Troy King, Pt. 2
Below is follow-up to the post, “Planned Troy King Press Conference Now Off,” that I would have included there if I had been able to follow up in time with a source for clarification and for explicit permission to use some comments.
A source close to King, in adamantly denying the allegations about King in rumors that are circulating, called the rumors “atrocious” and “as bad a smear attempt as Windom faced in 1998.” (Steve Windom was a Republican candidate for Lt. Gov. in 1998 when he was confronted with accusations that he assaulted and raped a prostitute. The accusations where shown to be false, and Windom won the election.)
Why would King not address the rumors publicly?
“Listen, people accuse Troy King of being so political, but the first and only consideration he has had in all this has been for his wife and kids. He could have been ahead of it and addressed it on Tuesday [of last week]. He could have been pro-active and had a press conference on Wednesday. But he kept saying no, he didn’t want his child to go to school and be confronted with these lies, including having other children call daddy names.”
The source believes the story is on the wane and does not believe it will have another news cycle. “It peaked when the story hit on DailyKos. I knew it might get wider, but it wouldn’t get bigger after that.”
We may know soon enough if that represents wishful thinking.
Related Articles:
ummmm….school is out for the summer.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 3:39 pm
Here’s what makes me keep thinking on this one: the behavior is out of character for Troy. It IS the normally smart thing to not address rumors, but Troy King has been the sort to call press conferences at the drop of a hat in the past. And any person on this board- if they are being honest - would have expected Troy King to scream bloody murder into every microphone in this state if someone accused him of being gay. Instead, he has not been on camera all week - which must be some sort of record for him right there.
And Loretta does have a point above. I am sure Troy is concerned about his family but he is in politics. It is not like people weren’t already making a lot of jokes about him.
I’m not convinced this is over. If it dies down over the next 48 hours, maybe. But there is a LOT of smoke out there still . . . .
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
Loretta, I have to give you credit. You spotted something in that statement that many of us would not have noticed: the fact that school is out.
Here’s what your observation tends to support: 1) that this statement (what was told to Danny) is a spin doctor’s carefully worked out explanation, probably honed over the last several days in several meetings. It isn’t directly from Troy, who would have known his kids were not curently in school - so it was created by someone else. It should have been checked more carefully before it was handed to Danny. 2) If people are actually working in the AG’s office to create a legend to explain this thing away me may have no idea just how deep this goes.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 4:12 pm
>>Listen, people accuse Troy King of being so political, but the first and only consideration he has had in all this has been for his wife and kids.
Until I read that, I was convinced all this was false. Troy King would run over his own mother for political gain. Why make up such an over-the-top-lie at this juncture?
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 4:16 pm
[…] Doc’s Political Parlor: A press conference in which Attorney General Troy King would deny all rumors raised this past week was planned for this afternoon in anticipation of a Sunday Birmingham News story which did not materialize, two sources close to the AG tell the Political Parlor. King was planning a “full confrontational” response to the anticipated Sunday story, but now the sources do not believe the rumored Birmingham News story will run. […]
Pingback by King Press Conference Doesn’t Materialize After Bham News Story Doesn’t Run | fishbowlAMERICA — July 14, 2008 @ 4:38 pm
Good grief. Family is a very valid concern for Troy. His kids will be back in school in less than a month, not to mention birthday parties, Sunday School, and other public events before then. There’s nothing over-the-top about that reasoning. This situation is the classic communications dilemma: you can hold a press conference about a nasty rumor that appears limited to blogs and political insiders, which then braodcasts the smear to an even bigger audience, OR you can brace your family to batten down the hatches and wait for the storm to move on to the next target. The easy part is denying he plans to resign — the tough part is the follow up questions about why it was even contemplated. The word pre-emptive is useless when you’re dealing with these kind of allegations. Unless there are very specific allegations with dates and times, it is tough to disprove rumor mill smears. There are examples of both strategies out there, but I think he’s taken the right approach until something appears in the mainstream media.
Comment by Pachyderm — July 14, 2008 @ 4:48 pm
There is a real problem why he can’t do like other politicians and say I made a mistake and I’m working through it and everything will be fine. His problem is that he is the Attorney General and sodomy is against the law in Alabama. Think about it, if it is true, he could be prosecuted for it. Granted no one else gets prosecuted for it, but no one else is the chief law enforcement officer.
Comment by tommy cotton — July 14, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
#6 I agree that not addressing rumors is usually the way to go for a political figure. What is unusual here is that had never been the way Troy King has done things in the past. He would have been in front of cameras faster than a fading movie star on the red carpet.
His behavior during this matter is not consistent with his past record. That makes people wonder. In any event, the next few days will settle this one way or the other.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 5:27 pm
Kids have the memory and attention span of a gnat and most of them wouldn’t remember it in the hustle and bustle of returning to school. Plus, I’m almost convinced the kids of politicians attend “How to defend my elected parent against nasty rumors at school” Summer Camp so I ain’t buying this very weak argument about his wife and kids. They ought to be pretty darn thick skinned at this point in Herr King’s stellar career. If they aren’t then there isn’t much hope that they will ever be and he should get out of politics now before he scars them permanently…..if he hasn’t already.
I say he isn’t calling the press conference to deny it because there is someone out there ready to come forward and call him down. Plus, I don’t think he could keep a straight face while declaring, “I am not gay.”
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 5:34 pm
In any event that statement the insider gave to Danny smacked of carefully prepared, over-a-week-in-the-making political spin. Doesn’t make Troy guilty of anything, but it doesn’t sound like an open, honest, off-the-cuff explanation either.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 5:39 pm
Oh, and this defense amounts to nothing more than “What about the children?”
WEAK!!!
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 5:41 pm
#8, can you site an example of a rumor that TK took in front of the cameras? And Loretta, if you think kids will forget allegations like this in three weeks time then you are even more clueless than I previously thought.
Comment by Pachyderm — July 14, 2008 @ 6:00 pm
Loretta, I would’ve thought your campaign for governor was public embarrassment enough for you, but your role in perpetuating this smear campaign is a new low for you. The disgusting comments you’ve made have probably even offended the 8 Alabamians that actually voted for you. Congratulations.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 6:08 pm
Pachyderm…Apparently I’m not nearly as cluless as you’d like to think I am. But keep on thinking it. That’s how I often come out on top….I let and hope people will underestimatt me and write me off as a loony dope smoker….many do and some live to regret it.
With one ‘ummm’ and six small words I’ve cast real doubt on the sincerity of the hysterically funny “What about the children” straw man thrown out by Camp King. Apparently all the pot smoking I have done isn’t nearly as damaging to my mind as whatever King and his folks have been gobbling by the truck load.
Maybe they should hire me as their PR gal. At least I’d be more creative.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 6:12 pm
“Public embarassment”…get hold of yourself. I had more fun than I have ever had in my life running for governor and got my message of drug policy reform heard statewide, nationwide and around the globe. Not to mention name recognition (obviously you, anonymous poster, know who I am) and the beginnings of great relationships with many Alabama legislators. For free I might add. Y’all had to pay millions for media coverage of your campaigns. I didn’t run to win…hell I’ve never come across any weed that would make me that pptimistic….obviously you’re somking something different if you think I thought I was going to win. WHat flavor is it?
It is perfectly cool if you want to hate me because I am right….it’s much better than being hated for being wrong.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 6:23 pm
#13, my hats off to you. That’s the best post I’ve read in a while. And thank you, Loretta, for your contributions to our state by elevating public awareness about “weed” reform. Shorty Price got a lot of name recognition, too, but at the end of the day he was just a punch line. Knock yourself out.
Comment by Pachyderm — July 14, 2008 @ 6:43 pm
>> His behavior during this matter is not consistent with his past record.
I’ll admit that post #8 put it a little better than I did, but that’s along the lines of my point.
Comment by pachyderm is way too sensitive aka anon #4 — July 14, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
Troy, Bi the way, will take care of this in house. We should leave it alone and concentrate on deeper subjects.
Comment by LB-22 — July 14, 2008 @ 6:55 pm
There is a big difference in what alcohol (which shorty price was fond of) and weed (which I am fond of) does to ones mind and ambitions. Others already recognize that Shorty Price never had my ambition. You really oughta get with the program.
Nice try though pachy…turn the attention to the fact that I am OPEN about the fact that I like weed and lost an election that I never intended to win and maybe….just maybe you can deflect attention away from your own sinking ship. I know you’re angry and offended that I (an admitted dope smoker with big knockers and a smart mouth) screwed up the believability of Camp King’s childish attempt to gloss this thing over and move on. You’ll get over it :)
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 6:56 pm
Hey Danny,
Is the little cartoon figure at the top meant to look like he is in the process of bending over?
Just wondering……
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
This is pretty smooth.
First the story is “A press conference in which Attorney General Troy King would deny all rumors raised this past week was planned for this afternoon.” That gets the word out that King would deny the rumors, without having to, you know, actually deny them.
Then act two is “he could have had a press conference last week but waited to protect his family.” Honestly, he wouldn’t have needed more than a written statement of denial last week. There would have been no YouTube videos, no crude comments, no Wonkette snark.
As for the story being on the wane, this just hit my email and I suspect it might get even more folks digging into Troy’s background. Should have issued a flat denial last week and shut this down while he had a chance.
Comment by mooncat — July 14, 2008 @ 7:46 pm
Glad he didn’t - a statement last week would’ve denied the rest of us the opportunity to watch the freak show of left-wing bloggers falling all over themselves, trying to substantiate a lie. The richest part of this is the begging by lefty bloggers for King to issue a statement, and their frustration at his failure to do so - which is clearly the right move unless and until a story appears in a legitimate press outlet.
In the meantime, I guess we’ll have to settle for the ramblings of fallout shelter residents railing about government espionage against its citizens and fart jokes from washout candidates that were the subject of endless jokes themselves. Good work, guys.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 8:10 pm
That just hit my email too Mooncat.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 8:10 pm
Mooncat: troy issues a statement last week and guess what, immediate headlines (not what he wants), doesn’t issue statement and no headlines - hmm, I’d say good move.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
#22…You qualify for “AMATURE NIGHT” at Club Republican Straw Man
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
“A-M-A-T-U-R-E”, Loretta? Really?
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 8:37 pm
#s 22 and 13 get my votes. I am still waiting for Loretta Nall to deny the rumors I am hearing about her getting caught doing unspeakable things to her son with a zuchini. She hasn’t denied it yet, so I can only assume it must be true.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 8:38 pm
Happy to have provided you with some entertainment. As to the “lie”……. well, we’ll see about that, won’t we? And if it turns out to be true, then who is the freakshow?
I don’t often wish misfortune upon others, but in TK’s case, I’ll make an exception. He’s an embarrassment.
Comment by montysano — July 14, 2008 @ 8:39 pm
#27 - Thank you, I’ll be here all week. Try the veal.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 8:41 pm
#26…where did I claim to be a great speller…and really if that is all y ou got you should stop now….before you further embarass yourself.
#27…My son fully admits to eating that zucchini in a squash casserole…will Troy King do the same? I doubt it.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 8:43 pm
In fact we’re calling a press conference on the zucchini in the squash casserole tomorrow. Join us!
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
Good observation, Loretta, in comment 1. Funny.
Commenter #2 and #8, we reached opposite conclusions. I’ve been thinking that King had made a mistake not responding, and whether it’s a mistake now or not, I realized that he does not have a history of responding to blogs. He didn’t respond to the bulletproof vest bit that was here, nor did he respond as I recall to the whole bit about the Christmas CD he made that we went on about. I would be glad for you to provide counter-examples.
#4, that was LOL funny, unless of course you are his mother.
Comment #3 and #10, fwiw, no one “gave” or “handed” a statement to me. That came out of a very long rambling conversation. It’s funny to me that somebody conversationally re-tells what’s going on from that one person’s perspective, mentions “kids in school” in July, and somebody thinks that “smacked of carefully prepared, over-a-week-in-the-making political spin.” LOL. BTW, the conversation was so long and rambling, that I felt I had to go back and ask permission to use some of the comments.
#12, good question, which is what I was getting to earlier in this comment.
Loretta, in 20, it’s supposed to be someone passing along a rumor, but it may be goofy and inappropriate. If so, I can remove it.
Mooncat in 21, I was kinda excited when I first heard about the Monday press conference (fwiw, first heard from a Democrat), thinking that would be interesting. Only to dig around and find out that they were not going through with it. Still not sure that he’s playing it right (as you also suggest). Time will tell the tale on that one. And you may be right that they are being overly optimistic about it being on the wane. Although compared to the middle of last week, would be hard to be anything but.
Comment by Danny — July 14, 2008 @ 8:53 pm
Please don’t remove the toon at the top….far from being goofy and inappropriate…It’s almost like prophetic…dude….. :)! May turn out to be quite fitting in the end…like you know what Im sayin’ man??? Are we on the same plane??? (Done in tone of Cheech and Chong)
I have been finding it very entertaining the words that come into play when discussing rumored closet homosexuality. It’s hard to say anything without word play.
Anyone else having this problem?
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 9:06 pm
Far be it from me to question your journalistic credibility, however, since you cannot name the “source close to King”, it is difficult to judge his credibility. The way this entry reads, it almost appears as if you are implying that this individual speaks for King. It is interesting to me that the liberal democrats and homosexual websites have been spreading this story for over a week now in a desperate attempt to elicit a response from King in the hopes that they could get this vicious smear into the legitimate press. The fact that he has chosen not to respond to a vicious political smear from questionable sources, while questioned by many on this and other blogs, seems to be his right. IMHO, it seems unfair for you to try to attribute a comment plucked from a rambling discourse from a “source close to King” and allow the inference that he is representing King who has deliberately, rightly or wrongly, chosen not to respond to this smear campaign. King has spokespersons whom he pays to speak on his behalf when he is unavailable. It is hard for me to believe that your sources are qualified to speak on his behalf when he has chosen not to do so.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 9:21 pm
Moon Cat–despite what more irresponsible “journalists” will tell you, unsubstantiated rumors never warrant reaction. You and the other bloggers of the left are looking less and less credible the more this goes on. I’ve got news for you, it isn’t Troy King that is looking like an idiot right now. It is all the left wing bloggers who are repeating these rumors as fact in the absence of any EVIDENCE whatsoever.
Comment by Susan Fillippeli — July 14, 2008 @ 9:24 pm
Whoa….Republicans taking a swipe at Danny???? Beyond desparate…..This is off the charts………they tried it on my blog too Danny.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 9:33 pm
I don’t want to spread any rumors, but I was told by a reliable source that the woman’s son in this clip was actually Troy King.:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HurEm5gb5NE
This is a low blow, I know, but I couldn’t resist.
Comment by The Hanson Brothers — July 14, 2008 @ 9:43 pm
Taking issue with someone is off the charts? An honest difference of opinion is “taking a swipe”? Wow. Pretty thin skinned for a libertarian. I would think someone who regularly engages in zuchini love with family members would be a little more rough and tumble.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
HB in #37 - Yeah, it was low, but the fact that you linked to a clip of one of the funniest movies of all time makes up for it. LOL!
Seriously, the thing that bugs me the most about this is the deafening silence coming from the King camp. If I was accused of what he is being accused of, and I was innocent, I’d leave no stone unturned to clear my name. I guess that’s why I wouldn’t make a good politician, though.
Comment by The Sandman — July 14, 2008 @ 10:01 pm
Anonymous in 34,
I understand your point. The post would be far stronger if I could have named the source, and I considered not posting the post at all. In an exchange with a friend about that, he thought it might be useful and interesting to readers despite that limitation.
If a source is named, then the issue of credibility is largely born by the named source, not the publisher. If the source is not named, then the issue of credibility is born by the publisher who cannot name the source. In the instance of this post, the issue of credibility is born by the blog.
If you are a long time reader, then you can judge the blog’s reputation for credibility based on years of posts, the many stories that we got out before anyone else that were shown to be true, by the care to note that a post was edited or updated because some new info came into to play and it was important to get it right. The track record here is good, and I stand by it.
If you are a new reader and have no track record with the Political Parlor, then you might look at the blog’s About page where I have shamelessly gathered some unsolicited comments that others have made about the blog. That will give you a sense of what some others think about the blog.
But in the end, you have to decide the weight and credibility you want to give to anything you read. It’s healthy to be skeptical, and I appreciate your comment.
As a practical matter, I don’t think it’s unbelievable to think that King does not respond publicly but talks to a circle of folks, some of whom might be willing to converse with me when I asked about the planned press conference I heard about. I know it’s possible. :)
Best,
Danny
Comment by Danny — July 14, 2008 @ 10:07 pm
Troy King wishes that he had as much masculine chest and arm hair as my son holding the zucchini.
A few commenters noted on that zucchini post that Troy might be interested in it. I tell you….that would be about the only thing in Troy’s illustrious career as AG that would impress me…that was a very impressive zucchini…but my whole family ate it…and we ain’t shamed to say it in public.
I told y’all…we’ll call a press conference tomorrow where my son will fully admit to eating parts of that zucchini in a squash casserole….and if it make you happy the rest of my family will admit to eating the rest. It was a total family ‘affair’. Will Troy admit to eating his zucchini? Inside or outside the confines of a casserole dish…doesn’t matter to me really..
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 14, 2008 @ 10:16 pm
Just curious — does anyone know the people that reported to King in Fob’s administration or Riley’s? I don’t believe any of this stuff — if it were true, these rumors would have swirled years ago, not weeks ago. In my opinion, by the end of the week, this story will only be kept alive by a couple of left leaning bloggers. Too many people would have had the opportunity to leak anything improper with TK over the years for this to be true.
Comment by realist — July 14, 2008 @ 10:32 pm
Quite frankly, we’ll never know what occurred unless his wife speaks out….or files for divorce..I am of the opinion that the reason this matter is taking so long to develop is rather simple: he’s doing everything to keep the wife quiet; promises, and more promises; on his hands and knees begging her not to reveal the affair; if he’s able to “pay her off”–you’ll see Troy Boy and Fatty standing together at the podium together scorning the “radical left”…it’s just a matter of time–you know: “just take your time honey (after the initial shock) and we’ll discuss our future tommorrow.” Politician’s see this all the time, one scandal after the other; just another fire to put out. I can hear it now: “oh, honey, you’ll just ruin my life– and you’re life in the process”…..”Let’s just stay together for the kids” …good grief.
Comment by Elsabiades — July 14, 2008 @ 10:50 pm
Elsabiades,
What a wonderful christian you must be to attack a woman’s appearance because she happens to be married to someone whose politics you disagree with. Do you know Paige King? Is there some reason you direct your invective towards her? My guess is that you are such a beautiful person, both inside and out, that it qualifies you to make vicious horrible attacks on the physical appearance of women who are not public figures and who you know nothing about. Because people like you are pushing this rumor, no fair minded person believes it.
Comment by Elsabiades — July 14, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
#42 Good point. This is an organized, orchestrated smear campaign which appears to be well funded and directed by consultants. It began after 3 succesive polls showed King to be well in the lead for the 2010 Governor’s race.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 11:35 pm
Loretta,
The question is, what did you do with the zuchini before you fed it to your family. The rumors are far and wide and it isn’t pretty. You haven’t denied it, only tried to spin what happened to the zuchini after you engaged in your unspeakable acts. I am shocked and I think your silence on the whole sordid affair speaks volumes.
Comment by Anonymous — July 14, 2008 @ 11:38 pm
“It peaked when the story hit on DailyKos…”
SPIT. The Daily Kos is a disgusting website - I will never forget that Kos said “screw them” about Americans killed in Iraq.
It seems that this has been a Leftie disinformation campaign. I would hope that you all would be ashamed of yourselves, but that would involve you having a sense of shame…
Comment by Reactionary — July 15, 2008 @ 12:14 am
#42 Rumors did swirl years ago. I heard the first rumor of this nature three years ago. Someone very close to Troy claimed he knew it to be true more than a year ago, though at the time he was on the outs with the General over an unrelated matter. A post on Daily Dixie from six months ago refers to “certain speculation.” I assure you, by the time it got to Daily Dixie, it had certainly made the rounds many times inside the State House.
What made this latest version of the rumor jump to the big time are the extra details: a specific time, place, and person. Still doesn’t prove it’s true, of course.
Comment by JW — July 15, 2008 @ 12:23 am
Windom? Peed in a jug during an ongoing legislative session. Next?
Comment by whoever — July 15, 2008 @ 12:29 am
The thing about this whole affair is, the remarkable speed with which the story spread. 25 years ago, it would have taken weeks of whispered innuendo over Jack Daniels at the Elite for it to get around Montgomery - let alone across the state. Welcome to the Net Age.
Now, about who might be pushing this story. It’s pretty easy to accuse “liberals,” “Democrats,” Mooncats, Lorettas, or whomever. But think about it a minute. Go back to Cicero’s principle for indentifying a murderer - cui bono? In this case, would Democrats really want to cashier the one Republican whom The Birmingham News won’t be supporting - editorially or in page one coverage? I didn’t think so, either. I’d look more intensely at those persons who might be more anxious about facing a statewide officeholder with some name recognition in a Republican primary. Take your pick among the contenders, there.
Comment by Hillbilly35801 — July 15, 2008 @ 1:28 am
Just because Loretta Nall got 2,000 votes in a statewide election, she thinks she has some mainstream credibility. Instead of realizing she is of the most lunatic of the socialist fringe, she displays classic signs of sociopathy. The Libertarian Party in Alabama more or less died on the vine in 2002 and most former or genuine Libertarians did not support her or vote for her. They saw Nall as a left winger or socialist. Now she fully reveals she is small minded and full of hatred. Her hate filled heart surely shines in her comments about Troy King. The druggies, sexual deviants, and other opponents of a strong Christian culture have nothing better to do than to engage in destructive behavior (including unjustified hate-based smear campaigns).
Comment by Not A Small nall Thinker — July 15, 2008 @ 2:32 am
I have nothing to say about Loretta or Troy, negative or positive. I do, however, dislike anyone’s invasion and capture of the comments section of this blog. Let me read what a lot of people are thinking rather than a lot about what one person is thinking. With all due respect, Mrs. Nall, please use your own website for your railing. Don’t be a hog.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 6:12 am
#46…Y’all all know about far and wide don’t you….Larry Craig comes to mind. Truth is I had a secret zucchini party with a bunch of other depraved women….I mean we have to use zucchinis because of King Troy’s stranglehold on the adult novelty industry.
#51…be careful recycling the attack lines there…else someone might accuse you of being ‘green’….which I hear is almost as bad as someone thinking you are gay if you are a member of a certain party
#52….you can skip over my comments. I think Danny can manage his own site and decide who can post here and who cannot without any help from you.
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 15, 2008 @ 6:42 am
I am troubled by the rumors that Nall violated her son with a Zuchini. These rumors are starting to spread and she has yet to deny it. I have heard them from multiple sources. Her silence on the subject is deafening. When will the mainstream media pick this up? Supposedly there are pictures on the internet.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 8:23 am
The reasons the rumors about King get play is his previous record and his tendency towards public blunders. If someone attempted to “make up” a rumor about Tim James, Bradley Byrne, or Jack Hawkins it would go nowhere. Their public behavior would not lend credibility to an outrageous rumor. But Troy “Flak Jacket Sex Toy Country Crooning Elvis-sized entourage” King has created a public persona that invites ridicule. And for the person hyping his polling numbers , I’ve seen some of those polls, and King’s really dwarfs his opponents in one category: negatives. His are through the roof and doom any campaign - perhaps even a reelection run. He can’t raise the money for Governor with those negatives, much less win the votes.
That’s why this is sticking, regardless of the truthfulness of the rumor.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 8:41 am
The reason the rumors are getting play is because they are part of an orchestrated campaign conducted by his political enemies. The “blunders” as you describe them, are not blunders, so much as they are items which liberals and the gay lobby use to lampoon King. Even so they are not well known by your average “man on the street” but merely internet chatter. If King were not far and away in the lead for the 2010 race, this preposterous trash would not be pumped into the blogosphere.
As far as your claims that King has high negatives, that was not indicated in the poll results I saw, and was not reported in the Tuscaloosa news article on the Anzalone poll, so I have to be curious as to what poll your are referring to. Perhaps your own internet poll?
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 9:52 am
#56, here’s a word your doctor will probably use when you are taken to see one: “paranoia.”
Troy King is not the victim of a wide-ranging conspiracy. No one is trying to derail his unstoppable gubernatorial election train.
I have some news for you. Troy King will never be governor. Won’t happen. He’s going to have real difficulty holding on to his current job - and that was before all this new garbage.
He has high negatives. He already had high negatives in 2006. AEA’s polls by Gerald Johnson, polling done for BCA by Whit Ayres, polling done by newspapers over the years all show this and contunue to show it. And a quick call to Anzalone Lizst will probably confirm the high negative numbers they also found.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 10:38 am
Here - from the “Tuscaloosa News” story #56 cites - is proof of the high negatives of troy king:
“Anzalone said his poll shows both King and Hubbard with higher negative ratings, 25 percent each”
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 10:43 am
It looks like Anzalone did not poll Troy King vs. Tim James, Jack Hawkins, or Bradley Byrne. It looks like the poll was designed to present Artur Davis in the best possible light, so it may be that Anzalone paired Davis against Republicans he perecived as weak - like Troy King.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 10:52 am
Oops - Byrne was in there, but neither Hawkins or James. So King was NOT polled relative to those strong contenders.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 10:55 am
You think 25% is high negatives? You are the one who lives in a fantasy world. One third of the electorate is the polar opposite of King idealogically, and he only polls 25% negative? In the world of big time politics, that is gold for an incumbent. Hubbard has the same negatives and he is a complete unknown. The 25 % negative is anti-republican sentiment in a near recession and unpopular republican war.
Interesting that you cherry picked a quote from the article I cited without putting it in context. The negatives for Hubbard and King were merely described as higher than Davis’. Here is a citation to the article for those who are interested. http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20080309/NEWS/803090330 I suppose you failed to post a cite because it undercuts your entire premise that King is not a viable candidate for Governor. As the polls clearly show, not only is he a viable candidate, he is the clear frontrunner. Your fervent wish that he won;t get re-elected seems a little silly. If he is the frontrunner for Gov.; he certainly won’t have any trouble gettiing re-elected to AG if he runs for AG. Sorry you don’t like it. Sorry you can’t accept it. It kind of seems like you might have a personal agenda here - is that possible?
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 11:16 am
I’d guess that Tim James and Jack Hawkins weren’t included in Anzalone’s poll for the same reason that Loretta Nall wasn’t.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 11:24 am
Wow! Loretta says six words, and you guys got so riled up that we’re now 58 comments into this thing. Considering that the only folks I’ve ever seen so riled up about Troy King tend to be working for him, the backlash against her makes me wonder. Six little words…
“School is out for the summer.”
And yes, a quick response to the issue would have likely put an end to things. Even a quick laugh and comment on how ridiculous it is would have sufficed. It has been proven that, in politics, slow responses tend to make things worse. (Remember John Kerry’s slip of the tongue? See how Obama suffered by dragging out his relationship with his now former pastor?)
By the way, is The Birmingham Weekly considered to be a legitimate news publication?
Another question… If these rumors are not true, then don’t you think Troy King would want to address any libel and slander against him? And why would the McCain camp act so strongly to a mere Internet rumor? And why, with King’s colorful record, would his political enemies EVER need to make up rumors to smear him? The truth is much more fun.
Comment by ALmod — July 15, 2008 @ 11:26 am
“we’re now 58 comments into this thing”
Add a few more in the time it took me to respond.
I need my own six words.
Comment by ALmod — July 15, 2008 @ 11:27 am
Dear #44, Well, to begin with I am not a “Christian”; but rather; a deist who does not believe in any “man-made” god’s…Next, it’s the “Christians” who supported Jorge Boosh and his so-called phoney “war on terror” which has lead this country into financial ruin and resulting in the destruction of Iraq: a country in no way connected to 9/11. For “Christians” the killiing of one is murder; the mass murder of 1,000,000 in Iraq: a reasonable foreign policy..
Comment by Elsabiades — July 15, 2008 @ 11:28 am
#61 - Sanka.
If your goal is to persuade this board that you are batcrap crazy, you are certainly getting there.
Again, your poll does not even include Jack Hawkins or Tim James, and was obviously intended to puff Artur Davis. Using it to proclaim Troy king the “frontrunner” for Governor is offbase. And I can tell you - as many who read this board will affirm - that a LOT of people in powerful positions in this state think King will have difficulty winning reelection. Some of theose same people aupported Troy just 2 years ago. I know them; I talk to them.
And King’s negatives are - along with Hubbard’s - the highest of the candfidates in the article contradicting your earlier post. They aren’t Don Siegelman high -yet - but I have seen polls where Hawkins and James have low single-digit negatives. Troy’s triple them.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 11:31 am
It doesn’t matter what Troy King’s negatives were. He is done. He won’t try to run for governor. And if he does try to run for AG again, he will get beat. The question is, who is gearing up to run against him. On the dem side, I could see Tyson giving it another shot. I could also see Luther Strange considering a primary challenge if he decides to opt out of a governor’s race (that could be risky for Big Luther though . . . I guess it would depend on how weakened Troy King looks then). But regardless, King won’t make it past the general. Not after this . . . there is no way. And Alabama will be a better state because of it.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 11:32 am
I know people that think Troy could hold on to AG. I’m not convinced, but I know people whose judgment I respect who are convinced that he can hang onto his current job. But nobody in high circles in Montgomery thinks Troy will ever be elected governor - no one. He’s got more baggage than an overloaded 747.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 11:40 am
Or #62…It could be because I’m not currently seeking any elected office. The story says the polling was done in mid-Jan 2008….doh!
Comment by Loretta Nall — July 15, 2008 @ 11:42 am
Any poll this far out - excuse the expression, Troy - is just a name recognition poll. It has no real bearing. Negatives, however, continue to impact elections.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
Luther Strange is actively running for Attorney General. Makes no difference if the incumbant runs, whether the Governor appoints Jim Main (or anyone else). Luther is running and getting financial and other commitments.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 12:27 pm
I think Luther may run for AG and he may run for Lt. Gov. I think he really wants to run for Gov. But if he runs for AG he will beat Troy (unless Troy makes a run for Gov. - which he won’t win, but if you are gonna lose, you don’t want it to be for reelection). I think Gov. is a stretch for Luther.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 12:32 pm
Alabama Politicians used as punchlines in jokes the most:
1) Troy King
2) Roy Mooore
3) Nancy Worley
4) Perry “Tanman” Hooper, Jr.
You will notice that 3 of these are no longer in office and the 4th soon will be joining them in the defeated and disgraced category . . .
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 12:49 pm
and yet, there is still not one single shred of evidence to back any of the allegations. After all this time, that speaks volumes.
Comment by Susan Fillippeli — July 15, 2008 @ 1:13 pm
All of us on here really don’t know that Susan. The Birmingham News supposedly wrote an entire story and has it in publication-ready-form. That doesn’t make it true, but it also does not mean there is “not one shred of evidence.” There may be a lot of evidence - we’ll know by the end of this week most likely.
I think the reason for the interest in this is Troy King’s persona. This would not be a big topic if it was, say, Luther Strange or even Bob Riley. No one would buy it, but with Troy King you just can’t rule something like this out. He made this bed - again Troy, forgive the expression - now he has to lie in it.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
There’s plenty of evidence, in the form of informed sources. But typical of Alabama, it’s not considered to be true until the Newhouse press and AP weigh in.
As we have seen many times before since blogs were invented, you have to give the papers time. They work slow compared to us. And since Eddie Curran is still out on his drunken leave of absence trying to fix his screwed up book, and since Brett Blackledge is off to DC to work for Karl Rove’s friend at AP, there’s no one left to do the story.
You would think Dana Beyerle could get off his you know what and do something, but he was off chasing the ivory-billed woodpecker last week.
Maybe they are just afraid to touch it. Offending those last few straggling church readers with a story about a gay Republican hypocrite might just put their declining circulations into the final nose dive. It’s the “end times” for family newspapers, but they have to squeeze the last few dollars out of them, just like Bush and Cheney and Rove have squeezed the money out of the federal treasury in Iraq.
I must say I find your discussion about credibility quite funny, as if a blog’s ethics could ever stand up this level of anonymity. Perhaps the reason the newspapers can’t get this story is because they have a policy against using anonymous sources. And who wants to be the named source on a story accusing Troy King of being caught by his wife in a gay affair with a male aide?
Rob Riley wishes he could say it, but daddy knows best…
Has anyone called Luther Strange?
Comment by informed source — July 15, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
Or his wife?
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
Anony # 75–Actually, we do know there is no evidence because no one has been able to produce a single piece of primary evidence supporting the allegations. If the newspapers had them, they would run them.
And mis-informed source–You are sounding an awful lot like the irresponsible “journalist” who likes o takes pictures of birds. He doesn’t like to use evidence either–just rumors and more rumors.
Comment by Susan Fillippeli — July 15, 2008 @ 2:16 pm
Susan, I am sorry to say this, but you are just plain wrong when you assert that newspapers not going with a story means they have no evidence. That is just nonsensical, and I worked a few years in journalism (and work with journalists to the present day) so I know.
I have seen numerous stories with a great deal of supporting evidence not run through the years. Sometimes there was some evidence but not enough to rise to the levels of that needed to go to publication. Sometimes the paper was waiting for stronger evidence that is anticipated. Sometimes the paper decides the risk associated with publication is too great.
However, to state that a story not being published means there was no evidence is just silly. By that standard, there was “no evidence” for years about marital impropriety between Bill Clinton and any number of women he has been definitively linked to since the end of his presidency.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 2:25 pm
glynn wilson/76/informed source: you repeatedly bash this site and those who post anonymously, so why are you posting anonymously?
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 2:29 pm
I don’t know about Glynn Wilson, but I do know that well-researched factual stories don’t run sometimes. Susan was just wrong with that statement above.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 2:42 pm
Is this the same Susan who campaigned around the state with McCain and King?
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
Susan is due respect for posting on here under her real name - that’s ballsy. But she is dead wrong about newspapers and how they operate. You can have enough evidence on somebody to choke Nancy Worley and the story can still be either killed or held for numerous reasons. It certainly does not mean there is no evidence just because a story is put on a shelf.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
And yet, where is Troy? Any sightings in the past few days?
Comment by Rachel Wynn — July 15, 2008 @ 3:40 pm
Mo one on any single blog I’ve read in the last week has a single piece of documentation or on-the-record primary source or eye-witness or anything else that rises above the level of gossip. If they had it, they would use it. That includes the bloggers–even Glynn.
Comment by Susan Fillippeli — July 15, 2008 @ 3:42 pm
Susan I agree with you about bloggers and evidence - you are right on that. But that does not mean newspapers or others have no evidence. They very well may have it.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 3:45 pm
Susan, there is no “evidence” to support a lot of things. There seems to be no real “evidence” to support that a certain former governor took a bribe, but I suppose that’s different. In either case, a lack of “evidence” doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen, and I’m sure you’re completely unbiased in your own stance of evidence and truth.
After all, the only evidence in most cases such as these tends to be that the person in question comes out and admits to it. If one of the “lovers” were to come out about it, it would still be his word against King’s unless the guy happened to take pictures or something. That wouldn’t stop the endless press coverage, the book deals, and the interviews. There are actually some telltale signs on this one– McCain’s distancing, the odd reaction and lack thereof from King, etc. Those aren’t direct evidence, but you have to admit that they are pretty damning.
But let’s be honest for a second. The MSM doesn’t give any more of a damn about evidence and fact checking than bloggers. As a matter of fact, they probably care less because they make money off of sensationalism. Bloggers typically don’t get paid. If the MSM did care, twenty-four hour news outlets would have nothing to talk about, and the word “speculation” wouldn’t need to be a part of our vocabulary. Rather, it seems that newscasters and television pundits have a nasty habit of broadcasting whatever odd email happened to be forwarded to them that day. I’m still waiting on the report about the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide.
Most recently, The Birmingham News and several other outlets sat on various stories about Birmingham Mayor Larry Langford for some time before bringing them to press. And there was evidence– LOTS of evidence. Why did they sit the story? Turns out Langford had been holding a deal over their heads in which the city pays to have public announcements run through the paper. The News makes a lot of money that way, and Langford was trying to find another publication to use. It wasn’t until Kyle Whitmire at The Birmingham Weekly said something about it that the News started running some of its stories about Langford. There are still several stories that have not been fully published. If I’m not mistaken, I was the first person to report on Langford’s office rennovations– on my blog, of all things. There was a financial trail. Heck, you could even walk into City Hall and smell the paint! There was plenty of evidence, and I wasn’t the only person that knew about it, so why then was it not reported on for so long?
Comment by ALmod — July 15, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
“There seems to be no real “evidence” to support that a certain former governor took a bribe, but I suppose that’s different.”
Actually there was enough evidence to convince a jury of his peers to convict him. That included at least 5 witnesses testifying to direct knowledge that it was a bribe, a cancelled check, and an effort to hide the donation.
Again, no one has been able to bring forward any information that rises above anonymous speculation.
Comment by Susan Fillippeli — July 15, 2008 @ 5:57 pm
If convincing a jury (or lack thereof) determines the quality of evidence, I suppose that Richard Scrushy has been unfairly picked on. And there is always the possibility of an appeal jury seeing things differently. Oddly enough, the case was thrown out before.
The whole “it didn’t happen if you can’t prove it” argument from the GOP on every little thing is getting to be tiresome, and it has almost always come right before something has proven. The thing is, these things typically don’t get this big without some substance to back it up. At about the time that you hear the “you can’t prove it” line, one of the aids who happens to know where the good stuff is decides that the notoriety is worth the risk of breaking confidentiality. Just ask Scott McClellan.
Comment by ALmod — July 15, 2008 @ 6:25 pm
In order to find evidence of something don’t you have to have an investigation first?
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 15, 2008 @ 6:26 pm
5 witnesses? Try Nick Baily lying through his teeth to try to save himself from going to jail. A check with a date that did not even match the story. And a failure to report a donation (similar to those the Republican Governor’s Assoc. didn’t report from Scanlon that ended up in Riley’s coffers). And a conversation between Siegelman and Scrushy that nobody heard. If that is your idea of evidence, Susan, then the argument against Troy King would be a done deal. There was about as much evidence in the Siegelman case as there is right now on this blog against Troy King.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 6:29 pm
It’s clear that the Birmingham News is not publishing this story because it is so explosive (and could ruin people’s lives) . . . that it is a risk they are just not willing to take right now. They probably have there sources . . . but I am sure they also received significant push back from people who said it was all a lie and they would lose all credibility if they published it. I am sure they are waiting for the story to develop. But I agree with the posts that say there are a lot of reasons papers (for better or worse) don’t print stories . . . not just because of a lack of evidence.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 6:33 pm
http://www.myspace.com/troykingalabamaqueen
Comment by Alabama Queen — July 15, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
Let me again ask — where is the AG? He’s nowhere to be found. Telling is the fact that he was AWOL at a luncheon sponsored by a victims’ right group that is in his camp. He seems to have fallen off the face of the earth — why?
I can’t tell anything about whether these rumors are right or not, but his disappearance is a cause for concern.
Comment by Rachel Wynn — July 15, 2008 @ 7:28 pm
The b’ham news hates King. If they had one single credible source of information they would have run this story a long time ago. The facts are the facts and the story is a lie. The rumors were that King was divorcing and resigning over an affair. There is no divorce. King lives at home. He has not resigned. There is no affair. All of these things leave trails. The B’ham news as well as every other news organization in this state has investigated under every rock. If King was divorced, there would be court filings. If he had resigned, there would probably have been coverage of the appointment of his replacement. These are demonstrable lies that were spread by political opponents because every single poll that has been run up until now has shown that King is, by far, the leader in the 2010 Governor’s race. The dems and the gays can scream until they are blue in the face that he will never be Governor, that the polls are meaningless this far out, that his miniscule negatives will preclude his election; but facts are facts and the ALFA polls, the AEA polls, the Anzalone poll and now even the Democrats own polls show King winning the nomination and head to head against Davis or Folsom in the general. That’s the long and short of it and sorry for those of you who hate him, but you live in a red state and King is the conservative candidate and no one can or will outflank him on the right.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 7:29 pm
The Birmingham News also “hates” Larry Langford. Why then would they sit on multiple Larry Langford stories? Why would they allow the bloggers to come out with those stories first? It’s not due to lack of evidence, and it’s not due to lack of knowledge. So to say that the News would go to print if they had evidence is a completely moot argument. Even if the story was bogus, they could easily cover themselves by reporting that there are rumors.
But since when has evidence ever been important to Troy King? I suppose I’ll be more concerned with lack of evidence against Troy King being gay when Troy King starts showing concern over lack of DNA evidence against death row inmates who ask for it. After all, at least Troy King being gay isn’t a life or death issue.
Comment by ALmod — July 15, 2008 @ 7:53 pm
Thanks ALmod, along with Elsabiades for admitting your true colors. You hate King because of what he stands for and you are repeating baseless slander because you wish to destroy someone who has different ideology than you. Elsabiades will even attack his wife and children to accomplish his desired objective. Typical of the dems and the gay lobby, the ends justify the means. As I said, any fair thinking Alabamian will consider the source and reject this political smear campaign.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
Okay, I realize that I am fueling the fire by writing a comment, but this has disgusted me to the point that it has become necessary for me to vent. This story is actually HURTING PEOPLE. Yes, Troy King is a political figure, but his wife and children are not. Nor is his male assistant, or his wife. The story is false, and even I can see that. I am by no means a republican who is trying to ‘protect’ the Attorney General. As an import from the North, I can assure you that I know few people down here who are as liberal as I. Why don’t you all just give the man the benefit of the doubt unless actual proof arises. In the meantime, treat all of the people who are hurt by this story with an ounce of decency and stop gossiping about them.
Comment by Angry Dem — July 15, 2008 @ 9:24 pm
# 98 . . . it’s hard to feel sorry for Troy King. He’s thrown so many people under the bus for political gain. I just can’t feel sorry for the guy. Plus, maybe if he would show up and quit ducking the public and his job, then the rumors would stop. But as long as he is AWOL, the stories won’t stop. And that’s nobody’s fault but his own.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 9:44 pm
# 95 . . . I would have at least had to take your comment seriously two weeks ago. I don’t think Troy King would have won the Republican primary, but he certainly would have entered as the frontrunner. As for the general election, if he was the nominee, you certainly could not rule him out. While the Democrats will certainly be competitive in 2010, this is Alabama, and the Republicans will certainly be in a strong position as well.
But . . . it’s not two weeks ago. Unfortunately for Troy King, everything as changed for him (fairly or not). Everyone has heard these rumors, and while nobody knows if they are true or not, his chances of being governor are finished. If you go to youtube and type in Troy King, you get videos about his gay sex life. If you mention his name around people who never pay attention to politics, they laugh and say isn’t the guy in the sex scandal. My sister had never heard of him until this weekend, but she she called me asking about the rumors because she had read about them on Facebook.
We live in an internet age. It’s a different kind of politics. And it might be unfair. It might be disgusting. Maybe it even recks lives sometimes. But it is the reality of the political age we live in. Alabama is not that big of a state. And everyone is talking about Troy King and his personal life. His chances for being governor are finished. If his supporters are smart, they will move on and find a new horse. Maybe Rob Riley, or Bradley Byrne, or Luther Strange, because politically, Troy King is as good as dead. He can keep his job for now, but he will never be elected governor.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
Sorry for all the “certainly’s”!
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
Mr. Certainly and the rest of the dems and gay lobby.,
Methinks thou dost protest too much.
We all understand that you hate Troy King. You hate him so much that all of your waking hours are spent trying to further a rumor your ilk hatched in an attempt to destroy him. The bad news for you is that you gave it your best shot and you failed. You did not get one single legitimate source to take your bait. No one purchased the big lie.
You can repeat it as often as you want, it’s not true and Alabamians aren’t believing it. They may be curious the first time they hear it, but when they look around and see that no legitimate sources found it credible, they see it for what it is, a gutter-politics smear campaign. Your own sister saw through it. Your best shot failed. Troy King is still married to the mother of his three children, he is still the Attorney General, and he is still the front runner for Governor in 2010. Sorry your sleaze tactics didn’t work.
Comment by Anonymous — July 15, 2008 @ 11:16 pm
#100 - I went to You Tube and typed in “Troy King” and did indeed find videos about his “gay sex life”. However, what you failed to mention is that all of these videos are linked in one way or another to our friend Loretta Nall, who by no means can be considered an unbiased observer of this whole alleged affair. I think this little fact that you failed to mention kind of blows your argument that King is finished right out of the water. Nice try, though.
Comment by The Sandman — July 16, 2008 @ 12:42 am
And thank YOU for showing your true colors and flat out LYING.
“you are repeating baseless slander”
Why don’t you do me a favor? Go on over to my blog and show me ONE instance where I’ve even mentioned the King situation. Perhaps if you weren’t so busy spitting out the GOP talking points, you’d take the time to pay attention to the fact that I wasn’t defending a lack of evidence but rather harshly pointing our a double standard that certain people seem to have when it comes to such things. We don’t care so much for evidence when it’s someone’s freedom or someone’s life that we’re talking about, and we believe the Swift Boat Veterans, but if you dare assert that Troy King is gay, then well you’d better have some pictures or a video because anything less is not good enough.
And just what is this “source” you are asking to consider? Are you referring to the informant, or are you referring to the blogs who have gotten the scoop on multiple stories, including various Langford (a Democrat, I might add) mishaps and (lest we forget) Memogate? You might want to be careful of who you label a “dem” or “gay lobby.” I happen to be an independent voter, and I’m a stay-at-home mom. A Democrat wouldn’t have gone after the Birmingham mayor and city council repeatedly. A Democrat wouldn’t have gone after Joe Reed. A Democrat wouldn’t have endorsed John McCain.
Angry Dem, all due respect, but there actually is some substance to the story. I know it seems like a lot is just being mindlessly repeated, but they’re just protecting a source. If they were going to create a gay rumor out of thin air, they’d have gone after someone else less touchable. There’s just no need to make something like this up about Troy King. He’s done enough PUBLICLY to feed the MSM and the blogosphere for the next 10 years. There’s no motive.
As to this:
“Troy King is still married to the mother of his three children”
That’s not unusual in political couples. Why does everyone assume that if the husband had an affair that there will be a divorce? Bill and Hillary Clinton are not divorced, so therefore must we assume that he never cheated on her? Catherine of Aragon stayed married to Henry VIII for years even though he was cheating on her, and she refused to leave him willingly. Did Diana leave Charles when she first discovered he was cheating? John and Jackie Kennedy stayed married, so can we assume that he never cheated on her? Political marriages are just different from other marriages. Career Politicians are not every day average people like you and me, unfortunately. They are quite often groomed from birth to be what they are. Marriage (and even children) is a political strategy for them.
As to this:
“You can repeat it as often as you want, it’s not true and Alabamians aren’t believing it.”
Let me say that it wasn’t the initial rumor that convinced me. It was the reaction from the Right. Notice that my very first comment on this situation wasn’t on my own blog. I haven’t blogged in months. In fact, it’s been weeks since I commented on anyone’s blog. I haven’t commented anywhere else but here, and it was after about 58 comments of mostly Republicans who were livid about Loretta Nall pointing out that school was out for the summer. THAT is what got my attention.
If it didn’t have some substance to the story, and if it wasn’t any more than a silly rumor, then you wouldn’t see these people so riled up. So then, I’m led to believe that there must be something to this. I mean, we’ve got a GOP political consultant from AU responding to a blog post about this. Do you honestly believe that the PR guys would be out in full force if they didn’t feel like there was something to defend?
Comment by ALmod — July 16, 2008 @ 9:55 am
About school being out: I don’t know about King’s children, but my niece’s public school is IN now, it’s year round.
Also, schools around here start up pretty soon.
Comment by Reactionary — July 16, 2008 @ 10:22 am
Most public schools are out at the moment and won’t start back for a few weeks. Now, imagine if King had come out, laughed, and said, “That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. Of course, it’s not true!” Do you honestly thing that would have resulted in better or worse things being said by children than letting blogs go ahead and run with it?
These things are being said, either way. But by King NOT holding a press conference, that adds fuel to the fire by saying, “Well, he’s not denying it!” If he’d come out and said something, it’s quite possible that this would have been old news by the time school started back for most Alabama children. Instead, he’s prelonging the media attention by not denying it.
Hey, I think I just found a motive for the lack of a press conference.
Comment by ALmod — July 16, 2008 @ 10:36 am
Danny, Bessie Smith’s “Inside Alabama Politics” has an interesting take on this whole thing. Obviously this is gradually bleeding into media other than blogs.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 11:03 am
#107 Can I have a link to the Bessie Smith article?
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
Don’t have a link - reasd the hard-copy newsletter
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
Here is the first appearance of this story in MSM Alabama media, with a lot of background. Also - for Susan - note the description of how print jornalists decide whether or not to publish stories - even stories where hard evidence DOES exist. You’ll find that stories can get killed even when there is a good deal of evidence to support the story.
http://www.lagniappemobile.com/article/1587
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 12:51 pm
“That’s how things roll now. If enough people start chatting and blogging about something, it can practically become a major news item even without a shred of what any journalism professor would consider “fact.” Welcome to the new journalism.”
Is that what you were referring to?
Or was it this?
“In some ways it is frightening, as one can easily imagine a situation in which a false story could go viral and smear an innocent person. Even as I write this, that still may be the case with this story about King. Certainly as of July 11, there isn’t a shred of “fact” out there suggesting the story is real. There are plenty of knowledgeable people who insist it is fact, but sans photos, admissions, love notes or court filings, the old pieces that would have made up a standard news story are missing.”
And this is not a story about Troy King–it is a story about the gossip about Troy. Big Difference.
Comment by Susan Fillippeli — July 16, 2008 @ 1:52 pm
I love all these posters who claim to know the inner workings of The News, what stories it has written and ready, and why Langford stories were held. The fact is, Langford stories weren’t written until the documentation was gathered, and it had nothing to do with any “deals” hanging over heads. You all are so caught up in your own mystery and hype.
Second, The News has no story written and ready, and Danny’s source on that was also dead wrong. Now, a reporter may try to bluff King and others to get a comment to base a story on, but there was no story ready to run. And mostly, because Susan is right … the only supporting material right now on this story are Montgomery hacks who claim to know things about King and say they know certain events happened. But when you ask them — and yes, Glynn, that’s you — to prove it, they have nothing to prove this. That’s why this rumor hasn’t risen above the irresponsible level of the blogosphere.
As we speak today, that’s the status. I just love, though, how you all seem to know everything about why the “story” isn’t running. Come up with everything you can, except this one — how about because no one can offer anything at this time to back up their big mouths.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
Siegelman’s friends continue to confuse evidence in a courtroom with comments in blogs. A jury heard testimony from six — not five — witnesses who documented the impropriety of and nature of the campaign payment as a bribe. One of those witnesses was Nick Bailey, and whether you like it or not, the jury believed him. So let’s not fool ourselves with a cheap rewriting of history to claim there was no evidence in the Siegelman case. Clearly, that’s wishful thinking.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 2:15 pm
I did see one thing in Susan’s post above that caught my eye - something she quoted and I will repeat here: “There are plenty of knowledgeable people who insist it is fact.”
Note the term “knowledgeable.” Equate that with Montgomery insiders who hve been reliable news sources before.
I also know some people very knowledgeable about Montgomery politics who also swear this story is true - people not given to making false statements. And I also know some reliable people who swear there is nothing to this rumor.
There very well may be truth to this story. It isn’t just bloggers making things up. I think there is a strong possibility that somewhere in here is a hard nut of truth.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
Anonymous in 112,
Good comments. Thanks.
I hope I did not misrepresent the source that you say was “dead wrong” in a way that was not clear. My understanding was that the source believed a Birmingham News story was coming on Sunday, which is not quite the same as saying that they knew. I actually said that they “anticipated” a story. Not meaning to split hairs, but I don’t think it’s accurate to say that it is “dead wrong” that they anticipated a story.
ALMod in 104,
You got my attention when you said “the PR guys” were “out in full force.” I know he has defenders in blog comments, but I think I have missed any organized effort by PR guys. Can you elaborate? I know I initiated a couple of calls trying to confirm or not the rumors of his resignation and of the press conference I heard about, but other than that, I’d not heard much from his side. I’d hate to miss PR guys out in full force if I’m overlooking it, and feel like that would be a story. I would be glad to hear more about that.
Thanks.
Danny
Comment by Danny — July 16, 2008 @ 3:11 pm
Anonymous #112, something you said caught my eye.
You said:
Second, The News has no story written and ready, and Danny’s source on that was also dead wrong. Now, a reporter may try to bluff King and others to get a comment to base a story on, but there was no story ready to run.
And you know this how?
Anon #112, you also said this which caught my eye:
The fact is, Langford stories weren’t written until the documentation was gathered, and it had nothing to do with any “deals” hanging over heads.
Are you saying documentation was gathered for Langford but none is being gathered for King? If not, why not?
Thanks,
Comment by bhmhomeboy — July 16, 2008 @ 5:41 pm
116 No documentation is being gathered, b/c none exists. The rumors you manufactured to hurt King were demonstrably false and have been proven so. The rumors being posted on all the gay websites were that Troy King’s wife was divorcing him and he was going to resign over an illicit affair. How hard is it to walk to the court house, request a copy of King v. King and make a copy of the divorce pleadings? How hard is it to walk into the office of the Attorney General and ask the receptionist for a copy of the letterhead and check the name of the AG that replaced King after his purported resignation that the gay blogs said was coming a week ago. There is no documentation because the stories are lies. A political hit job aimed at the frontrunner for 2010. Most of the people I talk with now realize this was trumped up and have told me they support him now more than they did before. Admittedly, I am not talking to many democrats or gays.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 7:33 pm
A rock for my rock.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
Setting aside the rumors of sexual impropriety, other issues have come to light that the main stream media should investigate. Specifically, how does someone who is one year removed from college with a broadcast journalism major and no law degree suddenly rise to such a high level in the attorney general office? How does someone with presumably no managerial or personnel experience become integrally involved in the decision making of the attorney general office? Did the aide receive use of one of the largest offices in the attorney general’s complex after less than a year of employment? Is it true that the aide received a five figure raise in salary during a year in which other state agencies are facing layoffs due to budgetary constraints?
These are issues the main stream media can and should investigate.
Comment by Antisthenes — July 16, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
what the heck are you talking about? the guy is an executive assistant. a glorified gofer. every politician has one, they are usually political appointments and they are always over paid.
Comment by Anonymous — July 16, 2008 @ 11:08 pm
Oh, but there was a deal that was very much hung over the News by Langford, as The Birmingham Weekly so eagerly pointed out. And the Birmingham News even covered it after Weekly blew the whistle. If you’d like a history of that, feel free to take a gander over at my blog archives, as I’m really not in the mood to dig up old links.
Documentation had absolutely nothing to do with it, and that’s proven by the fact that the News was able to publish the details of Langford’s “confidential” tax increase before they had the documentation. The News did file for the release of the information, but the details were leaked to them before they got it. Documentation wasn’t needed in the case of Langford’s office renovations. All you had to do was walk into City Hall to see it. Duh! If documentation was needed for everything, they’d never get any stories out on time.
You do realize, by the way, that many of us do have friends and contacts who work in these newsrooms, right? I personally am proud to call one News columnist a friend. And I have several contacts that range from state legislators to MSM journalists. I’m no dummy when it comes to the inner workings of a newsroom.
So to answer homeboy’s question, there was little documentation (if any) that was gathered on some Langford stories because little was needed. Almost all of it was public knowledge. It doesn’t take more than a day to get some pictures and interviews, which is why the whole “gathering documentation” claim as to why the News took WEEKS to report the office renovation is completely absurd.
Now, why on earth would we believe that there’s enough out there to print a story? Because Troy King believes it, or at least he did. Troy King believed that there was enough of a story– enough out there for them to get their hands on– that he planned a press conference that he later canceled. THAT gives more credibility than anything.
And the fact remains… There is no need to make anything up about the AG. He’s screwed up enough as it is.
“One of those witnesses was Nick Bailey, and whether you like it or not, the jury believed him.”
So if I tell a lie, and you believe it, is it true, then? Your sense of right and wrong is astonishing.
Danny… The answer to your question should be obvious, but you do have my email.
Comment by ALmod — July 17, 2008 @ 4:52 am
Your misguided focus on office renovations for Langford notwithstanding, you miss the point of the earlier post. It regarded far more significant stories about Langford, as opposed to the less signficant reference you’re making. You also prove my point about publication of the “confidential tax increase,” which was something published after documentation was leaked to the paper. And your claim to have “inside” information at The News is also not impressive. The material on Langford was gathered before stories were done and the issues properly documented, and The Weekly’s claims or your own about Langford’s “deals” hung over The News are equally absurd. But it fits a fantasy you have about how real media operates, which allows bloggers to rationalize their own irresponsible actions.
Interesting, too, that you focus on Bailey’s testimony to cling to your belief that everyone has lied against Siegelman - the media, the grand jury, the prosecutors, the judge, the jury, some fellow defense lawyers, the White House — everyone has lied, but Siegelman. Also funny how Siegelman’s defense lawyers didn’t create a liar out of Bailey. But of course, the jury was in on all of it too, so the fix was already in. You also miss the significant point that five other witnesses corroborated Bailey’s characterizations. But again, your myth is more interesting than the truth.
It’s amusing how good your “sources” at The News are. I can assure you, mine are far better.
Comment by Anonymous — July 17, 2008 @ 7:44 am
to 119; they can investigate, but they can’t write a story. The minute they publish a story (or even a reference) on an employee of the AG’s office who is NOT a public figure, linking him to all this trash on the internet (at least by inference), they will be subjecting themselves to tremendous liability. Therefore, they couldn’t write the story unless they could prove that the trash in the rumors was true, which has already been proven to be false. There is a cloak of protection they enjoy when writing about public figures. Other employees of the office are not public figures, thus the standard for defamation is much lower. The named employee would not have to show actual malice.
Comment by Anonymous — July 17, 2008 @ 8:23 am
“Already proven to be false”???
#123 that’s an unsupportable statement. True or false on this one has definitely NOT been established.
I did hear something yesterday personally from a source very close to the AG himself that seemed to confirm the marital separation story. That may be a total coincidence and that also could be a misinterpretation of facts, but this story keeps on keeping on and will until it either dies from lack of info or it hits mainstream media.
Comment by Anonymous — July 17, 2008 @ 9:26 am
Wow! You really ARE grasping at straws! Let’s see… Where to begin…
“Your misguided focus on office renovations for Langford notwithstanding, you miss the point of the earlier post. It regarded far more significant stories about Langford, as opposed to the less significant reference you’re making.”
No, it was stated that they would NEVER sit on any story about a politician unless there wasn’t enough proof to back the story. I proved very easily that they so and that they did. Just because it’s not the exact little story you wanted doesn’t mean that it’s not an example. Tax money was being used (and is being used) to make expensive cosmetic changes, and the people had a right to know. I wasn’t the only one who commented at the time that they were going easy on Langford, as you can see here:
http://gordonunleashed.com/blog/2007/12/14/birminghams-mayor-and-the-press/
The office changes were just one example. It’s an easy one to use because it was the most noticeable, but there were more:
http://almoderate.com/2007/12/07/god-bless-birmingham-weekly/
The first blog link talks about the deal that Langford had hanging over the News, and it quotes the Weekly article. Unfortunately, The Weekly takes down its articles from the web after a certain period of time. Absurd or not, the deals hung over the News were even reported by the News themselves– but not until after the Weekly article was printed. So why would the News report false information about itself? Also, if the News failed to report it earlier, is it because it lacked the proper documentation about itself? You know, like VIDEO COVERAGE of the COUNCIL MEETING just a few weeks prior where Langford announced that he’d be seeking other sources to release city announcements? Give me a break!
“And your claim to have “inside” information at The News is also not impressive.”
I was pointing out how little you know and the fact that some of us actually DO know how newspapers work– despite your claims otherwise. I could care less how little you are impressed by your own ignorance.
“The material on Langford was gathered before stories were done and the issues properly documented.”
Yes, it was… WEEKS before some stories ran. The Weekly is not held to any lower standard, and they STILL published before the News. You’d be surprised just how quickly you can gather the information and documentation to back up a story.
So that means that this…
“It’s amusing how good your “sources” at The News are. I can assure you, mine are far better.”
…is complete and utter b.s. The News itself published articles about the situation, albeit later than other publications.
“But it fits a fantasy you have about how real media operates, which allows bloggers to rationalize their own irresponsible actions.”
I suppose it’s a fantasy of mine that “real” media decided to show false documents regarding the president’s service record. I suppose it’s a fantasy of mine about how the “real” media has to post corrections and clarifications on a near daily basis. I suppose it’s a fantasy of mine that the “real” media “accidentally” leaked the name of a CIA operative. I suppose it’s a fantasy of mine that “real” media in 24-hour news fashion has incorrectly reported the death of more than one person. And I suppose it’s a fantasy of mine that the “real” media has:
http://www.regrettheerror.com/
Oh well, you get the point. Methinks they doth protest too much. Our identities aren’t exactly secret, and we are held to the same legal standards and can be sued, AND we aren’t backed by corporate law firms.
Even Troy King has given the rumors some small amount of clout. No matter how much you don’t want to believe it, he originally had scheduled a press conference. That means that he believed that there was enough out there for him to be required to say something in his defense. So he was preparing for the story only to cancel the event later.
“they can investigate, but they can’t write a story. The minute they publish a story (or even a reference) on an employee of the AG’s office who is NOT a public figure, linking him to all this trash on the internet (at least by inference), they will be subjecting themselves to tremendous liability.”
That would be why they (and we) sometimes leave names out of articles. The same thing goes for names of crime victims, but that doesn’t keep them from publishing the stories.
Regarding Bailey… If you’ll go back to some of my previous blog postings you’ll see that I believe that our former governor was 100% guilty. The same for Richard Scrushy. My point in bringing up the story at all was to point out the double standard from the GOP in requiring “evidence” for everything. That’s why I also brought up the DNA evidence. The stance seems to be that hard evidence is necessary when you claim someone is gay, but if an innocent person could potentially die, we care not for running a simple test that could make sure we got the right guy.
I might also point out that a jury believed that O. J. Simpson was not guilty, Richard Scrushy was not guilty, and Congress did not find sufficient evidence during the Clinton impeachment to remove him from office. Does that mean that these people were all innocent? Rather, your standard on what is truth and what is not seems to be focused around what you can make a small pool of people believe– not actual truth. If that’s the true basis for the GOP to determine what is true, then I’m afraid the AG is (excuse the pun) screwed.
Comment by ALmod — July 17, 2008 @ 9:53 am
UPDATE:
It appears that Weekly DID NOT take down the article. They just moved it:
http://www.bhamweekly.com/archive_article.php?article_id=572&issue_id=91&vol=11#article
Also, here’s the Birmingham News coverage of their own debacle, in case anyone else wants to claim that it’s all a part of my imagination:
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2007/10/news_publisher_editor_meet_wit.html
http://search.al.com/sp?aff=100&keywords=%22legal+advertising%22&x=0&y=0
(al.com no longer has the article freely available, but it is available in the archives. This is the search results, and you can read SOME of the article in the description.)
He’s also pulled the same stunts with broadcast media:
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2008/04/langford_pulls_advertising_fro.html
Comment by ALmod — July 17, 2008 @ 10:08 am
I’m glad I hit a nerve with ALmod, who sounds just about as psychotic as the boy at Locust. And interesting that your bizarre fascination with the Langford “deal” hanging over The News seems to crumble under its own weight. How then do you explain how that paper produced article after article after article noting problems Langford faces, not only in a potential court setting, but with the council? Is it because he hangs a “deal” over their head? How is it that The News produced stories about his non-profits, charities, private business deals and other issues? Is it because he hangs a “deal” over their head?
Let me get this right. You post links to issues relating to Langford’s use of city classifieds. And you believe that supports your point that The News was afraid to publish because of this “deal.” And it occurs to me you have no idea what publication today actually publishes those classifieds. Because if you did, you’d realize how dumb your argument looks. And your entire theory on The News not publishing stories about Langford, and by extension not publishing stories about King, is because its afraid to lose the city classifieds? That’s your “deal” hanging over their heads?
And interesting how you take as fact that a press conference was scheduled by King. Really? And your proof is? … Careful to believe those who claim to know things, but don’t put names or documentation on the table. Obviously you’ve never played poker. Or better, join our Tuesday night game because it’s clear to me you’re a sucker. “You wanna fold because of these three Aces in my hand.” And after you fold, guess what, you don’t see my hand.
I’d say you’re an idiot, but your own rantings pretty much show that. So I’ll let you speak for yourself.
Comment by Anonymous — July 17, 2008 @ 11:30 am
It is hard to keep up with all the BS on here posted by the various anonymous posters, but I do note that anonymous # 127 is critical of sources that do not include names, yet refuses to attach his or her own name to their opinions.
Comment by Joe — July 17, 2008 @ 4:22 pm
“Joe” on the other hand, really puts his money where his mouth is. Way to take a stand “Joe”. Nobody can accuse you of not signing your name “Joe”.
Comment by Anonymous — July 17, 2008 @ 8:45 pm
Right. And click on “Joe” and go to Bessemer Opinions and see where I stand on the Troy King issue. I fully believe he is hiding (or trying to) in a deep closet filled with young guys. I’ve seen it too many times when the virulent homophobes are the closet gays. On Bessemer Opinions search Troy King and read all about it.
Comment by Joe — July 17, 2008 @ 9:03 pm
Hey, Joe -
I went to your Bessemer Opinions page and read the latest post (it took me a couple of times to sort out the Part A’s and Part B’s). If I’m reading it right, the point you’re making is the only reason he’s clamming up is because he’s guilty, right?
If that’s the case, it makes perfect sense to me. If somebody accused me of what King’s being accused of, and I was innocent, I would stop at nothing to clear my name (politics be damned in this case). And you know what, I don’t know anybody who wouldn’t do the same thing.
Anyway, if that’s what you’re saying, I agree with you. Even if you won’t post your name. :-)
Comment by The Sandman — July 17, 2008 @ 9:48 pm
Sandman,
Yeah that is exactly the point I am making.
Oh and right, since every post on Bessemer Opinions says “Posted by Joe Openshaw.” I am not embarrased or ashamed of my opinions and writings. I am suspicious of commentors on my blog (and this one too) who post anonymously. What is their real agenda? It’s easy to hide behind the cloak of anonymity, easier than hiding in, say, a closet. Gee, maybe those anonymous posters actually are in a closet!
Comment by Joe — July 18, 2008 @ 9:18 am
Sorry Mr. Openshaw, but the gays are the ones driving this rumor. Just look at the sights shilling it.
as for 131, maybe you would stop at nothing to clear your name, but you are not an elected official. The only way for King to clear his name is to keep quiet. The fact that not one legitimate source has printed this smear proves the lie. The minute King steps to the microphone and denies a gutter politic smear campaign he makes it a national news story. Every paper runs the story under the headline, AG denies he’s gay. King has 3 small children to worry about. As of now, only sleazy disgusting websites like Locust fork have published the name of these children in connection with these baseless rumors. Maybe you would do something different, maybe not. I guess we’ll never know, until you get elected AG and smeared by gay websites attacking you because of your political agenda.
Comment by Anonymous — July 18, 2008 @ 10:19 pm
Anonymous… You seem to be missing the point. I never said that the News never wrote an article. I said that they failed to write any critical articles pointing out Langford’s problems until weeks after he’d been elected– AFTER they’d been outed as being bullied by the mayor. Are you really that desperate to prove me wrong after I’ve shown you where even the News reported on this deal, or are you just not even reading my posts at this point?
You obviously have no idea what the difference is between classifieds and city legal advertisements. (Those are still publised by the News, by the way, so yes I do know which publication still carries them. If you had done any reading at all of the links I gave you, you’d see that the council went ahead and voted to renew their contract with the News.) There’s a HUGE difference in definition as well as the amount of money involved. The fact that you don’t know that shows about how much you know about how a publication operates. No, I’m not saying that King is holding something similar over their heads. I’m poining out that there are reasons why a paper would hold back a story.
“Obviously you’ve never played poker.”
Actually, I have. Usually when a guy is jumping up and down and ranting about how good his hand is, it’s a classic tell of a bad hand. Now if one player has actually calmly turned over two of their cards and has an Ace of Hearts and a King of Hearts, and there’s a 10 and a Queen on the table, and the other is still jumping up and down saying that he’s got the Jack but hasn’t shown it yet… Guess which one of us seems to behave the most threatened.
You’re sounding more and more desperate by the minute. Keep it up. You just can’t argue with the fact that the Langford threat to pull Birmingham’s contract with the News actually existed. And the Birmingham News refrained from criticizing the new mayor until after that was reported on by the Birmingham Weekly. In fact, they even published an editorial asking Patrick Cooper to drop it and move on. It’s proven, it happened, and closing your eyes and wishing it wasn’t true, clicking your heels, and throwing pixie dust doesn’t make it any less real. I’ve proven that the News can and will hold a story. And if they can hold it in one case, they can hold it in another.
“I’d say you’re an idiot, but your own rantings pretty much show that. So I’ll let you speak for yourself.”
Yeah, I read news articles and pay attention to what’s going on, and I don’t ignore them and tell people who do read them that it all happened in their imagination. I must be the idiot. You’re a rather classy fellow, I should say. Please tell me more, because I really value the opinion of the type of person who ignores very solidly proven fact and calls people idiots when they refuse to ignore it as well. Ignorance is bliss, after all. You should be a philosopher.
By the way, I’d love to confirm your suspicion. There is in fact a “gay lobby” that sits behind the scenes and plans these things out. They have a master plan which includes secretly turning every heterosexual married man gay and the killing of cute little kittens. (They’ll let the mangy ones and those ugly hairless things live just so that they can taunt you.) Be afraid, and be sure to spray down your home with Lysol, or the gay will get you. Lock your doors and don’t leave your home. I hear it’s airborne.
Now, let’s see… Apparently you didn’t catch one of the many interviews with Barack Obama (who does have a small child) where he had to address various ridiculous and rather venomous rumors about himself. He went on television, laughed about them and shrugged them off and said “not true.” End of story. THAT is how a true politician handles these things. It doesn’t stop with politicians, either. Celebrities, even those with small children, will go public to address rumors– even the ridiculous ones. Why? Because it’s a tried and true method that actually is more likely to work than ignoring the rumors. Now, I know that Marie Antoinette is an exception to the rule. She ignored the rumors about her, and she had small children. I’m sure she fared well.
Comment by ALmod — July 19, 2008 @ 11:20 am
It’s no wonder nobody reads your site.
Comment by Anonymous — July 19, 2008 @ 11:38 am
That would probably be because, as I stated before, I’m not blogging anymore.
On the other hand, back when I was blogging, I got some fairly comparable readership. Nice try, though. :)
Comment by ALmod — July 19, 2008 @ 11:44 am
THAT is how a true politician handles these things. It doesn’t stop with politicians, either. Celebrities, even those with small children, will go public to address rumors– even the ridiculous ones. Why? Because it’s a tried and true method that actually is more likely to work than ignoring the rumors.
134 - That is exactly the point I was trying to make.
133 - I stand by my original comment. Generally the only people who don’t go public to defend themselves are the guilty ones. Any argument to suggest otherwise is pure BS in my book. And don’t give me the doing it for the kids argument. I have six kids, and if I knew I was innocent of a charge and kept my mouth shut just hoping it would go away, they would lose all respect for me and probably wouldn’t believe I was telling the truth.
Comment by The Sandman — July 19, 2008 @ 12:12 pm