It is not often that I disagree with Bruce’s posts. While we have very different styles, we have very similar political views. Often when something in the news strikes me and I want to post on it, by the time I check our blog, I’ll find Bruce has already posted on it.
I had thought that Bruce and I would agree when V the K of Caption This! e-mailed us both about Tom Malin’s past. What struck me about this was the hypocrisy angle, not of Mr. Malin, but of the anti-Republican gay bloggers, ever eager to pounce on anything, no matter how minor, which they could use against the President or his party. Yet, if they discover that someone on the Left had done something similar, they ignore or it make excuses for the Democrat’s behavior.
To me, that’s the issue here. And to that extent, I believe Bruce’s post was newsworthy — to draw attention to the hypocrisy of the left-of-center bloggers who were obsessed with Gannon’s past (because he’s a Republican), yet indifferent to Malin’s (because he’s a Democrat).
That said, I’m troubled by posting this stuff on Malin’s past for a number of reasons. First, I just don’t believe it’s right to snoop around in someone’s private life (to glean details of that individual’s private activities where he did not harm anyone). Not only that. Malin has acknowledged his past mistakes and changed his behavior, thus, assuming that he did not hurt anyone (to whom he would need make restitution), we cannot hold this against him.
And finally, because of my libertarian streak, I could basically care less if someone is (or was) an escort. As long as he’s not coercing anyone and not having sex with minors, it’s his body. What Malin used to do may not be good for his soul, but it’s his soul, not mine.
In Malin’s race for state legislature, voters should evaluate him, not on his past behavior, but on his present platform. As to what he did in the past, provided he didn’t hurt or harm anyone, that’s his concern — and should not be one for the voters. But, it is interesting that so many who work themselves into a lather about what a Republican does on his own time are indifferent to what a Democrat does on his.
(GP Update – 4:00PM Tuesday – I understand where Dan is coming from on this and agree that gutter politics is gutter politics. However my biggest problem is that this man, who expects the public to put their trust in him, had the bad judgement to allow this story to come out — no pun intended — by someone else, and then appears to suddenly “find religion” in order to salvage his political candidacy. However, my biggest question of judgement is why anyone with an escorting past would think they could run for public office without the past being disclosed.)
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com