Reposted from
The Yankee Rag
I'll admit it, I'm in love. I know there are sides like his early endorsement of John Kerry and such, but dammit I love Eliot and surprisingly the Washington Post seems to be right there with me (I say "surprisingly" mostly because of the Post's god-awful hawkish Editorial Board).
But, The linked Post piece reads more like a narative released by Spitzer '06 then anything. While it does give Grasso and others Spitzer has aimed for their say, albeit a bit briefly, paragraphs like these make me wonder if the writer isn't afflicted with the same adoration as myself:
Now Spitzer is an accomplished public speaker who leavens his thirst for intellectual combat with a self-deprecating sense of humor. He'll quote Homer Simpson and Daniel Patrick Moynihan minutes apart in the same speech. His Manhattan office is filled with photographs. Dozens feature his wife, Silda Wall, a former law school classmate, and their three daughters, and Spitzer says he is intrigued by what his visitors say about the others. Many ask about the courtroom sketch of him during the Gambino trial. Others notice Teddy Roosevelt, the New York-born president famous for busting corporate monopolies. But almost no one from Manhattan recognizes NASCAR driver Jeff Gordon, whom Spitzer met through his brother-in-law.
But the WaPo Love Train doesn't stop there. Today's Editorial Piece starts with this:
HARDLY A WEEK goes by without a corporation or a corporate chieftain being humbled. May 24 brought the suing of Dick Grasso, the former chairman of the New York Stock Exchange; the week before brought the punishment of Richard S. Strong, a leader in the mutual fund industry, who accepted a $60 million fine and a lifetime ban from the financial industry to settle allegations that he had lined his pockets at the expense of ordinary investors. These headlines, which come to you courtesy of Eliot L. Spitzer, New York's attorney general and aspiring governor, show that even the most elegantly white-collared bosses are not above the law. But preventing a fresh round of scandals when the next boom happens will require reform of the regulatory machinery. It will depend less on Mr. Spitzer's office than on the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Eliot really seems to have the support of damn near every mainstream paper I read (no, the NYPost is not mainstream, nor do I read it). I find this odd since he really is a bit of a vigilante when it comes to corporate crime and like Dean, is a well-connected rich dude in populist clothing. Is it that they are terrified that he'll turn his office on them if they speak badly of him? Or do the papers have a little respect for their audiences, and realize that it's unwise to go after the guy who is protect the customers?
And to digress a little, I believe that Spitzer, combined with the federal-regulatory environment has done more to endear the left to states' rights then really anything since WWII (I use that cut off since I'm rather ignorant about the states' rights battles before then). It's all part of a paradigm shift that really leaves me scratching my head from time to time wondering, "What happened to my ingrained political stereotypes?"
The Republicans are big-government liberals now, the Dems overhauled welfare and the right rails against "activist judges" and "out-of-control" state officals. Much of this can be reconciled with the knowledge that the Republicans, in general, don't have principles other then a thirst for power, but it is hard for me to really get my head around.
In the meantime I'll continue my worship of Mr. Spitzer dreaming of his inauguration in '07 and hoping for a well-timed suit he files against the Bush Administration, in say mid August of this year.
