No. An "enabler" would have made the adultery possible. That accusation is central to the article and the pull quote and it is groundless. Mr. Blumenthal provides information on things that Sen. Coburn has said and uses them as a club against his friendship with Sen. Ensign. Mr. Blumenthal's claim that Sen. Coburn's "role in the scandal" "raises questions about the extent to which he participated in a coverup" is no more than hot breathing from a leftist. Apparently, Mr. Blumenthal is writing a book detailing such transgressions, no doubt a novelette in comparison to the Remembrance of Things Past or War and Peace that could be written about lefties. In American culture, those who tell others of a friend’s transgressions that do not violate civil law are not considered friends at all. And what friends say to one another in private ought to remain private. To lefties, transgressions and conversations should be made public if they involve conservatives, because, well, you know how conservatives are. Mr. Blumenthal wrote that Sen. Coburn has "demonstrated an uncanny ability to transform zealous and occasionally very weird moral crusades into headlines." What was the “very weird “moral crusade? Why does Mr. Blumenthal make that claim? Someone who is zealous sets all other factors aside to further the person’s objective,e.g., many “Global warming” fanatics not caring about how their governmental impositions will take jobs away from people and throttle the economy. Has that happened with Dr. (his other worthy title) Coburn? This article was propaganda intended to inflame lefties. It likely succeeded. [And "[n]either Hart nor Coburn have responded" is ungrammatical and illogical. The verb should be singular.]