The worst dishonor of Spitzer is his resignation

In 1998, the House voted for the empeachment of Bill Clinton as president of the United States because of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Earlier today the governor of New-York, Eliot Spitzer, resigns because he paid a lot of money for a prostitute.

The democratic life of America can not go down the tubes with the noise of these scandals. Altough he slept "between dirty sheets", messed up his "Sheriff of Wall Street" reputation and showed his part of arrogance and stupidity; he shouldn't have resigned. Never are the democratic institutions so endangered as when emotions and hypocrisy outstrip the legal framework which has designed these institutions. And, untill now, nothing says that Eliot Spitzer used services of an illegal association or spent public money.

Eliot Spitzer's name appeared in a federal investigation's report about a ring of prostitution named Emperor Club VIP. The governor was identified as client number 9. He paid more than 80 000 dollars for prostitutes over a period of several years while he was Attorney General, and later as Governor. The american press sent its prying reporter on the place of the "crime". They found the last "party" of Eliot Spitzer which took place in a Washington luxuary hotel on february 13th. Pictures of the room and prostitutes' versions turned the politician as a vicious and egoist man. Sure he is for a part. Shame on him.
But lectors and public in general, even if they have the right of having complete information, shouldn't judge neither a man nor a woman for a family affair. There's a time for public life and a time for pricacy. Confusing these two parts of life is wrong most of the time. Spitzer is not the first, and not the least, to fall in such a scandal. Before him president Bill Clinton was asked to resign because of his sexual interest with a young student. And Newt Gingrich, the man who was the House speaker when this institution was empeaching president Clinton, confessed last year to cheating on his wife at the same time. In 2004, the former governor of New Jersey, James McGreevey announced his resignation after revealing he had an adulterous affair with a man. Everybody can see, with these examples, how all these campaigns of indignation smell hypocrisy.

Shame on the "sheriff"

What is more exciting in the Spitzer case is that this guy has always presented himself as a right man. He was called the "Sheriff of Wall Street" for his tough standing against the financial lawbreakers. As Attorney general he fought without mercy to make the place clear. He used the same processes of enquiry than one which discovered accusing transactions on his bank account. So the "Sheriff" couldn't conduct himself as a thief, he had to give the good example.
Altough he did his thinking with an other organ than his brain and hurted the people who believe in him, the very strict "judges" of today must explain exactly what is breaking the law in the Spitzer behaviour. The public opinion, or what the media call alike, fired Eliot Spitzer, but, untill now, he just appears as a client, a consumer. He just could be charged with solliciting prostitution which is a minor accusation. Nothing says that Emperor Club VIP was an illegal association. Nothing says that the former governor of New-York mistreated a call-girl. And if the enquiry revealed that Emperor Club VIP broke the law, nothing would say that Client n°9 were in the conspiracy.

As said, Eliot Spitzer acted with supidity, believing that his high position protected him from enquiries. He acted with arrogance believing that his big money could permit him all his fantasies. Sure he did not conduct himself as a good father. But his wife, whose feelings were hurted hardly, stood near her husband not only when he officially announced his resignation, but also when he publicly admited the fact two days before. If the first victim can understand some mitigating circumstances as the high pressure of power man's life, the public must understand this too.

Forfeiture of the votes

But first of all the reasons which tell not to reject an elected man caught in a dirty private affair, citizens must consider his doing. It's not a puritain appreciation thal tell if Eliot Spitzer acted well when he cleaned the financial place of Wall Street. It's not an emotional feeling that decide if Spitzer governed well or not.
Actually, in the Spitzer's case, there is no place for reason. Republicans, who forget that their Louisiana senator David Vitter is still in office even after he was identified last year as a client of  an other ring of prostitution; pushed Spitzer out to show themselves more right than right. Democrats; who see how much this deplorable affair could affect the actual presidential campaigne, have counciled him to resign. This resignation is just leaded by policitical issues. It's not more than a strategy of advertisment.
But nobody seems to see that this resignation looks down upon the voters who elected a man for four years in 2006. If there's no legal reason for his empeachment, the exit of Spitzer is no more than the forfeiture of their votes. Frankly, if people don't like a politician's behaviour, the constitution plans some meetings, the elections, to express such a desagreement. When emotions, strategy and allegation leads politic decision, the democracy is always breaken down.

In conclusion, since the federal investigations' report has been published, the media, which represent the public opinion, spent just three days to fire Eliot Spitzer. It's crazy because in all this newspapers; which made their top story around this puritain affair, the reader can always find an advertisment about an escort offer some pages after the moralist article. There's no evidence of any illegal act against the former governor, nothing to conduct him to an empeachment. But the media decided in the place of voters. Then there's no democracy anymore.