Dick Durbin is living proof that experience does not necessarily engender wisdom. Despite more than a quarter-century in politics and 23 years in Washington, Illinois' senior senator has violated a cardinal rule for political survival, namely, never explain, and never apologize.

Up until his bone-headed remark that Iraqi prisoners at the U.S. Naval facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, were being treated in a manner comparable to that of "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime . . . that had no concern for human beings," Durbin was having a very good year. First, he had been elected Democratic whip in January, making him the Senate's number two Democrat. And second, he had joined the Senate's unofficial millionaire's club, with his 2005 net worth topping that sum, making him one of the body's 45 millionaires.

But then Durbin, age 60, apparently concluded that his whip's post entitled him to be a Democratic attack dog, and he failed to grasp the fact that facts do matter. He thought he was on the campaign trail, and that he could take cheap shots at the president and the Republicans and not be held accountable. And the fact is that American soldiers are not torturing and liquidating the prisoners who allegedly had been terrorizing, torturing or liquidating their countrymen back in Afghanistan, Iraq or elsewhere. Did Durbin think that U.S. military prisons are the equivalent of a five-star hotel?.

Vice President Dick Cheney quickly lambasted Durbin as "totally out of line," House Republican leader Tom DeLay called it a "monstrous attack against America's military," and Republican Senator John McCain, a former Vietman prisoner of war, demanded that Durbin read Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's books on Stalin-era gulags in order to get so a flavor of real torture. But Democrats rallied around Durbin, and the senator issued a statement that "this administration should apologize . . . for authorizing torture techniques that put our troops at risk."

Just when it appeared that the tempest had subsided, and that Durbin's inflammatory remarks would fade away, one very important Illinois Democrat took umbrage. Mayor Rich Daley, whose son is in the military, castigated Durbin, saying, "I think it's a disgrace to say that any man or woman in the military act like that" and that "there are not horror stories like that at Guantanamo Bay." Following Daley's outburst, the senator took to the Senate floor and said that "if anybody was offended," he offered his "heartfelt apologies," with press reports stating that he was holding back tears and was choking on some words.

Luckily for Durbin, there will be no immediate political consequence for his verbal stupidity. There is adequate time for voters to forget. Durbin was re-elected to his second term in 2002 by a margin of 778,063 votes, getting 60.3 percent of the total cast, over Jim Durkin, an unknown and underfunded Republican. Durbin spent $4.9 million in that contest, winning 77 of 102 counties. In 1996 Durbin, then an obscure Springfield congressman, won his initial election by 655,204 votes (56.1 percent) over Republican Al Salvi, whom he attacked as an "extremist." Durbin and Salvi both spent $4.9 million in that race, and Durbin won 50 of 102 counties.

In both campaigns Durbin posed as a moderate, even though his Washington voting record belies that assertion. As the adjoining vote chart indicates, his liberal votes continue: backing U.S. foreign aid for abortions, opposing tort reform, increasing marginal tax rates and opposing key Bush appointees. Durbin recently argued that the president should appoint a "moderate" to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. But if John Kerry were in the White House, I'm sure Durbin would not be making the same plea.

A recent statewide poll by SurveyUSA in June for KSDK-TV in Saint Louis, taken before the "Guantanamo gaffe," pegged Durbin's job approval/disapproval at 50/34 percent, compared to a 72/21 rating for Durbin's Democratic colleague, Barack Obama. Expect new polling to show a further dip in Durbin's popularity. The rule of thumb among political strategists is that an incumbent who has an approval rating under 50 percent is an incumbent soon to be an ex-incumbent.

Indeed, Durbin's newfound prominence may have consequences. South Dakota's Tom Daschle long masqueraded as a moderate, but when he became the Democratic minority leader, his liberal votes and issue stances were clear to see. He lost re-election in 2004, enabling Durbin to move into the whip slot when Harry Reid of Nevada moved up to Daschle's spot. Now, as whip, Durbin will be a visible, contentious spokesman for liberal causes and a partisan Democratic attack dog. He won't be able to run as a moderate when he seeks re-election in 2008.

Can Durbin be beaten? It depends on whether the Republicans win the Illinois governorship in 2006, whether the Iraq insurgency is over and U.S. troops are home, and the identity of the 2008 presidential nominees. If we're still in Iraq and Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, then Democrats likely will sweep Illinois and Durbin will win his third term. But since Reid is only 65 years old and holds a safe Senate seat, Durbin's chances of moving up to the leader's post are remote.

As for Obama, age 44, his future is limitless. He did differ with Durbin on two key votes: He backed Condolezza Rice for secretary of state and he backed tort reform. After winning his first term in 2004 by a record-breaking 2,152,820-vote margin, with 71.9 percent of the vote, many expect him to be a senator for life. Among Obama's career options: He could run for a second term in 2010, and he surely win. A Harvard Law graduate and a University of Chicago law professor, Obama could be on the short list of possible U.S. Supreme Court appointments should a Democrat win the White House in 2008. Or, most intriguingly, Obama, a state senator for 8 years, could run for Illinois governor in 2010. If he won, he'd be America's only black governor, and he would be in a prime position to run for president in 2012 or 2016.

But this much is clear: Obama is Illinois' up-and-comer senator, while Durbin has upped-and-come. And if Durbin keeps sticking his foot in his mouth, in 2008 he may be out-and-gone.