Let’s say you’re on a business trip, and you get lonely so you decide to hire a prostitute. But you like the girls you know back home, so you decide to place a call to your pimp back home, offering to pay for the whore’s transport to wherever you are in addition to your usual fee. Does it bend the law? Maybe. Does it mean you’re not fit for your job, even if you’re, say, a project manager and expected to lead? Probably not. Does it make you a horribly immoral person? Well, not that much more immoral than hiring a prostitute in the first place, which if you believe some people, is not much different from marijuana. Should you be run out of your job and disgraced for life regardless of how good a job you did before? If you used company funds, maybe; but if you paid with your own money it’s not even the company’s business.
But if you’re the governor of New York? Apparently it’s a different story.
I’ve been reading about the Elliot Spitzer scandal and beyond the hypocrital irony, I’m seeing a distinct disconnect. I’m not seeing how “patronized a prostitution ring” exactly equates to “is a corrupt politician” or, considering just how popular it really is, “is a reprehensible person”. If he used campaign or state funds to pay for his “night of fun”, or if he lied under oath about it or actively tried to obstruct the investigation instead of semi-fessing up, I could see the scandal, but if it’s about doing something that any red-blooded American of the same gender would do (well, most)?
Doesn’t this only show that Spitzer is (gasp!) actually human and not a perfect little saint? Do we actually expect our politicians to be the latter? Considering how many corrupt, truly reprehensible politicians there are out there, shouldn’t we be focusing on more important things for us to get upset about our politicians? JFK was anything but a saint, after all.
Really, aren’t there more important things for the media to talk about? I would think the damage the Bush administration has done over the past seven years is far more important than a governor’s sexual escapades. Bill Clinton, after all, had sex outside marriage while in an executive office, and I would say it didn’t affect his ability to be president too negatively, would you?