The New York Times broke the Spitzer story. They learned of it on Friday and forced his announcement yesterday. But their editorial board, and their Sulzberger family, love the governor soooo much. They love him, but they are also self-appointed guardians of middle class morality! And honor! So what to do? Write the most ridiculously mealy-mouthed editorial ever? Sure! While every other New York paper howled for Spitzer's head, the Times felt that he probably should maybe resign, or at least that it would be perhaps a bad idea not to resign, or something. That is the argument of the lead editorial of the most influential opinion page of the Upper East Side.
"He betrayed the public, and it is hard to see how he will recover from this mess and go on to lead the reformist agenda on which he was elected to office." They go on to call him arrogant, and stupid, and hubristic, and "sadly, wrong." But they refuse to actually say anything. They're just disappointed! They're so disappointed that should Governor Spitzer decide not to resign he will owe the Times editorial board a very, very good explanation for fucking that hooker before they'll trust him again.
Did Pinch Sulzberger step in to ask that the board not actually call for a resignation? If he was going to throw his weight around, could've he at least have asked that they become the only major media outlet to outright call for him to stay on? That would've at least been interesting!