Richmond Times Dispatch on Frank Wolf: "Obscene"

The Richmond Times Dispatch, whose editorial page is consistently conservative and pro-Republican, breaks form this morning and mocks Frank Wolf.

Why is Virginia Rep. Frank Wolf paying people to look at porn?

OK, it's not that bad: It's not like Wolf is paying people to do so out of his own pocket or anything. It's actually worse than that: He's paying people to do so out of your pocket.

Back in August, we wrote about "Frank Wolf and the Morality Police." We explained how Wolf had earmarked $150,000 to pay two retired cops to surf the web for porn. We also noted:

It turns out that the program is run by an outfit known as Morality in Media, "a conservative religious group that has worked since 1962 to 'rid the world of pornography' and whose headquarters is, improbably, on the Upper West Side of Manhattan." Among other things, this group works to restrict the display of magazines like Cosmopolitan because there are references to - gasp! - SEX on their covers, Believe it or not, they're also on a crusade to prove that swearing or cursing can "break up a marriage," "lead to violence," "disrupt school order," and - worst of all, no doubt - "contribut[e] to an erosion of office etiquette." (so, that was the problem with my last job!)

Utterly bizarre, but apparently this is what Frank Wolf considers to be a top priority. Now, even the Republican Richmond Times Dispatch, owned by Republican-friendly Media General, is calling out Wolf for his porn program:

...it seems even more wasteful than a lot of congressional earmarks. Why pay people to look at Internet porn when millions are so eager to do so for free?

Good question. Here's another one for Wolf: why do you believe that spending our tax dollars making sure we're all using nice language, not reading Cosmo as we wait to pay for our groceries, and not looking at porn on the internet is more important than funding embryonic stem cell research, encouraging renewable energy, or winding down the war in Iraq in a responsible way (and as your constituents overwhelmingly want)? Maybe you've been in Congress a wee bit too long and have lost touch with what your constituents really want? Just a thought...