I've noted a couple of intriguing stories in the news this month about recovering alcoholics and drug addicts getting out the vote for Boston mayoral contender Martin Walsh. He was once an alcoholic but has managed to stay sober during his political ascent, helping other addicts and alcoholics along the way. That's generated a lot of good will evidently and these people are out woprking to elect him mayor.
Except for W, I can't think of any other major politican who has publically acknowledged being a drunk, and I certainly can't imagine that many recovring druggies and drunks were public about campaigning for him, the way they are about Walsh. Even Wilbur Mills (anybody here old enough to remember Fanne Foxe?) didn't own up to it until after he'd disgraced himself and had to resign.
So is this a good thing or not? Should he have remained anonymous, as in AA anaonymous about his past? Or at least quiet about it? And do you think more politicians will own up to such past abuses? And could they also galvanize a large segment of voters in a political race? Or is all this unique to Walsh because of his personality?
Thoughts on any or all of that?
Seizing a second chance after substance abuse treatment, volunteers flock to mayoral campaign of fellow survivor state Rep. Martin J. Walsh - Metro - The Boston Globe
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/us...th-a-past.html
EDIT: I'm not interested in his politics 'cause I don't know what they are. More interested in the semi-organized army of recovering people who want him in and what that means.