Jon Kyl just doesn't get it, does he?

From an article in Wednesday's Arizona Republic -

In an interview with The Republic, Kyl said leaks take on partisan overtones on Capitol Hill.

Democrats appreciate leaks that embarrass the Bush administration, such as the stories exposing torture and humiliation at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, while Republicans decry them.

But Democrats demanded to know who in the White House leaked the information that Valerie Plame, the wife of an administration critic, worked for the CIA.

"It's a crime to leak classified information, and it should be," Kyl said. "It looks a little bit to me like it depends what the political cause is. If we're for the leak, then we don't want to ever try catching anybody. But if we're against the leak, well, then it's OK."

So somebody help me understand this -

Is he placing the leaks that exposed the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib on the same ethical level as the leaks that endangered the life of the wife of Joe Wilson, the "administration critic" that he spoke of?

Perhaps the more pertinent question is "does Jon Kyl have a moral compass that points only toward the White House?"

Oh, and as an aside, did anyone else notice the 'irony' in how Kyl bemoaned partisanship while he very partisanly defended the retaliation against a critic of the administration?

He just doesn't seem to understand that his job is to represent Arizona's interests, not the White House's.