One Word For Dean Barnett About David Vitter

And that would be wrong.

Not about his condemnation of Senator Vitter slipping it to hookers behind his wife's back; nor about his outrage at the Clintonesque (or Kobe-esque) press conference the Louisiana Republican conducted yesterday. But, rather, about his demand that Vitter resign his Senate seat.

Barnett argues for it this way:

After seeing his press conference yesterday, I have one other word for the Senator: Resign.

Please understand - I’m no moralist and I refuse to play the Elmer Gantry role. I frankly confess that I’m a flawed person with a raft-full of sins in his past, present and likely future. But then again, I’ve never suggested that I should be a United States Senator.

If Vitter can’t show fidelity to his wife and family, can his constituents reasonably hope for better?....

When you enter public life, when you seek to lead millions of people, a modicum of moral authority is necessary. Given his past rhetoric on the subject (and giving Vitter perhaps undue credit for being honest in said rhetoric and not a true Elmer Gantry type), surely he knows that he no longer has the moral standing necessary to lead. He chose another path, and he should at least have the courage to hold himself accountable for the path he’s chosen.

First of all, one does not call on a U.S. senator to quit for committing the sin of adultery and escape the tag of "moralist." Right is right and wrong is wrong. If you say that Vitter should quit because he did something morally wrong, guess what? You've made yourself "Elmer Gantry". I'd be more impressed with Barnett's post if he hadn't tried to duck behind his lame disclaimer.

Second, there's this little matter of the downward trend of GOP numbers at a time when the other party is building up toward forcing a catastrophic defeat in the War Against Islamic Fundamentalism. If the year was 1997 and the GOP was far in the majority in a time when there was little at stake, sure, prepare the tar & feathers. But there's a lot more - an enormous amount more - to lose right now by surrendering a senate seat that Louisiana's Donk governix, Kathleen Blanco, is sure to flip, than by holding our noses, keeping our mouths shut, and laying the groundwork for a primary challenge to Vitter in 2010.

Speaking as one who would have much preferred to see Bill Clinton impeached over pretty much any of his other countless scandals than the one involving pecker tracks on a Gap dress, it seems obvious to me that retaining a vote against defeat in the war is more important than one GOP senator's inability to refrain from "grazing in other pastures". I would be a lot more outraged at conceding more ground to the jihadi-symps without a fight than by what Vitter did. It would take the Republican nickname "the Stupid Party" to a whole new level.

That DB actually argues for this and still claims to be strong on the war reveals an unseriousness that I would heretofore have never suspected, and will not forget.

UPDATE: Will Senator Vitter need a double-cot tonight? Or can he just borrow Uncle Teddy's?