Posted on 03/11/2008 12:00:08 PM PDT by PurpleMan
"Gov. Eliot Spitzer has been soliciting high-priced hookers for at least six years and possibly for more than a decade, sources tell The Post....
Sources tell The Post that Spitzer had frequented high-priced hookers as far back as 2002 and possibly earlier."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
PICS?????
In New York circles, affairs and even if they’re gay and lesbian affairs are common amongst the married.
What? His wife is trying to doing a Hillary and get him to stay? She'll take the embarassment, the shame, the looks, and the hits to her reputation (not to mention the pathetic example she sets for her 3 daughters) to remain "First Lady of New York".
She must be sicker than he is.
Bill help set up Spitzers trips.
But were they virgin Prostitutes
“Tehran’s police chief, Reza Zarei, has been arrested after he was found nude in a local brothel with six naked prostitutes,”
Six? Lucky man!
The wife always knows. Some just choose to look the other way.
Client # 1 was William Jefferson Clinton
He didn’t “make a mistake”! This has been going on for TEN YEARS if you believe all the reports coming out. No, I haven’t gone through my husband committing adultery, but I do know that ten years of it is no mistake. It’s a pattern of behavior that I would not be forgiving and I would certainly NOT be encouraging him to “stay and fight” so that every juicy detail of those ten years can be in the spotlight to do further damage to my children. She’s enabling him and it’s going to hurt those children immensely.
Go to the link & read the whole article, says he didn't want to wear a condom!
He's a RAT!
I wonder when some realistic wife is going to stand up and say. “You know, I am just not as interested in intimacy as I was years ago. So long as he brings home a paycheck, gives me and the kids enough quality time and remembers my birthday and Valentines day, I don’t mind if he does what makes him happy. And it’s just not any of your business.”
[Have you seen a picture of this guy? No wonder it cost 5 grand a pop.]
I was thinking that as well.
And, in fact, what brought him down was the immense size of these financial transactions. They were so large that they tripped money laundering alarms.
If he had paid normal prices (no prostitute is worth more than $500), they could have been written off as meals in very expensive restaurants.
Spitzer created the system where banks would tattle on people for transferring $4000 here or there.
I really disagree with this wiretapping and betrayal of customers by banks...but Spitzer ruined a lot of lives by doing this so it was sweet justice to see him caught up in the same jaws.
About a wife knowing:
1) If you let your wife see all your finances, she will figure out when you are seeing other women.
2) If you let your wife snoop into your cell phone and computer, she will also know.
That being said, a man with backbone is not going to tolerate his partner snooping into his electronic tracks and it is advisable to have separate finances anyway. Any man who allows his partner to say “I would cut it off if you ever cheated on me” deserves to actually have it come to pass, because accepting that comment means that you’ve already been figuratively castrated anyway. :-)
Whatever happened to the star-eyed interns who used to give it out for free? My theory is that the old lesbian feminists, who ran Spitzer like a puppet, carefully chose staunch feminist interns and assistants for Spitzer.
It is clear that ZERO women in Spitzer’s professional environment were sexually attracted to him, which doesn’t necessarily say something about his strange looks as much as it reflects what happens when you (and the New York State public) glorify anti-male feminism.
I bet Schwarzenegger has nobody on his staff who admires him either...because modern political HR managers like it that way.
For anyone thinking “I think that all politicians should be surrounded by women assistants and coworkers who do not have a sexual interest in him”...I am not saying that married male politicians should actually sleep with their staff, but there is something very wrong with a society and the politicians when you consistently get situations where none of the female coworkers are attracted to the male politicians anymore.
If politicians cannot get that stuff for free, the price goes up and they are open to selling out our rights and interests to get it.
If Spitzer was into hanky panky, he should have had the backbone to tell his HR person that he would have the final word on who got hired and fired among his staff.
It is very clear by his desperation to pay huge prices for prostitutes that Spitzer was NOT in control of who got hired for his staff.
Who, then, controlled Spitzer’s staff?
The answer: radical feminists, who also told him when he could sit, when he could stand and when he could go to the bathroom.
Maybe Spitzer ran away on Valentine’s Day as a cry for help because he knew he was just a puppet of feminists he could not possibly have really admired.
If you combine this theory with the fact that he wanted to have unprotected sex with a prostitute, it is clear the man did not LIKE himself and certainly did not LIKE his wife.
I hope, after he helps get the Mann Act partially overturned (sex trafficking hype obscures real sex slavery and no old federal law should be allowed to stand that uses the catchall phrase “for immoral purposes”), the guy comes full circle conceptually and then helps the men’s rights movement map exactly who the radical feminists are who really run New York State.
And now Marianne from Gilligan’s Island has been arrested for driving while high on pot. :-(
She was my role model (I had a crush on her when I was a kid).
Either we bring out our religion and say “Oh no, the liberals have caused us to fall so far”...
or we recognize that Ron Paul was right when he said that the federal government simply cannot and should not waste its time on social reengineering.
Not that I would like to die in a headon collision with Marianne from Gilligan’s Island. She deserved her $400 fine for that. :-(
What I want out of this Spitzer Scandal is that no more zealous prosecutors like Spitzer be allowed to think they will win political brownie points punishing men for wanting extra-marital sex. This was Spitzer’s specialty. Such prosecutors are blatantly going after the “women’s vote” and blatantly ignoring males (including themselves) when they do this.
The next hooker to be arrested anywhere in the US, should demand that she be treated no differently than Spitzer.
The next man arrested in San Francisco by those gorgeous female cops conducting those sting operations on Sutter Street...needs to mention Spitzer to the judge.
No matter how self-righteous and faithful-to-his-wife a man is, it amounts to misguided chivalry when he puts himself and other men under draconian laws that straightjacket his own options. It happened in the Victorian Era and then the Mann Act and the new Violence Against Women Act prove that too many male politicians are still, in the 21st century, willing to turn themselves into eunuchs singing in the castrati choir just to be seen as a knight in shining armor fighting the other “decadent” males out there.
Hmmmm...I wonder how long before Bill Clinton’s name doesn’t come to light in this whole mess?!?
I will give Bill Clinton credit for probably not having to pay in the thousands to have sex with someone. He probably knows the score: $400 is enough for the best looking women who “sell direct” and there are so many ways to make a free trip to Paris or the Virgin Islands have “strings attached” that any man of means can buy whatever he wants “indirectly” if he feels he has to buy a woman’s affections in the first place (you offer a free trip to the Virgin Islands and the other person gets hooked and knows what they probably have to do to get more trips).
Of course, after the way he called Monica “that woman”, I wouldn’t blame most women from avoiding him or being very wary.
I had someone working for me once who accidentally activated his Nextel phone walkie talkie function to his wife, while he was leaning against a wall and commenting to another guy about the beautiful girls walking by. He was saying “I’d sure like to plug that one” or whatever.
When his wife got furious over what she heard, the man got even more furious that she had quietly listened in on her.
He was so convincing in his argument that his wife had cheated him more by listening in than he had by talking that way to his coworker, that I ended up giving him a raise.
It takes integrity to stand up for one’s civil right not to have one’s privacy badly invaded. And yes, if you pick your nose or burp in the Oval Office, that is privacy that does not need filming simply because you are President.
I lost respect for Clinton when he accepted the BS that Ken Starr had bullied Monica into “confessing”.
I would have said “Monica is a friend of mine and I consider anything bullied out of her to have been highly illegal”...and I would have strongly pursued that angle.
I would have stood right behind him on that.
If he had done so and if Gore had characterized Ken Starr as a fascist in 2000, Gore might now be President.
But, because liberals are more into fascism and Big Brother than Ken Starr ever thought of being, Clinton didn’t oppose the fact that Monica had been bullied to discuss her private life.
Instead, he called her “that woman” and lied when he did not have to.
He also insulted Yasser Arafat by allowing the question at that time, but Yasser needed insulting. :-)
A lot of liberal women joined the Republican Party because of the Monica Lewinsky case. They were furious with the other feminists for giving a man a pass for cheating on his wife because they strongly believed that this should be a federal offense. These feminists believe that violence or cheating against women is a federal offense and this is now codified into law by VAWA an update of which Bush signed in early January 2006 despite the Rehnquist court implying it was all highly unconstitutional.
We have yet to purge the Republican Party of these imposters. Heck, I am sure there are plenty on FR.
Makes sense to me. No one person really understand the conniving that goes on in those circles. It is all about power and transparent loyalty.
Thanks.
On the one hand, Spitzer had already endorsed Hillary last year, and when he leaves, there is one less superdelegate.
On the other hand, Spitzer embarrassed her on the driver’s licences for illegals, and was said to be leaning toward changing to Obama.
So, she loses a “committed” superdel, but the rest of them get the message: Stay where you are, or get Spitzered.
I could be wrong, but it seems Clintonian to me.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.