News-Record.com

It's a pretty sad commentary when the Dems are just happy a D-Governor hasn't actually violated prostitution statutes in his adulterous activities.

A decade ago, it was vitally important for Bill Clinton to vehemently deny any allegations of extramarital activities. Now the governor of the nation's second-largest state can admit he's had affairs and it's considered no big deal.

I disagree, but maybe I'm wrong. After all, we've gone through 9/11, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, now an economic downtown. Maybe the sexual behavior of political leaders really isn't a big deal.

Help me out here.

It's only a big deal if it involves a Republican. Then the media and the pompous, self-righteous (but morally corrupt) Dems will crucify you for not meeting standards they themselves can't meet.
Democratic Party hypocrisy on this subject is pathetically apparent.

New York's new governor: I don't pay for extramarital sex.* Doug

Of course not! He is a legally blind black man! What HO would take money from him?

Jaycee: "It's only a big deal if it involves a republican."
A pretty ironic comment, considering this post refers to the Spitzer scandal that has been ALL OVER the national news for over a week and Spitzer is...a democrat.
I think that republican scandal is sometimes more outrageous because of the hypocrisy factor: Repubs claim to be the party of morals and family values, so when one of them does something that directly contradicts that message of course there will be more outrage.

m, thanks for proving my point.
Republicans care about family values, and Dems don't.
Republicans resign when exposed, Dems boast about it.

Good one Jaycee!

Republicans resign when exposed, * jaycee

Except North Carolina Republican Commissor Coy Privette with his 20 dollar HO! Right jaycee? Or to really top it off! How about Senator Vitter from Louisiana in his diapers with a HO? Of course, on the other side of republican transgender issues, we had Senator Craig with his amazing Jesus toe tapping dance in a airport men's room. Just love your republican family values math jaycee!

This is obviously a pre-emptive strike. The new gov. and his wife knew that the bloodhounds would be on this story like flies on a dung heap. after he took office.

The fact that he didn't pay monetarily for his affairs may show a measure of fiscal responsibility, which in a pol. is usually a good thing.

I think also this may be a good opportunity for women who kind of always wanted to have affairs with polticians but maybe didn't have...well, lets just say; the Creator was not kind in the looks dept. , and now in light of the gov.s visual limitation, to maybe have a chance.

Overall, I think the positve must be stressed here, as always.

You also could say this opens the door for other politically capable individuals, who in the past might have shied away from public life because of the potential for exposure of personal or moral shortcomings, to go ahead and run for office because it's now OK in our culture to commit marital infidelities. After all, just because I'd cheat on the person I love doesn't mean I'd ever be dishonest with, say, voters. Right?

I guess we have to remember that people who run for office are human beings and not robots.

Obviously high priced hookers and affairs while a person is holding office opens the pol up to blackmail and other types of manipulation by external forces with potential bad effects on the country and citizenry.

As to character/ moral issues etc. this is a sticky subject and would have forced a few lightweight guys like Thomas Jefferson into political oblivion etc. and seeing that the middle-eastern oil nations that have us over an oil-barrell are governed by guys that can have 300 wives, it's hard to say how relevant monogamy is to the modern world or if was ever relevant.