Kat with a K

I guess I like rules.

My feelings on two of the big political stories from the past few weeks keep coming back to one thing: I seem to feel that people should follow rules, or at least be willing to accept the consequences if they knowingly break rules. This seems very clear-cut to me, so I sort of don't understand some of the big controversies going on.

Eliot Spitzer: Regardless of anyone's personal feelings about whether prostitution should be legal, it is completely incontrovertible that hiring a prostitute is, in fact, illegal, and that Spitzer knew this, and did it anyway. Some are arguing that it's a "victimless crime;" some say the victims are Spitzer's family, the people of New York, etc. - but I don't see why that matters. Spitzer knowingly broke laws and should be held accountable. On the other hand, I also don't think he should be punished more than others might be, just because he has made a career of battling crime and corruption. It makes it a better story, sure, but it doesn't actually matter.

Michigan and Florida: Why all the angst? There were rules. The Democratic state parties Michigan and Florida agreed to these rules. Then they broke them. Now they don't want the consequences. So? Sure, they thought the DNC wouldn't actually impose the punishments they said they would impose. But isn't that their problem?