Personal lives are immaterial in politics

Another week has come and gone and another political sex scandal has steeped. This time with former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner — again.

Weiner is fighting like mad to make a rapid political comeback after resigning his congressional seat due to a sexting scandal. He seeks the only mayorship in America that matters — New York City. But he also finds himself right back in the thick of it, it having been revealed that he didn’t exactly stop sexting random women he meets on the Internet after he resigned in disgrace and promised to be a changed man.

By the grace of God — or something — his wife has again forgiven his virtual indiscretions and asked the people of New York to elect her husband despite his tomfoolery. But the question remains: Will sexters in the city forgive Weiner’s dalliances? Only time will tell.

Meanwhile, in the same city, former (disgraced) Gov. Eliot Spitzer is also seeking political redemption. His personal shortcomings were discussed in this column two weeks ago. In short, while governor, he sought out high-priced hookers and more eggregiously (in my opinion) cheated on his wife. But as I mentioned previously, he paid the price for his mistakes and somehow his wife has also forgiven him.

Personally, I couldn’t care less who Eliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner send nude photos to. It matters not one iota who they sleep with on their own time. And as stated previously, I don’t even care if they pay for it — and the voters of the Big Apple shouldn’t either.

What should matter to people is whether these people can do a good job at the offices they’re running for.

The concept of “character counts” when it comes to politics should be thrown right out the window. We’re not voting for the position of best friend. We’re not hiring a nanny. We’re looking for people who can make decisions that are in the best interest of our communities as a whole.

You may recall about 15 years ago or so when the biggest problem this nation had was the fact that our Commander in Chief had an affair with an intern. Sure other people had other issues with him, but really his biggest flaw was his sexual ego.

After Bill Clinton left office, we got a member of the moral majority in charge and things kind of went to pot. Coincidence? Maybe. But I’ll take Bill Clinton’s flaws over George W. Bush’s any day.

There is, however, a portion of the country that would disagree with me wholeheartedly. They’d rather have a squeeky clean moralist who royally stinks at running the country than a jerk who’s really good at it.

I want my friends to be nice people but I don’t really care if they’re good at their jobs. I want my employees to be good at their jobs but I don’t really care if they’re good at their marriages.

When it comes down to it, politicians are our employees and unless their personal lives make them incapable of doing their jobs, they should remain personal. Not public.

Scott Leffler is an expert in character flaws and schooled in politics. Follow him on Twitter @scottleffler.

Moral turpitude is an affront to justice everywhere

Former Gov. Eliot Spitzer has decided to jump back into the political arena, running for New York City controller. Apparently “The Steamroller” — or “Client #9” if you prefer — just can’t seem to avoid the limelight.

Spitzer, you should recall, resigned his position as governor on St. Patrick’s Day, 2008, after it came out that he was a regular client at a high-priced escort agency. He then did some TV, made some jokes at his own expense and tried to get his image fixed.

Well apparently him getting back into politics is “an affront to women everywhere” according to Manhattan Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal.

Rosenthal says that soliciting prostitutes is demeaning and degrading to women and adds to the problem of human trafficking.

Except I’m not sure I buy it at all.

Just as prohibition led to more cheaper alcohol and the “War on Drugs” has led to more harmful drugs (and a staggering prison population boom), the fact that prostitution is illegal to begin with is probably one of the biggest reasons human trafficking exists.

Let me explain.

If prostitution were legal — regulated, mind you, but legal — it wouldn’t have to be carried out under the cloak of darkness. That openness would lead to safer conditions, and less likelihood that the type of conditions that leads to human trafficking could exist in the first place.

Mind you, prostitution isn’t illegal everywhere. It’s perfectly legal in Nevada. Regulated, mind you, but legal. That regulation means that sex workers must be treated humanely, are tested for sexually transmitted diseases regularly, are paid fairly, and pay taxes on their earnings.

The primary reason that prostitution is illegal has nothing to do with degradation of women or human trafficking. It has everything to do with some people’s moral compasses navigating other people’s lives.

The illegality of prostitution makes no more legal sense than bygone laws which prevented interracial marriage; Some people’s values ruling everyone’s lives.

Personally I think that cleaning toilets or working in the sewer is disgusting. But that’s no reason for those things to be illegal. In fact, they’re a necessary evil. I’m not sure prostitution is either necessary or evil, but a comparison could be made to sewer workers. It’s a dirty job. Some people are willing to do it. Others aren’t.

My basis for laws goes like this: If what I’m doing doesn’t hurt anyone else, there’s no reason for it to be illegal. If — hypothetically speaking, of course — I wanted to sell myself for sex or pay someone for sex, how does that hurt anyone else?

Personally, I think “an affront to women everywhere” should be that they’re told by law what they can and can’t do with their bodies. “An affront to women everywhere” should be the fact that prostitution is illegal to begin with.

That said, Spitzer did break the law. But he paid his price. He resigned his office. He did his apology tour. And he’ll never be president.

Continuing to punish someone for a “crime” for which they’ve already paid is an affront to justice. And punishing someone for a “crime” which shouldn’t even be illegal is equally appalling.

Scott Leffler would undoubtedly end up homeless if he tried to work as a prostitute. That’s why he writes columns instead. Follow him on Twitter @scottleffler. 

Dear Governor Paterson: I never liked you

I have my biases just like anyone else.

Add to that the fact that I'm somewhat vindictive and not particularly forgiving and, frankly, it makes me the type of person whose bad side you don't want to get on. And if you are on my **** list and you fall? Well, I'm not going to feel guilty about enjoying it.

I'm not saying this as a threat. It is merely a disclaimer. Usually you get those at the end in small print, but I like to put mine out front.

I was never a fan of David Paterson. I'm not afraid to call him “the accidental governor.” I mean, let's be honest here. If Eliot Spitzer were a combination of more discreet and less freaky, we still wouldn't know anything about David Paterson. And we'd all be just fine with that, I'm sure.

When Paterson assumed the role of governor, he had a radio tour to introduce himself. I was working for WECK and WLVL at the time and got the same email every other talk show host in the state got; announcing that the new governor might consider being a guest on my show to tell the taxpayers what he was all about.

I called the number on the email, hoping to set up a live interview with the governor, the third we'd had since I had started my talk show several years ago – but the first who had offered to do a live interview. Or at least, I thought that's what the offer was.

I wish I could recall the conversation verbatim, but I cannot. I do remember whoever I talked to telling me that Cheektowaga and Lockport were not important enough to warrant the new executive's time. The woman on the other end of the phone didn't seem to care that radio waves were capable of traveling and just because the stations were licensed to Cheektowaga and Buffalo didn't mean that only residents of those communities would hear it.

“Yeah, we're licensed to Cheektowaga,” I told her, “but the majority of our listeners are actually from Buffalo, the second largest city in the state. You may have heard of it?”

The preceding paragraph is paraphrased, but that was the gist.

It didn't matter. She wasn't buying it. And just as quickly as David Paterson had become governor, I was done with him. Frankly, if his media people were that clueless, I could only imagine how bad he must be.

He didn't disappoint. He struck me as equal to his aide in terms of cluelessness. Honestly, I've been thinking for days of something he did that impressed me or gave me any sort of notion that he may have been more intelligent than I gave him credit for. I came up empty.

The thing that has frustrated me most about Governor Paterson has been his constant insistence that he was “making the tough decisions” by deciding to raise taxes. I've never gotten the impression that any politician ever has lost sleep over deciding to raise taxes.

Now, deciding not to run for a full term as governor cause your administration is plagued with scandal? I'm thinking that might have caused “the accidental governor” to lose a few winks.

So it's been decided that this partial term will be his last. Good for us. I would have to say to the governor, though, “Why wait? I mean, really. Just go now. You haven't accomplished anything yet. And now that you're a lame duck, you're not going to.”

In short, allow me to add myself to what is surely going to be a long line of journalists who suggest to to governor that he should do us all a favor and resign.

If that seems vindictive to you, it's because it is. Not that it matters. He won't care about my opinion. I'm not from a big enough city.

Spitzer: What we need

You can't always get what you want. But if you try sometimes, you might just find you get what you need.

Meanwhile, here in New York, we often get what we want. Only to find out what we wanted was not what we needed.

I read recently that former state attorney general and disgraced governor Eliot Spitzer was considering a run for the US Senate. While I'm not particularly keen on the idea of our junior senator being the guy lovingly referred to as “Client number nine,” after looking over the other possible contenders, I'm thinking he might be what we need.

Before reading that Spitzer was considering running against Senator Kirsten Gillibrand for the senate seat she was appointed to, I kind of forgot that Kirsten Gillibrand even existed. That's a bad sign for a US Senator. I mean, considering I can probably name most of the 98 senators who represent the other states, having to think about one of our own is a sign that she's not really a voice to be reckoned with, ya know?

I hate to admit it, but I kind of miss the one-two punch of Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton. Sure, she was a carpetbagger who only wanted to use her senate seat as a step in her quest for the presidency, but her profile and demeanor meant more attention for New York.

Think of United States senators in the way they were envisioned prior to the ratification of the 17th Amendment. They were all appointed to act as ambassadors for the state, working on behalf of the state government to express the state's view in Washington. They needed to be strong, charismatic representatives to get their states what they needed.

With the passing of the 17th, the senate is now elected by the people and their role has changed. But most good senators are still the strong charismatic ones, acting as ambassadors rather than the proxies that one of my least favorite amendments has made them into.

Gillibrand may make a good proxy. But she does not make for a good ambassador. Spitzer would.

Some might say that his prostitution scandal would render him impotent when it comes to being able to get things done in the senate. I disagree. Yeah, his image is tainted. Sure he has an uphill battle to regain the respect of the world. But no matter what tawdry details of his sex life you may know, he's still Eliot friggin' Spitzer, a force to be reckoned with. And the school-yard style teasing in the senate would die down quickly as the steamroller reminded his colleagues why he gets things done.

It can probably be said that a senators effectiveness is directly proportional to how well his or her name resonates in the state's he or she doesn't represent. If I can't remember Gillibrand, what are the odds that anyone from Kansas can?

Yes, electing Spitzer would officially make us the laughingstock of the country temporarily. It's not something we want. But when the laughing dies down and Spitzer gets to work, the new one-two punch of Spitzer and Schumer would be exactly what we need.