The "Jeff Gannon Hypocrisy" hypocrisy
Damn. Radley Balko can't catch a break. He's getting hammered from both sides for his recent Fox News column which dealt in part with the role of bloggers in uncovering the Jeff Gannon scandal.
To be sure, hypocrisy abounds on both sides of this issue. Many on the left, to whom Clinton's sex life was strictly off-limits, are gleefully trafficking in every salacious detail of Gannon's "side job" as a M4M escort. They'll claim, of course, that they're not really hypocrites, but they're merely illustrating conservative hypocrisy. Riiiiight. Sorry, but that's just self-serving crap. Granted, the spectacle of Ann Coulter defending a gay hooker against the vicious homophobia of the left is a bit of a howler, but this is no way justifies the shameful treatment Gannon has endured from the left-hand side of the blogosphere.
So in the midst of all this posturing, along comes libertarian columnist Radley Balko (who voted for Kerry, by the way), saying
Likewise, many of the same leftist blogs that castigate the religious right for intolerance didn't hesitate to reveal the sexual peculiarities of White House correspondent/sympathizer James Guckert, aka Jeff Gannon.
This prompted AMERICAblog to respond with the headline "FOX News defends hookers." Classy, huh? Balko's inbox is filling up with hate mail, from enraged conservatives and liberals alike. That's a sad commentary on the current American political landscape. With left and right both consumed in a bizarre role reversal for political advantage, people like Balko are the only ones making any sense. Everything else is just partisan bullshit.
Comments
well put.
Unfortunately, people like him are too few and far between.
Posted by: Adam | February 25, 2005 12:39 PM
Running an escort service and advertizing it on the internet are not private activities. They may be frowned upon by many people, including (caugh) the religious right which "Gannon" himself loved to court in his "articles." But you tell me how that is in any way similar to going after Bill Clinton's private life? I might also add that JG's activities are illegal. Additionally, there was nothing professional about what Bill Clinton was doing. He didn't advertize his services on the internet. Lewinksy barely told anyone and she happened to be wiretapped when she confided in someone about PRIVATE affairs. It was all completely based on a pathological need to slime someone. These have absolutely nothing to do with each other except that they both point a lot more to the obsession with sex (not morality as they claim) on the part of the religious right.
Posted by: umpire | February 25, 2005 12:46 PM
Ump, I completely agree with you, to a large extent, about Clinton/Lewinsky. Moreover, I agree that publicly accessible information about Gannon is fair game for bloggers, and his rights have not been legally violated.
Nevertheless, Gannon's activities as a gay escort are not directly relevant to his job at Talon news service, and the way some lefty bloggers have been gleefully wallowing in the Gannon muck is unseemly, and very likely will backfire.
Posted by: Barry N. Johnson | February 25, 2005 12:59 PM