Might work for him. Didn't do it for Larry Craig or Mark Foley, but they were Republicans. It all worked out fine for Barney Frank, so that (D) besides his name may make it a non-issue.
According to The Washington Post's website, Spitzer has apologized for vague wrong-doing but has no plans to resign. And may well not. It may all blow over. After all, he's not a hypocrite, is he?
Well, not by the definition of the left, anyhow. It might seem that a guy who busted up prostitution rings, slamming the folks involved in them as vermin, might be kind of hypocritical if it turns out he's involved, in some manner, in a prostitution ring.
But in the lexicon of the left, hypocrisy is actually something a person is only capable of if they are a conservative, a Christian evangelical, or a Republican. And only if they are doing something they can be run out of office on--not if the hypocrisy involves going along with liberal policy initiatives when they said they wouldn't. For example: who on the left attacks Dubya, for example, for saying he would not sign campaign finance reform unless it met all this criteria, and then signing a campaign finance reform bill that met none of the criteria he spelled out? Nobody on the left attacks him for that, but let Larry Craig look for a little anonymous gay sex in an airport bathroom, and watch out!
Which is not to excuse Larry Craig, only to point out that "hypocrisy" only means one thing in modern politics--a Republican or conservative not living up to the standards he or she sets for himself or herself in a manner that can be leveraged against them or the party.
Well, we'll see. Elliot Spitzer may be called out for being a hypocrite (he already is, and not for this, but for his differing attitudes towards big Wall Street money when attacking them got him favorable press, and when their money could help him fund his campaign). But I doubt it. The governorship of New York is important to the Dems, and Elliot Spitzer is a prominent Democrat. It'll take more than some involvement in some prostiution ring, as hypocritical as such a thing might be in the old-fashioned dictionary sense of the word, to get rid of Elliot Spitzer.
Although given the bi-partisan way Spitzer has made enemies as he clawed his way to the top, there may be a few too many Democrats (or possesors of reliable Democrat money) that might like to see him fall on his sword to protect him. Time will tell.
Seriously, they are. Which is a good thing. Using a modern secular myth to justify looting the private sector and punishing the tax payer is reprehensible, and the more people who wake up to the same, the better.
The Jawa Report has a breakdown on how Axelrod and the Obama campaign are trying to make fake grassroots campaigns to smear Sarah Palin, while, at the same time, leaving a trail of smoking guns everywhere. No wonder the left like's to tell us they are the smartest and most ethical folks out there!
The Journal of Feminist Insight blog has a breakdown of softballs Charlie Gibson tossed Obama vs. the prosecutorial nature of his questions for Palin. Pretty damning stuff, indeed. For Obama: How does it feel to win? For Palin: Do you have enough qualifications for the job your seeking? And on and on and on.
Not classy, Charlie.
Apparently to folks of the left, the ends will always justify the means. Ruin people, lie, cheat, steal, anything short of murder (and, hmm, who knows, maybe that, too) is okay if it means you get universal healthcare and progressive taxation. Learning that, on the left, the end always justifies the means is why I'm not a liberal today.
