Silda Spitzer, Same Outfit in Happier Times
Maybe Silda Spitzer viewed standing by her man at today's resignation press conference as an eco-outfit opportunity.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer and his wife Silda Wall Spitzer at Monday's press conference. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer)
The now former first lady of New York wore what looked to be the exact same suit and scarf that she wore in this video on Domino magazine's web site. Though, in the video, in which Mrs. Spitzer gives a tour of the eco-friendly governor's mansion, she looks much, much happier (though not that much more relaxed) than she did today by her husband's side as he explained on national television how he has "begun to atone" after being busted as a client of a high-priced prostitution outfit.
By Mary Ann Akers |
March 12, 2008; 3:28 PM ET
Previous: Sinbad Unloads on Hillary Clinton |
Next: Where Are They Now: Gary Hart
Posted by: sasquetc | March 12, 2008 5:43 PM
The Poor Thing...must have been many sentiments of so many today watching her stand by that scumbag. Isnt it remarkable what super intelligent people can do to themselves and others when they are only concerned with themselves?
I do wish for happier times for this Woman, but suspect she may have to take her own steps towards that becoming a reality.
Posted by: billy buoy | March 12, 2008 5:46 PM
Really? This woman's life has crumbled and you feel the need to make petty comments on her outfit. She has to make some sense of this awful situation to her three teenage daughters while people like you can lob snide remarks from the sidelines. I would hope that if something terrible like this happened to you that members of the press would show a small shred of decency and not critique your choice of outfit on an incredibly humiliating day.
Posted by: olbluis | March 12, 2008 6:56 PM
I don't think that there was anything in the post that was insensitive. I seriously doubt that Mrs. Spitzer has time to read what blogs are saying about her, anyway.
Posted by: CCH | March 13, 2008 3:51 AM
I'd like to understand why these wives are reverting back to a sort of '50's mentality and "bravely" standing by husbands who have totally humiliated and wronged them. I don't understand the psychology that drives them to participate in their errant husbands' humiliation as well. Surely the world would understand if they didn't do this. I think Hillary set this example, actually, but since her there have been Mrs Gov of NJ, Mrs Wide Stance...and others...what is going on here with this atavistic retro protocol? Why don't these men stand there on their own? Truly bizarre behavior.
Posted by: prattleon | March 13, 2008 8:45 AM
And what could possibly be of interest in her wearing the same outfit? Do you give or throw your clothes away after wearing them only once? What an idiotic observation.
Posted by: vibeway | March 13, 2008 12:21 PM
After it is all said and done, I do feel for the "Soon to be Former First Lady" of New York.
Boy oh Boy, her husband is without a doubt a "super" jerk. The one good thing is sooner or later they get their do.
I'll continue to keep her and her daughters in my prayers.
Posted by: Dave | March 13, 2008 1:18 PM
How dare anyone to make a statement what Silda Wall Spitzer wore when her husband gave his resignation speech.Put yourself in her place. No one can pass any judgement on this woman. She is first a brilliant lawyer in her own right and a mother of three teen age daughters. Give her compassion that she stood by the man she married and gave him unconditional love and was also a devoted mother and brought a new level of intellectual class to being the first Lady of New York State. Each first Lady in the past were lovely yet Silda brought a touch like Jackie Kennedy brought to the White House. We shall deeply miss her presence as our first Lady. No one should cast any form of Judgement on this Crown Jewel of a woman first and as the first Lady of New York State. As Mother Theresa once said " to judge a person leaves no room in your heart to love" and I will add respect and forgive such as for her husband. We in American make such personal matters so very public. If this all took place in sophisticated Europe the entire matter would have be in the rear of any newspaper and also forgoten the very next day. The American people get great pleasure to buy newspapers or pundits on television or radio enjoy increasing ratings by destroying other. Shame on you all that dare destroy peoples private matter. Let us all pray that the Spitzer Family can rebound as a lovely supportive family and also that Eliot can sometime in the future continue to share his brilliance with the American public. This all can come about if we can heed what Mother Theresa once said.
Posted by: Dr.George J. Corella | March 13, 2008 1:42 PM
Why is this even a story? It's just more sexism from the Washingtonn Post.
I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack a woman on the worst day of her life, but this really lacks class.
Posted by: livia38 | March 13, 2008 1:58 PM
I can't believe this article was written by a woman. How insensitive.
Posted by: Marie | March 13, 2008 2:35 PM
You obviously have too much time on your hands to know that she is wearing an outfit again. Who cares? Isn't this the freaking Washington Post? Shouldn't you be researching was the new Governor's transition plan is? Or something else actually relevant?
Posted by: Danielle | March 13, 2008 3:44 PM
I agree, with the others; what a totally inane comment to make about Mrs. Spitzer!
Posted by: Jane | March 13, 2008 4:37 PM
The Washington Post needs to fire you. You are pathetic regarding Mrs.Spitzer's attire. What a waste of a column and a salary!
Posted by: Yvonne | March 13, 2008 4:38 PM
it is unfortunate that a spouse must be subject to disgrace being brought to his or her family, through no fault of their own. as a parent , she is faced with the role of being the supporter and guardian to her children.. let get this news media extravaganza over .. the deed has been done the gov resigned.. allow the mother and children to get on with their life, without being under a microscope
Posted by: Mr. S.B | March 13, 2008 4:38 PM
She wore a pantsuit standing next to him while resigning and a suit with a skirt in the video of her touring of the mansion showing all their greening efforts.
Posted by: Novaqt | March 13, 2008 4:52 PM
You ought to be ashamed of yourself to post this nonsense about her outfit she wore standing next to her disgraced husband. Clearly, she wore a black suit to demonstrate her husband's fall from grace and the dispicable, arrogant, detached, unfeeling resignation speech. Silda sure was blindsided by his humiliation he has put herself and his family through. He must have read the book Blind Ambition. I hope she comes to her senses and leaves him. Its one thing to forgive one indiscretion, but 10 years. What a slap in the face.
Posted by: Novaqt | March 13, 2008 5:01 PM
I am shocked at what journalism has come to, and I am a journalist. Between this LAME column and Cindy Adams, "so what?" editorial in the "Post" where she compares an affair to take out, I am ashamed to say I am part of this profession. Yellow journalism? No. Stupid journalism? Yes.
Posted by: K.G.S. | March 13, 2008 6:36 PM
BREAKING NEWS!
Silda Spitzer ...
... wears the same clothes twice! We repeat: Eliot Spitzer's wife does not throw away her clothes wearing them once, but in fact SAVES them for FUTURE use!
She must be so humiliated.
No, wait. Mary Ann Akers - she's the one who should be humiliated.
Posted by: Jason | March 14, 2008 3:54 AM
Fire Mary Ann Akers ! Period.
Posted by: Ann | March 14, 2008 2:11 PM
Clearly, Silda Wall Spitzer has more class in her little finger than May Ann Akers will ever possess. The Post should be embarrassed that its masthead is being used to publish worthless, insensitive drivel of this nature.
Posted by: Matt | March 14, 2008 2:27 PM
How catty! Who CARES?
Posted by: Pam | March 14, 2008 5:43 PM
Are You Guys Nuts.
Why make the poor lady involved.
Find a real Job.
Posted by: Johnni | March 14, 2008 7:10 PM
If Eliot had a wisp of class he would never have asked her to stand there with him for the additional humiliation. Why she didn't let him twist in the wind, alone, is still puzzling.
Good riddance.
Posted by: pmc617 | March 17, 2008 10:42 AM
This snark column was probably specifically written to rile up the masses to blog here. Don't fall for it.
Posted by: Katherine | March 17, 2008 12:10 PM
2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll
New Vids! and New Polls Posted Weekly!
Give Us Ideas For Polls!
Posted by: votenic | March 17, 2008 10:58 PM
WHO APPROVED THIS STORY? S/HE SHOULD BE FIRED ALONG WITH THE WRITER.
Posted by: WHO'S THE BOSS? | March 28, 2008 11:21 PM
Post a Comment
We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.
User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.











skank