May 11, 2001

6:31 AM

The Rumor is spreading.The Tallahassee Democrat gets up to 10 calls and emails a day asking why they haven't printed it. Vanity Fair is sort of writing about it in its July issue, they say. The Internet is all abuzz. But it seems that nobody can prove The Rumor, so instead they're simply going to keep talking about the fact the rumor exists until either someone comes forward with documentable proof, or until practically everyone knows about it anyway and thus the desired damage is done, regardless of whether The Rumor is true or not. It seems to have something to do with high-ranking Republican Florida state government officials and blowjobs, though. The same old "friend of a friend heard that Jeb and Katherine Harris are lovers" BS, or something newer? Doesn't the media have a responsibility to keep their trap shut until and unless they can come up with some real proof, rather than forcing it to come out by making the lack of provability into a so-called news story?
posted by aaron (42 comments total)

so you're asking that the media act differently than it did in, say, the clinton years? or the election?

did you have a problem with the media spreading flat-out lies about al gore during the election, painting him as an individual that couldn't tell the truth when almost every single one of the "lies" they accused him of telling were fabricated either by republicans or the media itself?

suddenly you expect "the media" to act ethically?
posted by palegirl at 6:37 AM on May 11, 2001

The sad thing is that the media is acting differently than it did in the Clinton years. The sadder part is that they're giving Dubya lots of slack.
posted by owen at 6:44 AM on May 11, 2001

Yes I did, when they were lies. However, there is no doubt that Gore has, ah, padded his resume over the years, which is what made the not-quite-true reports about him flourish so easily. In other words, yeah, they should have stuck to the true, easily-provable examples of his lies, but that they made up new examples doesn't disprove the basic underlying reality.

Likewise, I would not like it if the media made up stories about recent liasions between the two unnamed individuals above, if they had proof of older trysts that seemed somehow too boring to publish themselves.
posted by aaron at 6:46 AM on May 11, 2001

The Capitol press corps is waiting with bait-like breath...

I smell a worm!
posted by xiffix at 6:50 AM on May 11, 2001

The sad thing is that the media is acting differently than it did in the Clinton years. The sadder part is that they're giving Dubya lots of slack.

Absolutely right, owen. I'm sick to death of the free ride Dubya seems to be getting from the allegedly "liberal media". And anything the Dems did during the Clinton years was like bleeding in front of sharks.
posted by mac at 6:53 AM on May 11, 2001

"Liberal" doesn't necessarily mean "more liberal than you personally."
posted by aaron at 6:57 AM on May 11, 2001

Regardless of which way the media chooses to sway, which is often whatever side looks more favorable, I don't think you can fairly accuse Al Gore of "padding his resume without acknowledging Dubya's attempt at riding on his father's coattails. No one seems to take note of the botched business record of this man or stops to consider why he has been a grade "A" failure. But, even with all of this taken into account, there is still hope in the simple fact that "El Presidente" wields far less power than people would assume. The frightening issue is not so much who has been elected President, as much as it is the division between party lines in the House and Senate.

Ahh, leave it to spell check to speak the truth. When running my post through, it suggested that I replace "Dubya's" with "Dumbass'."
posted by Oddsea at 7:03 AM on May 11, 2001

media have a responsibility to keep their trap shut until and unless they can come up with some real proof

They do, but they sure as hell didn't do it the last 8 years, did they? George & Jeb gotta take as good as they give...
posted by owillis at 7:03 AM on May 11, 2001

I had no idea George & Jeb were reporters before January 20.
posted by aaron at 7:07 AM on May 11, 2001

From the article:
There's a rumor galloping around town, a story which - if true - would change the political landscape considerably. If you've heard the titillating tale, you know the one I mean. If you haven't, you're not going to read it here.

Talk about a tease! Geez, what is it already? Gimme the goods!
posted by mapalm at 7:13 AM on May 11, 2001

And I had hear it was Jeb and Jena! If he chooses the Sec babe, then that explains the other rumor: he may not run again. But I suspect the two deserve each other. As Freud might have said about this: sometimes a bush is just a bush.
posted by Postroad at 7:28 AM on May 11, 2001

The party and machine behind George & Jeb were leaking info on Clinton since he started running in '92.
posted by owillis at 7:29 AM on May 11, 2001

So if Jeb and Kathryn had been involved at some point in the past, how exactly would that change the political landscape? Also, are we talking just state or federal, as well?


But if you've got something substantial, my phone number and e-mail address are listed right below.

Contact Bill Cotterell at [e-mail] or [phone].

Oh, and I agree there's no story until there's a story so why be so coy about it. "If you find any stained dresses give me a call!"

Bleccch!
posted by xiffix at 7:31 AM on May 11, 2001

Actually, aaron, if you consider their phone calls to John Ellis (Bush cousin) at Fox News on Election night, one could certianly argue that they had a role in news production, if they were not reporters.



Where is Drudge on this rumor? Oh, that's right...he only reports on Democratic rumors....he knows whose giving him his audience.
posted by brucec at 7:31 AM on May 11, 2001

3 points:

I hadn't heard about this rumor until now, so this thread is helping to spread it, whether intentionally or not.

If the rumor is true, it pales in comparison to the more serious allegations regarding the systematic effort to deny thousands of Floridians their right to vote. Any story that deflects attention from the *real* scandal in Florida will only serve to delay or preclude positive change there.

I didn't care about the private lives of politicians before, I don't now, and I won't in the future as long as as they perform their duty as they have sworn to do. All of the scandal mongering does nothing to help the public make well-informed decisions about their leaders, and keeps qualified people from seeking office and moving our country forward.
posted by gimli at 7:33 AM on May 11, 2001

These sexual rumors were wrong when they did them to Clinton, and they're wrong now.
posted by Doug at 7:36 AM on May 11, 2001

gimli: Right on, right on, and right on!
posted by whuppy at 7:41 AM on May 11, 2001

> These sexual rumors were wrong when they did them to
> Clinton, and they're wrong now.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Neither Bill nor Jeb is making it with Xena, no matter what Rupert Mordoch would have you think. (But I have heard some steamy stuff about John Ashcroft and Sailor Moon.)
posted by jfuller at 7:50 AM on May 11, 2001

Thanks Aaron! You're such a friend to spread this around! But wait, this doesn't have anything to do with BC's zipper so how could it possibly be news?

The ONLY reason this story "resignates" with the American public is because the Repugs, Jeb included, have taken on the mantle of the party of "morality and integrity." Hypocrisy on stage and on trial. The sword has two edges. Maybe Larry Flynt will out the lovers? Where's the "parental responsibility" in this picture?
posted by nofundy at 7:54 AM on May 11, 2001

Hey, aaron: Gore padded his resume, eh? Well, I was once in an automobile with FEMA Director James Lee Witt. OK, actually in the car behind him for most of the time, but in his vehicle momentarily, if I remember correctly. I'm not kidding, and it was absolutely no big freakin' deal. Witt was an Arkansas crony of Bill's, or rather his was a pure patronage job. Ohigod, the Vice President of the United States was a bit off the mark in his remembrance of being with Witt in Texas. Padded his resume. The media made *such* a huge deal over that. It's the most disgusting thin I've ever seen. Even a journalist I admire to no end, "Promised Land" author Nicholas Lemman got into the act with his profiles in the New Yorker. The author reports, Friends say Gore exaggerates about being close to them. Well, sheesh, he was only the Veep of the most powerful nation on Earth, maybe he was trying to do those ungrateful jerks a favor.
posted by raysmj at 7:55 AM on May 11, 2001

i am fellated to hear that jeb has a problem with scandal.
wait, i think i meant to say elated there. sorry all
posted by moz at 7:55 AM on May 11, 2001

I didn't care about the private lives of politicians before, I don't now, and I won't in the future as long as as they perform their duty as they have sworn to do.

If the rumors about Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris are true (and I have not read anything to believe they are), it's relevant because Bush recused himself from the recount in Florida and left Harris in charge. Harris is hardly impartial if she's having an affair with him.

As for honesty and politicians, nothing Gore said in the debates was as big of an untruth as this:

"JIM LEHRER: Governor Bush, if elected president, would you try to overturn the FDA's approval last week of the abortion pill RU-486?

"GEORGE W. BUSH: I don't think a president can do that."

One of the first things Bush did upon taking office was to announce that the federal government would reevaluate the FDA's approval of RU-486. Does anyone believe he didn't intentionally lie during the debate to avoid offending female swing voters?

The only alternative is that he wasn't aware a president is higher up in the executive branch than the head of the FDA, but we've been told time and time again that Bush is an underappreciated genius.

I'm not aware of anything Gore said during the campaign that was intentionally misleading on matters of substance, such as a president's plans with regard to the availability of an abortion pill.
posted by rcade at 8:31 AM on May 11, 2001

Commenting on Owen's link, "Mr Bush Catches a Washington Break" Washington Post omsbudsman and columnist Geneva Overholser writes:

"YOU'D LIKE to think each new president encounters the same standards of press coverage. It just isn't so.
...
"Conservatives have built up a well-funded, well-targeted set of organizations aimed at shaping public opinion. And the press obliges. The left has nothing comparable. One result is that, with a conservative now in office, there's simply less coverage.

"The Washington-based Project for Excellence in Journalism examined the networks, Newsweek and a couple of leading newspapers, and found 41 percent fewer stories on the president in Bush's first two months, compared with Clinton's.
...
"Meanwhile, the well-oiled machinery of conservative opinion-making rolls on."

The Clinton sex stories would NOT have seen the light of day without millions of dollars in legal and private detective fees subsidized by his political enemies--a process once described with perhaps some lack of charity as dragging hundred dollar bills through a trailer park.

The reason for legal action is not, of course, to win the case but simply to get the story into the public record.
posted by steve_high at 8:38 AM on May 11, 2001

Why all the talk about Katherine Harris? It was my impression that the rumor actually involved Cynthia Henderson, a former Playboy bunny turned lawyer. Jeb appointed her to a state post last year. At least she probably wears less makeup than Harris.
posted by trox at 8:48 AM on May 11, 2001

"Liberal" doesn't necessarily mean "more liberal than you personally."

Aaron, you and I have been at loggerheads about this since... well, it's lost in the mists of time. (Okay, since February.) But I think that regardless of whether one accepts the canard that there's a liberal media bias, one can admit that the right has a much stronger infrastructure for providing spin control. The Democrats haven't mounted anything like the coordinated efforts the Republicans did under Clinton. (That's not an dig against the Republicans; they played the game better than the Democrats are playing it.)

And no, of course Jeb's extramarital affairs, if they even exist, are none of the media's business, in general. If he doesn't have the power to fire or promote Harris and didn't lie about the affair under oath, and if the affair doesn't illustrate his hypocracy in some particular way, I don't think they're the media's business in this particular case, either. It's a shame that the attack-dog school of journalism has gotten so prevalent, but I think that we're going to be stuck with tabloid journalism for some time to come.

It was my impression that the rumor actually involved Cynthia Henderson, a former Playboy bunny turned lawyer. Jeb appointed her to a state post last year.

And if that can be proved, tally-ho! That's a story.
posted by snarkout at 8:54 AM on May 11, 2001

And no, of course Jeb's extramarital affairs, if they even exist, are none of the media's business, in general.

Um, in general, maybe.

But when the supposed affair is someone who has control over whether you brother gets elected POTUS, yes, it's pertinent, whether there's a supervisory relationship between the two parties or not.
posted by baylink at 9:02 AM on May 11, 2001

Or, the relationship would seem pertinent had Harris done anything but follow Florida law to the letter. She followed the system exactly, and is getting hung out to dry for doing what the Legislature required.

Since she didn't do anything outside the rules, she's clean. Let her swallow whatever she wants.
posted by dwivian at 9:14 AM on May 11, 2001

granted, this piece is kind of old, but here's an interesting article/editorial about the possible jeb bush/katherine harris affair, and how major news organizations (cnn) have stopped their staff from reporting on it.
posted by chacal at 9:21 AM on May 11, 2001

But when the supposed affair is someone who has control over whether you brother gets elected POTUS, yes, it's pertinent, whether there's a supervisory relationship between the two parties or not.

I think Harris was predisposed to tilt things towards W. whether she was having an affair with Jeb or not; is having an affair with Jeb really going to make her that much more predisposed to swing things W.'s way than just being one of Jeb's cronies and thinking that she might be rewarded with an ambassadorship?
posted by snarkout at 9:34 AM on May 11, 2001

Heh. Herein lies the difference between repubs and dems...
if you're the alleged lover of a prominent republican, you get a chance to be considered for an ambassadorship.

But if you're the alleged lover (M. Monroe) of a dem (Kennedy), you end up dead in a hotel room.
posted by crunchland at 10:09 AM on May 11, 2001

I do recall Drudge reporting on this rumor a few months back. You have to remember however, that Newsweek was all set to kill the Clinton/Lewinsky story until Drudge dug it up, and I'm sure that the Democrats are doing all they can to try to confirm this rumor.
posted by gyc at 10:12 AM on May 11, 2001

As for honesty and politicians, nothing Gore said in the debates was as big of an untruth as this:

Actually, the lies "W" told about various issues in Texas was way bigger.
posted by ParisParamus at 10:18 AM on May 11, 2001

No one seems to take note of the botched business record of this man or stops to consider why he has been a grade "A" failure.

You mean like Abraham Lincoln?
posted by mikewas at 10:54 AM on May 11, 2001

Comparing Bush to Lincoln is rich.

Lincoln, born in extremely modest circumstances to parents who were almost completely uneducated, brought himself up through a ferocious appetite for books. When a shop he ran failed, he conscientiously paid his debts.

Bush, born in extremely wealthy parents and given every educational advantage American has to offer, is famous for his disinterest in books. He was bailed out of every failed investment he ever made by others as a result of his family connections.
posted by rcade at 11:11 AM on May 11, 2001

gimli - If the rumor is true, it pales in comparison to the more serious allegations regarding the systematic effort to deny thousands of Floridians their right to vote.

I assume you are talking about the Gore teams effort to get thousands of absentee military ballots thrown out, right?
posted by schlyer at 11:32 AM on May 11, 2001

you go rcade! Bush was not born in a log cabin. same goes for comparisons between Bush and the crusty Truman, who also mispoke a lot.

His mispeakins came out of personal circumstance, Bush's from lack of effort. Expect Bush to play this 'I'm being misunderestimated' card way too much. It's already getting old.
posted by brucec at 12:12 PM on May 11, 2001

1996: 'where's the outrage'

2001: 'where's the drudge report.'

ok gyc, drudge may have reported the rumor a few months back. now its a few months forward. let's see the type of investigative effort he's put on other things.
posted by brucec at 12:15 PM on May 11, 2001

Bush, born in extremely wealthy parents ...

I'm surprised the mocking has not commenced about this typo. Auugh.
posted by rcade at 1:12 PM on May 11, 2001

*If* the rumor is true and Bush tries to deceive the public, I'd certainly be just as outraged as when I was when I heard about Clinton and Lewinsky.
posted by gyc at 8:55 PM on May 11, 2001

If Jeb and Ms. Harris are having an affair, that would be very unfortunate for all the family members. But suppose the affair is true. There is still no case that Kathleen Harris acted improperly in any way with regard to the Florida election. She followed law passed by the Florida legislature. The only grip I have seen about Harris' actions were that she followed the law. Someone please find me a shred of evidence that she did anything improper. Being a supporter of GW isn't enough. What improper action did she take to swing the election to GW?
posted by shackbar at 8:17 PM on May 13, 2001

Katherine Harris didn't just follow the laws. She had a lot of discretion in how she conducted herself because of Florida's conflicting election laws, and she used all of it to benefit Bush.

Harris also spent $30,000 of taxpayer money on a get-out-the-vote commercial before the election featuring Bush supporter Norman Schwarzkopf, traveled extensively to support the Bush campaign and supported a private company that removed thousands of eligible Florida voters from the rolls under the false claim they were felons.

There's a reason that Harris was named the Free Republic Public Servant of the Year in 2000.
posted by rcade at 10:48 AM on May 14, 2001

I'd disagree that her decision to follow the strictness of the law benefited Bush alone - Gore made the mistake of jumping the gun on contesting the vote, and this cost him the valuable time necessary to get things done right. When Ms. Harris stuck with the timeline, the Gore camp got pissy. If he had waited for a certified return, then contested it, he might have been able to get a state-wide recount, which would have won him the whole game. But, he was trying to hedge on "safe" counties.....

And, I would bet that the reason Norman Schwarzkopf did the commercial is because a friendly face asked; there would have been a Gore-friendly face had Harris been a Democrat, primarily because of "who you know" and how it impacts who you pick for a job with no budget. $30,000 is **NOTHING** in the commercial business.

The private company that was using state-provided data to remove voters from the Florida rolls was doing so entirely subject to the data in question. Disenfranchisement was merely collateral damage as a result of the attempts to (rightly) remove voters that had no right to vote. Oddly enough, something you could have brought up and been quite safe, is that the worst batch of erroneous data came out of Texas.....

And, the reason for Harris winning the Free Republic Public Servant of the Year in 2000 was for standing strong in the face of public pressure to let things be done, and done, and done, and redone, without end. She stuck with the mandated deadlines, and did a good job. Had Gore won, I think she still would have won the award. I know that I feel that she did an excellent job (except for her makeup, but if that is the best you have to denegrate someone, stop there and go home) in spite of all the hell the media, and the world, put her through.

I'm a little weird about being the head of elections and doing campaigning for someone, but there isn't an impartial person alive in politics.
posted by dwivian at 11:01 AM on May 14, 2001