"In a decent moral setting, the federal investigators who accidentally came upon Spitzer's transgressions would have brought their discovery to him privately, informed him of the risk he was running, and then left the next move to him. He might have atoned; he might have sincerely changed. Turning his dalliance into a medieval morality play about the Devil grabbing a sinner by the tail follows a puritanical value system that we would all be better off leaving behind."

When i read these lines in this article, i felt that this is 100% true to any individual in the society..

Mohan Varadaraju

The key words here are "In a decent moral setting". In a decent moral setting there would not be the need for privately investigating a public figure.

I think that it is a crying shame that our society has sunk to the level of accepting and publicizing these perverted behaviors as a normal course of events. The media is so fixated on these despicable scenarios that the public has come to accept them as the norm.

Where are the heroes for today? Where are the role models for the developing impressionable minds?

What is meant by - "following a puritannical value system that we would all be better off leaving behind"? Why so? What about setting some kind of a value system that is worth following?

"Betsy" S.

Hello Deepak and Everyone,

The problem with our political figures getting caught with their "johnny" in the "jill" or "jim" is that most of these political figures play very important roles in our law-making, law abiding government positions within our society. So, of course, when one of these figues shouts from the halls of justice that to be homosexual is wrong, wrong, wrong, and for a political figure, no less, an ex Attorney General to shout from the halls of justice that he "broke up a prostitution ring late last nite" and then runs to the office to call is "high priced hooker," is kind of, well, absurd, even more than hypocritical. I mean these very same officials hold their "dramatic press conferences" to bring the desired attention to thier heroic deeds on one hand, while the other hand doing naughties in very strange places.

So, it is not so much about the sex as it is about the very public persona and position of the person involved. If it is your President getting "free gifts" in the Oval Office, or your Senator soliciting for "gifts" in public bathrooms and an Ex-Attorney General who prosecutes prostituion rings while getting his "very expensive gifts" after 5....then of course people are going to talk, laugh, cry, want to know every last detail, and, I mean, every last detail...(I mean I can't tell you how many articles wondered, just, "what exactly did the $4,300 "gift" consist off, feel like, look like.hmmmmm there was something about the eagerness, in the asking, of these particular details, that it made you wonder a bit about the inquirer....hmmmmm

Yea, I am afraid as long as we have government officials who dress up like supermen by day but "dress down" when the lites go out...you will always have this kind of pubic curiosity...and there is nothing puritanical in any of this...I assure you.

have a great evening...nice chatting...gotta go..ruth

Dear Besty..

What is meant by - "following a puritannical value system that we would all be better off leaving behind"? Why so? What about setting some kind of a value system that is worth following?

There are many biological factors and unconscious behavioral patterns lying at the very core of our existence that could never be controlled by a set of governing rules created from society.

We become what we judge.

The paradox of following a puritanical value system is that it encourages constant seduction but denies satisfaction, so a perpetual frustration of normal outlets eventually finds release in perverse ones.

An unforgiving puritanical society scorns its victims in the press and metes out punishments that have never been demonstrated to have any deterrent or corrective value. And shame is used as a tool of cruelty.

Of course little children must be taught that dangerous behaviours are 'wrong' but as they grow older, discernment should replace moralisim or moralizing. The attempt to impose standards of would-be *absolute Good and Evil* is one of the greatest moral pitfalls. Right and wrong always seems to divert our focus and exists as a function of perception. I happen to agree with Deepak on the issue of prostitution with the caveats listed.

Bonnie

PS: Actually Spitzer was not 'accidentially' discovered, the FBI had been wire tapping him for weeks.

If you are public don't be private, if you are private don't be public.

Look, here's the basic underlying phenomenon of this whole sex and morality thing:

The very first thing is to accept and fully embrace the fact - the unchangeable fact - the you are an animal.

Society has resisted this simple truth for millenia and it has caused all kinds of blocks on our evolution, not to mention inflicting some of the most hideous suffering on humanity we have seen other than outright war and torture.

You and I are animals - our DNA is animal DNA, our bones are animal bones, our brains are animal brains, and our bodily functions and needs are the bodies, functions, and needs of animals.

Get used to it.

Actually, it is very liberating to accept your animalness, embrace it and enjoy it. Animals lead rich sensuous lives full of sights and smells and sounds and rich, unverbalized emotions and states of consciousness.

Mammals - that's us, remember - also have this enormously rich and rewarding connection with our sibling/litter mates, mates as adults, offspring, and emotional bonds of friendships developed over periods of years in our lives. The way we nurture children for example, is a very primeval, instinctual, animal trait. Yet it also brings the greatest heights and depths of emotional experience and enriches our lives.

Now, as I have said before here, one of the (more or less) unique traits of the human animal is that we don't have a set mating season, or rutting time.

For better or for worse, once we reach puberty and the sex drive kicks in, it stays with us into old age. Most animals have a specific time they feel like mating, and the rest of the time they go about living without being driven by the mating urge.

Not so humans. We are are blessed (or is it cursed? - your beliefs decide) with the never-ending sex-drive.
No doubt it is a big part of why we multiply so successfully compared to other species. Wherever we have lived, we have risen to the top of the food chain, and generated population explosions. Soon there will be 10 billion of us.

A feature of the sex desire is that it loves novelty and the unknown. It's no accident folks get bored with their mates sexually. The biological drive to find new mates and propagate rules us from the very basis of our beings. The unknown lover is the most attractive, the thrill of hooking up with a near-total stranger is the stuff of nearly everyone's fantasies. Be truthful: how many of you married guys fantasize about your wives? No, you fantasize about the unknown, exotic, dangerous lover. I submit to you that that is basically a biological drive your imagination is trying to cope with. It's not your fault, and you aren't a sinner because of it. You were born to seek out new exotic dangerous lovers. It's a very primeval and powerful drive, and it was designed to help you go out and make lots of new human animals so the species would be fruitful and multiply, so to speak.

In the same way having a baby and a family is a deep primeval urge for the woman. That too is part of being an animal. Just like the dream house. The dream house fantasy is basically the nesting instinct expressed in the human animal.

Marriage and social rules designed to control sex all have the one goal of not allowing the sex drive to rule our behavior.

But given our biology, that's a tough mandate to fill.

So social rules that force virginity, chastity, monogamy and all the rest are doomed to fail a high percentage of the time.

We have reacted to that by imposing punishments. Sometimes mutilation,and death and torture. Modern society chooses social embarrassment and incarceration.

Does it change the biological reality? Not much.

So I say accept, enjoy and revel in your animal-ness and enjoy all the sights, sounds, and sense riches that brings.

Paradoxically, by accepting and liberating your animal nature, you will find you are not drawn to perversions.

The perversions are the result of suppressions.

People have resisted being animals and tried to blot it out in all kinds of ways. It has led to stifling social conventions and endless neuroses and anxiety.

This results in things like society freaking out when a guy hires a prostitute.

Meanwhile we go on glorifying those who are destroying our society, giving us endless wars, and causing great suffering.

If you look at society, you can see that people tend to respond in animal-like ways to stimulus and all their problems. But we try to pretend we don't.

The pretense is making us miserable, stressed, depressed, and even suicidal.

Really, all the suffering is not necessary.

I'm me. I'm an animal, and a human. Wow, the best of both universes! Who could ask for more?

So, actually this guy Spitzer IS a hypocrite. He is trying to lead the split-personality life that society is demanding of him.

This is where politicians fail. They try to keep the appearance of model people that somehow embody all of society's neurotic social conditionings.

Besides being impossible to do, it sets them up for a life of neurotic behaviors.

We do have a new role model.

The French president Sarkozy :)

Mieke

Of course it does divert attention away from the point that they were spying on him. It is not unreasonable to do a $4,000 transaction, nothing that should create suspicion. It all sounds fishy.

How many other members of congress and government are being spied upon ? By who and to what political advantage? Perhaps we should not have allowed such powerful unsupervised domestic spying capabilities. They can be considered a threat to national security leading to an imbalance of power in a nation and a way for a few to seize political control.

Privacy is essential to this nation. Freedom from persecution and judgment, that is what privacy is all about.

are there really any controls?

Unless of course they were trying to scare everyone.

We do create the environment for hypocrisy; the result of judgment. Those that judge become hypocrites.

Hypocrisy is the real issue one measure and standard for the third party, the elite at the pyramidal apex, and another for the indentured servitude at the base.

I totally agree with all that you've written, Deepak. The fever pitch hysteria in the media over an individual's sexual behavior is what is truly shameful.

It panders to the inner sense of emptiness that so many experience, seeking a vicarious thrill in violence done to others. As important news goes unreported, this senseless coverage reminds me more of the decadent Roman empire in which they threw people to lions for general entertainment and diversion.

While our country (and indeed the world) face a magnitude of current and future problems due to corruption and greed at the highest governmental levels, why on earth should anyone feel more concerned about what goes on between consenting adults than about the loss of life and destruction of planetary balance and resources?

I've done several blogs this week, including one on this site, on the recent report on the contamination of the water supply by prescription drugs and hormones. But compared with a peep show into the lives of others, that's not very titillating.

However, hormones in water are not good for anyone's sex life, or for their health. For all we know, individuals who enact sexual behaviors at odds with their ego or public identity could have a biochemical imbalance, or be taking meds that contribute to compulsive behavior. Without knowing more than it should ever be our business to know, judgmental reactions are totally inappropriate.

I totally agree with all that you've written, Deepak. The fever pitch hysteria in the media over an individual's sexual behavior is what is truly shameful.

It panders to the inner sense of emptiness that so many experience, seeking a vicarious thrill in violence done to others. As important news goes unreported, this senseless coverage reminds me more of the decadent Roman empire in which they threw people to lions for general entertainment and diversion.

While our country (and indeed the world) face a magnitude of current and future problems due to corruption and greed at the highest governmental levels, why on earth should anyone feel more concerned about what goes on between consenting adults than about the loss of life and destruction of planetary balance and resources?

I've done several blogs this week, including one on this site, on the recent report on the contamination of the water supply by prescription drugs and hormones. But compared with a peep show into the lives of others, that's not very titillating.

However, hormones in water are not good for anyone's sex life, or for their health. For all we know, individuals who enact sexual behaviors at odds with their ego or public identity could have a biochemical imbalance, or be taking meds that contribute to compulsive behavior. Without knowing more than it should ever be our business to know, judgmental reactions are totally inappropriate.

# 8 Dear yogi-one, I beg you to consider the following:

You are what you think.

Your DNA is the information field of the sum total of
all your previous thinking.

In reality you are neither animal, nor human. Both this
words are but notions. At the present state of our
civilization it is commonly agreed that ''we are humans''.

And that is the most difficult psychic conditioning to
transcend.

When the knowledge of our true nature will become a
more shared reality, no one will have a problem with
the idea of identifying oneself with the Cosmos and all
its winged creatures.

Perhaps there'll be a time again when Man ( as Manu, the
founder of the Solar Dynasty ) will know himself to be All
that there is.

( From your pseudonym) I assume you practice yoga. Many
Yogic text advise to use the formula to help an aspirant to
identify with his real nature.

Aham Brahmasmi ~ is perhaps the most important, which
literally translates: I am Brahman ( Totality ).

Just to give you an example; whether you believe it or
not, yet in the golden age of the Old Dynasty, an ancient
Egyptian Pharaoh did not think of himself to be a human
being, nor any other member of his society thought of
him as being just human.

In any case you insist on your animal nature. What about
being a plant, besides it took much longer period in time
when we all shared plant nature. Why not to go further to
identify yourself with a mineral kingdom ? It was even longer
period. Billions of years, compared to the animal stage.

You see where it takes us ? We all share the sameness in
every stage of an evolutionary progression of consciousness
precisely because we are nothing but consciousness.

Embrace all your stages as your own self and transcend
them altogether.

Nietzcsher used to say provocatively: '' What is Human ?
Is it something hanging on the infinite string between an
angel and a beast ? ''

That's why I say. You are what you think yourself to be.

With Love

Jai Guru Dev

igor

Deepak,

I agree with you, there should be no "glass bedroom"--I don't like knowing what goes on in other people's sex lives especially when the person looks like Spitzer.
But, really, Spitzer gets no sympathy from me because
1) if a person wants to bust up prostitution rings it should follow that they do not then repeatedly hire high-paid prostitutes--is that not common sense? am I missing something?
2) Spitzer should never have had his wife standing by his side while he gave his "apology" and resignation--hell, the guy can do what he wants in his "glass bedroom" for all I care, but why does he need his wife to stand there next to him while people throw rotten tomatoes at him? Does the man have no class--I mean even an iota--to humiliate his wife like that--to me that was the most pathetic thing he did--so to me he made an ass out of himself, b.c I don't care what he did as far as going with prostitutes but he should not drag his wife into his freak show.

Olivia wrote: Spitzer should never have had his wife standing by his side ...

Isn't this Amazing? Why it is always the male in the relationship to be blamed, I mean, in this case what if the wife insisted that she be on his side, perhaps like Hillary did when she stood beside Bill. Then the wife has to be blamed isn't it?

If a male goes to a prostitute, he is exploiting the woman for sex. If some wealthy woman hires a male prostitute, she is being exploited for money.

Perhaps Spitzer's wife knows that he uses an Escort Service for sex(which she mayn't be able to fulfill.) From a wife point of view, it's much better than getting involved in a relationship outside marriage.

Spitzer should have learned from him buddy Bill; how to have FREE sex, and how NOT to lose your job. But then Spitzer's wife is no Hillary.

And he is no President who can abuse his Executive power.

John,

Oh yeah, I'm sure she insisted upon being at his side--as in "honey it's OK you repeatedly hired a 22-year old overpaid prostitute, let me support you through this difficult time, really let me make you some chicken noodle soup and give you a shoulder massage oh and are your feet comfortable let me bring you a foot stool--no, she probably deeply despises him and HE was using her as a prop. There must be a LOT you don't know about women if you think that women enjoy having their husbands use prostitutes and then bring home possible STDs.
I love how you state that you seem to just "know" that a wife would prefer her husband going to an Escort Service over looking for an "outside relationship"--what? You lost me there.
Here's how I see it, she gave birth to 3 of his children, he owes her some respect. Sorry, I will never be "liberal" enough to think that a person has a God-given right to publicly humiliate their wife.
Spitzer disrespected his whole family. Great statement for him to make to his teenage daughters about how he views women.
Am I morally judging him? Of course I am. If he wants to bust up prostitution rings, then he shouldn't be sleeping with prostitutes. People have every right to be p*ssed off at this guy.
AND, if he's unhappy in his marriage, then he needs to grow a spine and get a divorce and then look for someone else. Do I think he should be prosecuted? No. Do I want him to be a governor? Hell no.

"Here's how I see it, she gave birth to 3 of his children, he owes her some respect. Sorry, I will never be "liberal" enough to think that a person has a God-given right to publicly humiliate their wife."

If only the story did not leak out....

You must be living in pre-Kinsey America if you 'think' most husbands/wifes don't have extra marital sex adventures with/without his/her spouse's consent/understanding.

So, are you saying he should have disrespected her? Is it "OK" because most morons do it? Is it OK that men are no longer real men? And that if they "stray" in such a bufoonish manner they can't handle it like a man, take the heat like a man, they need to run back to their wifey and have her hold their hand? If he wanted to play he should pay and not whine about it--he should take it like a man.
Look, whatever he wants to do is his business. Whatever most morons do is their business. But as a woman, I object to men not being real men, if he wants to "do the crime" he should have the guts to take it like a man and not drag his wife in front of the cameras.
And as for what most people do in their marriages, that is not my concen, if they want to make a joke of their "commitment" and bring home STDs to their spouse, that is not my problem, the fact that people make these b*llshit commitments and stand up in front of a preacher and lie is again not my problem.

Basically, he shouldn't be making laws for other people if he is not going to follow them. This guy put people in jail for pimping prostitution and here he was using prostitutes. Not a smart move.

"you saying he should have disrespected her?..."

"Sorry, I will never be "liberal" enough to think that a person has a God-given right to publicly humiliate their wife."

hmm....amazing how you imagine an project things. You clearly are not someone with whom one can have an intelligent dialogue with. So rant on, make straw man arguments and create false dilemmas. You past behavior on this blog(for ex. discussions with Ratnasambhava on gun control) supports you consistency.

Enjoy.

"Basically, he shouldn't be making laws for other people if he is not going to follow them. This guy put people in jail for pimping prostitution and here he was using prostitutes. Not a smart move."

YOU ...GOT IT!

WOW!

Basically, my compassion runneth dry. There are people starving, countries at war, genocide going on in the world...and yet here I am being asked to feel bad for hypocrites wielding power, to shed a tear in my beer for men who have been handed absolutely everything, don't care who they hurt, don't care who they lie to...they are the ones who deserve a big "boo-hoo". I say that's baloney.
And to say prostitues aren't victims? I have a member of my family who worked helping prostitutes--most of them are
drug-addicted, come from histories of extensive abuse, some are homeless and some are suffering from AIDS or other diseases...these prostitues have been chewed up and spit out by life circumstances, they are ill (whether through drug-addiction, emotional damage, or actual disease), and I would say yes, they are being victimized by the johns who use them.

OH I am so sorry for "making straw men arguments and creating false dilemnas" whatever that means.
OK fine I am wrong. There should be no morals. I feel really bad for Spitzer. It was great he had his wife help him through his prostitution scandal. He sounds like an upstanding guy. He sets a great example. OK, have a great day.

Examples of Olivia's cognitive dissonance:

First she says "Do I think he should be prosecuted? No." and then says, "This guy put people in jail for pimping prostitution and here he was using prostitutes."

Then he must be put in jail. No?

***

"AND, if he's unhappy in his marriage, then he needs to grow a spine and get a divorce and then look for someone else."

"sex outside marriage" and "unhappy in marriage" is a false dilemma.

***

"Do I want him to be a governor? Hell no. "

Well... and many women wanted Bill Clinton to be the president, although he "used" his wife (or his wife used the opportunity to create her own image..whatever) more than what NY governor did(or his wife did) publicly.

"OK fine I am wrong. There should be no morals. I feel really bad for Spitzer. It was great he had his wife help him through his prostitution scandal. He sounds like an upstanding guy. He sets a great example. OK, have a great day."

You are great example of black and white thinking of the first order. You talk in extremes. Color blindedness. Exclusion of the middle.

"yet here I am being asked to feel bad for hypocrites wielding power, to shed a tear in my beer for men who have been ..."

WHO exactly is asking you? Did I? Did Deepak?

You are merely projecting. And the fault lies within your psyche.

"And to say prostitues aren't victims? "

WHO said that?

Your ALL-OR-NOTHING thinking is curious...if not typical.

"And to say prostitues aren't victims? I have a member of my family who worked helping prostitutes--most of them are
drug-addicted, come from histories of extensive abuse, some are homeless and some are suffering from AIDS or other diseases...these prostitues have been chewed up and spit out by life circumstances, they are ill (whether through drug-addiction, emotional damage, or actual disease), and I would say yes, they are being victimized by the johns who use them."

Now Now, there is a difference between street prostitution and semi-legalized escort service prostitution (you get male prostitutes too, btw.)

Saying that ALL prostitutes are victimized against their choice, or that NO prostitutes are victimized is taking it to the extremes.

Saying that ALL prostitutes are victimized against their choice, or that NO prostitutes are victimized for it is their choice, is taking it to the extremes

John, I feel that the article definitely implies that Spitzer was treated unfairly, therby asking me to feel compassion for him.

Call me old-fashioned, but no I don't think there should be moral police, but I for one am sick and tired of politicians making a mockery of their own families--yes Bill Clinton absolutely did do that (although he did not do anything illegal) and also setting a terrible example for everyone else. I feel so strongly about this and also think in black and white terms (true I admit that) b/c I think that our leaders should have some integrity. I mean why are the people leading us displaying such moral corruption? Is this what we want in our leaders? I could deal with a politician having an affair if it was based on love or some other one-time mistake but not when the politician clearly has no intact morality and sees prostitutes when he is married--we shouldn't be asked to have leaders like that--my point was the guy should have resigned--absoslutely.

In Ancient India, in the good old days of Kama Sutra Prostitution was very much legal. In the modern world too, there are many places where it is legal. Street prostitution has a lot of bad side effects; crime, exploitation, drugs etc... Prostitution goes on by independent prostitutes and by Escort service which are more popular and secure for would be prostitutes in the western world. One reason why Spitzer or his Escort Service The Emperor's Club won't be prosecuted for prostitution; for money laundering, yes.

If a person(male or female) needs to fulfill his sexual desires instead of having multiple relationships just for sex it better to have legalized prostitution rather than street prostitution. Marriage is not just about sex, isn't it.

"my point was the guy should have resigned--absoslutely."

And he does come March 17, whats your point?

So do you or do you not think Bill Clinton should have resigned?

If No. Is it because he didn't do anything "illegal"? or is it because it was because you "could deal with a politician having an affair if it was based on love or some other one-time mistake."

In real world, the only way an ugly guy can desire a sexy woman is by using force. In real world, it is difficult to court an interracial person. A busy guy doesn't have time to date. It is ridiculous to suggest that couple's should divorce if one partner can no more offer the sex needed by the other. Prostitution works for betterment that way.

John,

To respond to your posts
Post 1: You lost me. Are you saying he won't be prosecuted for using prostitutes because it was a high-class service? Because that has nothing to do with it either way. Are you saying he is being prosecuted for money laundering b/c I think that is not correct.

As far as your statement "marriage is not just about sex isn't it?" Did I ever say it was? What point are you making?

Post 2: I said he should have resigned in response to Deepak's article--did I incorrectly infer that Deepak felt he should not have resigned? As far as Bill Clinton, he did nothing illegal, therefore no I don't feel that he should have had to resign.

Post 3: Whoah...you wrote "the only way an ugly guy can desire a sexy woman is by using force"--um, not true, not everyone bases their attraction on superficial standards..."it is difficult to court an interracial person"--um, what? why would it be difficult--not sure I understand that..."a busy guy doesn't have time to date"--um, then maybe he can change his schedule so he is not so busy..."it is ridiculous to suggest that couples should divorce if one partner can no more offer the sex needed by the other"--did I say that? "prostitution works for betterment that way"--no, it doesn't.

"Are you saying he won't be prosecuted for using prostitutes because it was a high-class service?"

Did I?

"As far as your statement "marriage is not just about sex isn't it?" Did I ever say it was? What point are you making?"

That comment was not addressed to you.

"I said he should have resigned in response to Deepak's article--did I incorrectly infer that Deepak felt he should not have resigned? "

stop asking stupid questions.

"As far as Bill Clinton, he did nothing illegal, therefore no I don't feel that he should have had to resign."

Great. If that's your argument, I lost any respect to your point of view. "illegal" is something that needs to be proved in court.

Ok dude, hilarious.

"the only way an ugly guy can desire a sexy woman is by using force"--um, not true, not everyone bases their attraction on superficial standards...

True. But unfortunately, in the real world, "Most" ugly people don't get sexy women.

"it is difficult to court an interracial person"--um, what? why would it be difficult

It is. In the real world. Ask some Asian who goes to an Irish club in South Boston.

--not sure I understand that..."a busy guy doesn't have time to date"--um, then maybe he can change his schedule so he is not so busy...

Again, we are talking of real world, where all sorts of people reside. Not everyone is like you.

"it is ridiculous to suggest that couples should divorce if one partner can no more offer the sex needed by the other"--did I say that?

Did I say, you said that? You should ask yourself if you mean that.

"prostitution works for betterment that way"--no, it doesn't.

It does. The complicated society will have less problems out of sexual frustration. But exploiting women by commercial prostitution is not what I advocate.

Amazing, Olivia thinks that it's okay for a President to "humiliate" his wife by having extra marital sex and still remain in power. And the Gov. who humiliated his wife has to resign only because she thinks he did something "illegal".

There's a lot of exploitation in human trafficking and street prostitution. There is less when it comes to independent prostitutes and Escort services.

There is little chance that Spitzer or the EMperor's Club VIP will be successfully prosecuted for alleged prostitution.

So Oliva thinks, Bill Clinton's "sexual mis-conduct"(which is punishable under law) with regard to at least four women is not "illegal" because it was not "proved" in the court of law. Amazing!

John, I think we will have to agree to disagree. You criticize the way I argue, but it seems you go in circles never truly addressing points that are made before you launch into new points.

I do believe that Spitzer should have resigned. He put pimps/prostitutes in jail and then went with prostitutes. It's simple math--and why do you need to drag Clinton into the whole thing? That's a separate issue with different factors.
I object to Spitzer humiliating his wife. Yes, I do. The guy has no class at all. But honestly, it doesn't surprise me. Most men are very simple creatures of whom little can be expected. Perhaps you are right and prostitution should be legalized so that men can go after all they really care about, it seems from your statements--a "sexy" woman--I just hope for their sake they can all afford high-priced prostitutes or the woman may not be so "sexy".

"Perhaps you are right and prostitution should be legalized so that *men* can go after all they really care about,.."

And women, and lesbians and gays...

Bill Clinton is a very valid subject to reveal your twisted logic.

Spitzer resigned before he was "impeached". Not so with Bill Clinton. This guy (proved) "lied" under oath in front of the grand jury. He was "disbarred" from practicing law! And it was okay for you that he stay in power. Great!

If anything What Bill as a Pres. did to the trust of American people and the way he humiliated and victimized Hillary Clinton(who is twice as capable as him) is nothing compared to the hypocrisy and the humiliation he brought to his family.

oh, btw the Gov. didn't abuse the power vested in him, like Clinton did. And nothing has been proved in the court of law to deem Gov. conduct as "illegal." same as Clinton. Its true the Gov. did pass laws which went after the people or customers who enable prostitution as well as the prostitution rings. And called ALL prostitutes as victims, whether street or Pretty Woman like call girls.

Talking about ugly guys getting sexy woman, I mean not just those ugly in physical appearances, but also those that are in character. Tell me what sexy woman who looks beautiful but has ugly character falls for an ugly guy with great character. Now come on if all ugly guys get sexy women, then what about handsome guys, they get ugly women? Understand Game Theory as applied to dating, John Nash in Beautiful Mind explains how there is an (Nash)equilibrium where everyone gets not just what is best for them BUT also what is best for the whole group.

John,

You are all over the place in your thinking...from Clinton to ugly guys with great character to the movie "Pretty Woman" to Game Theory--there is no longer a thread to follow containing any logical progression, so I will just appreciate your merry-go-round of thought.

In response to John's comment in Posting #25:

The hypocrisy rate among politicians is off-the-charts!

They promise you anything in order to become elected and then their Ego-driven march towards more and more power takes over.

Those who are so wrongly motivated should not be legislating any laws for the people of the world.

"Betsy" S.

This show is scheduled to air on Friday at 9:00pm EDT on ABC....