David Frum defends Maggie Gallagher's actions, saying there is nothing wrong with a knowledgable person working for the government.
I've looked at this story now for more than a day without commenting, and have concluded that Mrs. Gallagher has done nothing wrong. She has done research on marriage, and been paid for it. Some of that work was for the government, and some was for herself and the organization she represents. I'm sure there are a lot of people who work for liberal think tanks and also worked for the Clinton administration. Should she have disclosed it? She admits it would have been proper to. But to attack her credibility because she didn't is pure nonsense. Even if she had disclosed it, her attackers would have still been looking for something else to attack her for, as Eric Alterman all but admits here (a question that would actually be relevant for Princeton University's Peter Singer to answer). You can never disclose enough to please your critics.
This sounds to me like a case of one side, namely those who want to tear traditional marriage down, making up new rules as the game is played, rules that apply only to the other side, similar in tone and practice to those who insisted on getting money out of politics, until that money came from a liberal.
UPDATED: link to Eric Alterman's post added after noticing it on Opinion Journal's Best of the Web.