Leave Silda Wall Spitzer Alone!
As if it isn’t bad enough for Eliot Spitzer’s wife that the whole country knows her husband cheated on her with high-paid prostitutes, the L.A. Times piles on with a front-page article about whether she was right to appear on stage with him when he made his speech.
First of all, I think it’s incredibly presumptuous for people to declare how they would act in that situation. Hardly anyone in the country, except Hillary Clinton, has been in such a public and awful situation. She has been married to the man for twenty-one years. What right does anyone have to judge her? How can anyone know they would behave? They have three teenaged daughters. Maybe she doesn’t want them to have to deal with the whole country talking about why she wasn’t at the podium with their dad, or why she didn’t hold their dad’s hand.
The kicker comes at the end of the article, which quotes a feminist claiming that Spitzer’s wife is really upset because she gave up her career:
Feminist writer Linda R. Hirshman has written harshly about “opt-out women,” her term for well-educated, successful professionals who quit jobs to advance their husbands’ careers. To her, that’s a risky and degrading choice.
“These women always look like deer caught in the headlights,” Hirshman said. “They were dependent on men to be their booster rockets, and now you see them starting on a downward trajectory.”
Just look, she said, at the pain on Silda Wall Spitzer’s face.
Yeah, just look at the pain on her face. The whole country knows her husband of 21 years cheated on her. Maybe the pain on her face has something to do with that, feminist writer Linda R. Hirshman, and not about your pet theories.
Boy, the L.A. Times must really be desperate to sell papers. They should be ashamed of themselves for publishing this story, on the front page no less.
Screengrab under the fold.
[UPDATE: Just so there’s no confusion: the woman pictured in this screenshot is not Ms. Spitzer.]
Unfortunately for Linda Hirschman, she neglected to read this from the NY Post.
“She quit her high-powered corporate-law job to stay home with their three kids and to run a nonprofit she started to help children learn about philanthropy.
Still, Silda managed to keep her own identity.
She never gave up her love of NASCAR racing, even after marrying her patrician hubby. In fact, her family eventually convinced him to become interested in the sport, too. “
Perhaps Hirschman and other arrogant cynics like her have never had the marvelous privilege of ‘opting-out’. Many smart women have discovered that the ‘downward trajectory’ was one of the best journeys of their lives. And I’ll bet more than ever, Mrs. Spitzer has not one moment of regret for having been able to be there for her daughters. Especially now.
Dana (213179) — 3/12/2008 @ 9:33 pmAnd I’ll bet more than ever, Mrs. Spitzer has not one moment of regret for having been able to be there for her daughters. Especially now.
Children? What are they? Parasites, live Teratomas, enslavers of women?
Seriously, the only reason I ever got married was to have children. “No regrets” would be the largest understatement ever.
Isn’t it about time for the LAT to buy a clue?
J. Peden (68e68c) — 3/12/2008 @ 9:57 pmpatterico, you’re shooting the messenger.
ms. spitzer was a mergers and acquisitions lawyer at skadden arps before she married “client 9”. that’s a pretty sharky line of work. predators sniff out companies that are bleeding money into the water and gobble them. i bet she can take care of herself just fine.
the times isn’t responsible for her humiliation, all responsibility for that rests with client 9. he could have told her “no honey, i got into this by myself, i’ll handle it by myself” but instead, he dragooned her into coming along. if she’s like maria shriver, the first lady of california, she has her own staff, some of whom are paid out of state dollars. when you spend money on someone, you get to critique their performance, whether it’s a hooker or a first lady. she was also playing a role of calculated public influence; garnering sympathy, diffusing scorn, registering a tacit endorsement and (on monday anyway) perhaps trying to save her husband’s job. there’s been a parade of political wives recently; senator vitter’s wife had to listen to him say “god has forgiven me.” senator craig’s wife had to deny that she was married to a restroom perv, and governor mcgreevey’s wife had to listen to “i am a gay american.” i, too, wonder what makes them stand up there so stoically, and appreciate any journalistic insights.
you have a knight complex, naturally you want to don your armor, tie her kerchief to your lance and ride all the way to new york to protect her. gallantry isn’t a bad thing, but it might not be helpful to ms. spitzer, or to women generally, in this context. i have a knight complex too once in awhile, but it takes a lot to get me up on my horse these days.
assistant devil's advocate (c479e0) — 3/12/2008 @ 10:17 pmada – Today I thought she was staring daggers at Eliot as if thinking, you deserve every bit of this you asshole, you brought it on yourself, and I want to see you bend over and take it Mr. Steamroller you fucking putz. I saw no support at all really from Monday or today. You guys are dreaming.
daleyrocks (906622) — 3/12/2008 @ 10:56 pmADA: predators sniff out companies that are bleeding money into the water and gobble them.
And then make them profitable, saving jobs and improving our economy.
Why do you hate America so much?
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 3/12/2008 @ 11:23 pmsaving jobs and improving our economy.
heh. first thing that happens after a merger, all the redundant people get axed. when you hear an analyst talk about “synergy”, it means “how many people they can fire and still do the job of the two combining companies”. other jobs are offshored to mumbai and bangalore. if you pay closer attention, eventually i’ll let you take your dunce cap off.
assistant devil's advocate (c479e0) — 3/12/2008 @ 11:40 pmSilda doesn’t have the cutest mug (what aging woman does?) but it’s an exceptionally low blow for the LAT editors to remark on it with that headline.
Yeah, she has a “troubling” face. She’s an old lady. If someone made fun of my Mom that way, I’d pop them one in the face.
It shows just how much animus they have towards traditional gender roles. Even though she’s hardly a stay-home-and-bake-cookies type, they’re making her out as some kind of Betty Homemaker who must be destroyed for feminism’s sake. It’s not sexist when the LAT does it, though, because they’re liberals.
How would the nutroots react if the WSJ had said that Geraldine Ferraro put a “troubling face” on Clinton’s difficulty in attracting black voters?
Or that Hillary Clinton put a “troubling face” on the Dems’ efforts to pull out of Iraq?
Or that Madeline Albright put a “troubling face” on Democratic efforts to negotiate with Kim Jong-Il?
Or that Barbara Boxer put a “troubling face” on Democrats’ support for abortion?
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 3/12/2008 @ 11:43 pmI sincerely regret that my above remarks might be interpreted as stating that all women lose their looks as they age. I didn’t mean to say that, I don’t think it’s true, and I didn’t mean to be an insensitive prick. I’m sorry. I know this is a sore spot for women (that’s why I got so dern angry) and I should have been more careful in how I phrased my remarks.
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 3/12/2008 @ 11:57 pmsilda doesn’t have the cutest mug (what aging woman does?)
this may be the single least gallant, as well as one of the dumbest comments i’ve ever seen on this blog. silda looks just fine, particularly when compared to your other examples. you must be very young, gay, or both.
assistant devil's advocate (c479e0) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:13 amThey’re attacking Silda but I think it’s really aimed at Hillary. How much damage can she do to the Dem party before the gloves really come off? I suppose we’re about to find out.
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:14 amI don’t think that picture goes with the article in question.
Adriane (09d132) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:48 am“heh. first thing that happens after a merger, all the redundant people get axed. when you hear an analyst talk about “synergy”, it means “how many people they can fire and still do the job of the two combining companies”. other jobs are offshored to mumbai and bangalore. if you pay closer attention, eventually i’ll let you take your dunce cap off.”
If the company is “bleeding money into the water” it seems like there are only two choices; continue to lose money until the company is bankrupt and lose all the jobs, or restructure, make the company more efficient and save most of the jobs. It sounds like a simple decision to me. The mergers and acquisition people shouldn’t be pilloried when they sacrifice some jobs to save many more just because their motive is to turn a profit for themselves.
Mike S (d3f5fd) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:31 am“all the redundant people get axed”
Yeah and they always fire the best ones, the brightest, best educated and hardest working. Who else would stupid capitalists fire?
I also agree it’s much worse to fire redundant workers than all of them, which is what is going to happen if you let the company continue to bleed and go broke.
What do you think is going to happen if a bleeding company doesn’t get “gobbled”? The fairy Hillary will come and kiss it better?
BlacquesJacquesShellacques (324683) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:34 amIf it is true that the missus really tried to discourage Steamroller from resigning, then she loses a lot of my sympathy. CLUE: the people of NY don’t NEED you Spitzer’s as much as you might suppose, Silda. I suppose she might have been thinking as a lawyer though – I hear that is hard to deprogram (jk)
rhodeymark (e86321) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:43 amDaryl Herbert:
No offense to the lady who is pictured in the screenshot above, but that is not Ms. Spitzer. I’m wondering if you were unaware of that.
Not that it has much to do with the price of tea in Timbuktu, but Ms. Spitzer is actually very pretty.
Patterico (4bda0b) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:46 amBTW – your screengrab cut off the most important comments of all – Greg Packer’s.
rhodeymark (6797b5) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:49 amI have put in a small update to the post in case anyone else was confused about that.
Patterico (4bda0b) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:49 amWell, when it’s a matter of firing 50 to save everyone else’s job, or letting 300 people end up out of work because the business shut down, I suppose I can see how horrible it would be to save 250 jobs…
We ask again, why do you hate america so much?
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:53 am*catscalls over the soon-to-be-ex-Mrs Spitzer*
Man. She is damned good looking…
If she would like to inflict some “ha, showed you” on Mr Spitzer, I can think of few better than I, the younger, better looking Conservative. 🙂
I would make that sacrifice for her. Because I’m a giver…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 3/13/2008 @ 5:57 amYes, she is an attractive, classy lady. But this is just one of countless instances where somebody has steak at home and goes to McDonald’s for a Big Mac.
nk (8a8387) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:04 amyou have a knight complex, naturally you want to don your armor, tie her kerchief to your lance and ride all the way to new york to protect her.
I just think I lack the judgmental gene on this sort of thing.
You do realize the post title is a takeoff on that “Leave Britney Spears alone!” guy, right?
Patterico (4bda0b) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:07 amPatterico, I want to see your video for this, now…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:13 amI felt very sorry for Mrs Spitzer until I read somewhere she was his confidant on all the AG stuff he pulled.After 21 yrs of marriage she should have a pretty good idea about the true nature of Mr. Spitzer.If she condone all his other ‘steamrolling’ and is only upset when it hits close to home I don’t have near the sympathy for her I originally did
mymy (2c4553) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:19 amBy the way, has anyone noticed that the waters down the activity of Gov. Spitzer? It seems like every radio headline sounded like this:
“The governor of New York has been linked to a prostitution ring.”
If he was a Repubican it would have sounded more like:
“New York’s top Republican spends tens of thousands of dollars on high-class hookers.”
Spitzer has been called a corporate reformer by the media. Not bad.
Alta Bob (13384e) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:20 amI don’t think I’d need any persuasion to hit Silda like a freight train. Logging my first insensitive, misogynist, but really supportive comment of the day.
daleyrocks (906622) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:23 amThat’s for sure. I can’t help but think of Hugh Grant’s illicit liaison when he was living with Elizabeth Hurley.
Steverino (e00589) — 3/13/2008 @ 6:56 amBessie Coleman was the first black woman to get an airplane pilot’s license. She was also an attractive, intelligent woman and a powerful politician in Chicago (Alderman). Her husband was the first death penalty conviction in Illinois, after reinstatement of the death penalty, for serial rapes that culminated in the murder of one of his victims.
There has to be some truth to the joke that men have enough blood to either supply their brains or their penises but not both at the same time.
nk (8a8387) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:10 amI dont know about Silda, but I reserve my sympathy for Spitzer’s three young daughters.
Bar Sinister (3b1790) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:12 amOr “Show me the most attractive woman in the world, and I’ll show you the guy who’s tired of banging her”…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:13 amBy the way, after looking at Silda’s picture and Kristen’s picture, it’s no contest in my mind. Silda’s beautiful; Kristen is a cheap little skank.
Steverino (e00589) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:21 amAmen, Steverino… Amen…
If I wanted a cheap skank, I could get one with 20 bucks at a college bar. Just get one of teh barsluts drunk.
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:25 amScott… you really seem to go out of your way to lower the bar on what passes for decent discussion amongst intelligent people.
Not always, but sometimes. Now, for instance.
Leviticus (1daf74) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:42 amWell, at least Scott stays on point, and doesn’t wander far afield on social-economic theory, mixed with a heavy layer of Nanny-Statism.
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:56 amI’m not really sure who that’s directed at…
Leviticus (1daf74) — 3/13/2008 @ 8:20 am#21. No, I thought it was more of a “LA Times mucks up yet again” post.
Adriane (09d132) — 3/13/2008 @ 8:42 amI’m sorry,I must havre misread you Patrick.Did you use the terms LAT”s and “ashamed” in the same sentence.I guess it’s time to take my cousin’s offer on the Lasik
nearsightedly yours,Corwin
corwin (07884c) — 3/13/2008 @ 8:42 amI have sympathy for their daughters, for whom this is all hugely tragic and entirely undeserved.
I don’t second-guess her decision to stand up and be photographed by Spitzer at the Monday and Wednesday press conferences.
But she lost my sympathy when she (by unanimous press reports) urged him not to resign. Maybe she didn’t read the wire-tap excerpts indicating that he was asking these call-girls for sex without condoms. That might or might not have put her at direct risk too, depending on their relationship. But anyone who believes someone with that little judgment, and that deep a self-destructive streak, is fit to be governor of New York is herself badly out of touch with reality.
Beldar (433d17) — 3/13/2008 @ 10:35 amBut you agree that she’s still one good looking woman, correct?
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 3/13/2008 @ 10:38 amBeldar, somehow I do not think that Eliot’s fitness for office was among her concerns with respect to keeping that office.
Just my opinion.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/13/2008 @ 11:04 amRe: Silda encouraging her husband to fight for his office.
My sympathies for Silda. Her whole world came crashing down on her shoulders. Perhaps in her state of shock, she was attempting to hang on to one of the pillars of her identity. Many women assume their husband’s professional identity when they choose to stay at home and raise a family, thus, once his status has imploded, so has hers.
She is no longer a “First Lady”, not in the eyes of society nor in the eyes of her husband.
Ghastly stuff.
Lesley (c36902) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:10 pmI see your point, Beldar (and, by the way, much appreciated your own post yesterday). Being a woman, I tend to hang onto the fact that her notorious support came quite early in the process. Who knows what Spitzer told her, or even his mignons. If, indeed, she was well informed of the entire situation when she encouraged him to fight, then she loses my sympathy, as well. Of that, I doubt we will ever know. But one thing is blantantly obvious to me — The woman standing at his side before the press was anything BUT the vivacious, brilliant-eyed, confident and, yes, very beautiful woman pictured by our kind site host.
God help the man when the state police detail leaves for good and the media is distracted. I’m betting Silda will shake any vestiges of shock and comportment by then and find the tenacity of a malnourished pitt bull, if she hasn’t already.
But my heart goes especially toward the three daughters, and I hope they will be able to put aside what I’m certain is overwhelming humiliation in this mess. And that’s probably the very least of what they’re likely feeling right now.
EHeavenlyGads (f29174) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:30 pm“Perhaps in her state of shock…”
…and maybe thats just it in a nutshell – this is Silda in a state of shock, no more, no less.
And in this state of shock maybe she numbly goes through the motions (standing at the mic w/her husband) as everything around her takes on a surreal tone and she just tries to keep control while forced to ride this emotional rollercoaster knowing she cannot and will not fall apart because there are still 3 young women who are looking to her for strength, direction and comfort. This would be the obvious behavior of any mother attempting to take care of her children while struggling to keep her own bearings.
There is something crass and merciless assuming or even speculating that she is plotting and planning ways to keep the political bennies rolling. IMHO, just getting out of bed and facing her husband, her daughters, and the entire world who knows their most private matters is in itself a Herculean feat of accomplishment.
Dana (b4a26c) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:48 pmThey both had White House ambitions. She urged him not to resign, regardless of what that meant for the people of NY or her family.
I feel sorry for the 3 daughters but view Silda as essentially another Hillary; putting her kids in harm’s way while likely knowing what was going on behind the scenes. Just naked greed.
Vermont Neighbor (c6313b) — 3/13/2008 @ 12:52 pmNot that it has much to do with the price of tea in Timbuktu, but Ms. Spitzer is actually very pretty.
When I wrote the post, the only images I had seen of Silda were low-res photos of her looking very glum at the news conference. She didn’t seem attractive at all. In other photos, she definitely looks better.
Note to political wives: don’t go to the press conference! You can’t win. If you smile and look pretty, people will think you’re taking everything too well.
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 3/13/2008 @ 7:38 pmDear Mr. Patterico,
Naef Basile (d671ab) — 3/14/2008 @ 9:28 amThat was a very sharp observation when you stated that Mrs. Spitzer may not have wanted her daughters to NOT see her standing by their father and holding his hand. That observation may be absolutely hitting the nail right on the head. I am as disgusted as any woman is by what he has done to her and their children, but I knew that the feminine vitriol over her appearance with him
was shortsighted. A woman of this caliber has just shown all American Women that being selfless in the wake of marital betrayal contains issues
which may be 100% about protecting the emotional health of her children. You’re a smart dude, Patterico.