I find the Larry Craig commentary out in the blogosphere disquieting today. Conservative websites usually given to sober analysis are permeated with crude humor while liberals cheer with glee about another conservative brought down by personal foibles.Then Mitt Romney vilifies his former supporter, comparing him to Mark Foley and Bill Clinton. I find the whole episode sad and another in the “what could he possibly have been thinking” chronicles but hardly grounds for cruel and sophomoric humor or a double dose of schadenfreude. As for Romney, I fully appreciate he has the unenviable task of disassociating himself from someone whose behavior is utterly repugnant to the social conservatives he is courting. (And yes he is likely nervous that some will criticize him for having signed up Craig, who was certainly the subject of many a rumor before now, to tout his social conservative bona fides.) However, the analogy to Mark Foley and Bill Clinton seems wrong and opportunistic. Yes, in the most generic sense Craig, Foley and Clinton all disappointed their families and constituents, but the similarities stop there. Foley’s actions preying on minors are in a legal and moral class of their own. Clinton’s great wrong was lying under oath, not illegally prowling a men’s room. For GOP presidential hopefuls not everything should be about the Clintons and not every failing by a supporter should be used as a springboard to garnish political brownie points in the “I’m holier than the Washington crowd” contest. No one looks particularly virtuous today.