Why Eliot Got Dumped

By all rights, Eliot Spitzer should have gotten a free pass. He is a Liberal Democrat and no one expects a high standard of personal morality (such an archaic word!) from Liberals; the standard is more “do your own thing”. The Liberals set the bar very low after Clinton; the operative phrase is: "as long as it doesn't affect his job performance"
One possible reason for their abandoning him is that he may have evoked their outrage by paying such an exorbitant price for sex, which goes against Liberals' egalitarian instincts. Clinton, on the other hand, got it as a benefit of his office, from the hired help, which is much more in line with Liberal doctrine - just another government entitlement.

Another reason, of course, is that there was an “African American” (and blind, at that!) waiting to take over and make more “history”. What a compelling story! It was one that was sure to set Liberal hearts aflutter.

Spitzer was, naturally, quickly read out of the Liberal fraternity. Instead, the media emphasized his hard personality, arrogance and moralizing tone. All these were plusses when he was the Liberal demagogue, going after corporate malfeasance. Even his prosecution of prostitution (normally a dicey call for a Liberal believer in “do your own thing”) was applauded by the feminist wing of the Liberal establishment; it was characterized more as going after “prostitution rings” (big business!) than self-actuating (even feminist!) “sex workers”. Forgotten were all his social Liberal pronouncement and endeavors: driver licenses for Illegals; advocacy of Gay rights and Gay marriage; etc… etc… Now he was just a control freak and a rich spoilt brat, to boot.

It is easier (for a White male, at least) to lose the coveted Liberal label and establishment embrace than for a sinner to be expelled from a religious community.