Last Modified: Sunday, August 23, 2015 7:05 AM

By Jim Beam/American Press

U.S. Sen. David Vitter’s sexual indiscretions that came to light in 2007 have surfaced for at least the second time in the current gubernatorial campaign. The next question is what part the revelations might play over the next two months before the Oct. 24 primary.

Vitter’s telephone number appeared among those associated with an escort service operated by a woman called the DC Madam. The events occurred while he was a U.S. representative, which was before he was elected to the Senate in 2004.

Acknowledging his involvement at the time, Vitter said, “This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible. Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there — with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way.”

The Republican establishment and his congressional colleagues accepted his apology. Vitter received nearly 88 percent of the vote in the Republican primary in 2010. He defeated Democrat Charlie Melancon in the general election with 56.6 percent of the vote to 37.7 percent for Melancon. There were 12 candidates in that race.

Gumbo PAC, a new political action committee, released a video in May related to Vitter’s ties to the DC madam. The Advocate in a news report noted that the PAC was “launched with the expressed purpose of targeting U.S. Sen. David Vitter’s bid to become the next governor of Louisiana.”

Luke Bolar, Vitter’s campaign spokesman, has always been quick to deflect any negative reports. He blamed the PAC video on retaliation for the senator’s conservative efforts in Congress.

“Sadly, this is more politics as usual from liberal Obama Democrats and their allies…,” Bolar said.

Rolfe McCollister, publisher of the Greater Baton Rouge Business Report, entered the fray last week. He wrote an opinion piece about the indiscretions titled, “David Vitter and the elephant in the room.”

McCollister said he remembered the late-night jokes by TV hosts about former Gov. Edwin W. Edwards in the 1970s, 80s and 90s.

“I remember the disrespect folks had for Louisiana as I traveled to national conventions. We were ‘the joke’ — but it wasn’t funny, and we lost residents and thousands of jobs during that time,” McCollister said.

After quoting Vitter’s 2007 forgiveness remarks, McCollister said, “We are all human and make mistakes and are in need of forgiveness. God can forgive, and so should we. I am sure he (Vitter) felt very lucky to be re-elected to his Senate seat in 2010… But now he is asking the people of Louisiana to again overlook his past and promote him from one of 100 representatives in the U.S. Senate to one of only 50 state CEOs and the ‘face of Louisiana.’ That is a very big ‘ask,’ and everything comes back into play. I believe that would be a bad hire.”

You can be sure Bolar is ready to fire back at McCollister on this one. The publisher has close ties to Gov. Bobby Jindal, who is no fan of Vitter’s. Their relationship surfaced when Robert Mann, a columnist for the Times-Picayune, criticized McCollister.

Louisianavoice.com noted that McCollister had contributed to Jindal’s campaigns, served as chairman of the governor’s transition team, was a director of Jindal’s fund-raising organization and was appointed to the LSU Board of Supervisors by the governor.

Bolar is probably chomping at the bit to respond to McCollister’s column, which the publisher had to know was going to happen.

Members of the media are treading on thin ice when they get personally involved in political events. They should definitely avoid contributing to candidates and serving in any official campaign capacities.

Media credibility may be at an all-time low in this country, and our impartiality is continually being questioned. Those in our profession who ignore that reality cause readers to question all of us on our objectivity.

The sad part of this is that McCollister makes valid points in his column. One, for example, is his statement about family values.

“ … Maybe most important and upsetting to many voters is that he (Vitter) made family values a major campaign issue and used it in the 2004 Senate campaign,” McCollister said. “Those actions are what still make it an issue in this major race for governor. It’s about trust and integrity…”

McCollister added, “Many voters or groups seem to take the position that as long as Vitter agrees with them on key issues and votes their way, they are willing to overlook the past. But, he has proved in the past that he is willing to forego his beliefs for his own edification. This has been true in both his politics and personal life. Will he do it again?”

Clancy Dubos of Gambit magazine said Vitter was wrong if he thought he could run for governor without having to face the scandal again. Dubos said Vitter deflected voters’ attention by running an anti-Obama campaign in 2010.

“It will be interesting to see if that old deflection works again,” Dubos said. “At some point, Vitter will have to answer for his ‘serious sin.’ After all, it wasn’t Barack Obama who was dialing up hookers on Capitol Hill — while preaching ‘family values’ back home.”

No one knows whether Vitter’s past indiscretions will become a major issue in the current election campaign, but stay tuned.