To edit or not to edit

The title of this entry will most likely make some people chuckle, namely the editors, but here is my dilemma: when I write it is usually in the spur-of-the-moment just because something moved me, and so writing it keeps it in the archives of my ever deteriorating brain. Now, if when looking back at it I notice a, shall we say, lack of fluidity, a poor use of language, should I go back and change it? As bad as it is sometimes, it does represent an instance where I felt the need to say something, or nothing, but still say it.
I am actually referring to my last entry. My most avid reader, who shall remain anonymous, correctly pointed out that the first half of the blog was not my best. As I re-read it I realized that I could have done a much better job, but yet did not feel that it was right to change it. Somehow it was like I would have betrayed the moment, when I was tired beyond words but still needed to say something.
So the question is, good writers need to revisit their masterpiece (aren't they all masterpieces?) so as to reach near-perfection, but, for the rest of us, is the feeling lost by a lack of editing?
Oh, and for those of you who I'm sure are staying up at night wondering how the lamb/pork/mystery meal went... it actually turned out pretty good... mustard saved the day!