Thursday, February 9, 2012

Koolaid From Mimi Alford?

The blogosphere is all atwitter about Mimi Alford and her allegations that the late John F. Kennedy bamboozled her into an affair when she was a 19-year-old intern at the White House.  A site called Rock Center has an interview with her, which you can read for yourselves.

Regretably, JFK's many marital infidelities are so well-documented that no one - not even the most ardent of Kennedy devotees, doubt them.  So when someone like Alford comes along, a common reactions has been to automatically assume that she is telling the truth.  I'm not willing to blindly jump on that bandwagon, and I find it most disconcerting that some otherwise sensible Catholic bloggers seem to be doing precisely that.  They seem to forget that the existence of a general pattern of misbehavior does not constitute evidence of the same misbehavior in specific instances.

As you read through the Rock Center piece, you'll notice her allegations of being passed around from JFK to Ted Kennedy to aide David Powers.  All these individuals are now deceased, JFK being dead for over 40 years.  Obviously none of these men are able to refute Alford's allegations and tell their sides of the story.

Ms. Alford has written a book called Once Upon A Secret: My Affair With John F Kennedy And Its Aftermath.  She stated in the web piece her difficulty in talking of the affair - but writing a book?  What proof will she offer that this affair occurred?  What irrefutable evidence will she present?  In a word, why should we believe her?  I'm not saying it didn't happen, but I'm not prepared to ascribe to her credibility.  Think about it.  She's coming forward almost 50 years later.  All of the accused are dead, conveniently unable to contradict her charges.  This smacks of detraction, if not calumny.

Again, JFK's established patterns of 6th Commandment violations do not constitute substantial corroboration for Alford's allegations.  Will any evidence be offered in the book?  Who knows?  I certainly will not be dropping one penny to find out.  I regret that too many people will plunk down their hard-earned cash to satify voyeuristic impulses.  What a waste.

And now to address some points raised by someone who commented on the Matthews post at 6:17am today:   The Alford "revelations" and the Clinton investigations are not at all equivalent.  At the time the Clinton scandals broke, he was the President - not merely someone who had already been dead for decades.  The investigations and impeachment occurred because there was concern that he not only had, but was currently (at the time) abusing his office as President of the United States to subjugate women to his whims, and the idea was to stop ongoing crimes.  Of course Clinton had every opportunity to answer his accusers - as is proper in any real pursuit of justice.  The accused in Alford's case lack such opportunity as they are quite voiceless.  I don't know why you said she has a "duty" to spill her guts (assuming she is telling the truth in the first place).  What good is being served?  Who benefits?  What crimes are being prevented (now that the "criminals" are long dead and buried)?


  1. Matthews' book is called: "Jack Kennedy: Elusive Hero". Newsweek on JFK’s infidelities (1996): More striking by far than any single revelation here is the overwhelming evidence that in private life, JFK was pond scum.”
    Chris Matthews (2012): "Here's what I think. Once you've saved your crew over in World War II, and you're a hero, and you really did protect the men in your unit, and you really did risk your life, people cut you a little slack," Matthews said.”
    It is important for Alford, Exner et al to tell their stories for the reason Exner gave shortly before her death from breast cancer when she reported that she'd aborted JFK's child: "I never, never intended to tell this story, but because of the release of new documents, I need to tell it," Exner told Vanity Fair. "But now, before I die, I think the Camelot myth should be demystified, and the Kennedy legend examined for its reality."
    While Exner had receipts for her abortion that doesn't "prove" it was Kennedy's child. Alford states that when she thought she was pregnant, “Kennedy set up an appointment with an abortion doctor, even though abortion was illegal at the time.”
    There is no reason for a 2nd hand book full of slipshod errors on JFK except to perpetuate a lie and to make money for Chris: “Matthews calls the President's younger brother Robert Fitzgerald Kennedy. His actual name was Robert Francis Kennedy. He says Senator Joe McCarthy died in 1956, when it was actually May, 1957. He also says JFK was chosen as America's 34th President, when almost everybody knows he was the 35th. Errors like these make a reader wonder what else Matthews might have gotten wrong.”
    On the other hand, the counter to the glamor of evil is women telling about waking up the next morning to go buy the morning after pill in the campus health “care” vending machine. “Actually, “Once Upon a Secret” is less an act of independent self-possession, more the helpless revelation of a woman as a victim.”
    FYI Alford’s story was first published in 2003. Mrs. Kennedy died in 1994.
    JFK’s secrets just keep giving: From “Torn Lace Curtain” by Frank Saunders (1982)
    Then there was some talk about my having stayed up until after one to meet the president. I made the mistake of asking who this friend Lem Billings was. "Oh,him! He's always here," Dora Lawrence said. "I think he sleeps with Jack more than Jacqueline does," she said.

    This was all so new to me, I did not know what the maid was talking about. And evidently I showed it. The maid laughed, a kind of half laugh. "President Kennedy doesn't like to sleep alone, Frank. Lem Billings is an old school chum, and he's always with him," she said.

  2. I will be buying neither Matthew's book nor Alford's. I can see no use for either one of them.


Please be respectful and courteous to others on this blog. We reserve the right to delete comments that violate courtesy and/or those that promote dissent from the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.