A couple of weeks ago, Without Supervision alerted us to two remarkably bad letters to the editor attacking Malcolm Baldwin, evidently cobbled together from the results of a FOIA request for constituent emails.
As it turns out, the readers to whom Mr. LaRock and Ms. Mann addressed their concerns are unimpressed by their efforts. Here is a short response:
Dear Editor: I couldn’t believe the letter from David LaRock attacking Malcolm Baldwin, a respected community leader, just because he voiced support for an ordinary non-discrimination rule.
Here’s what I want to know: Why is LaRock so hostile toward people who may be different from himself? Moreover, why is he thinking about other people’s sexual orientation and bodies in public restrooms? I (for one) wish he would stop.
If this is the kind of thing Higgins supporters are interested in, I’ll be voting for Malcolm Baldwin.
Indeed. I don’t think this is the sort of thing Catoctin residents want their supervisor doing, or thinking about, or encouraging others to think about. Yuck.
Dear Editor: I hadn’t really thought about the county’s human resources handbook in the two years since it was revised to ban discrimination against gay employees. I had been a little surprised to learn that this wasn’t already the case.
Imagine my surprise to see one of the candidates for supervisor in my district attacked for expressing his opinion in favor of this policy, two years ago, as a constituent, to his local government. In his letter, David LaRock wants me to believe that Malcolm Baldwin, who consistently impresses me with his thoughtfulness and moderation, is too “left” because he asked the county government to adopt the same non-discrimination language used by all of our large private sector employers. Read more..
Here’s one wondering why Mr. Higgins would advocate that Loudoun’s local government take a head-in-the-sand approach to impending federal regulations on water quality:
Dear Editor: Sally Mann’s letter criticizes Catoctin supervisor candidate Malcolm Baldwin for taking part in public conversations about the need for the county to improve energy efficiency and protect our water resources. Among other things, she complains about his support of the county’s international award-winning Energy Strategy, and his attempts to address the genuine problems with the rejected Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance. Mann appears to object to Baldwin’s active citizen engagement with the policy questions that affect all of us, and to believe that these problems should be ignored by locations in favor of just leaving them up to the federal government.
That doesn’t make any sense at all. Are we supposed to prefer local representatives who don’t bother collecting any local data, and who aren’t interested in knowing how any federal and state regulations actually impact their own constituents? Read more..
There seems to be no one trying to advocate for the Higgins campaign online other than Dulles area activist Barbara Munsey, who has been diligently trying to change the subject in comments to the second letter. That’s not going very well, because 1) the LaRock letter speaks for itself as representing what is most important to Higgins supporters, and 2) differing legal opinions (acknowledged by the county’s own attorney) with regard to board authority are utterly irrelevant to the content and publication of the letter.
No amount of rhetorical effort can make the evidence disappear: Higgins supporters, and by association Mr. Higgins himself, believe that sexual orientation is a reasonable basis for employment discrimination, and think this an important enough matter to write campaign letters about it.