NY Governor, Eliot Spitzer, To Resign

[Bells]

bells i want to respond but i want to ask you something first

are you saying he is bad because he:

a)Had sex with a prositute?
b)Commited a crime?
c)cheated on his wife?
or
d) the way he did his job?

The reason i ask is because if its:

a) i personally dont think it should be illegal at all. I actually think it should be legal and the goverment should regulate the industry

b)well ok he commited a crime, fair enough. Is the crime bad enough to mean he shouldnt run or is it like bush smoking coke?

c)I HATE cheaters personally having been cheated on but that doesnt mean they arnt a good person to have running a country. I would MUCH rather have clinton as PM than have Bush for instance

d) This one is why i have asked so many times if we are only talking about the fact that he slept with a prostitute. I kind of understand your post but im a little unsure if he acted how you sugest then how would he not have been put down by a court if he was acting illegally or unethically. That is after all WHY we have a court based justice system


Oh and bells i ment does a specific procicuter CHOSE the case they get or do they get told "this is the case you WILL take, i dont care if you agree with the law or not, go do your job"

a) and (b) Prostitution is illegal, therefore he did commit a crime (which deals with (b)). As I said before, whether we think prostitution should be legal or not is beside the point. At present, it is illegal. And he broke the law. Let me put it this way. If he was still a prosecutor and someone in his position had committed the crime he has committed, he would have gone after them with a steamroller.

Is he bad? I do not personally know him, so I honestly cannot answer that question. But I will say this. When you portray yourself as being the father of all morality, going after crime like an attack dog, you need to make damn sure you are clean yourself. You need to make sure you do not break the same laws you actively went after as a prosecutor and then use those very victories in the courtroom to run for Governor. In short, don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.

(c) That is a personal matter between his wife and himself. But you need to realise one thing. He did not just cheat on his wife. He broke the law in doing so. His cheating is something that he will have to deal with at home, out of the public sphere. His current predicament is not that he cheated. It is because he broke the law he had taken an oath to uphold. He has broken the law he had previously prosecuted like an attack dog in the past. He has broken the laws which he used as part of his campaign to run for office, a campaign that included spreading the word of cleaning up the Government and returning ethics to the top of the agenda. Can you see the hypocrisy there?

(d) I am sure he "did his job" well. After all, he cleaned up Wall Street and went after corporate crime and white collar crime, as well as prostitution rings. And that is why this has come back to bite him on the backside. Even if he had not been a prosecutor in the past, he should still have resigned. As string pointed out, if you are working in a position of upholding the law, it should hold that you do not break those very laws. His previous employment or elected office was that of the Attorney General. While in that position, he fought and went after people he perceived as having broken the laws he broke himself as a Governor. As a Governor, he took an oath to uphold the law. He knowingly and willingly broke those very laws he swore to uphold. Again, can you see the hypocrisy there?

You need to understand something. When he was the AG, he was not the one who was given cases so much. He was the top legal honcho for the state. As in he would be the one to designate who prosecuted what. He made it his job to go after white collar crime and prostitution rings. No one forced him to do it. He did it all by himself. He made it his role to clean up Wall Street and clean it up he did. It is because of the way he had done his job as a prosecutor that makes this so god damn ironic. He has been caught out doing the very thing he actively sought to prosecute and punish others for. He didn't just give those people a slap on the wrist. He went after them with teeth bared and publicly denounced them as criminals. He was the one who chose to prosecute those cases.

 

[madanthonywayne]

Ooooh. A conspiracy theory. Or something. Hamsher also questions the leak of Spitzer's name, pointing out that Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) wasn't leaked from a federal investigation. She also wonders about Mike Bloomberg's recent talk of running for governor and a half-million given to Joe Bruno, said to be a pal of Attorney General Mike Mukasey, and also a target of one of Spitzer's investigations over the years.

Naturally, none of it proves anything, but I mention this aspect because a friend of mine just sent me an article that ran in the Washington Post last month, written by Spitzer. (He sent a link from Truthout, where the editors have included a note that, "The following article was published in The Washington Post the day after New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer allegedly engaged the services of a call girl at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC".)

I just read an article in the Wall Street Journal making some of the same points:

The Entrapment of Eliot
By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ
March 13, 2008

The federal criminal investigation that has led to Eliot Spitzer's resignation as governor of New York illustrates the great dangers all Americans face from vague and open-ended sex and money-transaction statutes.

Federal law, if read broadly, criminalizes virtually all sexual encounters for which something of value has been given. Federal money-laundering statutes criminalize many entirely legitimate and conventional banking transactions. Congress enacted these laws to give federal prosecutors wide discretion in deciding which "bad guys" to go after.

Generally, wise and intelligent prosecutors use their discretion properly -- to target organized crime, terrorism, financial predation, exploitation of children and the like. But the very existence of these selectively enforced statutes poses grave dangers of abuse. They lie around like loaded guns waiting to be used against the enemies of politically motivated investigators, prosecutors and politicians.

There is no hard evidence that Eliot Spitzer was targeted for investigation, but the story of how he was caught does not ring entirely true to many experienced former prosecutors and current criminal lawyers. The New York Times reported that the revelations began with a routine tax inquiry by revenue agents "conducting a routine examination of suspicious financial transactions reported to them by banks." This investigation allegedly found "several unusual movements of cash involving the Governor of New York." But the movement of the amounts of cash required to pay prostitutes, even high-priced prostitutes over a long period of time, does not commonly generate a full-scale investigation.

We are talking about thousands, not millions, of dollars. We are also talking about a man who is a multimillionaire with numerous investments and purchases. The idea that federal investigators would focus on a few transactions to corporations -- that were not themselves under investigation -- raises as many questions as answers.
[Eliot Spitzer]

Even if Mr. Spitzer's derelictions were serendipitously discovered as a result of routine, computerized examination of bank transactions, the dangers inherent in selective use of overbroad criminal statutes remain. Money laundering, structuring and related financial crimes are designed to ferret out organized crime, drug dealing, terrorism and large-scale financial manipulation. They were not enacted to give the federal government the power to inquire into the sexual or financial activities of men who move money in order to hide payments to prostitutes.

Once federal authorities concluded that the "suspicious financial transactions" attributed to Mr. Spitzer did not fit into any of the paradigms for which the statutes were enacted, they should have closed the investigation. It's simply none of the federal government's business that a man may have been moving his own money around in order to keep his wife in the dark about his private sexual peccadilloes.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120536943121332151.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

 

[Asguard]

Bells in reading this thread i have been thinking about two other cases and im trying to see if its the same thing

1) is the way the howard goverment treated Justice Kerbie (i hope i spelt his name right) the chief justics of the high court who was accused of picking up male prostitutes in his goverment car. At the time i thought so what? Ok so he was using his car (i am assuming he is alowed to use his car to do personal things like most of them are anyway) so what if he picked up a guy. The whole thing had nothing to do with anything other than Howards campain against homosexuality (im personally PROUD that we had a chief justice of the highest court who was gay). On this matter there are all the gays who while it was illegal sort to change these laws and they were right

The second case is that of bill clinton, who was percicuted for having an afair. Was he wrong, well thats up to his wife to decide and if she feels he was its ALSO up to her to decide what should happen. Impeaching him was REDICULAS. Yes he lied and therefor commited a crime but in that situation i would probably lie too. He should never have been put in the situation in the first place.

So i see your point about the way he acted as a AG but by the same token can see the problem with judging politions by there sex life

After all Rudd went to a strip club and is doing what he can to bring australia together. I sometimes doubt even JENETTE has seen howard naked but he tore the country apart. Sex has NOTHING to do with how you run a country or a state.

 

[iceaura]

So let's review:
Republican nailing hookers/pages/guys in bathrooms=CULTURE OF CORRUPTION!!!!!!!

Democrat nailing hookers/pages/guys in bathrooms=nothing to see here folks, personal business. Tragic story.

If you've noticed, that does not fit the current hoopla

almost the opposite.

This case is all over the headlines world wide - and unlike the McCain philandering, there is no corruption implied (yet). There is very little in story here; no one is even suggesting that Spitzer's pursuit of professional "sex" corrupted his job, say - it's a one note event

and it does not fit the past treatments of people like, say,

Vitter - who was not caught by diligent Federal agents tapping his phone and email, whose name was not leaked to the press by the Justice Department immediately, and who has not resigned his office

Gannon's client, whoever he or they were - Gannon was never even thoroughly deposed under oath (let alone wiretapped and monitored, as far as the Justice Department will say - although the warrantless wiretap program was well launched by then) about his overnights at the White House (can anyone say "security risk" ?).

So there's a double standard here - a culture of corruption that gets yawns (the Siegelman case, the AGs, the Drug War connections everywhere, continual scandals surrounding heads of regulatory agencies and the private companies they oversee, lobbyist fingerprints all over everything)

and a juicy scandal of little public import that gets headlines.

 

[Tiassa]

I don't think it's that simplistic

Oh, please. If this guy were Republican you'd be all over him and dancing with glee.

I think you're reaching on this point. I don't recall "dancing" about Vitter. Who knows? Maybe I did. Hell, I don't even remember what his excuse was. All I recall about that case is that he confessed publicly after Hustler called to confirm the details of a story they had. Oh, and I do recall that his fellow Republicans gave him both applause and support

Like I said: Spitzer didn't claim he was just getting a massage (Tobias). He wasn't a paid abstinence advocate (again, Tobias). He wasn't a priest fiddling with choirboys. Nor was he a prominent "family values" Christian preacher banging a gay hooker and doing meth (Haggard). Add to that he wasn't a homophobe highly esteemed by the Christian right who got busted in a public park offering to prostitute himself to a police officer and then blaming his actions on the fact that the officer was a black man (Allen). He didn't attempt to hook up with a cop for sex in a public restroom and then claim the whole thing was a misunderstanding about his "wide stance" while insisting he wasn't gay, despite the fact of several former gay lovers swearing affidavits insisting otherwise (Craig). And he certainly didn't hire a gay hooker, get blackmailed, call the cops, and then try to deny the story (Curtis).

Spitzer's hypocrisy stems generally from the fact that he was the Attorney General for the state of New York, and had prosecuted people for similar behavior. It does not stem specifically from an invasive, self-righteous, puritan obsession with sexuality. And I would suggest your attempt to personalize the issue overlooks this point.

Unlike Tobias, Allen, and Craig, Spitzer has not offered some ridiculous excuse to pretend he did not do what he did. We've yet to see whether Spitzer follows Haggard into a perverse "rehabilitation" before falling with a dodgy "charity" run by a registered sex offender, but I rather quite doubt he will.

Spitzer acknowledged his guilt, apologized to his family and the people of New York, and resigned. In other words, he has so far done exactly what is expected of him. I'm sorry if this deflates the irony somewhat, but it is what it is.

As to the point about Foley, we won't dwell on the time FOX News tried to claim he was a Democrat. But, again, we come back to the fact that it is Republicans who tend to exploit the "family values" platform, who openly fight to diminish homosexuals in society, and who constantly equate homosexuality with crimes against minors. And that's what makes Foley's party affiliation significant. Hell, I might as well turn the point and complain that the same press that has not said much about Spitzer's party affiliation is trying to hide the fact that when a Democrat got busted being hypocritical, he went and did ... the right thing inasmuch as there is any right thing left to do: he apologized and resigned.

Glenn Greenwald wrote last August of the difference between the falls from grace of Sens. Vitter and Craig:

On MSNBC's Dan Abrams Report last night, Joan Walsh and Pat Buchanan argued vehemently about the Craig matter, during which Buchanan admitted that Republicans care about sex scandals when it is "especially against homosexual activity" ....

To underscore that point rather powerfully, during that segment Emily Heil of Roll Call reported this:

If you look at David Vitter, I couldn't find anyone to talk to me about him in the days after his scandal. No one would talk to about it -- they said this is a private matter, this is a family member. And when [Vitter] eventually met with Republicans behind closed doors, they gave him a hearty round of applause, as I was told. I don't think Senator Craig is going to get that kind of reception.​

That report is consistent with articles in the immediate aftermath of the Vitter disclosures, such as this article in Louisiana's News Star -- entitled: "GOP Leaders Support Vitter":

Republican leaders generally are circling the wagons around embattled U.S. Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican Party Chairman Roger Villere said Thursday.

"The consensus is they don't want him to resign," Villere said after spending hours in phone consultation with Republicans for the past three days.​

What wretched and transparent deceit. Can we at least dispense with the fiction that the Moral Values Senate caucus giving rousing applause to David Vitter is motivated by anything resembling actual principles when forcing Larry Craig to resign?

(Greenwald)

Setting aside, for the moment, the difference between homosexual and heterosexual scandals, I would reiterate the irony and hope you are able to acknowledge it.

Because part of what you seem to be upset about is that, with less absurdity to deal with, people seem to be exploring other aspects of the story, such as those you acknowledged in posting Dershowitz's WSJ article.

If I'm not laughing as hard about this scandal, it's largely because Spitzer hasn't turned it into a farce as so many Republicans have done in the past. Well, that and Spitzer's hypocrisy is a little more general and thus only mildly ironic.

Lastly, as a specifically personal note, I would point out that you were responding to a discussion I was having with someone with whom I share a history of sharp disagreement. Someone for whom my disagreement with a reference I posted is insufficient. Someone for whom calling Spitzer a "crass moron" is insufficient. Someone who somehow managed to overlook my general attitude toward law enforcement (and specific jab in this topic) in order to pretend I was some sort of fan of Eliot Spitzer so that he might sharpen his pretentious complaint and feign some manner of self-righteousness. In other words, you chose to echo the distortion put forth by someone looking to pick a fight. So come on, man. Please? I don't really think the differences between Spitzer's scandal and those of certain Republicans I've pointed out are so difficult to countenance. Perhaps you disagree with how I weigh the irony and gauge the hypocrisy, but please don't pretend you're stupid. Because if I took you up on that point, I'm pretty sure you'd be offended.
____________________

Notes:

Greenwald, Glenn. "Forcing Larry Craig's resignation while embracing David Vitter". Unclaimed Territory. August 30, 2007. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/08/30/craig_vitter/index.html

 

[Bells]

Bells in reading this thread i have been thinking about two other cases and im trying to see if its the same thing

1) is the way the howard goverment treated Justice Kerbie (i hope i spelt his name right) the chief justics of the high court who was accused of picking up male prostitutes in his goverment car. At the time i thought so what? Ok so he was using his car (i am assuming he is alowed to use his car to do personal things like most of them are anyway) so what if he picked up a guy. The whole thing had nothing to do with anything other than Howards campain against homosexuality (im personally PROUD that we had a chief justice of the highest court who was gay). On this matter there are all the gays who while it was illegal sort to change these laws and they were right

Err the false allegation was that he was picking up teenage boys for sex. Everyone knew Heffernan had made up the allegation and had had the false documents drawn up. How Heffernan survived the scandal is beyond me.. He used Parliamentary privilege to attack Justice Kirby and it was obvious to the population that it was completely false. Justice Kirby had the proof that the allegations were false. And to be honest, Kirby would not have been so stupid as to do something like that in the first place. The man has morals. Had he been guilty of it, however, he should have been arrested and charged. Straight or gay, picking up teenage prostitutes is highly illegal and down right wrong, and doing it with a Government car would have made him a complete moron and not worthy of his position in the High Court.

The second case is that of bill clinton, who was percicuted for having an afair. Was he wrong, well thats up to his wife to decide and if she feels he was its ALSO up to her to decide what should happen. Impeaching him was REDICULAS. Yes he lied and therefor commited a crime but in that situation i would probably lie too. He should never have been put in the situation in the first place.

He was prosecuted for having lied under oath. Clinton's case is vastly different to Spitzer. Clinton had the Republican party baying for his blood and did anything and everything to force him out of office. Clinton's impeachment was political grandstanding at its best and worst.

So i see your point about the way he acted as a AG but by the same token can see the problem with judging politions by there sex life

Had he not broken the law, it really would not be an issue.

That, added to the fact that he was such a rabid AG who went after others for similar crimes, makes his position and his public stance to be highly hypocritical and frankly, it takes away from the position he was meant to have been fulfilling.

After all Rudd went to a strip club and is doing what he can to bring australia together.

Visiting a legal establishment is not the same as paying a john to have a prostitute travel interstate for sex, knowing that doing so would be breaking federal laws. Nor is it the same as fraudulently getting a hotel room. That, plus the way he settled his accounts makes him highly suspect. It also makes him someone who broke the law.

I sometimes doubt even JENETTE has seen howard naked but he tore the country apart.

Not something I ever think about, nor do I want to think about.

Sex has NOTHING to do with how you run a country or a state.

No it does not. Except when you break the law to get said sex. Then it just makes you a criminal. As I said before, whether we agree with prostitution laws or not, is quite irrelevant. He knowingly and willingly broke the law. People who do that are usually prosecuted for it. He has, in the past, prosecuted others for the same crime he has committed. He should be treated like everyone else, and be treated as he had treated others in the past.

 

[superstring01]

bells i want to respond but i want to ask you something first

are you saying he is bad because he:

a)Had sex with a prositute?
b)Commited a crime?
c)cheated on his wife?
or
d) the way he did his job?

The reason i ask is because if its:

a) i personally dont think it should be illegal at all. I actually think it should be legal and the goverment should regulate the industry

b)well ok he commited a crime, fair enough. Is the crime bad enough to mean he shouldnt run or is it like bush smoking coke?

c)I HATE cheaters personally having been cheated on but that doesnt mean they arnt a good person to have running a country. I would MUCH rather have clinton as PM than have Bush for instance

d) This one is why i have asked so many times if we are only talking about the fact that he slept with a prostitute. I kind of understand your post but im a little unsure if he acted how you sugest then how would he not have been put down by a court if he was acting illegally or unethically. That is after all WHY we have a court based justice system


Oh and bells i ment does a specific procicuter CHOSE the case they get or do they get told "this is the case you WILL take, i dont care if you agree with the law or not, go do your job"

He did ALL of those things. Prostitution (IMHO) shouldn't be illegal, but it is, and seeing as it is, and seeing as he's in a position to ENFORCE those laws (which he did-- by putting people in prison), it is the height of hypocracy to then break those laws. You don't elect a man to a position to pick-and-choose which laws he likes and which laws they don't. He was elected to comply and enforce those laws. He then decided to break those law where and when he felt that it benefited him.

superstring01 just for your infomation i wouldnt be a hypocrit i would be a murder if i sold food i knew was contaminated

You would ALSO be a hypocrite. Poison doesn't necessarly mean you'd be killing someone. Shall we look up the definition of "hypocrite"?

hypocritehttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite

Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritēs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
Date: 13th century
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Looks like Spitzer. Smells like Spitzer. IT IS SPITZER!

As if hypocrisy wasn't enough, he also broke the law (it's possible to be a hypocrite and not break laws). Worse than that: he has permanently damaged the lives of his family, and that may not be a crime, but it certainly does effect the American view of him.

~String

 

[countezero]

Nothing in any articles you posted answers any questions about Spitzer's being targetted.

Just the opposite. An investigation of Spitzer is supposed to have led to the prostitution ring, rather than the other way around.

Here's the lede:

"A law enforcement official says New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's role in a prostitution scandal grew out of a public corruption inquiry triggered by his movement of cash to bank accounts operated by the call-girl ring."

An update attached to the story, posted after my post, says that it's unclear whether the Feds were looking at the ring prior to following Spitzer's money.

 

[Pandaemoni]

So, when a governor uses the police to harass and embarrass his political enemies, nothing happens to him. When it's revealed that a governor, on his free time, pays a woman for sex, he must resign.

The lesson here is obvious: Governors should use the police to harrass and embarass people into not revealing these stories!

The sad thing is, she's not even all that hot. Cute, but not $5000 an hour and end our career for her hot.

 

[madanthonywayne]

The sad thing is, she's not even all that hot. Cute, but not $5000 an hour and end our career for her hot.

I agree, but I heard something about the governor being into some really wierd stuff. Maybe she's the best looking prostitute he could find willing to do whatever the hell it is he likes.

Or it could just be she reminds him of an old girlfriend or something. Who knows?

Regardless, I am a bit disturbed about some of the details of how this story came to light. I don't like the idea of the feds investigating someone over crap like this. If the federal government were to follow anyone around long enough, tap their phones, etc.; they'd surely find something to convict them of.

 

[Asguard]

bells i had forgoten the fact that it was teenages that heffen was falsely aleging. There are definitly some members of the liberal and national parties this country could do without (heffenen and tuckey being the ovious two). Its very gratifying that we have a cheif justice who is openly gay actually, now we just need some gay politions to bring some sanity back to the parliment on gay rights. But anyway i can see your point and i guess i agree with you. I just dont want to see situations (in general) where either a) a good polition is thrown out of public office because he happens to do the wrong thing sexually (thats a matter for his\her partner and has nothing to do with how they run a state or country) or b) where judisal cases for example become tainted by the actions of the prosicutor (ie because the procicutor speed means that he\she cant try any speeding or road related cases)

But in this specific case i can definitly see where your coming from (wether i agree or not im not sure to be honest). I will always find using a prostitute, sleeping with another guy or having sex in public to be idiotic charges to make against anyone because none of them should be illegal activites

 

[madanthonywayne]

I will always find using a prostitute, sleeping with another guy or having sex in public to be idiotic charges to make against anyone because none of them should be illegal activites

I'm mostly with you here, except for the sex in public. If the couple is trying to be discreet, then I agree (say having sex in the park but off somewhere where no one can see). But I don't want people mating in the middle of the aisle at the grocery store!

 

[madanthonywayne]

The sad thing is, she's not even all that hot. Cute, but not $5000 an hour and end our career for her hot.

Could you post a picture of a girl you consider:

$5000 an hour and end our career for her hot.​

Because that must be pretty fuckin' hot!

 

[ashura]

Ah, new gov comes in with a zing!

David Paterson: ‘The Only Whores I Know Are Lobbyists’

David Paterson just gave his first public address since Eliot Spitzer's resignation yesterday. He made noises about "getting back to work" and the budget, talked about being black and blind, indicated he wasn't planning any major changes to his predecessors more controversial policies, and became the first human being in government to express sympathy for Spitzer himself. "My heart goes out to Eliot Spitzer, his wife Silda, his daughters," he said. "I know what he's gone through this week. In my heart, I think he's suffered enough." Paterson also displayed a rather awesome sense of humor. "Just so we don't have to go through this whole resignation thing again," one ballsy reporter asked, "have you ever patronized a prostitute?" Patterson thought for a minute. "Only the lobbyists," he said.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/03/david_paterson_we_cannot_waste.html

 

[15ofthe19]

No way Paterson saw this coming.

 

[Asguard]

hey i found another hipocrite

Road safty MP loses his licence for speeding
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23372381-5006301,00.html

What a dick head

 

[Bells]

So, when a governor uses the police to harass and embarrass his political enemies, nothing happens to him. When it's revealed that a governor, on his free time, pays a woman for sex, he must resign.

The lesson here is obvious: Governors should use the police to harrass and embarass people into not revealing these stories!

The sad thing is, she's not even all that hot. Cute, but not $5000 an hour and end our career for her hot.

I never understood that. I can't believe he was not made to resign when those first allegations about his abuse of power was first discovered. Was it a lack of evidence?

bells i had forgoten the fact that it was teenages that heffen was falsely aleging. There are definitly some members of the liberal and national parties this country could do without (heffenen and tuckey being the ovious two). Its very gratifying that we have a cheif justice who is openly gay actually, now we just need some gay politions to bring some sanity back to the parliment on gay rights. But anyway i can see your point and i guess i agree with you. I just dont want to see situations (in general) where either a) a good polition is thrown out of public office because he happens to do the wrong thing sexually (thats a matter for his\her partner and has nothing to do with how they run a state or country) or b) where judisal cases for example become tainted by the actions of the prosicutor (ie because the procicutor speed means that he\she cant try any speeding or road related cases)

But in this specific case i can definitly see where your coming from (wether i agree or not im not sure to be honest). I will always find using a prostitute, sleeping with another guy or having sex in public to be idiotic charges to make against anyone because none of them should be illegal activites

I don't think I have ever met a police officer, prosecutor or a judge who did not have a speeding ticket or two. Unless the individual was doing 100km's above the speed limit while drunk and then crashed their car into a person, other vehicle or house, then it really is not that much of an issue. There are different types of laws. Some breaches of conduct are worse than others.

There was a judge in Sydney who was drunk and crashed his car into another parked car, all while drunk. After he had been arrested, he stole his blood sample. He then attempted to use his position to have the charges dropped. Should he have been made to step down? Yes. As I said, there are some breaches of conduct that result in your no longer being worthy of your position and you should be made to step down.

 

[countezero]

An interesting, somewhat related story...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/123035

 

[Lord Hillyer]

Elected officials should be issued chastity belts.

 

[countezero]

Apparently...