It's a sign of just how strange this campaign cycle is that a genuinely respected journalist (the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza) Tweeted out this ambivalent query in the moments following Rick Perry's parting endorsement of Newt Gingrich: "Perry drop out getting most of the attention but Marianne Gingrich stuff seems like bigger story, no?" Uh, yes?

Perry's support will probably not translate into a great number of votes. It's main benefit was to put up streamers and sparklers around the positive aspects of Newt's candidacy (he's totally still running!), distracting reporters – and maybe voters – from the pervasive stench that has clung to the former speaker ever since he left office.

Perry's endorsement seemed as heartfelt as anything Perry has done in this cycle, which is to say, "genuine to the extent he understood what he was saying". And not even Perry is a big enough idiot to think he could ignore the news that was coming through on reporters' phones even as he spoke.

Newt is not perfect. But who among us is?

True enough, though one can argue the gulf between simply "imperfect" and the kind of moral blindness practiced by Gingrich is so wide that not even Newt's ego could bridge it.

Indeed, if the Marianne Gingrich interview bears out the worst of what's been previewed so far, it's not so much the fact of the infidelity (well-established at this point) that galls, as it is Gingrich's massive sense of entitlement. (Ironic, that, given Newt's haughty lecturing on whether or not poor people understand the value of "work". Does Newt understand the value of values?)

Politicians' – especially conservative politicians' – hypocrisy about marriage is a comedic staple, but that doesn't mean Americans are inured to the kind of grand arrogance exhibited by Gingrich. Asking your wife for an "open marriage" after you've already been having an affair for six years? There's an American idiom about the uselessness of shutting the barn door after the horses have already gotten out; Newt was informing Marianne that the barn door was open, the horses were out, and if she would just clean up the stable, he would be back after he was done screwing.

This is not the attitude of a penitent sinner, it's the attitude of someone who thinks telling his wife he's cheating on her is a favor. He takes largely the same attitude as a lobbyist. Sorry, "historian".

His wife is, undoubtedly, "bitter" (and who wouldn't be?!) and perhaps Newt's supporters can weave this meme into the tapestry of "they're just jealous" faux logic that they've tried to blanket over other criticisms of Gingrich. It's also true that mere infidelity isn't an electoral deal-breaker, especially if a candidate can offer something tangible to a self-interested voter: forget buying the wife a ring, dangle jobs!

Newt does not offer an economic plan, however, or even really a vision of American prosperity. His entire campaign is predicated on spite: his personal vindictiveness when it comes to Romney, and his embodiment of conservatives' desire for vengeance on Obama. The vision of Gingrich getting off some grand round of zingers during presidential debates probably motivates more of his supporters than any specific policy. (Not to say that Gingrich has many specific policies. "Kids as janitors" is about as detailed as he gets.)

With that thin scaffolding of disdain holding up his campaign, it's hard to imagine Gingrich actually obtaining the nomination. But as diaphanous as voters' vision for him is, his self-regard is of such magnificence that he may not notice when everything else has melted away. What I'm saying is that I can totally imagine Gingrich the candidate marching on long after everyone else has stopped following. Sort of like his wives.