As you've perhaps heard, a certain Ted Haggard of the National Association of Evangelicals, who apparently gets to have weekly conference calls with the President, has admitted to buying meth from a male prostitute, who gave him massages, but not having sex with him. The prostitute has said that he did have sex with Haggard, and now there's some sort of kerfuffle afoot. Where is Jerry Springer when we need him?
People keep asking what effect this will have on the election next week. I think the effect of this will be that serious discussion of things that actually matter will be postponed for another week, and people who wanted to vote one way or the other will still vote that way.
The Conservatives will continute to cast stones at the prostitute and the left more generally, which is sort of their default setting. If it turns out that the guy is an adulterer, I'm not expecting the right to ask if he should be the one instructing the rest of us on how to have a happy marriage, or arguing that marriages can only work between a man and a woman.
And forgive me for thinking that the glee on the left in regards to the story is a little self-righteous and vaguely gay-bashing for my tastes. Also, I disagree with Andrew Sullivan, who has been willing to give Haggard the benefit of the doubt, but also keeps suggesting that he's a closeted gay man! I've said before that it's possible to be bisexual, or even straight, and enjoy occasional gay sex. This might be news to Sullivan, and actually most people, but is it more enlightened to stick the wrong person in a closet marked "Gay" than in a closet marked "Straight"?
Lastly, I've got to give credit to Patrick for arguing that Haggard might want to consider worshipping Priapus instead of the Christian god!