I understand your comment, heric. But I think that this event, coupled with other similar ones, are signs of a new shift in political power.

Call me cynical, but I imagine that Craig is just the tip of a very huge iceberg that is the scandalous sexual and private behavior of more politicians, past and present, than you could fit into a large football stadium. There is, I believe, a connect between power and power sex.

But up until Clinton's Monica Lewinsky scandal there was always, I'm guessing, a sort of mutually assured destruction (not a gentleman's agreement), that each side would keep the other side's indescresions private -- using it only in the most dire of political circumstances when political arms needed twisting.

But after Clinton, two things happened -- one is that the left/Democrats finally had proof positive that they were bulletproof in matters of sexual scandal. Sure, they might have concluded the same from the Franks or the Studds scandals. But those were different. First, they were Senators and only reflected the tolerance of their own, small constituency's tolerance for sexual scandal. The second thing, however, involves what is the other main reason for the shift...

...the internet now makes the spiking of stories virtually impossible.   So now that every story is national (by virtue of the internet) and we now know that Democrats nationally will tolerate any sexual scandal. There is now no mutually assured destruction anymore.

Hell, the Democrats don't even mind scandal like William Jefferson, so it isn't limited to sexual scandal.

Republicans are going to have to figure out a new way to survive the scandals because the old balance of scandal power is gone.