Spitzer Swallows

Oh, the hypocrisy! The sleaze! The squalor! Am I talking about New York soon-to-be-not Gov. Eliot Spitzer? Heck no, I'm talking about the media. Every time a pol is caught with his pants down, the media collectively take a deep breath -- pens poised, laptops on standby -- while someone decides how the story is to be spun. Will the guy be dragged up and down in the dust like some hapless sheep in an Afghan festival, or will the media defend his right to be "a normal male, and everybody makes mistakes, and who was harmed, really, and etc. etc."? Will they pile on, pretending to be shocked -- shocked! -- that such things can happen in our day and age? Or will they immediately turn on the guy's accusers, calling them "religious nuts", "right-wing fanatics", "Puritans", "Victorians", "haters", and the like? I guess it all depends on who they already have a grudge against. It doesn't even seem to follow party lines, as the Spitzer case shows. In fact, we could define two basic models of the media's treatment of this sort of thing -- the Bill Clinton model and the Spitzer model. Both are Democrats. Of course, at least the Democrats are much less often accused of "hypocrisy", since they are not known for launching moral campaigns. For that you need a Larry Craig. (BTW, his current web site includes an item headlined, "Beef is Safe". You can't make this stuff up... )

And while we're on the subject of the gov, it's worth asking what, if any, actual charges are going to result from all this. An AP article yesterday provides some clues:
(1) Soliciting and paying for sex. Wow, this is such rare behavior in our society, it's no wonder a guy has to quit a job as governor if he's caught doing it.
(2) Violating the Mann Act. Yes, that's what I said. This is the act that is occasionaly brought into play to punish men who have illicit relations with minors. But when's the last time it was used in the case of very much a non-minor -- and a hooker to boot! The whole thing beggars belief.
(3) Illegally arranging cash transactions. Well, this charge covers so many things -- millions of instances a day, I would guess -- and besides, what business is it of the government's anyway?

I guess the outcome of the discussion re: charges will reflect the _establishment's_ take on Spitzer. The media's take on him is already writ in very black ink, and there's no white-out in sight.

So you see, in exchange for -- and by the way, I've seen her pictures. OK, she's not bad looking, but at that rate? Good grief. I would expect at least the entire Finnish women's bobsled team. Anyway, in exchange for a few very overpriced trysts, the poor sap gets a chance to swallow his own nose in public (Did you see those photos? That's what he was doing, right?), create one more "long-suffering political wife", and blow an otherwise promising career as the Scourge of God. But hey, he stepped on the wrong toes somewhere along the line, and that person got hold of his buddies in the media, and the vigil began. Their efforts just got richly rewarded, and we have to put up with the result -- at least until the next sucker comes along.