In an homage to The New York Times’s news-breaking, flood-the-zone, Spitzer coverage these last few days, CJR offers this compilation of creative ways our grey lady has kept her composure when recounting what, until the emergence of “Client 9”, was the ignominious phrase most associated with Eliot Spitzer’s short time as New York’s governor.
Since Monday:
And they said a governor who, only a year ago, had been quoted calling himself ”the steamroller”—but with a vulgar flourish—had steamrolled his own career. [James Barron, March 11, 2008]
Long predawn runs, fierce basketball games: He did nothing at half-speed. ”Listen, I’m a steamroller,” he told a State Assembly leader in his first days as governor, adding an unprintable adjective into the mix for emphasis. [Michael Powell and Mike McIntire, March 11, 2008]
With a swagger, he warned one assemblyman that he was a ”steamroller,” modifying that word with a street profanity to show that he was not some effete product of the Upper East Side who could be trifled with. [Clyde Haberman, March 11, 2008]
And some classics:
Take Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the professed ”steamroller.” (That’s the sanitized version of his self-description.) [Clyde Haberman, October 9, 2007]
And then there is Mr. Spitzer’s often-quoted warning to a Republican assemblyman that he is a ”steamroller” who will run over opponents. He modified ”steamroller” with an all-too-familiar profanity, apparently to show what a tough guy he can be. [Clyde Haberman, July 10, 2007]
In a previous outburst, now widely publicized, the governor described himself to the Assembly minority leader, James N. Tedisco, as a ”steamroller”—adding a profane adjective for emphasis—who had accomplished more in just a few weeks than any other governor. [Danny Hakim, March 15, 2007]
He referred to himself as a ”steamroller” in a heated conversation with the minority leader of the Assembly, James N. Tedisco, adding an expletive for emphasis, according to an account in The New York Post that neither man has disputed. [Danny Hakim, February 5, 2007]
And how it all began in the Times:
Much of the talk in the Capitol on Wednesday was about remarks Mr. Spitzer reportedly made during a heated telephone conversation with Assemblyman James N. Tedisco, the Republican minority leader, in which the governor was said to have used salty language to compare himself to a ”steamroller.” The remarks were reported by The New York Post. [Michael Cooper, February 1, 2007]
A vulgar flourish? An unprintable adjective? A street profanity? An all-too-familiar profanity? A profane adjective? Salty language?
It is, after all, a fuckin’ family newspaper.

What is it with the pimpy-faced immaturity that drives these wannabe "journalists" to use needless profanity on the webiste of a (formerly) premier academic journal?...
Is it really necessary in McLearyland to debase the profession in such a manner?
What exactly is the point of this ludicrous post, other than letting a juvenile wannabe "watchdog" have a chance to potty-mouth gibberish?
Is anyone (over the age of fourteen)actually impressed by this silly stupidity?
Posted by padikiller
on Wed 12 Mar 2008 at 08:16 PM
What's ludicrous is watching people, newspapers and other media dance around this word. It's origins are lost in the annals of time yet it's perceived power is as unmistakable as it is mystifying. What is it about the word that so offends people? Is it the puritanical American aversion to anything that refers to sex?
There's actually a great documentary on the subject, simply titled FUCK. For it's narrow subject of this one word, it's a greatly entertaining and informative piece.
Posted by AhmNee
on Thu 13 Mar 2008 at 02:04 PM
The simple fact is that the word is offensive to many people. It is profane. There is almost never any reason to use it in civil discourse.
It doesn't matter if its origins are obscured by time, and it doesn't matter if any particular group of people have decided that sexually graphic language should be imposed upon readers to describe non-sexual conduct.
The juveniles here will use any convoluted logic they can find (McLearyland is rife with it) to justify the "in-your-face" use of sexually explicit profanity, but the simple fact of the matter is that these kiddies only seek an adolescent thrill by doing so.
Whatever high potty-mouthing gives these punks.... The result is certainly NOT "professional journalism", but instead nothing more than cheap pornograpy.
Posted by padikiller
on Fri 14 Mar 2008 at 12:34 AM
Just using the word "Fuck" constitutes pornography for you? Wow, you're a cheap date.
Posted by Shii on Tue 23 Mar 2010 at 02:54 PM