You can’t legislate judgement.

Hemi:

This is a good call, particularly your note that, in the Dawn Wells case, everything was punished EXCEPT the ACTUAL crime - the danger she posed driving under the influence.

Spitzer is a hypocrite, absolutely.  But he is no less competent as a governor today than he was yesterday, or will be tomorrow.  So we lose a Nader-type fighter for “people” to a non-crime, all in the name of political payback.

What a country.

Peace.

This is an interesting (and revealing) comment from you cyrena. Actually, the entire post is, though I’m sure you don’t realize that.

Superficially, you excuse your personal bitterness and distrust by suggesting that you’re just being pragmatic and realistic.

But be advised that you can’t assign the same motivations to the rest of society, who don’t have your personal hang-ups or prejudices, or hidden agendas, and be aware that we CAN see through them.

Having sex, morally sanctioned or otherwise is not the heart of this matter. Equality under the law is. That we attempt to control the uncontrollable with police and law enforcement officials is laughable. The war on sex, drugs and gambling is a bottomless money pit.

I’ll give a recent example of the shameful state of our country’s law enforcement. The story has been reported that Dawn Wells, Marianne of Gilligan’s Island fame, was stopped by a cop for driving erratically in Idaho. Reportedly driving home from a birthday party in her honor, Wells was found to have drugs in the car and was tested and found driving under the influence. She was sentenced to five days in jail, fined $410 and will serve six months probation for having marijuana in the car. Wells obviously had good lawyers along with a little local clout and goodwill. Do we really care that she had a couple of cocktails at a party? Do we care that she possibly used and uses pot? No on both counts. The only issue anyone should care about is she has proven to be a danger on the road and yet there is no report that she lost her driving license or her car. The actual crime goes unpunished. We ask police and the court systems to be pseudo-experts on drugs and alcohol and they don’t stand a chance against even a mediocre liar….. er lawyer. A dash mounted camera makes a cop a pretty good witness to erratic driving. Why not cut to the chase? Maintaining control of your vehicle should be the deciding factor. What if she was not found under the influence? What if she just can’t drive worth a shit?  The behavior that endangers others should be the concern and if that were the case the appropriate sentence would go a long way in addressing the other behavior.
And so the powers behind the scenes have us chasing our tails and finger pointing at other humans with sex drives and otherwise addictive personalities. Imagine that. Just about everybody likes sex, drugs and gambling. If you say you don’t, it’s likely because you’ve been brainwashed into thinking those things are bad for you. Everything is bad for you in excess. Government spending for example. Water is not good in excess, see New Orleans. But while we’re continually sticking our finger in the hole in the dike of human desires (how’s that for a pretty picture?) the flood waters of white collar crimes that do real damage to everyone are largely ignored. “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.”

We’re left with empty victories like this one. They’ve caught a low-life billionaire boner at his own game. The only plausible reason this ever came to light is that Spitzer likely stepped on someone’s Johnson further up the chain of command. That should alert you to how little clout even billionaires have in this game. It’s time to change the game.

Here’s the opening sentence from a NY Times article By Danny Hakim and William K. Rashbaum, published on March 10, 2008:

“Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who gained national prominence relentlessly pursuing Wall Street wrongdoing, has been caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet with a high-priced prostitute at a Washington hotel last month, according to a law enforcement official and a person briefed on the investigation.”

“Gained national prominence relentlessly pursuing Wall Street wrongdoing”, that about says it all.

Cyrena:

“This is an excellent essay. If taken totally out of the realm of connection to me personally…”

Au contraire!  You have personally attempted to intimidate me myriad times, including via name-calling, outrageous accusations, and blatantly telling me to “shut up” on at least half a dozen occasions.  You are EXACTLY the kind of person to whom this essay is addressed.

“Now you don’t say here, or otherwise use quotes to separate the actual essay from your own comments, but at least you DO credit the author, Laird Wilcox.”

You really can be dense!  Except for the opening line, the ENTIRE THING (two-part post) is the essay.  Are you actually saying you didn’t know this?

“What you FAIL do to however, is to engage the argument itself, into any meaningful connection to your addressing it to me, making you a defamer and subversive terrorizer yourself.”

Excuse me?  This is pure sophistry - and BAD sophistry at that.  The suggestion that posting an essay about defamation is itself defamation - or could be in ANY possible instance - would be laughable if it did not display such a willful, even dangerous, ignorance.  I think you better take a few steps back and consider what you just suggested.  It is unquestionably the most frightening thing I have EVER heard you say on LieDig.

“Meantime, overwhelmingly support your determination NOT to be INTIMIDATED by anyone, and to exercise your right to free speech.”

This, coming from a person who engages in defamation and intimidation more than most here.  You are in a SERIOUS state of denial.

Peace.  (even now…)

If Spitzer’s indescretion had taken place in a public restroom he’d probably be able to hang on for another year or so.  Every four years at the republican national convention it is reported that there is a surge in prostitution during the week of the convention in whatever city it is held in.  In 2004 they had “high end” prostitutes flown in.  Now some of those attendees who visited prostitutes must have been republican lawmakers who were delegates to the convention.  Did they betray the public trust?  Should they resign?

Thanks for your support and kind words Maani. Much appreciated.

I was watching a National Geographic documentary earlier tonight on Kent State. And I got to thinking about my generations fight against an unjust war. Just like I was against Vietnam, I am against Iraq. And just for the record, I was right from the beginning, too!

But I was struck in watching the documentary that the Iraq war has not resulted in the National Guard opening fire on unarmed citizens, killing four, and physically maiming others for life. And I pray that never happens again. Even though lives were ruined by Kent State the men and women wounded that day, and I met and worked with some years ago, they were never bitter and spread peace and love every where they went and in what they do.

Previously I had read that the current young generation was very progressive and liberal as well as anti-war. When reading those articles I was very pleased that it looked like the grip conservatives have/had on America was finally coming to a close. I was hopeful for the future.

But after my experiences with some of the young folk here I am beginning to wonder. If the behavior of some of these people is what the new generation is all about, how do they hope to unite a country let alone the world?

As the King of Siam said, “Tis a puzzlement.”

Bert,

This is an excellent essay. If taken totally out of the realm of connection to me personally, (as having been addressed to me) it would be totally within the context of this blog.

Now you don’t say here, or otherwise use quotes to separate the actual essay from your own comments, but at least you DO credit the author, Laird Wilcox.

So, thank you so much for sharing it with us all.

What you FAIL do to however, is to engage the argument itself, into any meaningful connection to your addressing it to me, making you a defamer and subversive terrorizer yourself. In other words, it’s the equivalent of gross cowardice and hypocrisy, to post such an excellent essay in your efforts to engage in the very same tactics that are being explained.

Meantime, overwhelmingly support your determination NOT to be INTIMIDATED by anyone, and to exercise your right to free speech.

Now OF COURSE you do understand, that in the context of this essay, that applies to ALL PEOPLE, since equals are to be treated equally, and we all have this right to exercise this free speech, and we ALL have this right to NOT be defined ‘en mass’ by the singular opinions (or personal experiences) of others.

I suspect that it would be easy enough to manage your efforts on these blogs, via a suggestion that RAE made not long ago…

Maybe you should make it VERY, VERY, VERY, clear, that in exercising your free speech, (to which we are all equally entitled) you are in fact giving public voice to YOUR OWN OPINIONS, (which of course should be a ‘given’ understanding, but human nature sometimes forgets that) and that you personally, do not speak for the masses, and cannot speak for the masses.

In conjunction with that recommendation, you should probably avoid singling out any one specific poster, (such as C. Quil, or me, or anyone) unless you are restricting yourself to a specific comment from that poster, as separate from your personal experiences. IE. C Quail notes the political demise of Speitzer and says…

•  “Another illusion blown all to hell. So what else is new?

YOU then being a brand new comment, (rather than a reply to comment posted) and say this:

“Dear C Quil
•  Another illusion blown all to hell?????? ..I have no idea how old you are, but by the time I reached my mid 20’s I had learned not to idealize politicians - well, actually not to idealize any one. As Hamlet said to the devious Polonious, “...Use every man according to his deserts, and who should scape flogging?’ Who indeed?

And then you continue on with more unconnected blather. Now maybe C. Quil sees this as intimidation and defamation, and maybe he or she doesn’t. (on these blogs, I would certainly hope not, but then, from your essay we can see where he or she might)
So, keep doing the free speech thing bert. But maybe you should go back and read this excellent essay a few dozens times, so you can make the appropriate connections.

Again, thank you for sharing it on this PUBLIC forum. No need to single me out in addressing it though, because everyone should feel equally welcome to read and gain from it.

I would hate for anyone to by pass it, based on the fact that it was addressed to me.

Bert:

Excellent essay.  Thanks for posting it.  I was particularly drawn to this paragraph:

“The weakness of ritual defamation lies in its tendency toward overkill and in its obvious maliciousness. Occasionally a ritual defamation will fail because of poor planning and failure to correctly judge the vulnerability of the victim or because its viciousness inadvertently generates sympathy.”

This describes at least a couple of people here, particularly “overkill” and “maliciousness.”  And in my case (and apparently yours as well), “failure to correctly judge the vulnerability of the victim”: certain people here were obviously hoping I had thin skin and would simply roll over and play dead, or be intimidated into leaving.  One person has repeatedly told me to “shut up,” and another has begun strongly suggesting that I leave.

Personally, I find all of it amusing (though certainly sad) rather than intimidating.  Indeed, I find it breathtaking that some of the supporters of Obama - an adjunct professor of Constitutional law - have such little respect for the Constitutionally protected right of free speech, and spend so much of their time and energy engaging in ad hominem attack, name-calling, accusation, and other forms of intimidation, all the way up to actually attempting to get people to leave because they disagree with their views.

Oh well.  “It takes all types.”  Hang in there, bud.  Right is on your side.

Peace.

An attempt, often successful, is made to involve others in the defamation. In the case of a public official, other public officials will be urged to denounce the offender. In the case of a student, other students will be called upon, and so on.
In order for a ritual defamation to be effective, the victim must be dehumanized to the extent that he becomes identical with the offending attitude, opinion or belief, and in a manner which distorts it to the point where it appears at its most extreme.

For example, a victim who is defamed as a “subversive” will be identified with the worst images of subversion, such as espionage, terrorism or treason. A victim defamed as a “pervert” will be identified with the worst images of perversion, including child molestation and rape. A victim defamed as a “racist” or “anti-Semitic” will be identified with the worst images of racism or anti-Semitism, such as lynchings or gas chambers.

Also to be successful, a ritual defamation must bring pressure and humiliation on the victim from every quarter, including family and friends. If the victim has school children, they may be taunted and ridiculed as a consequence of adverse publicity. If they are employed, they may be fired from their job. If the victim belongs to clubs or associations, other members may be urged to expel them.

Any explanation the victim may offer, including the claim of being misunderstood, is considered irrelevant. To claim truth as a defense for a politically incorrect value, opinion or belief is interpreted as defiance and only compounds the problem. Ritual defamation is often not necessarily an issue of being wrong or incorrect but rather of “insensitivity” and failing to observe social taboos.

  An interesting aspect of ritual defamation as a practice is its universality. It is not specific to any value, opinion or belief or to any group or subculture. It may be used for or against any political, ethnic, national or religious group. It may, for example, by anti-Semites against Jews, or by Jews against anti-Semites; by rightists against leftists or by leftists against rightists, and so on.

  The power of ritual defamation lies entirely in its capacity to intimidate and terrorize. It embraces some elements of primitive superstitious belief, as in a “curse” or “hex.” It plays into the subconscious fear most people have of being abandoned or rejected by the tribe or by society and being cut off from social and psychological support systems.

  The weakness of ritual defamation lies in its tendency toward overkill and in its obvious maliciousness. Occasionally a ritual defamation will fail because of poor planning and failure to correctly judge the vulnerability of the victim or because its viciousness inadvertently generates sympathy.

  It’s important to recognize and identify the patterns of a ritual defamation. Like all propaganda and disinformation campaigns it is accomplished primarily through the manipulation of words and symbols. It is not used to persuade, but to punish. Although it may have cognitive elements, its thrust is primarily emotional. Ritual Defamation is used to hurt, to intimidate, to destroy, and to persecute, and to avoid the dialogue, debate and discussion upon which a free society depends. On those grounds it must be opposed no matter who tries to justify its use.

AS LONG AS AMERICA IS A FREE COUNTRY I WILL EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH AND WILL NOT BE INTIMIDATED BY ANYONE.

Your ritual defamation tactics do not and will never censure or shut me up.

The Practice of Ritual Defamation
Laird Wilcox

  Defamation is the destruction or attempted destruction of the reputation, status, character or standing in the community of a person or group of persons by unfair, wrongful, or malicious speech or publication. For the purposes of this essay, the central element is defamation in retaliation for the real or imagined attitudes, opinions or beliefs of the victim, with the intention of silencing or neutralizing his or her influence, and/or making an example of them so as to discourage similar independence and “insensitivity” or non-observance of taboos. It is different in nature and degree from simple criticism or disagreement in that it is aggressive, organized and skillfully applied, often by an organization or representative of a special interest group, and in that it consists of several characteristic elements.

  Ritual Defamation is not ritualistic because it follows any prescribed religious or mystical doctrine, nor is it embraced in any particular document or scripture. Rather, it is ritualistic because it follows a predictable, stereotyped pattern which embraces a number of elements, as in a ritual.

The elements of a Ritual Defamation are these:
In a ritual defamation the victim must have violated a particular taboo in some way, usually by expressing or identifying with a forbidden attitude, opinion or belief. It is not necessary that he “do” anything about it or undertake any particular course of action, only that he engage in some form of communication or expression.

The method of attack in a ritual defamation is to assail the character of the victim, and never to offer more than a perfunctory challenge to the particular attitudes, opinions or beliefs expressed or implied. Character assassination is its primary tool.

An important rule in ritual defamation is to avoid engaging in any kind of debate over the truthfulness or reasonableness of what has been expressed, only condemn it. To debate opens the issue up for examination and discussion of its merits, and to consider the evidence that may support it, which is just what the ritual defamer is trying to avoid. The primary goal of a ritual defamation is censorship and repression.

The victim is often somebody in the public eye - someone who is vulnerable to public opinion - although perhaps in a very modest way. It could be a schoolteacher, writer, businessman, minor official, or merely an outspoken citizen. Visibility enhances vulnerability to ritual defamation.

If it wasn’t that the republicans are the ones calling for the impeachment when they allow their own to solicit sex from the same sex in public toilets and that their top dog leaders w & dick have unequivocally proven their criminality for their personal, financial and political gain, I would care less but until those above mentioned republicans are held accountable for their treasonous actions then Gov. Spitzer needs to stay in office.

Maani!

Are you sitting down?
I completely agree with you!

Wow.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_gustav_w_080311_united_states_of_amn.htm

•  “I have no idea how old you are, but by the time I reached my mid 20’s I had learned not to idealize politicians - well, actually not to idealize any one.”

This is an interesting (and revealing) comment from you bert. Actually, the entire post is, though I’m sure you don’t realize that.

Superficially, you excuse your personal bitterness and distrust by suggesting that you’re just being pragmatic and realistic. Because, taken out of context with everything else, I would agree that we should never ‘idealize’ politicians or anyone else, but what I think you really mean there, is closer to ‘idolize’.

I think what you’re suggesting is that somewhere along the way, (like maybe by your mid-20’s since you suggest that here) you suffered some major betrayal based on your belief(s) that some one person or many were somehow ‘different’ than you had built them up to be in your own mind. YOU thought they were this, that, or the other thing, or perfect, or whatever, and they turned out to be human and subject to error.

Well, it appears that just as many of us learned that as well, (if we ever even thought it to begin with) but it didn’t result in a bitter distrust of the world at large, and everyone in it.

So, while you have this ‘fear’ that people have built Obama up to some larger than life image and will therefore be disappointed when he turns out to be human, your fears simply don’t apply to those of us who’ve never believed that to begin with.

In the case of Spitzer, most people (like me) aren’t looking at the ‘act’ as it displays moral or immoral whatever. In some places, (Nevada at least) prostitution is legal, and the laws are followed, and it makes for a more orderly and less chaotic process of what has been a human practice since the beginning of mankind. (or at least a very long time…courtesans have maintained privileged status in many societies, and that obviously wouldn’t be the case, if there weren’t a DEMAND for them).

So, that is not the ‘issue of judgment’ with Spitzer at all. The issue of judgment (for the people of NY) is the hypocrisy, and his blatant violations of the law(s). Actually, the hypocrisy is secondary to the fact that he simply violated all kinds of laws; the illegal wire transfers, the participation in illegal operation that involved transporting people across state lines for the purposes of prostitution, and the “Club”, and the prostitution itself. These are CRIMES, and anyone indulging in such activity risks punishment as a result. That part is hardly complicated.

The fact that he himself, as an officer of the court, and as a prosecutor, has prosecuted others for these very same crimes, speaks to the morality of the crime, in it’s hypocrisy. That he is also an elected official adds to it even more.
So it is NOT some ‘idealized’ notion that the public had of Spitzer or any other elected or non-elected official or politician. The PUBLIC (the people of NY)expect him to abide by the laws of the land, and there isn’t a damn thing ‘idealistic’ about that!! It’s a plain and simple expectation of any citizen involved in what is alleged to be a democracy governed by the rule of law, where NO MAN is ABOVE the law.

The rest, is the morality part of the issue…the embarrassment to his family, etc, etc. It has nothing to do with anybody making a ‘hero’ out of him or any other politician.

So yes, a lot of people DO think that you don’t like Obama, and it’s because it comes through loudly and clearly on your posts. And, that’s your legitimate right as an individual, to dislike anybody, for whatever reasons YOU dislike them.

But be advised that you can’t assign the same motivations to the rest of society, who don’t have your personal hang-ups or prejudices, or hidden agendas, and be aware that we CAN see through them.

“Impeachment Threat Looms for Spitzer”

You think? The only people that got f*cked were his daughters for having to put up with this old school embarassment. This thug always protested too much. There is no illusion blown here, once a thug always a thug. He deserves what he dished out to Johns on his way up. They were paying $250 for their STDs and this priveledged daddy’s boy was paying $5000. I guess he never had to shop bargain basement. And neither does New York. Luckily the liuetenant governor is a stand up guy who has the respect and not the fear of both parties. Sometimes you get a bargain in a bad deal.

New Yorkers I guess. 

This guy had to kiss the AIPAC ring for that job.

The most recent example of a modern day tragic figure (in other words, author of his own demise) a la Macbeth, Thane of Glamis.

Another illusion blown all to hell??????

I have no idea how old you are, but by the time I reached my mid 20’s I had learned not to idealize politicians - well, actually not to idealize any one. As Hamlet said to the devious Polonious, “...Use every man according to his deserts, and who should scape flogging?’ Who indeed?

We are all after all fallen angels and therefore fallible.

Thomas Jefferson fathered an illegimate son to Sally
Hemings while Presient and in the White House. Does that lesson the fact that he wrote one of the greatest documents, The Declaration of Independence, in the history of the universe? I think not.

I think Spitzer is a great man, fallible and human, and stupid if you will. He is human after all. And this incident should not and does not for me, lesen all the good that he has done. He slayed many a giant who are not half the man Spitzer still is.

In fact, this is just a great lesson in why we should not build any human being up to mythical proportions. Becasue humans can’t live up to it.

It is a fatal mistake and one I see happening right now with Barak Obama. I am sure many folks on this blog think I dislike Obama. I do not. I just refuse to build him up so high that some day I will see he too has feet of clay.

There is a lesson in here for all of us. It is always better to deal with reality than with fantasy. And that may be the difference between being a child and growing up. I don’t look to any one to be my idealized hero.

So Spirzer’s fall, while tragic, is just one more case of - he is only human after all.

Maani…

Your post is quite astute.  As soon as I heard about Spitzer, I suspected it was a sting operation.  Spitzer is too smart to get caught in a wiretap especially since he himself used such devices to apprehend miscreants.  I suspect his sources that would inform him of such activities were compromised and he believed it was all clear.

Personally, I can’t wait until Kristen surfaces and describes all the sordid details.  Right now she’s probably in negotiations for at least a 6 figure deal——but she can’t wait too long for the American public has a very short attention span!

Two philandering Governors, both from New York, One died with heart attack while exploring and other reluctant to resign waiting till his wife kick him out of the house and senate kick him out of governor house.

FLASH!

“Spitzer Sting: Political Payback?”

There are some aspects of the ongoing revelations about Spitzer’s connection to a prostitution ring that have become troublesome to many people, and may be the result of “political payback” at the highest levels of government - FEDERAL government.

The investigation began some months ago when a bank reported to the IRS that someone was moving certain sums of money in a suspicious manner.  The sums were somewhat less than $5,000.  However, banks are not required to report suspicious transactions of less than $10,000.  In addition, even in THIS case it is usually INCOMING sums, NOT outgoing ones that are investigated.  As well, given the minimal amounts, why did the bank not simply inform Spitzer, who was, after all, not simply the governor but a major long-time client of the bank?  Why, as one person put it, did the bank and IRS “go to DEFCON 4” over sums of less than $5,000?

As well, for some reason, “Client 9” has FAR more mentions in the formal IRS “Complaint” than any of the others: over 50, compared with less than 20 for most of the other “clients.”  Yet the number of transfers of money made during the period of the investigation shows that Spitzer probably engaged in the illegal activities perhaps half a dozen to maybe a dozen times.  Why the outsized number of mentions in the Complaint?

Finally, there are some serious “connections” here.  The agent in charge of the IRS operation, Mike Garcia, is a long-time friend and former colleague of Michael Chertoff.  Even more interesting is the following.

As we know, one of Spitzer’s “claims to fame” was his “take-down” of certain Wall Street firms, costing them enormous amounts of money in fines, plus jail for some of their employees.  One of the hardest hit was Goldman Sachs.

Guess who was chairman of GS during this time?  None other than Henry Paulson, who is now…Secretary of the Treasury, under which the IRS falls.

Could this investigation be “political payback” - and reach all the way up to the Secretary of the Treasury?  Would ANYTHING about this administration surprise us?

Stay tuned.  And watch the Net: stories of this type are appearing rapidly.

Peace.

I think the rat you smell, felicity, is Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzales. This is what the U.S. Attorney firings were all about. Those who did what the Repubs wanted kept their jobs and went after Dems like Spitzer. Those that wouldn’t do this got fired.

Expect more of this as the Repubs try to make all Dems look bad and like law breakers in this Presidential Election year.

Maani, why do you insist that I’m correlating job competency and morality.  I’m not. 

I don’t want a competent sleeze ball like Spitzer governing my state because I’ll always have to suspect, if not assume, that he’s up to no good. 

To go one step further, I don’t have my copy of The Republic open right now, but I doubt Plato would have much good to say about assholes like Spitzer being leaders.

So, it’s a matter of degrees.  How much of an asshole does a person have to be to be disqualified from public service?  The last couple years in the USA demonstrates that the answer is, there is no limit, apparently.

Bottom line, Spitzer is a lying, two-faced, cheating SOB who needs to be in the private sector where the good people of New York can then choose if they want anything to do with scum like him.  As their governor, they had no choice. 

But don’t worry, he’ll be running for the WH after this all blows over—and probably get elected.

50 years ago, I never dreamed it could get like this.

I guess I’d better start moving funds in/out of my bank accounts in increments no larger than what, about $5,000?  Fifteen thousand and the FBI is alerted? 

I smell a very big rat, namely, Wall Street gunning for Spitzer who just happens, like a lot of men - and women - to have a brain that ceases to function below his waist.

How beautiful is it that we find no grounds to impeach a man whose actions have resulted in hundreds of thousands deaths, not to mention untold suffering, but we’re going to impeach a man for hiring a prostitute.  Only in America

Another illusion blown all to hell. So what else is new?

But why drag his wife into the photo-ops? I know it’s supposed to look good for the perp - supportive, loving family and all that - but why should she have to suffer the humiliation in the public spotlight along with him?

Hope she dumps him on his ass.