Sex or Money--Which More Corrupting?

Here we go again. Another talented, high-profile, reform-minded politician--this time Governor Elliot Spitzer of New York--gets himself caught in his own pants zipper.

Upsetting? You bet. One, for how willingly a brilliant, powerful, anti-corruption reformer risks everything in order to have intense, fleeting, personally and professionallly costly sexual encounters; and two, for how deeply motivated his rivals are to decry sex, claim hypocrisy and defeat another successful Big Enemy of Big Corporations. (See earlier blog on "The Appeal" by John Grisham.)

Come on, people. The motive behind going after Spitzer has to do with money, not sex. The party of Big Business will NOT permit a populist business reformer to go without being shamed and disgraced in his personal life. Is it because they see sex as a more corrupting political influence than money? No. It's because they see sex as the quickest liability of an anti-profiteering, anti-Big Business, pro-regulatory reformer--especially one who's a Big Democrat.

Likewise, the Party of The People sees the purposeful curtailing of public services and the reckless amassing of staggering profits as the likeliest liabilty of a tax-hating, anti-government-services zealot--especially if he or she IS or is favored by Big Republicans.

In point, both sides are vulnerable.

So where do YOU fall? Wherever it is, just make sure no one from the government is reading your blogs and emails or listening in on wiretaps!