As for: The term we are looking for here, I think, is ‘damage control’.
Perhaps, but the nature of the confession is head and shoulders above that of the typical Dem.
Clinton: "Listent to me real carefully. I did not have sex with that woman."
Kennedy: "The sleeping pills made me do it."
Typical Dem: "I made a mistake"
This Guy: "I sinned. I accept full responsibility."
It really is different and refreshing, don't you think?
Not so different—and given the context—not so refreshing, either. Remember: the evidence against Vitter was immediate and undeniable, while Clinton squirmed on that particular hook for awhile—and would’ve gotten away with it, too, had he not inadvertently left behind DNA evidence on a dress.
Again: it isn’t enough for someone like Vitter, an elected official, to simply apologize when he commits a corrupt act, no harm no foul. ‘Taking full responsibility’ only has meaning if taking that responsibility implies accepting the public and legal consequences of that act. When he publicly admitted to buying the services of a prostitute, he confessed to a crime, thus ‘taking full responsibility’ means he gets arrested, gets processed, gets a court date set, and appears before a judge or pleads out. That’s what happens if you or I commit a relatively minor misdemeanor and admit to it in public. Sins are private, crimes are public.