the guilt by association argument is in politics.
But I wanted to hear start a discussion on what our response as Democrats and Progressives should be in this type of situation. Given how ridiculously corrupt the Republican party has become and how flagrantly they break the law, I think it is important to discuss how exactly we respond to one of our youngest, brightest stars being caught up in a very Republican scandal.
On the Privacy of Spitzers Behavior:
I do not see how Spitzer calling an escort service in NY from D.C. and having a prostitute engage in interstate travel in exchange for several thousand dollars in violation of the laws of every jurisdiction travelled by said prostitute can be called private behavior.
As noted by one of the front page diaries, the defendants in this case are being charged under a federal statute which makes it a crime to engage in exactly the type of behavior that Spitzer solicited from the defendants. Our United States Congress has decided that it is a very, very serious crime to transport women across interstate lines for the purpose of money for sex. This is called human trafficking when it is done in Albania...I will call it for the purpose of our discussion exactly what it is - HUMAN TRAFFICKING.
Thus, we have a situation where the Governor of one of the largest states in our union has provided economic support for a multi-million dollar human trafficking operation. Not only that, this governor has prosecuted exactly the type of business that he now frequents!
This is clearly not a private matter. There are huge implications that reach back to his days as the Attorney General of NY. Did he frequent this escort service during his AG days? Did he SELECTIVELY PROSECUTE certain competitors of the escort services he frequented? Did he get FREEBIES in exchange for favors?
These are questions we MUST get answers to in order to make sure that Spitzer is not one of the corrupt scoundrels we deplore so much on this site.
I will add one more thing - I am actually not a huge fan of the criminalization of prostitution; however, this is because I think that the current system harms women more by keeping them in the shadows and under the control of their pimps and not giving them the adequate access to public health and other sources of help. But this debate is not about prostitution- IT IS ABOUT AN ENFORCER OF THE LAWS BREAKING THE VERY LAW HE PROSECUTES.
On the resignation of Democrats in the face of Republicans not resigning:
I was very alarmed by this argument.
By the logic of this argument, if one set of actors who are entrusted with power violate the trust of the people who give them that power and refuse to be held accountable, then all actors who are entrusted with power and violate that power can then violate the trust of those who gave them power without repercussion.
Just because Larry Craig is still in office after pleading guilty to soliciting a man in the bathroom does not mean that Spitzer can now go and solicit away all the prostitutes he wants.
This is exactly the kind of logic that makes Democrats look WEAK and UNPRINCIPLED in arguments with Republicans. Prior to the self-destruction of the Republican party in 2006, Democrats were consistently viewed as weak by Joe Six Pack due to our inability to have consistent principles that are applied across the board. I am not arguing that Republicans are more principled, only that the perception has been so due to the fact that Democrats are willing to give a pass to our own leaders who break the public trust.
You know what? Bill Clinton perjured himself, violated the public trust and SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED. THERE. I said it. I hated the Repubs for doing what they did to him due to my ideological affinity with Bill, but he completely f$#cked things up for all Dems due to idiotic behavior. Let's not tip toe around this REALITY. Just because we like, or loved, or adored, Clinton does not mean that we must give him fellatio when he screwed things up for us. Just like a good parent gives their kid a good (literal or figurative, all depends on how you want to raise your kids) hit upside the head when they f#$k up, we need to do the same with our elected leaders. If we keep putting up with this kind of crap in our party we are no better than the Republicans.
Which brings me to the final issue-
On Talking about Spitzer's behavior in this light being bad for Dems in General:
I have lots to say on this. But I want responses and discussion on it. How should we respond to this kind of behavior? I clearly do not believe we should give him a pass. In fact, I want him run out of town as quickly as possible so that we can start over with a new face who isn't weakened or embarrassed to do their job properly.
Update: Reports are that he will resign but I still want thoughts on these issues.