Back in June, as a brand new blogger, I posted on Eliot Spitzer and conveyed my own disapproval of the self-seeking, ethically-challenged New York State Attorney General rather bluntly.

Columnist John Podhoretz’ opinion of the man is apparently not all that different from my own, and he adds some good background, to boot.

Here’s what the Times editorial endorsing him said in 1998: “Spitzer has misled the public about how his father’s wealth was used to support about $9 million in loans that financed his campaigns in 1994 and 1998. His conduct may not be illegal, but it was clearly designed to circumvent laws that would have limited his father’s direct contributions to the campaign. In normal circumstances, Mr. Spitzer’s evasions would have made it impossible to endorse him for the state’s top legal position.”

Pretty extraordinary, don’t you think, in light of Spitzer’s shameless pose as a heroic Mr. Clean, throwing the moneychangers out of the Wall Street temple?

Read on.