« Rohrbacher on Refugees | Main | McCain On the Economy » Vitter: It's Not the Same!!!!17 Mar 2008 05:33 pm With Elliot Spitzer out, what about the Senate's number one hooker-lover, David Vitter? Well: Anybody who looks at the two cases will see there is an enormous difference between the two of them. The people that are trying to draw comparisons to the two cases are people who've never agreed with me on important issues like immigration and other things. It's true that I don't agree with Vitter about much, so maybe my opinion doesn't count, but the difference isn't at all clear to me. Comments (31)
Spitzer was a spendthrift, big-city liberal, whereas Vitter exercised much more restraint as to how much he spent on each of his trysts with hookers. 
Both are complete dogs looks-wise? I mean, at least Bill was like a 5.5/6 during his prime.
Matt, the difference is so obvious. While trysting with HIS hooker, Spitzer had the wrong views on immigration!
I guess that is why he got freebees and the others needed to raid their bank accounts.
it seems as though Sen. Vitters is getting pampered on this issue
Vitter didn't have the misfortune of having his tryst scheduling recorded by the federales. If he had, then they would be more similar. Also, and perhaps more importantly, I hadn't heard that anyone alleged that Vitter violated the Mann Act. Federal crimes usually cause more problems for politicians that state-level crimes.
I'm guessing the difference was about 4000 or so dollars an hour.
This thread should be closed, because harv has already won it.
Not what Vitter meant: but the difference is that the Lt. Gov of NY was a Democrat and at the time Vitter got caught the Gov of LA who would appoint the replacement Senator was a Democrat. Of course now that Jindal is Gov that is no longer an issue, so now the difference is just that Vitter is a Republican so he can get away with it...
Shorter Vitter: The people who are asking questions about me aren't my friends, so there.
Let me get this straight: if the Governor of LA is a Democrat Vitter won't resign, and if the Gov. is a Republican he doesn't have to resign? Oh, now I get it.
Vitter broke the Mann Act and committed structuring offenses? Who knew?
Legislators seem better able to weather these types of scandals than governing officials.
Daddy Love, Now you are starting to get it, the rules for Rebuplicans are always different.
I'm guessing the difference was about 4000 or so dollars an hour. Fiscal responsibility!
Q: Is there a difference? A: Depends . . .
Good point, Al. The Spitzer scandal is all about structuring and the Mann Act. No one cares about the prostitution, liberals are just highlighting it so they can take shots at David Vitter.
And the fact that Spitzer had prosecuted prostitution rings. And had pushed for stronger penalties for johns.
Eliot Spitzer, Matt, not Elliot.
Eliot Spitzer, Matt, not Elliot.
And the fact that Spitzer had prosecuted prostitution rings. And had pushed for stronger penalties for johns. Whereas Mr. Vitter has dedicated his professional career to decriminalization of prostitution, advocacy of polyamory, and more relaxed societal attitudes about sex? Okay, then. At least Vitter wasn't a hypocrite.
Pablo Escobar hadn't dedicated himself to criminalizing drugs, so I guess he shouldn't have had the US government after him, so there. Al plunges to further depths. If the Spitzer scandal was just about the Mann Act, a stupid law that has been used to persecute black people who date white people (the first time somebody was convicted under it was a black man who was convicted for buying his white girlfriend a train ticket) and one's political opponents, no one would care. It's the prostitution fucking, stupid. If Vitter cared about de-criminalizing prostitution, he wouldn't be a conservative Republican.
If you think Spitzer will be charged with violating the Mann Act or structuring, I've got a bridge to sell you. The WSJ, among others, have looked into this and concluded that at this point any case on these charges would be unbelievably weak.
The difference is obvious, IOKIYAR.
Odd that Spitzer's actions were found intolerable in a very liberal state, while Vitter's raised no particular problems in the Bible Belt. Vitter had also held himself to be a paragon of family values and rectitude.
"Odd that Spitzer's actions were found intolerable in a very liberal state, while Vitter's raised no particular problems in the Bible Belt. Vitter had also held himself to be a paragon of family values and rectitude. Posted by bob h | March 18, 2008 7:07 AM" Very true. Put it this way; a couple of years ago a child prostitution ring was found to be running out of the Atlanta airport. Right there in the middle of the Bible Belt, not at JFK or LaGuardia, there was a child prostitution ring. Let's just face it, Southern white Christianity cares a lot more about hate than love, peace, brotherhood, etc. Hating on gays, lesbians, immigrants, black people, Arabs, Persians, Muslims, secular (non-neocon) Jews, etc. have become what it's all about. White Southern Christianity has stopped being part of a culture and a religion and more of a reactionary political movement that just happens to help some televangelists get rich.
Spitzer's case was recent, whereas Vitter's prostitution visits were beyond the statute of limitations, and thus without any possible legal consequences. That's the only thing I can think of that he could be talking about. Doesn't make a bit of difference to me, same crime, but I guess it does to Vitter since he didn't feel any obligation to resign in humiliation.
lemmy caution Great Alphaville reference!
Vitter had long since stopped and reconciled with his wife by the time his odd sexual practices came to light - Spitzer was caught red-handed, as it were, in the course of a federal investigation. It's not totally different, but it is significantly different.
Vitter's prostitution bust will only help him in the eyes of New Orleanians (from whence he comes) -- we like 'em "interesting" (e.g. Nagin, Edwards, Jefferson). The rest of Louisiana likes that he's one of those right-thinking men, and his visiting the brothel just plays into their already tainted perceptions of New Orleanians, so it's only expected of him. Win-win situation for Vitter.
Comments closed March 31, 2008. |
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email Books by Matthew Yglesias
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Weekly Archives
Categories
|
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Heads in the Sand
The difference is obvious: Vitter wore diapers.
Posted by Brautigan | March 17, 2008 5:47 PM