Photo credit: @julesdwit.
A not-for-profit media organization supported by people like you.
Danny Hakim, New York Times Albany bureau chief, clarifies what we know about whether there's any connection between convicted Madam and Comptroller candidate Kristin Davis and Eliot Spitzer.
Watertown's Mayor Graham had stood by Davis
The Mayor of Watertown Jeffrey Graham believed in the rehabilitation of Kristin Davis and actually supported her run for Governor which was backed by political consultant Roger Stone, and this election picked her as a more viable candidate for NYC Comptroller then Eliot Spitzer. Now before you just throw the good Mayor under the bus, although his judgment is often called morally lax and open to revue, be aware that the City of Watertown did receive a very favorable evaluation from NYS Comptroller Tom Di Napoli's Office on the recent City budget; and Watertown’s financial outlook for the coming year.
And yesterday it looked like Mayor Graham was a major player in reeling over a 100 million dollars in Regional Development money into a NNY project for a key inner City redevelopment project for the City of Watertown, aided by the efforts of COR Project leader Mr. Jim Wright, that will help to demolish and replace the old 'Mercy' Hospital' shell, a huge potential eyesore now avoided, and that will no longer be a burden to taxpayers for years to come. Kristen Davis appears to have let Mayor Graham down. A Mayor who for years took a lot of heat to stand by her in the name of standing up for rehabilitation, and Kristin's right to a second chance after paying her debt to society with jail time. Say it ain't so Kristen!
Mike Flynn 'Middle Class Mike'
I would love to see Eliot Spitzer run for presidentand Kristen Davis as his running mate.This would be called the Dream Team.T
@ "Brian N.":
"can someone explain to me why there was no charges to Spitzer for being a "John"?"
That may be the most salient question of all regarding Spitzer.
Yet it was not asked during Brian Lehrer's interview with Spitzer this past Monday.
Lehrer asked Spitzer, in rather vague terms, about the hypocrisy issue. Spitzer answered evasively, saying only that he wouldn't call it an unreasonable argument and then quickly changed the subject. The obvious question that Spitzer should then have been asked, but wasn't, is: Well, then, what's the counterargument? And then ask Spitzer why he never faced any criminal charges. And go on to ask him whether his position concerning the criminality of prostitution and the penalties for it have changed since his fall from grace. If Spitzer would answer that they have not, then the next obvious question would be: Why? And how do you justify continuing to maintain that /others/ should be prosecuted and suffer harsh penalties for the /very same/ acts that /you/ committed with utter and complete impunity.
These are the questions that Brian Lehrer /should/ have asked Eliot Spitzer but did /not/.
Actually, the performance of just about any sex act imaginable, (almost) no matter how depraved, by any number of participants, for monetary compensation is perfectly legal-- as long as: a) it is recorded (filmed and/or photographed) and,b) the recording is then marketed and distributed to consumers
It's called hardcore pornography and has long been legal in at least most of the U.S..
But if (even) just one person pays (even) just one other person to perform /any/ sexual act-- no matter how (relatively) innocuous (e.g., an 'enhanced' massage...), it is called 'prostitution' and is a criminal offense.
(My point here is neither to condone nor to condemn any of the acts/practices that I cited but to simply point-out what should be the obvious, glaring inconsistency and contradiction in the law here.)
I just finished reading Mr. Hakim's NY Times article, and I must say it was the most entertaining piece I've read in a while. It also shows what a media/political circus we NYers are privy to (and you just can't beat the free cost of admission). H.L. Mencken would be proud.
Having listened to Brian Lehrer's interview of Elliot Spitzer on Monday's show and then reading through the comments page for the segment, I was struck and dismayed by the number of people who just don't get it. This is a man who condemned others for the very same vice that he himself indulged; while cavorting with prostitutes with brazen impunity, Spitzer prided himself on his zealotry in pursuing and prosecuting people for prostitution, including, specifically, the "johns".
This, Spitzer's incredibly blatant /hypocrisy/ and the way in which he held himself and continues to hold himself, and be held by others, as effectively being above the law --the very law that he was sworn to uphold--is the issue here. /Not/ prostitution, /per se/, whatever one's personal views on the matter happen to be. The obvious inability to make this distinction, as demonstrated by so many here, is rather appalling.
Caller from Plant City: bingo!
This might be off topic, but can someone explain to me why there was no charges to Spitzer for being a "John"? Was it beyond the statue of limitation? As far as I know, being a customer is still illegal. I understand he did not use government money or resource, but what he did was still illegal.
To Sal from Queens: how is it exploiting the consumer to offer something for sale? Makes no sense whatsoever.
It's not about "anti male sexuality." It's about hypocrisy: secretly breaking the law while being a law enforcer.
Prostitution is legal in Israel, but pimping is not. But it is hard to convict pimps if the prostitutes won't testify against them in court. I don't know why prostitution isn't legal here. Makes no sense.
To the guy who just phoned in saying prostitution is the only crime where both seller and buyer are criminalized ...
have you heard of illegal drugs?
Thanks for addressing this topic, Brian. Now I won't have to buy the National Enquirer this week. That's a savings of $3.79!
OHHHHHH! so a WOMAN was the madam ... this really does not jive with some commenters here that said that Spitzer the hypocrite was "exploiting young women".... looks like the women were exploiting the men with their charms for sale... is any thing new?
let's get all this anti male sexuality clap trap out of the debates
Email addresses are required but never displayed.
Brian Lehrer leads the conversation about what matters most now in local and national politics, our own communities and our lives.
Subscribe on iTunes
BL Weekend: Learning To Drive; Gentrifying Thrift; Senator Gillibrand
WNYC 93.9 FM and AM 820 are New York's flagship public radio
stations, broadcasting the finest programs from NPR and PRI, as well as a wide range of award-winning local
programming. WNYC is a division of
New York Public Radio.