Editorial: Gay sex, no way; prostitutes, no problem

2 Sep 2007 // Ordinary mortals will have trouble grasping the nuances of the Republican ethical code in the U.S. Senate.

Trolling public restrooms in search of gay sex is definitely beyond the pale. Thus the GOP leadership will not touch Larry Craig of Idaho with a 10-foot pole.

Meanwhile, it is evidently jake for a member of the world's greatest deliberative body to enjoy the services of the world's oldest profession. His colleagues are not inclined to make a pariah out of our own David Vitter.

Whereas Craig has been stripped of his committee assignments, it is business as usual for Vitter. Craig is under strong pressure to resign his Senate seat, but Vitter remains secure.

The Senate Ethics Committee has been asked to consider the transgressions of both Vitter and Craig, but there is a crucial difference. Craig's colleagues want the committee to discipline him, but the request in Vitter's case comes from an outside watchdog group with the somewhat prissy title of "Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics."

The committee, pretty tame at the best of times, may not have much difficulty finding a pretext to leave Vitter alone. Since Vitter was in the House when phone records show he was doing business with the D.C. madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the committee could easily conclude it lacks jurisdiction.

Almost two months after Vitter's whoring came to light, it is clear he has been forgiven, at least on Capitol Hill. Craig, however, is a political goner. We can only guess why Vitter escaped a similar fate. The Senate moralists must deal in the subtlest of distinctions.

Craig pleaded guilty after giving the come-on to the man in the next stall only to find he was an undercover cop. It is true that Vitter has no criminal record, but that's a mere technicality. The "serious sin" which he admitted committing in Washington was also a crime, but occurred too long ago for a charge to be brought.

Vitter has denied allegations from Canal Street madam Jeannette Maier that he sinned at her joint too, although that would have been even longer ago. Maier continues to insist that she remembers Vitter appearing at her brothel, and says he used to call her "Gidget." We may never know who is telling the truth, but it makes little difference how often or where Vitter sinned.

What we do know for certain is that he and Craig each broke the law. Neither committed a hanging offense, but neither brought any credit to the U.S. Senate either.

Which is the bigger hypocrite is also a question that would drive a sophist to despair. Craig has been one of the Senate's most reliable gay bashers, while Vitter has developed a prim and proper style worthy of a bishop. At least we won't have to listen to him preaching family values again any time soon.

Morally, there may be no discernible difference between Craig and Vitter, although it figures that other senators might be more sympathetic to the whoremonger than the men's room wolf.

It is likely that more members of the U.S. Senate have paid hookers than have experienced gay encounters at airports. Republicans in particular might find it easier to forgive lapses of the heterosexual variety.

But only politics can explain why Craig and Vitter have met such different fates. If Craig were to seek re-election next year, he would almost certainly lose and maybe to a Democrat.

Were Craig to heed pleas for his resignation now, Idaho Gov. Butch Otter would name a replacement. Otter is a Republican.

But Gov. Kathleen Blanco is not. Besides, Vitter has three years left on his term, time enough for voters to forget while he takes full advantage of Washington 's selective ethics.