Spitzer and Seymour: One fallen Democrat; One fallen Republican

This comment is from a resident of Iowa who has worked with Jim Seymour in the past on issues facing Iowans

At least in the case of Elliot Spitzer, the fallen NY Governor, the Democrats insisted on his resignation. In contrast, despite Seymours sexual perversities, Iowa Republican majority leader, Iverson, believes Seymour can still be an effective leader. Why does Iverson choose to be so cavalier and dismissive about the Seymour situation? This is not solely about a perverse sexual appetite; but about bad judgment, irresponsibility; about lies, purposeful omission, deception and the risk to the party. Seymour was an "official" candidate at the time of the offense; "officially" representing the Republican Party and family values. Yet on the same day in Des Moines he had no moral conflict in submitting his Senatorial candidacy paperwork in the morning and paying for oral sex from a prostitute in the afternoon, killing two birds with one stone. After all he had to go to Des Moines on political business, anyway. Since he chose not to confess his sexual proclivities to the party leaders, he must have felt pretty secure that the word was not going to get out. Why was he so certain that the news would not be leaked to the public as in the case of U.S. Senator Craig? Why wasn't the arrest of a public figure reported in the press?