Democratic governor caught with his hands in the nookie jar *UPDATED*
Bookworm on Mar 10 2008 at 12:41 pm | Filed under: Democrats, Media matters
I would be remiss if I did not point out to you that Democratic NY Governor Elliott Spitzer has some problems with prostitution — and it’s not that he disapproves of it:
Gov. Eliot Spitzer has been caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet with a high-priced prostitute at a Washington hotel last month, according to a person briefed on the federal investigation.
The wiretap recording, made during an investigation of a prostitution ring called Emperors Club VIP, captured a man identified as Client 9 on a telephone call confirming plans to have a woman travel from New York to Washington, where he had reserved a room. The person briefed on the case identified Mr. Spitzer as Client 9.
The governor learned that he had been implicated in the prostitution probe when a federal official contacted his staff last Friday, according to the person briefed on the case.
The governor informed his top aides Sunday night and this morning of his involvement. He canceled his public events today and scheduled an announcement for this afternoon after inquiries from the Times.
If the story is true, my deep sympathies to his wife. If it’s false, I wish him the best of luck.
Of note is the fact that nowhere in the New York Times article from which I quote is Spitzer ever directly identified as a Democrat. Instead, there is a single oblique reference to his party buried in paragraph 9: “In recent weeks, however, Mr. Spitzer seemed to have rebounded, with his Democratic party poised to perhaps gain control of the state Senate for the first time in four decades.”
The “spot the party” trend continues in other news stories on the subject:
The AP story never once uses the words “Democrat” or “Democratic.”
The CNN story never once uses the words “Democrat” or “Democratic.”
The LA Times blog breaks ranks and reports on Spitzer’s status as a rising Democratic star.
USA Today’s story, which is being repeatedly updated, as of 3:36 EST has no mention of Spitzer’s Democratic ties.
Reuters Canada (which is the only Reuters story I’ve found so far) is mum about Spitzer’s political affiliations.
Once again, as interesting as the story itself is the story about the story. The underlying story is a typical political plot: rising young prosecutor and political can’t resist temptation. Frankly, as a story, it’s been done before. The much more interesting story, of course, is the chronic inability members of the MSM have, when one of their own (i.e., a Democrat) is caught doing something bad, to fulfill their obligation to report the story, with all the who, what, where, why and how questions answered. In the case of Spitzer, given his prominence in the Democratic party, the who question should properly be answered by identifying his party affiliation. It’s shoddy, deceitful journalism that reporters are persistently trying to hide that ball.
UPDATE: It’s emerged that the prostitution ring was fairly ritzy, with hourly rates (!) running from $1076 to $5921. AJStrata asks the right question, which is “where in the heck did Spitzer get that kind of money?”
UPDATE II: Apropos the above, Spitzer was paying at the high end, coming in at $4,300 per hour. Big money for a government employee, right?
UPDATE III: Regarding that $4,300 figure, Reader Iam let me know that this number is not quite as straightforward as the reports would have it. Looking at some of the original legal documents squirrelled about over the internet, Reader Iam thinks that the more accurate description of that number is that it “reflects not just the cost of the Feb. 13 encounter specifically, but also a deposit toward unspecified future activity to avoid some of the issues connected with the “service provider’s” not receiving mailed funds in a timely fashion. (The subtext, stated in some places, is that Spitzer was eschewing other, more efficient, payment options which more typical clients used.)” Thanks for the clarification, Reader Iam.
Email This Post To A Friend
8 Responses to “Democratic governor caught with his hands in the nookie jar *UPDATED*”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
It’s shoddy, deceitful journalism that reporters are persistently trying to hide that ball.
It is just their propaganda at work.
I know people who actually thought Abraham Lincoln was a Democrat and were quite surprised to find out that he was, gasp*, a Republican.
This exploits the propaganda principle that it is best to have your target audience draw their conclusions. Especially when those conclusions favor you and you influenced them into making those conclusions.
So if you continue to mention Republican corruption and nada nada nada, then do not mention Democrat corruption by name and feat, then after awhile, people subconsciously make the assumption that ALL corruption they hear about are due to Republicans.
This is the marvel and beauty of propaganda and psychological warfare, Book. You convince somebody by making them believe that they were the ones that decided certain things were true. Instead of the truth, which is that I, the puppet master pulling the strings, was the one that decided for them what they were going to believe in.
You see the same thing with violence in Iraq. The media does not explicitly come out, like Bush tends to do in press conferences, and claim Iraq is going into endless civil war all the time, what they do is to simply allow people to draw those conclusions and then repeat those conclusions. Because the conclusions didn’t come from the media, people think, they don’t see the media as being “biased” or propaganda apparatuses. They think they were the ones that found information and made a judgement about Iraq. In reality, they did no such thing, Book.
The same thing also applies to violence and problems in America. Americans think the world is a rosy place because the only problems they hear are about are here in America. They don’t feel the pain of Iraqis or Russians or the Chinese or the Afghans, because the only problems they hear about are problems coming from America. So obviously people are going to think this country ain’t all that much to be proud of, correct.
So obviously people are going to think this country ain’t all that much to be proud of, correct.
And then the media will say “we didn’t tell anyone America or Bush sucked”. We’re unbiased, we’re the straight down the middle, so sayeth Bill Keller of the New york TImes.
On an objective scale, though, reporting organizations such as the New York Times do not produce very good quality propaganda. The reason is simple. They not only fool others but they also fool themselves. It is one thing to make propaganda, it is quite another thing to fall for your own propaganda. Then you become from a puppet master to a puppet.
The only reason why the media appears to be dominating the debate and the information warfare is that there is absolutely no opposition to them. Competent or incompetent. With no opposition, it is very easy to win, even if you are the lowest of the low in terms of skill.
Book, as you said it is sad for his wife and family; but what I find sadder is that when he made his public announcement his wife was standing beside him. I simply do not understand “political” wives who let themselves get used like that.
As for Spitzer; some people have written that he achieved fame and political fortune by using the considerable power of a Prosecutor to ruin the lives of high-profile business people through dubious prosecutions. I don’t know about that. But, given the documented excesses of Prosecutors arround the country, I have no sympathy of any of them who are caught.
Nookie? Don’t think I have heard that term since high school.
Yeah, you have to love that “caught with his hands in the nookie jar” - very good, BW! Very good!
On the other hand, I remain uncertain why anyone disapproves or cares. It’s one of those “crimes” that probably ought not to be, and should remain between he and his wife.
Where Spitzer got the money is probably the same place he got all of his money: Daddy. Spitzer is one of those New York democrats, much like Schumer, who have apparently never held an actual job in their lives outside of the politically appointed, or political office. He’s run into problems before with how his expensive lifestyle and expensive housing was supported, and the answer always seems to have been Daddy, a New York City housing mogul. His “government employee” salary was pretty much the least of what he had available, always. The problems arose with his lack of clear reporting/transparency about it. He’d have been far better if he’d just admitted from day 1: “I’m incapable of making a living commensurate with how I like to live, so I live off Big Daddy, and there it is” - but that would probably be a blow to whatever pride he has, or tries to project.
But he fits right in with the “prominent democrat” model: “Do as I say, not as I do.” The implication is: “rules are for you peasants, not me.”
The last time I heard it used was by John Ringo. You guys wouldn’t happen to be of the same generation, now would ya?
JJ, I shouldn’t think the “problem” with Spitzer’s actions need explaining.
First, whether one agrees with the law or not; prostitution is illegal in the state of New York, as well as in the District of Columbia. The people who established this law justified it on the basis that prostitution is NOT a victimless crime. (Maybe you would argue that at $3k/hr and up, there is a question as to the vicitim is, but that is irrelevant) More importantly, anytime someone who is charged to enforce the law, flouts the law it is cause for concern to our whole society.
Second, this guy has prosecuted prostitution rings during his meteoric career. That was part of his legend. I doubt that the people who faced Spitzer’s prosecutorial power would shrug this off. They are certainly justified in asking whether he shouldn’t be held to the same standards as those he pursued? As you may know it is standard practice in most juridictions to humiliate , and otherwise punish “Johns”, as well as the people plying the trade. Many police departments set up stings for the purpose of catching them. I know that DC does; and, I wouldn’t be surprised if New York does something along those lines. This guy may move in more discreet circles and pay a hell of a lot more for what he gets, but the nitty gritty is, he is a “John” just like the schmuck who picks up a hooker on the street. He should not be treated any better, or any worse.
Third, the bottom line; the awesome level of pure hypocrisy exhibited by this guy raises legitimate questions as to whether he has the intellectual honesty and moral fiber we should expect of people we allow to govern us. (Oh, I know he is probably no worse than some, perhaps many, others; but, that is no reason to shrug and move on when any of them are caught.)
Didn’t say it wasn’t a problem, was pointing out he’s had past problems on an entirely different level. The two don’t connect, and I didn’t connect them.
Where’d he get the money?
Maybe from Dad.