Trouble with this situation is that he compromised his office.
An Attourney General and Governor should not be buying illegal services from criminals.
He is not the average Joe who is woried about his wife finding out or a play boy celeberty. If they are extorted it is a personal problem.
These mobsters could have used his compulsions to manipulate the law to their advantage.
He didn't pick up a transvestite on the street Like Eddy Murphy or even solicit sex from a stranger in a toilet, he was making himself vulnerable to mobsters.
THAT is his problem.

HuffPost's Pick

The Labor Government in England banned prostitution in the 50's after an official report called "Sitting on a Fortune" which was the answer one interviewee gave as to why she left her good factory job.It was banned on social grounds since the asset depreciates,the price goes down and eventually violence and multiple abused children lead to the intervention of the authorities.Eventually the hooker becomes a burden at an early age with no other skills and no market for the only one she has.This is admittedly a socialist view of the problem but I doubt that the career trajectory of even the highest paid practitioner veers far from the norm.It's not victimless and while I sympathise with Spitzer for trying to can some of the crooks on Wall st. he was contributing to crime.He has suffered enough but I think his many enemies want to dance on his chest.Let him go with the lesson learned,maybe he'll open a ministry.
PS Most of the people he pursued were guilty of far worse crimes than he is now accused of but they only f***ed us metaphorically and that is no crime in America no matter how much they stole from widows and orphans.He was a hero with a zipper problem

In "Hit and Run," Nancy Griffin and Kim Masters's tale of Jon Peters and Peter Guber's dysfunctional, amoral reign at Sony Pictures, a source is quoted on why two alphas like them, who could have had their picks of any starlets in hollywood, turned instead to hookers.
"They weren't paying them to cum, they were paying them to leave."
Prostitutes get paid for their time, and therefore value it as much as any other professional. For a busy man like Eliott Spitzer, burdened by a full schedule and family obligations, that time consciousness is a prostitutes second most desireable attribute.

I don't think it's surprising when we hear of the great variety of people's sexual activity that falls far outside of the marriage bedroom. The surprising thing is that we don't have sex all the time and with every reasonably attractive person we see, strangers and all. In subways, elevators, lunchrooms, wherever.

When you think about it, sex is just straight up pleasure. So why would we deny ourselves the maximum possible pleasure? I know the theory is that the whole idea of marriage was to prevent women from having multiple sex partners because otherwise men wouldn't know which ones were their kids. Or other people think it was just a matter of men "owning" women like they own horses: you're mine, and no one else can use you.

Or maybe it's just some twisted religious issue: the religious leaders tell people we are bad when we do what feels good. That way we all walk around feeling ashamed all the time. Isn't that the whole parable of being thrown out of the garden of eden -- isn't it that people started having sex (the "snake?"). Why did the church people decide sex was bad?

I wish we could just leave it to private resolution. Whatever you work out. Just think, all this sneaking around, shame, suspicion, insanity that we see associated with sex. Wouldn't it be better if we just said work it out with your spouse, reach some agreement, live with it, and it's nobody else's business. Why should someone feel ashamed if they are sexually aroused by being spanked, for example? What harm does it do? Why should society intervene in such private matters? It's almost like there is nothing else in our society that a person can do that is considered quite so "bad" as is having sex. I'm not even sure murder gets as big a headline as does sex. I know war doesn't. George W. Bush can murder One Million Iraqis, but as long as he doesn't have sex with anyone other than his wife it's okay.

Let's see what happens when Bush nukes Iran: will it force the Spitzer issue off the front page? Or not?

Okay, nothing new here. When are women going to grasp that they hold the power in these situations? If you want to sell your soul and/or body for a job by all means go ahead. But if you are truly appalled, laugh at the act while it's happening. Or pull out a magnifying glass and ask what's going on in the petrie dish.

Ah, women, you hold the power and you just...don't...get...it.

"Why did you let him do it?"

Ask yourSELF that question, Ms. Braudy. Just why did you let Michael Douglas masturbate in front of you, then wait all these many years to blog about it......whilst chastizing another woman for her part in coersion? Once, I had a man "whip it out", so to speak, which was not only inappropriate for my boss, but for a date.

I did what both you ladies didn't have the integrity to do.

I LEFT THE ROOM and ceased any further interaction, in business or otherwise. One can only wonder, if you at least even tried to warn your assistant. I'm thinking, not. I'll bet your biggest concern at the time was being slighted. Don't get me wrong, I despise this type of behavior from men. But I also despise women who tacitly condone it, only to later find the courage to vilify it. At this point, it only makes you look complicit and bitter.

Is there any reason, apart from revenge and spite, for putting names to these tales you tell?

This makes sense. Hiring a prostitute, is really about having power over a sexual partner. There is hardly any need to consider the other, as in most human relationships.

Perhaps the easy availability and increased popularity if prostitution fuels the idea, that if wives and girl friends don't put out, in exactly the way their partner chooses, that person is free to go elsewhere. It certainly puts pressure on women to perform in a way that they might not feel comfortable with.

No comments. Hmmm. Is it possible you have stunned even the rambunctious horde of Huffpost readers into silence?