The NYT editorial page (along with several left wing blogs) makes a fair point when they wonder why the Republicans are rushing to investigate, strip and disown Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho, while Sen. David Vitter got barely a head nod.

There's the F.B.I.'s inquiry into whether Senator Ted Stevens swung a quid-pro-quo deal for a government contractor who eventually renovated his Alaska home. There's also Senator David Vitter's presence on the client list of a Washington brothel. Mr. Vitter, a social conservative, pleaded guilty to "sin" (heterosexual) and no leadership call ensued for a thorough in-house ethics inquiry. Certainly, no Republican called for the resignation of Mr. Vitter, who comes from Louisiana, which has a Democratic governor who would then replace him. Mr. Craig is from a safe state with a Republican governor.

The answer is not, as the editorial page suggest, the brutal agenda of trumpeting the gay-marriage "agenda." That issue has largely run its course, as the states where the issue is most effective have already passed their marriage amendments. It's not much of a factor anymore.

Nor is it merely the cold political calculation that Vitter would be replaced by a Democrat and Craig, a Republican. That that is part of it I won't deny. Mitt Romney doesn't care about that, at least not primarily, and he was one of the first to scramble.

But the far larger reason for the scramble on Craig is all about 2006 and Mark Foley. Foley took himself out of the game very quick, but does anyone remember what the Democrat party mantra was last October? It was, "you should have known, you should have done something."

The response to Craig is perfectly proportionate to the ability of Democrats to use Craig as a hammer to beat the rest of the Republicans for their perceived sin and corruption. Sadly, no one gets excited about garden variety corruption in Alaska (in Ted Stevens case) or using expensive hookers (in Vitter's). But anonymous sex in a public restroom has that yick factor, because we all use public restrooms. So it's a whole different matter.

It's a strange world we live in where Democrats are coming to the rescue of a damaged Republican, but if they want to whine about his treatment, perhaps they should rewrite the Mark Foley standard to be a little looser, it's not an election year after all.