The Spitzer debacle

I know this isn't really a state politics site, but there are so many New Yorkers who post here, that I am curious to know everyone's take on the Eliot Spitzer situation.  Yes, my diary title is probably objectionable to some.  Bruno isn't exactly smelling like a rose either, and the whole thing stinks.  But what else do you call it when a governor who swept into office riding mainly on an image of ethical reform and "law and order" winds up embroiled in an embarrassing scandal that gets uglier by the hour?  (For those not up to date on what's going on, here's a link to today's developments.)

I honestly haven't talked to any Democrats who aren't privately appalled at either (a) what they see as guilt by Spitzer's staff or at the very least (b) what Spitzer has allowed himself to get drawn into after only six months.  That said, it probably isn't any secret that Spitzer has very few friends in Albany anyway, even in his own party.  

It has been frustrating over the past year or so to see Spitzer unquestioningly lionized by the casual observer, when even those who admire him and have high hopes for him were aware he wasn't Mr. Perfect, had certain problems with him during the campaign, and saw warning signs that all was not well.  This, even as it's undebatable that the lords of Albany (Bruno and Silver) are slippery at best, that the legislature is dysfunctional, that the place is a total snake pit...

What do you think?  What's your assessment of what Spitzer needs to do now?  Is he handling it well or not?  Should he fight, or be contrite?  Is his position defensible?  What does his situation mean for the future of reform in New York -- is it tied to the outcome of this scandal, or do you think not?

•  doesn't look too good

  To take on the entrenched machine politics in Albany (in both parties, sadly), Spitzer would basically have to come in with a huge popular mandate, lots of energy, and a squeaky-clean moral high horse. Regardless of the allocation of blame, it's no longer looking likely that that's going to happen. At best Spitzer may be able to push through a piece of legislation or two, but I don't see him reforming the place wholesale anymore.

  As for the current scandal, I don't really know who's responsible for what, but I agree it doesn't look like there a lot of clean hands around, which isn't good for anyone, but even worse for Spitzer (nobody expects the legislative crowd to have clean hands anyway).

  by Delirium on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:09:13 PM PDT

  •  He should never have caved on the budget.

    Thats when Bruno knew the guy could be sucker-punched.

    He should get back to his old crusading self, and shut down the entire government until Albany is willing to play ball on election and campaign finance reform.

    If he can win that battle, he can then move to a more easy-going stance so he can get some legislation passed. The election reforms work, he will get stronger as time passes.

    by brooklynbadboy on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:15:48 PM PDT

    •  I think Bruno figured out how to play

      this when Spitzer had his infamous "steamroller" comment. From then on, it was Spitzer the bully trying to push around Grandpa Bruno. And it worked. Spitzer played right into his hands.

      by tigercourse on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:18:12 PM PDT

      •  Yep. But i still know that

        Bruno is a scumbag and Spitzer is a decent, if a bit overly self-confident, guy. So I take anything Bruno says with a grain of salt. He looks more like Paulie Walnuts than Grandpa.

        Still, this will all blow over.

        by brooklynbadboy on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:23:53 PM PDT

        •  There's a minor election taking place

          in the next week or so.  This is great timing for Bruno.

          If he can keep screaming loud enough, the republican might just win.  

          This isn't going to blow over.  The local television news people are licking their chops.

          by nupstateny on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:28:12 PM PDT

          •  Presidential election season.

            Once that heats up, this whole thing will be the hinter regions of everyones mind. By next year this wont be a big deal.

            He can ride it out. He's fine.

            by brooklynbadboy on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:32:09 PM PDT

    •  yeah, though his own party isn't helping much

      I mean you expect some sucker-punches from Bruno, the head of the Republican caucus, but the fact that they're also coming from Sheldon Silver, head of the Democratic caucus and Assembly Speaker, isn't helping anything, to say the least.

      by Delirium on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:26:35 PM PDT

      •  Nobody hates Spitzer more than Sheldon.

        Silver likes being in charge and making all the decisions.

        You can bet that Silver is in Spitzer's sights, too.

        by nupstateny on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:30:06 PM PDT

        •  yeah

          Shelly isn't even pretending this week.

          What's really grotesque (though sadly predictable) is how the Senate Republicans are using the Spitzer scandal as the flimsiest of cover so they can jettison whatever was worked out on campaign finance reform.  

          And then Silver being so transparent about his hatred for Spitzer... it's just fascinating watching how all sides in this scrum just... don't... get it.  They think the people see this as just another round of gamesmanship.  

          by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:47:38 PM PDT

          •  Spitzer dissed Silver,

            and every Assembly Democrat, BIG TIME over the DiNapoli/comptroller thing.

            Maybe they'll forget about it next year, but the wounds are still fresh. So they're in no hurry to rush to Spitzer's defense now.

            Silver is not perfect -- no leadership politician is -- but for 12 years he held the line, as much as he could, against the Pataki/D'Amato/Bruno gang.

            He deserved better from Spitzer, and he did not get it.

            I hope Spitzer is not seriously impaired by Troopergate, because he could become a great Democratic governor.

            But he can't do it alone, and he'll never do it unless he learns to control his temper.

            by devtob on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:22:43 PM PDT

•  Bruno is in much more trouble than Spitzer.

  He's probably gonna get indicted.  Eliot does need to learn how to work with people who aren't his subordinates.  I still think we picked the wrong guy last year, but I'm a bit biasedhere.  Spitzer will survive this but Bruno is fighting for his life.

  by MajorFlaw on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:11:31 PM PDT

  •  I don't think Bruno will be indicted and I'm sure

    he knows it.  That's another glitch in the USA firings and the AG's office knuckling down on prosecutions of republicans.

    That said, I feel that Spitzer has destroyed all chances of upending Bruno's tenure and has placed in jeopardy the ability of Democrats to win control.

    by nupstateny on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:18:11 PM PDT

    •  I believe that Bruno is being

      investigated by Soares at the request of AG Cuomo.  Why do you think he's gonna skate?

      by MajorFlaw on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:23:21 PM PDT

      •  Mostly because as soon as the attorney firings

        became public, and there wasn't another "leak", Bruno became confident again.

        I'll believe there isn't a connection when I see the indictment.

        by nupstateny on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:33:32 PM PDT

        •  Fair enough. n/t

          by MajorFlaw on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:38:22 PM PDT

    •  yup

      by Andrew C White on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:24:37 PM PDT

    •  I doubt it.

      Nothing is going to revive the Republican party in this state by next year. In fact, the NYGOP is going to get even weaker after the post-census re-apportionment in 2010. The upstate population continues to shrink while the City remains steady. Upstate will lose a congressional seat or two, as well as some state Senate seats.

      Provided they can't mount some sort of comeback in Long Island, we'll be fine.

      by brooklynbadboy on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:30:29 PM PDT

      •  The thing about republcians is that they

        are lockstep and they know how to move in for the kill.  I'm sure that the RNC will be more than happy to invest whatever they have to in order to avoid losing the little bit they now have here in New York.

        by nupstateny on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:36:22 PM PDT

  •  Suozzi

    Well, I was one of those who made a fuss over Spitzer's reluctance to debate Suozzi.  And sad to say, if you go back to that, you can see the traces of the sort of arrogance that may have gotten Spitzer into this current mess.

    The perplexing thing is how Spitzer could have the high road spread out wide before him, and then he sits around playing with the petty pebbles in the Albany sandbox.  He says "We will not waste this crisis," then what does he do?  Turns around and very possibly utterly wastes it.

    by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:53:22 PM PDT

    •  Did you see their one televised debate?

      Tom cleaned his clock.  Unfortunately, nobody was paying attnention.

      by MajorFlaw on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:08:00 PM PDT

•  Being arrogant and combative hasn't gotten

  him very far. He should try being contrite as hell. Beg for forgivness.

  by tigercourse on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:12:19 PM PDT

•  Its absolutely ridiculous.

  I want Spitzer to take on Bruno and Silver for that matter, but not over some trumped-up charges. This was staff arrogance at its absolute worst, and I have no doubt that Spitzer was in on it to some degree.

  This will blow over however.

  by brooklynbadboy on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:12:26 PM PDT

•  you are 100% percent right about

  the fact the people from the outside love this guy for no reason!
  I have been one of them saying that he could really go places... or atleast that is what it seemed to me
  However,
  This whole "scandal" here does stink... or atleast seems too, We will see how it all unfolds I am going to take a wait and see approach

  by yank2351 on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:13:10 PM PDT

•  Nice to see this here.

  I'm pretty appalled about it myself. After eight years of "six-packy" Pataki, I was really hoping a Dem governor would do some good, and all that. But I was worried about his "clean up Albany" crusade: not that it shouldn't be done (obviously, it should if it could be), but I wondered how his volatility and aggression would stir the muck of dirty local politics and ward-boss shits like Bruno. As you say, "a total snake pit," and maybe Spitz got bit?

  Did you read that New York article about Spitz a few weeks ago? You can find it here. It's a little hacky and snarky, but it's easy to see Spitz as perhaps crossing the lines a bit, as during his race for AG, in hot pursuit of a wanted target or goal. Like Captain Ahab! Seriously, though, I wonder how credible his professed distance from his aides' actions really is? It would be horribly ironic if a shining Dem paladin-type like Spitz were as nefarious and lowdown (and petty) as any Republican.

  by timmyk on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:19:01 PM PDT

•  We'll see how it all shakes out

  but at the moment it looks like a stupid, arrogant, and completely avoidable mistake (and ethical lapse) on the part of his staffers. Whether Spitzer himself knew what happened is still unknown. There is a reason Spitzer is arrogant. He is smart as hell and competent and this move was stupid and incompetent.

  All that said... he hasn't been helping himself or the cause of reform being "Mr. Steamroller." There is far too much inertia in Albany for anyone... anyone... to get away with that. I don't care how smart and competent you are. That level of arrogance just won't work.

  My guess is Spitzer pulls through this and for him politically it all blows over.

  For reform in NYS this is a significant step back. In order to recover his ground he is going to have to compromise with Bruno and Silver and that probably means that real reform is dead for now.

  And that really sucks.

  by Andrew C White on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:23:05 PM PDT

  •  This will pass,

    but it has tarnished the "Day One" guy forever.

    So small, so stupid, so petty, and yet so revealing, and so important.

    And a real shame.

    by devtob on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:42:33 PM PDT

•  I think you have to have some level of healthy

  suspicion and try to figure out where these attacks are coming from. We have a never Democratic governor in Massachusetts and it is my perception that in the first several months he was attacked mercilessly. He may have made some mistakes (something about hiring an assistant for his wife who the press seemed to think got too much money). While there may be some merit to what the claims are (I don't know, I am in a software release deadline and I hardly have time to pay attention), it certainly seemed that some group was determined to make sure Deval Patrick was attacked relentlessly. We saw this model with Clinton, so I am really wondering if these guerilla attacks on Democratic governors are somewhat orchestrated.

  As we all know very, very well, Bush's White House is extremely corrupt and so are a significant number of Republican members of Congress but they do not get the intense scrutiny and criticism that our two Democratic governors are getting.

  Now I am saying this without knowing much about the details. Maybe Spitzer is guilty as hell. But there are people out there who are determined to make life hell for Democratic politicians so that they are always off-balance.

  by lecsmith on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:31:03 PM PDT

  •  I think it was the Boston Globe who

    flat out referred to Patrick as "Moonbat".  You're right he took a lot of flack, but he's right on track now and I think he's impressing a lot of people.

    Spitzer has done this to himself.  No outside help is needed.

    by nupstateny on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:39:47 PM PDT

•  I see no problem

  Spitzer is fighting with entrenched incumbents who have  no problem fighting dirty. Sitting above the fray and saying that the state congresscritters are standing in our way does nothing to help get things done.

  The only problem I see is that Spitzer got caught.

  by jbou on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:33:26 PM PDT

  •  High ground

    The only problem I see is that Spitzer got caught.

    On one hand I can see where you're coming from, but on the other hand, I can't reconcile that sort of expedient hypocrisy.  (A politician's hypocrisy - I'm not calling you a hypocrite, jbou.)  This is the arena we play in now in New York:  corruption vs. cleanness, dysfunction vs. reform.  It's been in the public mind ever since the Brennan Center Report.  (Which never would have gained such notice, if it were not for the profound political news vacuum caused by the presidential election of 2004, which of course barely touched New York voters.)  

    This desire for clean, honest government was planted into the public discourse and it made Spitzer's very candidacy possible.  Spitzer did not create this arena for himself, he took advantage of it; and he can't now just change the rules of the game to suit himself.  Never was a governor elected with a clearer mandate from the voters.  That mandate isn't going to go away.

    Which is why Spitzer is in such a pickle.  As you can tell by the anger and disappointment which is directed at him (as well as at the usual suspects like Bruno), I think public opinion will steamroller even Spitzer if he does not deliver.  The longer this scandal goes on (and it seems to me that all the Three Men want it to go on, judging by the way they're behaving), the more pissed off the voters are going to get.  Albany seems oblivious.

    by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:04:23 PM PDT

    •  the voters will forget come election time

      Spitzer will beat Bruno back, and get some good legislation passed and trumpet it and he will win reelection. This had to happen, and Spitzer needs to win this fight. After Spitzer wins the fight he can clean things up.

      by jbou on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:07:01 PM PDT

      •  actually

        I'm wondering more about the 2008 elections.  Because honestly, depending on Spitzer's demeanor and on the outcome of any future ethics probes, the warfare could just go on.  And on.  And on.   And gathering up every legislator into the war.  That is how stupid I am beginning to think all these guys are.  Who knows, maybe 2008 is the year when the voters finally go batshit and start throwing their local benchwarmers out.

        by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:18:06 PM PDT

•  Heck

  Go to a Unicam (something like 150 seats with a Lt. Gov to break ties), and find some other ways to shake things up.

  Right now, there's 150 Reps and 62 Senators.

  So maybe shaking up the antfarm would be a good idea.

  Plus, it's probably more workable than just going to Term Limits.

  by RBH on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:38:56 PM PDT

  •  Unicam

    Richard Brodsky proposed a Unicameral legislature a few years ago, remember?  I never heard anything more about that though.

    by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:05:46 PM PDT

  •  But Here's a Wrench in Those Works

    Changing the structure and composition of the legislature would require amending the New York State Constitution, and doing so would require said amendment to:

    • pass both houses of the legislature during the next legislative session in 2008;
    • pass both houses during a second session of the legislature after the next general election of the Assembly in 2008, thus, sometime in the first half of 2009;
    • be approved at a subsequent statewide election, presumably no earlier than November 2009, though perhaps not until 2010, since there are no state offices to be filled in 2009 and I don't know that such a monumental change would be put forth in a year when turnout is exceptionally light.

    The amendment would then take effect the following January (either 2010 or 2011).  Frankly, I can't see the legislature voting twice to kill itself off, and I'd be equally dubious about the voters going for it right on the cusp of reapportionment.

    What about calling for a convention for a new state constitution, you might ask.  Well, the only provision for doing that is through a ballot question phrased as "Shall there be a convention to revise the constitution and amend the same?"  The next time this question is scheduled to get asked is 2017, as it is posed once every 20 years (in 1997, the 'yes' vote was only 40% of those voting on the question).  Alternatively, the question can be placed on the ballot at other times, but only via a law passed by the very legislature that would be unlikely to do so for fairly obvious reasons.

    Mind you, I wouldn't be at all averse to shaking things up to this degree, but I just can't see it happening.  There are many reasons why the NYS lege is consistently rated the most dysfunctional in the nation, and institutional inertia is most certainly among them.

    by The Maven on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:25:55 PM PDT

    •  Well

      You've convinced me.  Something needs to be turned into a smoking ruin.  It's the only way.  :-)

      by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:30:24 PM PDT

      •  Let's Not Get BillO

        over here thinking that we're seriously advocating violent acts against the state government . . .

        But yes, the state legislature is pretty much beyond redemption at this point.  I can hold out hope that reducing the Senate Republicans to minority status next year produces some gains with Malcolm Smith taking over for Bruno, but even so, I'm just not seeing the kind of systemic overhaul that would seem to be required to get things working with even a modicum of efficiency.

        by The Maven on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:46:29 PM PDT

        •  Can I have some of what you're smoking?

          I can hold out hope that reducing the Senate Republicans to minority status next year

          Unfortunately, we haven't yet even heard from the "I told you so" Republican voices, such as the Wall Street types mentioned elsewhere in the discussion and some of the rank and file Republican voters (and Repub-leaning independents).  They'll want Spitzer impeached over this.

          So I'm not sure how this scandal is going to prompt voters to go for Democrats (and you know how hard it was to even get Andrea Stewart Cousins elected).

          Forget taking the Senate in 2008, it was iffy at best.

          by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:58:54 PM PDT

          •  oh and I forgot to add

            ...that for Spitzer's staff to sicc the State Police on Bruno was a "masterful" touch.  Now he's got every independent/libertarian type in the state sitting up in bed with the screaming meemies over their personal liberties.

            So yeah, I'm sure those independents will be lining up to vote for Dems.  

            by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:02:00 PM PDT

    •  Yeah

      that's a really really complex process.

      I think the number of times that State Legislators knowingly voted themselves out of office was when Vermont decided to stop electing 450 members (or one from every town, I forget which), and went to even districts instead.

      by RBH on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:12:37 PM PDT

•  I Think Albany Will Be Fixed

  As soon as both Bruno and Silver are in "Heaven."  Too bad.  I thought Maybe Spitzer could do it, but now I am skeptical.  The odd thing is how shockingly functional the state is as a whole.  How in the world does anything actually get done?

  by bink on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:46:07 PM PDT

•  I don't care...

  Just stop raising the frigin subway fares!!

  by MikeBaseball on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 05:56:51 PM PDT

  •  The LA MTA is raising fares too

    I mean this is exactly the time in which to be reducing public transportation fees.  Get people out of cars....reduce our dependence on the Middle East.

    by SoCalLiberal on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:04:37 PM PDT

    •  Plus...

      Service sucks. Trains are overcrowded. And they want more money. I've never been on the LA system.

      by MikeBaseball on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:14:28 PM PDT

      •  Yeah that sucks

        The LA System is interesting.  We have 5 lines, one of which is a dedicated busway, one which is an actual subway line, and three light rail lines.  The light rail lines all have problems.  The Green Line goes from nowhere to nowhere (from Norwalk to El Segundo) and runs down the middle of a freeway.  Now I don't know who came up with this idea but it is patently stupid....you don't run light rail down freeway medians.  The Blue Line goes from downtown Long Beach to Downtown LA.  It actually gets a fairly high ridership but because it runs mostly above ground and often at grade, there have been like over 60 fatalities as a result since it opened.  The Goldline runs from Downtown LA through Pasadena and all the way out to Sierra Madre (though there are plans to extend it further with David Dreier's blessing).  The Goldline runs through some interesting places but it gets horrible ridership mainly because it's so god damn slow.  Currently a light rail extension (including some underground parts) of the Gold Line is going on through East LA and the Expo Line is being built as well.  

        Now LA's lone subway line (or actually, they technically just created a new line) is the Red Line.  Now, the redline had enormous problems getting built.  And the stations aren't as nice and smartly built as the Washington, DC stations.  However, the Red Line is fast, unobtrusive to traffic, and gets an enormous ridership.  And many Red Line stops are seeing a lot of economic development around the stations (which pretty much opened up in parts of LA that were not doing well economically).  Now there is a move to build a subway to the westside but it's taking forever to get laws against it repealed and to plan it and it will take even longer to build.  This will be known as the Purple Line.  A couple of stops are already being renamed as Purple Line stops.  The original downtown LA branch of the subway and three stops that currently run underneath Wilshire Bouelvard.

        Btw, Tom Glavine picked up his 299th career win yesterday.  This is pretty cool.  

        by SoCalLiberal on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 08:18:21 PM PDT

        •  Thanks

          Wow, thanks for the detailed description of the LA subway system. Like you said, I tend to walk a lot. I usually take the subway to work then walk home. I live in the Gramercy area (east 20s) and I am often with friends on the west side and if it's a nice night I'll walk. Although, cabs are so plentiful in this city that I admit to taking them too (probably too often than I need to).

          by MikeBaseball on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 06:31:39 AM PDT

          •  Grammercy

            I love that area.  The last time I was in New York, I stayed right down near Grammercy Park and that area is just great.  Of course, prior to that, I had stayed in either Midtown East or the Upper East Side and so all the restaurants and stores I wanted to go to were in that area.  That didn't stop me though from taking long walks to Midtown and back.  I use cabs but I prefer walking because I find NYC such an interesting place and because cabs cost money and because it's better for you to walk.  I only took the subway once when a friend living in the East Village suggested it would be much faster to take the subway than walk up to Midtown Manhattan.  The last time I was in NYC, I went to see the Robert Moses exhibit all the way up at 105th street.  I planned on walking up but then I got up late and it was raining so I took a cab.  I walked back though, lugging all the stuff I bought for the day from books at the museum to stops all over at my favorite stores.  By the time I got back from criss crossing the island, I had all these shopping bags, it was kinda funny.  I like NYC but I could see why living there would be a challenge.  It's too easy to run up credit card debt.  

            Wow, thanks for the detailed description of the LA subway system.

            You're welcome.  Right now, none of the proposed plans for rail expansion go to West Hollywood, which is silly.  

            by SoCalLiberal on Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 11:02:34 AM PDT

  •  it's a tax increase

    But not to fear, your increased subway taxes go to pay for welfare for Merrill Lynch and Goldman Sachs.

    Yes I'd like to see the fares cut, service improved.

    by davefromqueens on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:07:14 PM PDT

    •  Cut service and Cut Fairs

      Or raise fairs but improve service.  However, we have government and politicians who constantly undervalue mass transit and do everything possible to undercut it.  Now is exactly the wrong time to be raising fares and cutting services.  I could rant but it wouldn't do me any good.  If I ever run for public office, improving mass transit will be the center peice of my campaign.  

      by SoCalLiberal on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:19:11 PM PDT

  •  They should stop LOWERING

    the subway fares.

    With the elimination of two fare zones and the introduction of weekly and monthly metrocards, the average fare is now down to $1.30 -- the lowest in years.

    They've been able to support these ridiculously low fares using the support they've gotten from dedicated real estate taxes, but if those dry up the system would be in trouble.

    by LarryInNYC on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:37:40 PM PDT

•  Poorly played

  by Spitzer, and he's far from out of trouble as yet.  He really screwed up (and yes, I think it's impossible to believe he wasn't in this to a great extent).

  I approve of playing hardball with Bruno and Silver (don't know which of them I dislike more -- probably Silver), but when you kill the King you have to damn well make sure he's dead.

  by LarryInNYC on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:00:15 PM PDT

  •  Agree. Spitzer has not played this one well

    I worked in Albany in the late 1980s as Bruno was taking power. Before that, I saw him in committee meetings, where his comments were so stupid that his own staffers were always rolling their eyes. At the same time, any time anybody mentioned his name there would be stories about him approaching women in the most boorish and sexist way possible (all along he's married). I heard women come back from meetings or functions saying things like they had either been asked on horseback riding dates after a job interview, or were pointed at from across the room, with a loud question, "who's that?".

    So, I have always had less than zero respect for this inarticulate, corrupt idiot who has brought home big bucks for little Renssaeler county. He's also a stupid businessman, as indicated by his investments in Plug Power. For all the stupid local cronyism he'll mostly likely get indicted

    But having said all of this about this man's character and intellect, never underestimate him because he's got one thing - street smarts. He knows how to do political theatre extremely well.

    Bruno now has people thinking about something other than his pending indictment by playing up his  victimhood. What a champion actor.

    Spitzer should just let Cuomo's office get in there to ask anybody questions on the record, and take the lumps. Don't let the Senate in there. That's just asking to let the foxes in the henhouse. Then he should fire people if he has to. The less resistence he puts up (while still not letting in the Senate) the quicker the focus will get back to Bruno's own corruption.

    And don't think that the problem isn't only Spitzer's ego. It's the fact that Bruno has been used to doing whatever the hell he pleases forever and somebody is finally putting on the brakes. He hates that. But Spitzer's heavy handedness on this has worked to Bruno's benefit.

    So, I guess I'd say I don't approve of the actions of his staff, but I think Spitzer himself has good intentions. However, he has been hamfisted in the way he's conducted himself so far.

    by betson08 on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:17:36 PM PDT

•  The news media stinks

  Let's keep in mind that all the newspapers in NY were silent for 12 years when George Pataki was screwing up this state and when George Pataki had a myriad of scandals which went unreported by the press.

  NOt to excuse the allegations, if true there should be consequences for them, but let's keep some perspecdtive and realize that the media has spent the entire week blasting Spitzer.

  If this was Pataki, they wouldn't have reported this.

  by davefromqueens on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:05:47 PM PDT

  •  Media

    Oh certainly if it were Pataki... or even Mario... they wouldn't have bothered.

    What can I say?  Being a white knight sucks, Eliot -- particularly when you fight in the mud and lose.

    by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:11:01 PM PDT

•  At least it's a real scandal

  It's not some fluff story on who he was shtupping.  

  Just from glancing through the article, Spitzer seems a little overzealous.  The current Albany crew needs to go though and they're very unpopular.  They're trying to get Spitzer of course because Spitzer represents a threat to them and their current situation.  I think Spitzer has to take a gauntlet to all of them.  

  by SoCalLiberal on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:13:16 PM PDT

•  Spitzer needs to come clean-

  he has enemies at every level, and now is not the time to play hide and seek.  I support the man wholeheartedly, I interned in the Northern AG office for a while, did not work with him directly, but was up to date on progress being made within the AGO, and even when my semester was done, volunteered for another six months. He is smart enough to handle this appropriately, and he should.  

  Spitzer is a legal genius, that is his forum, it may mean he has shortfalls in other areas, though.  I kind of think of him as a modern day Cicero. As such he had best navigate carefully, or he could end up like Cicero.

  by lilorphant on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:18:12 PM PDT

•  Don't apologize for talking about state politics

  I love hearing state politics stories.

  by jct on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:20:34 PM PDT

•  A parallel we don't need right now...

  When I read this morning that Spitzer's aides hadn't been fully cooperative -- wouldn't testify under oath for Cuomo -- and THEN that Spitzer was going to assert executive privilege against any Senate subpoenas, all I could think was, Oh boy...just what we Dems need right now is to play out the same thing that's happening in DC, only with the parties reversed! And yes, I know, what Spitzer and his aides are accused of isn't anythin like the disaster Bush has wrought, but still... Spitzer needs to say, "Of course my aides will come and testify."

  by Glenn in NYC on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:25:47 PM PDT

  •  The Parallels Are Unsettling

    Indeed, if we were talking about a Republican governor making these same assertions, the comparisons to Bush and Miers etc. would be flying fast and furious.  It is no more excusable for a well-intentioned Democrat than it would be for a lawless sleazeball Republican.

    Spitzer needs to make his aides fully available, take his lumps now, and let it all blow away and subside during the slow season of August.  Allowing it to potentially fester gives Bruno everything he needs to throw up roadblocks for any major initiatives Spitzer tries to get through between now and election day 2008.

    by The Maven on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:35:50 PM PDT

•  I had no idea there were so many Kossacks

  following NY State Politics.

  My suggestion: in August let's have a dKos night at the ball game at Joe (the stadium named for the Fucktard), next to Hudson Valley CC in Troy, and invite the Gov.  It's a great beer buy, and the baseball isn't bad either.

  by davidseth on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:28:51 PM PDT

•  One more thought...

  There is an injured party in all this that can't be disputed:  the State Police force.

  Regardless of what you think about Preston Felton (the State Police superintendent), the NY State Police did not need this mess piled up on top of the many other troubles they have been experiencing over the past couple years (botched search for Bucky Phillips, dead troopers, dead troopers from friendly fire, etc etc).

  by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:40:10 PM PDT

•  The CUOMO factor. . .

  Another issue -- just what is Cuomo doing?  Is he playing it entirely straight?  Is he trying to get it out and done with?  Or has he discerned a new, quicker path into the Governorship?

  by LarryInNYC on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:43:20 PM PDT

  •  yuck

    Andrew Cuomo has no soul.  At least Spitzer has one.

    And with Gov. Cuomo Jr., you can be damn sure we'd be back to Three Men in a Room.  His father invented it.

    Reminds me of that line from 1984 -- "Imagine a boot stamping into a human face, forever."  Well, imagine Three Men in a Room forever.

    by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:46:09 PM PDT

•  So the answer is to elect Dems, huh?

  Thanks Eliot, on so many levels.

  As Mike Lupica put it so eloquently, "...it takes some doing to turn Joe Bruno into a sympathetic figure...".

  He was in on it, no question. Guys like Spitzer know every detail.

  I voted for him, and supported his position during the whole Hevesi thing, and now, am left to question how I could have been taken in. I have a relative in the finance industry who can't read Spitzer's name without growing a vein in his forehead, and I'm sure I'm going to be hearing from him.

  There should be an independent investigation, immediately.

  Typical, and sad.

  by NYContrarian on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:50:33 PM PDT

•  he fucked up

  period.

  the fact that he has taken a man who is demonstrably corrupt, who has been under federal investigation for over a year, and made him into the victim, the one who isn't "dirty", is absolutely stunning.

  and the ethics commission investigation ain't no joke.

  at a minimum he should have fired anyone tainted (rich baum, i'm lookin' at you, kid.) right away. he didn't.

  "after the Rapture, we get all their shit"

  It's time: the albany project.

  by lipris on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 06:54:35 PM PDT

•  Better lawyer than pol - saved by Prez Hillary

  Trained prosecutors may not make the best pols.  The skills are different.

  I think Hillary saves him and gives him a post as Attorney General or head of the SEC or something.

  by smartcookienyc on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:01:03 PM PDT

  •  he's friends with Hillary?

    News to me.

    by NYCO on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:03:46 PM PDT

    •  Sure! He's endorsed her already. n/t

      by smartcookienyc on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:15:31 PM PDT

•  The refusal of Spitzer's two aides to answer

  Coumo's questions under oath and the decision to give written depositions is sadly pure Karl Rove. You can't dispute that the Bush/Cheney modus of pure stonewalling hasn't affected Spitzer and his aides in this circumstance. Also, let's all stop pretending that the guy at the top doesn't know what his political hatchet men are up to. Bush knows, Tony Blair knew and anyone who's worked at that level in any administration (Federal, State, or local) knows that it's typical for these guys to sit around the boss' office and plot (real or imaginary) how they will screw their enemies: it didn't even start with Nixon.

  And Spitzer's incipient attempt to claim Executive Privilege makes Alberto Gonzales look smart by contrast. I voted enthusiastically for Spitzer, he's a great disappointment already and I don't see how he can change his stripes. The last thing in the world I would want to do is support Bruno or any Repug, but we can't wail about Rove/Bush and then support the same crap from our side. If Spitzer's innocent here, he'll have no problem clearing that up...if he's involved, then the hell with him.

  by Arctor on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:04:57 PM PDT

•  Bruno has hurt people like me

  Bruno blocks everything Progressive.
  That's what I care about most of all.

  by LNK on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 07:51:32 PM PDT

•  Disappointed in Spitzer

  He has great energy, and his bullying nature could actually shake up corrupt state politics in a positive way if he used ti well, but he's so far shown a real tone-deafness and lack of finesse. I think he's still got plenty of time to learn on the job, but there's quite a bit of learning to be done.

  by jmcl89 on Thu Jul 26, 2007 at 09:11:06 PM PDT