October 18, 2006
Waiting for the other shoe to drop
**** RUMOR PROBABLY FALSE: SEE UPDATE ****
Tucker Carlson and Dana Milbank have both reported rumors that a third page scandal is coming, this one involving a Congressman and a 16-year-old girl.
That would not merely seriously reignite the Foley Follies; it would also stifle the wingnut attempt to turn this into a gay scandal rather than a scandal about grown men abusing their office to make sexual advances to high-school students, and the party and institution they belong to scurrying to protect the grown-ups rather than the teenagers. If the story breaks this week or next, we could see a true landslide in November.
How likely is it that Carlson and Milbank haven't heard the name associated with the new rumor? Not very. But what's left of journalistic ethics keeps them from naming names unless and until the scandal breaks.
In the meantime, various bloggers, diarists, and commenters are busily speculating away. One commenter points to this AP photo as a hint.
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But if it isn't, I wonder why the AP picked this particular file photo from 2003 to use with the Foley story, and why the cutline identifies the second Congressman in the picture, who isn't mentioned at all in the text of the story, and why the picture wasn't cropped to show Foley alone, if Foley's problems were all that the picture was intended to illustrate.
If in fact the AP is sending coded messages in this fashion, do we approve or disapprove? I'm not sure. What I am sure of is that, if the picture and cutline weren't meant to send a message, they reflect some seriously careless editing.
Discuss.
Update Rich Miller of Capitol Fax, who from a partisan perspective would prefer to believe the rumor, has done some checking around and doesn't. If this is indeed b.s., then the AP photo editor got some 'splainin' to do.
Second update Archpundit has switched from predicting that AP would break the story today to referring its readers to Rich Miller. So the story has definitely cooled off, if it isn't stone dead.
Footnote This is why respectable media outlets don't run with rumors, especially rumors that could damage completely innocent third parties, and most especially children. Yes, Wonkette.com, I'm looking at you.
Don't have a name for you but can guarantee that if there is another name and he's a Democrat, Karl would have wasted no time leaking it to his talk radio pals.
Posted by: wren at October 19, 2006 04:48 AM"But what's left of journalistic ethics keeps them from naming names unless and until the scandal breaks. "
Hmmmm. That's the sort of 'journalistic ethics' which caused people to sit on stories until after the November, 2004 election?
Or, the same journalistic ethics that caused a major network to run a scandal based on false documents right before the 2004 election.
Posted by: Steve at October 19, 2006 07:26 AMOr, the same journalistic ethics that caused a major network to run a scandal based on false documents right before the 2004 election.
Posted by: Steve at October 19, 2006 07:27 AMMaybe a journalist can answer this: How much interaction is there between the photo and news department? My uneducated guess is that they needed a photo with certain proportions and that leaving the second member made it more visually interesting.
Posted by: npm at October 19, 2006 07:28 AMThe other guy in that photograph is a pretty obscure congressman, who recently became the son-in-law of one of Latin America's most brutal dictators.
Posted by: Cryptic Ned at October 19, 2006 08:04 AMI thought that you had to be caught with either a live boy or a dead girl for it to be a scandal. So unless someone produces a body, I don't see this one making much of an impact.
Now if it's actually John Shimkus, chairman of the House Page Board, who's been dipping into the kiddie pool, that would probably ignite a new wave of major scandal. I hasten to add that I've heard no rumors that it was him -- he's just the only congressman for whom I think this allegation would ignite a fiery national scandal. Well, maybe if it was Nancy Pelosi...
(If you want to delete my comment for containing names then so be it, but I repeat that this is not speculation.)
Posted by: neil at October 19, 2006 08:40 AMThe rules are different now. A live girl the day after someone gets caught with a live boy IS a scandal, because the two stories become one story.
Posted by: Laertes at October 19, 2006 09:32 AMAnyone who wastes 15 seconds speculating about the motives of AP editors or the coded messages they may be sending in their stock wire photos needs to go outside and breathe some of the brisk fall air.
Seriously, it's a good old, emotion-rich pic of Foley, and that's all there is it to it.
Posted by: trotsky at October 19, 2006 10:08 AMMy vote is careless editing. I think the picture and the caption were provided by AP.
For truly careless editing, check this out: http://www.christianpost.com/article/20061005/25019.htm
Same picture and caption but (unless you click to enlarge) the other congressman is not even in the picture. So if the Globe is sending coded messages to us, they were scooped by two weeks by the Christian Post.
Posted by: Anonymous Jim at October 19, 2006 01:41 PMWell, that's nice Mark. You trade in trashy rumors and then have the gall to point the finger at other websites. Yikes. At least we have a confession that you're not respectable. What's the appropriate description for your page now?
Posted by: Thomas at October 20, 2006 02:02 PMVery interesting site ! Good work ! Nongratulations :)
Posted by: Gvluxyys at December 8, 2006 08:28 AMCrefesef
[url=http://4nauto.org/volvo]volvo[/url]
Crefesef
Great page! I think it's cool! When is the next update?
Posted by: Gerard at December 8, 2006 10:53 PMHello all! Very nice site and very informativity!
Posted by: Leon at December 10, 2006 04:45 AMI am glad to find this site.
Posted by: Gerard at December 11, 2006 04:44 AMVery nice site and very informativity!
Posted by: Patrick at December 11, 2006 04:59 AMVery nice site. Thanks for your hard work in this site. I m glad I stopped by and will again many times.
Posted by: Manfred at December 11, 2006 05:03 AMHello all! Very nice site and very informativity!
Posted by: Arno at December 12, 2006 11:42 AMVery interesting site ! Good work ! Nongratulations :)
Posted by: Oscar at December 12, 2006 11:49 AMVery nice site. Thanks for your hard work in this site. I m glad I stopped by and will again many times.
Posted by: Peter at December 12, 2006 11:59 AMVery interesting site ! Good work ! Nongratulations :)
Posted by: Samanta at December 13, 2006 01:02 AMIt is very creative and includes a wealth of information.
Posted by: Willows at December 13, 2006 02:31 AMThis site rule the world! Keep fighting
Posted by: Ronald at December 13, 2006 02:51 AMVery interesting site ! Good work ! Nongratulations :)
Posted by: Ales at December 13, 2006 04:57 AMHi! Very nice and beautifull place! Keep it!
Posted by: Danila at December 13, 2006 05:00 AMGreat site! Regards: Thanks for the good info Way I'll be back very soon to see any update.
Posted by: Wilhelm at December 13, 2006 05:40 AMVery nice site and very informativity!
Posted by: Paul at December 13, 2006 05:47 AMHi! Very nice and beautifull place! Keep it!
Posted by: Pierre at December 13, 2006 05:53 AMThis site rule the world! Keep fighting
Posted by: Ales at December 13, 2006 05:59 AMI am glad to find this site.
Posted by: Gilbert at December 13, 2006 06:19 AMNice site it's very interesting site! your site is fantastic.
Posted by: Oscar at December 13, 2006 06:30 AMVery nice site and very informativity!
Posted by: Phillip at December 13, 2006 07:05 AMGreat page! I think it's cool! When is the next update?
Posted by: William at December 13, 2006 07:10 AMit is very nice to be on this site pls.your effort is nice keep it moving.
Posted by: Willows at December 18, 2006 08:10 AMThis site rule the world! Keep fighting
Posted by: Henry at December 18, 2006 08:13 AMThanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
