Deja vu?

If Spitzergate is creeping you out, think how Hillary Rodham Clinton must feel. Just when she was supposedly “hitting her stride,” along comes a world-class sex scandal that reminds us of the darkest days of her husband’s administration.

Until L’Affaire Spitzer, Clinton’s campaign had done an impressive job of replacing, in the minds of voters, terms like “cigar” and “stained dress” with terms like “commander in chief.” But New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s misdeeds — and the sight of his wife Silda’s drawn features — remind us painfully of Team Clinton’s past woes and make us wonder just what the First Fella will be up to while President Hillary’s taking those important 3 a.m. phone calls.

Sensibly, Clinton’s campaign lost no time deleting an item on Spitzer’s endorsement from her Web site after he was revealed to have been the client of a prostitution ring. But when asked about Spitzer on Monday, Clinton was equivocal: “I don’t have any comment. . . . I obviously am sending my best wishes and thoughts to the governor and to his family.”

“Obviously”? No! Hillary, it is not obvious why you’re sending “best wishes” to the governor. To his family, sure. But why does a man busted for buying access to women’s bodies merit the “best wishes” of our first serious female presidential candidate?

This gets to why this scandal has the potential to be more than just distracting and uncomfortable for Clinton. Spitzergate — and Hillary’s ambivalent response so far — reminds us that Bill wasn’t the only member of the Clinton family who let women down when he was in the White House.

As Bill’s career became mired in scandal after scandal, it became all too clear that Hillary was willing to tolerate pretty much anything he did. She seemed content to look away while her husband’s hatchet men sliced and diced the reputations of women who accused Bill of sexual harassment.

This week, Hillary’s unwillingness to speak out more strongly about Spitzer’s alleged misdeeds suggests she’s sticking to her old playbook: Look the other way when powerful men behave badly to women and hope none of the muck sticks to you.

Office sex with young interns is bad enough. Sex with prostitutes is a lot worse. The sex trade is part of a complex edifice built on inequality, violence and economic need. Most sex workers turn to prostitution out of economic desperation, not out of choice — and the vast majority of prostitutes are, at one time or another, raped or beaten by “clients.”

When Clinton sent Spitzer her “best wishes,” that’s the nastiness she chose not to mention. But there are some truths we ignore at our peril. Enough with “best wishes.”

Years ago, first lady Hillary Clinton vociferously condemned “the heinous practice of buying and selling women ... like commodities.”

I liked that Hillary Clinton. Could she please come back?

(Brooks is a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center. This essay originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.)