Talk:Eliot Spitzer/Archive 1

message: Removed fact tag on section "Work as attorney general" with regard to the broad powers of subpoena the NY AG has.  As can be seen here http://www.floridabar.org/tfb/TFBConsum.nsf/0/b121300d356fab5e85256b2f006c60e1?OpenDocument a subpoena is almost only ever issued by a judge.  For the AG to be able to subpoena people is indeed a power above and beyond most.  The law empowering this is cited in the article already. Huadpe 19:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fact Tag

message: This is very confusing about the order of Elliot Spitzer as the 54th or the 58th Governor of New York. On the list of New York Goverenors wikipedia page it lists Malcolm Wilson as its governor from 1973-1974 (Most likely when Nelson Rockefeller taken the VP in the Gerald Ford adminstration.) If Spitzer is the 54th Governor of New York,someone has note this and correct the order of the governors Jbc2k052 19:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re:54th or 58th

message: Which is it?
*According to the Governor's website, he is the 54th: http://ny.gov/governor/index.htmlAlso this page indicates that Pataki was the 53rd: http://ny.gov/governor/nygovs/index.html
Souldrifter 21:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 54th or 58th

message: I gave Spitzer in the win in this article because it doesn't matter. Bona Fides 19:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI debate win 

message: The people who select a party's nominees at a national convention are called 'delegates'.  Those who cast the actual votes that determine the outcome of the presidential election are called 'electors'.  In either case, they do not cast 'the' vote but rather 'a' vote; no state has just a single vote in the national conventions or the Electoral College, least of all a huge state like New York.  I would fix this if I knew which was meant; for all I know Spitzer was both an elector and a delegate; he would be eligible to be both, as he is not a federal official.  Most high-profile office holders, particularly Democrats, are delegates to their party's national conventions.
Regardless of what one thinks of his role in the tobacco settlement (he has only been involved at the very end, so perhaps this goes well unmentioned in the article), his role in the stock market fraud and abuse investigations has been great for every small investor.  If he succeeds in becoming governor of New York, it seems to me very highly likely that he will eventually become interested in being the Democratic nominee for President (in fact many suggest that this is his long-term ambition).  He has probably done more to advance the transparency of the capitalist process than anyone else in recent decades; ironically, if GWB is successful in getting a majority of the people to see this as an ownership society and themselves as capitalists, he may well have set up an excellent national candidate for the other national party in the relatively-near future.
Rlquall 18:24, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Still want to see the delegate/elector thing hashed out.  Is the intent that he was the one to say, "Madame Chairperson, the great state of New York, the Empire State, casts its 223 vote for the next President of the United States, Al Gore," or something to that effect?  That would make him the "delegation chair" (or at least the "acting delegation chair"), not the "elector", which is a separate thing at a separate time.  Rlquall 02:52, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I read the article and noticed the same point.  Coming here to see whether it had been addressed, I find that it was raised more than a month ago, to no avail.  Therefore, I've removed the sentence.  Neither convention delegate nor presidential elector is a particularly important position these days, when no real deliberation is called for.  Even if we had all the facts, I'd be hard pressed to see why the point(s) would merit inclusion in the article. JamesMLane 23:13, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Elector" or "Delegate"? 

message: Should this be retitled "higher aspirations" or "higher political aspirations"?  He's already no doubt "political"; he holds an elected statewide office.  Rlquall 04:45, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Political aspirations" 

message: I've removed the following paragraph by  Nobs01 for the second time:
"According to USA Today and the Washington Post, a witchhunt brought against brokers in the Mutual Fund industry, which has already cost the industry $3 billion, the only person ever charged was exonerated by a jury on June 10, 2005. "
I removed it because of the following:
* Violates NPOV: Uses blatantly loaded language ("witch-hunt") and slanting the facts (states "cost the industry $3 billion" without noting that this is restitution to mutual fund shareholders).
* Is factually incorrect: Nobs01 states that "the only person ever charged was exonerated by a jury." That is just factually wrong, according to Nobs01's own source (a Washington Post article). That article says the following, and I quote verbatim - "The probe yielded six guilty pleas" This means that not one, but seven brokers were charged with crimes. Six plead guilty right off the bat. One (Sihpol) decided to roll the dice on a trial, and was found not guilty. End of story.
I am perfectly willing to let the critics post criticism of Spitzer regarding the Mutual Fund industry investigations/prosecutions go, but not on purely partisan emotional grounds, nor on factually incorrect ones. --Daniel 05:42, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
 :I second the statement of Daniel, though I view criticisms of his as unjust.
--jonasaurus 18:59, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverting "Criticism of Spitzer"

message: "Spitzer's use of his family wealth was considered a key part of his electoral success, a fact for which he faced criticism."
I reworded this sentence somewhat, but I still don't like it.  Considered by who?  Criticism from who?  We should either say straight-out that his family wealth was part of his electoral success, and note who criticized him of it; or should indicate who "considered" it. Note that I'm not really questioning the claims here (which I don't know much about), and I'm sure sources can be found; I just don't like how it sounds right now. It seems to run afoul of Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_terms. I changed the first sentence in the following paragraph (removing "has been viewed as", since the article seems to show that he has stepped it up) for the same reason. Aquillion 01:55, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Considered

message: "During the 2004 Presidential election, Spitzer was reportedly a top choice to be attorney general in a possible John Kerry adminstration."
"Reportedly" in whose eyes? Is there a reference that can back this up?--RattBoy 02:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Reportedly"

message: The article should mention his campaign against spyware companies... I would write a section myself, but i don't know quite enough about it... --Wulf 05:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spyware 

message: Does anyone else here agree that the "Campaign for Governor of New York" section is too long here, particularly given that there already is a separate article called New York gubernatorial election, 2006?  I'd like to see someone take a whack at it here, cutting most of it, and moving any info that is not already in the New York gubernatorial election, 2006 article there.  Thoughts? -- Sholom 19:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Campaign for Governor of New York 

message: The ability of the Attorney General's office to obtain and publicize embarrassing or incriminating internal documents carries with it the possibility that a defendant's reputation may be damaged, although this may be little different from the power of any prosecutor. This has been demonstrated in Spitzer's investigations of public corporations, in which the issuance of subpoenas have been enough to drive down stock prices of the corporation in question. Spitzer investigations have led corporations facing civil action to choose to settle, and suspects in criminal investigations to seek plea bargains. Supporters have hailed Spitzer's prosecutions of white collar crimes, crimes that threaten investor confidence: critics maintain that Spitzer engages in legal blackmail that damages the economy, while benefiting his political ambitions. Others have held that Spitzer's active pursuit of white collar crime reflects an efficient use of his powers to diminish the well hidden and often well protected illegal activities of corporations and their executives.
I took this out. Completely unsourced and I think its not a npov paragraph. Doesnt really matter. There are no citations, its gone. Disagreement?
--Good call.--Rich 22:39, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  nnpov/Unsourced 

message: Help... can someone edit the article and talk page to prevent the oiutput from being too wide? Bona Fides 14:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What browser & OS are you using? Is the problem only with this particular article? --MichaelZimmer (talk) 14:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is worse on the Talk Page Bona Fides 14:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just did a fix on the Talk page - any better? --MichaelZimmer (talk) 14:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! :) Bona Fides 17:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too wide on browser 

message: Some people believe that Spitzer is widely perceived as a vindictive bully who even mainstream pundits fear would tear the state political arena apart. Joseph Dobrian, writing in Serf City (www.SerfCity.US), wrote a widely-read commentary titled "We Don't Need a Bully in Albany", which featured a cartoon of a Spitzer campaign button proclaiming, "Give Me Your Lunch Money".  	 
- 		 
Other people believe that Spitzer is a man of character and principle, and has proven that he isn't afraid to take on Big Business.
Thanks. I wrote the second part of that yesterday to counter the point that I thought was biased.
 
And This:
Spitzer is ignoring debate challenges from the third party candidates, such as the Libertarian Party's John Clifton (www.ElectClifton.org)
Unsourced, negative towards living person, pushing candidate, advertising
'''
Any objections?'''
Sig added Jasper23 00:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed this NNPOV bit from the article 

message: Any idea as to their birth years? Or must we keep updating their ages for the rest of their lives? Biruitorul 06:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Daughters

message: Does anyone know why the picture shows Spitzer in the Press Room of the State Department? Did he work for the State Department? I skimmed the article and didn't see anything. Can't get get a better pic? --Daysleeper47 16:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Although he was courted by the GOP, and can be seen as right of centre, I think his $20,000 donation to the DCCC in the elction season discounts him from being described as a 'Republican businessmen', as he has traditionalzly split his support among the two paties. The term suggests that he made a big exception and endorsed Spitzer- not true. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 158.143.162.166 (talk) 02:29, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Republican Trump? 

message: I removed the section calling Spitzer's referring to himself as a "steamroller" a threat. The idea that a suggestion of political power and popular support, stated in relative private -- though I would maintain it could have been part of his inaugural address, with obvious rewording -- is worth describing as a threat is ludicrous. This is so oft-used a phraseology as to be a cliche, but the presentation as it existed suggested an author who thought Spitzer intended to physically crush his opponents. Czrisher 15:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake "Threat" 

message: This article needs a short Bio section. Where and when did he go to high school? College? (Yeah, I know it was Princeton–see above–but when?) Law school? When did he marry? What are his daughters' and parents' names? How long was he in private practice, with whom, doing what???--HughGRex 10:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography / personal life 

message: This section has been tagged since 17 Dec 2006 (this edit) by Kevinrbing, who at the time posted a cryptic question on the Talk Page {this edit). The question appears irrelevant to the section in question–if not irrelevant then, it is now–and thus I'm removing the tag. If anyone believes that the tag should be restored, please discuss your criticism of the section here.--HughGRex 10:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Tag on Campaign for Governor of New York section 

message: I haven't looked at all of the election results but the 2006 general election results are clearly incorrect.  chances are they were taken from the initial news reports which cited unofficial tallies of  the votes.  the certified election results are available at the NYS board of elections website at www.elections.state.ny.us.  there are also no citations, but this has already been noted.
That section also notes that Faso ran on the conservative line in addition to the republican but does not note that spritzer ran on three lines himself (Working Families, Independence and Democratic).  
It should be noted by the updater (for purposes of accurately tallying the votes cast, not necessarily noted in the article itself) that NYS allows "cross endorsing" so the votes you receive on each party line are added together.
This is my first attempt to update a wiki page and am worried that I'll mess things up.  That is why I didn't make the changes myself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Santoshalper (talk • contribs) 15:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  election results 

message: I don't know what the policy normally is for newspaper quotes, but using two NY Post quotes in the Governor-- Reform section of the article would seem to lend an imbalanced perspective, especially considering the hard (some say inappropriate) right-leaning slant of that publication. Thoughts? 165.98.213.134 01:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NY Post Quotes 

message: Hi there.
I remove the sentence "To those familiar with history behind Spitzer's meteoric rise to power, the controversy and the e-mails that shed light on it during the investigation will appear particularly ironic (and embarassing for the Spitzer administration) since he had used e-mails against his famous Wall Street targets." from the Eliot Spitzer article because it wasn't cited, and I'm not really familiar with it so the context is unclear as how it relates to controversy. If you could explain it in further detail for novice readers and cite it, I'd appreciate it. Thanks! MrPrada 18:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eliot Spitzer 

message: Substituted at 20:26, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment