Kim's silence on BG situation

17,473 Views | 189 Replies | Last: 1 hr ago by Malbec
PartyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why would she not say "as I have stated before I pray for her safe return?" If she did say that before. I didn't listen to the podcast. It's almost like she wants to make news even if it is negative news. Now she looks like her players are just commodities to make her more money, and she doesn't give a shxt about them when they no longer are, rather than her kids.
trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PartyBear said:

Why would she not say "as I have stated before I pray for her safe return?" If she did say that before. I didn't listen to the podcast. It's almost like she wants to make news even if it is negative news. Now she looks like her players are just commodities to make her more money, and she doesn't give a shxt about them when they no longer are, rather than her kids.
welp…. I've got something to tell ya
Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
Malbec
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Mothballs said:


It's also bad publicity for LSU if Kim becomes involved in a back and forth with the press. She's moved on and so should you.
1. Back and forth with the press? If she just says, "We're all hoping for her safe return," it's over.
2. We shouldn't "move on" until BG is back. Even though we can't do anything about it, we don't need to forget about her. We need to keep the story in the front part of our consciousness.


Then why isn't it over?


Why didn't she say that she addressed it earlier? She could have told the reporter he was mistaken, but she said she wasn't going to say anything. And now it takes a tweet to point something out that she could have cleared up in 10 seconds. But that's what she does, she digs in her heels.
Wait just a minute. You said if she addressed it, "it's over." Now you are saying she has to continue to address the questions that she has already answered. Mulkey doesn't represent BG. She already made a kind statement on BG's situation, anything further should really be provided by those that speak on BG's behalf. And everybody that said Mulkey hasn't weighed in need to apologize and move on instead of doubling down or moving the goalposts, including those players that were flat out wrong about the subject.

*The above statements do not constitute an endorsement of any other Kim Mulkey positions or actions, but merely express the poster's views as to the fake news that has been promulgated by those with an axe to grind and parroted by others with a similar viewpoint.
EvilTroyAndAbed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Mothballs said:


It's also bad publicity for LSU if Kim becomes involved in a back and forth with the press. She's moved on and so should you.
1. Back and forth with the press? If she just says, "We're all hoping for her safe return," it's over.
2. We shouldn't "move on" until BG is back. Even though we can't do anything about it, we don't need to forget about her. We need to keep the story in the front part of our consciousness.


Then why isn't it over?


Why didn't she say that she addressed it earlier? She could have told the reporter he was mistaken, but she said she wasn't going to say anything. And now it takes a tweet to point something out that she could have cleared up in 10 seconds. But that's what she does, she digs in her heels.
Wait just a minute. You said if she addressed it, "it's over." Now you are saying she has to continue to address the questions that she has already answered. Mulkey doesn't represent BG. She already made a kind statement on BG's situation, anything further should really be provided by those that speak on BG's behalf. And everybody that said Mulkey hasn't weighed in need to apologize and move on instead of doubling down or moving the goalposts, including those players that were flat out wrong about the subject.

*The above statements do not constitute an endorsement of any other Kim Mulkey positions or actions, but merely express the poster's views as to the fake news that has been promulgated by those with an axe to grind and parroted by others with a similar viewpoint.


No, the reporter made an implication that she hadn't said anything about the situation, and she didn't correct him. She said, "And you're not gonna get one" meaning a comment. So with that one sentence, she let the world, myself included, think that she hadn't said anything and she wasn't going to. She could have said, "I've already said something months ago, and I'd like to concentrate on my current team during this press conference." But she didn't do that. It would have taken 3 seconds.
baylor1984
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Mothballs said:


It's also bad publicity for LSU if Kim becomes involved in a back and forth with the press. She's moved on and so should you.
1. Back and forth with the press? If she just says, "We're all hoping for her safe return," it's over.
2. We shouldn't "move on" until BG is back. Even though we can't do anything about it, we don't need to forget about her. We need to keep the story in the front part of our consciousness.


Then why isn't it over?


Why didn't she say that she addressed it earlier? She could have told the reporter he was mistaken, but she said she wasn't going to say anything. And now it takes a tweet to point something out that she could have cleared up in 10 seconds. But that's what she does, she digs in her heels.
Wait just a minute. You said if she addressed it, "it's over." Now you are saying she has to continue to address the questions that she has already answered. Mulkey doesn't represent BG. She already made a kind statement on BG's situation, anything further should really be provided by those that speak on BG's behalf. And everybody that said Mulkey hasn't weighed in need to apologize and move on instead of doubling down or moving the goalposts, including those players that were flat out wrong about the subject.

*The above statements do not constitute an endorsement of any other Kim Mulkey positions or actions, but merely express the poster's views as to the fake news that has been promulgated by those with an axe to grind and parroted by others with a similar viewpoint.
Kim should have corrected the reporter (she usually never has a problem with this, and I think enjoys doing it) and let them know that she had already commented on it and still felt the same on it and for those that didn't hear the podcast that she was praying for BG and her family. That would have been the end of it and she wouldn't the s-storm that she has now.
chorne68
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is a big problem for her and LSU.
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes!! They should fire her immediately and self impose a 5 year tournament ban! Good lord you people are so dramatic! All of the *****ing and morning from the usual Kim mob on here wanting her to say just 1 nice thing which she clearly did months ago
Malbec
How long do you want to ignore this user?
baylor1984 said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Mothballs said:


It's also bad publicity for LSU if Kim becomes involved in a back and forth with the press. She's moved on and so should you.
1. Back and forth with the press? If she just says, "We're all hoping for her safe return," it's over.
2. We shouldn't "move on" until BG is back. Even though we can't do anything about it, we don't need to forget about her. We need to keep the story in the front part of our consciousness.


Then why isn't it over?


Why didn't she say that she addressed it earlier? She could have told the reporter he was mistaken, but she said she wasn't going to say anything. And now it takes a tweet to point something out that she could have cleared up in 10 seconds. But that's what she does, she digs in her heels.
Wait just a minute. You said if she addressed it, "it's over." Now you are saying she has to continue to address the questions that she has already answered. Mulkey doesn't represent BG. She already made a kind statement on BG's situation, anything further should really be provided by those that speak on BG's behalf. And everybody that said Mulkey hasn't weighed in need to apologize and move on instead of doubling down or moving the goalposts, including those players that were flat out wrong about the subject.

*The above statements do not constitute an endorsement of any other Kim Mulkey positions or actions, but merely express the poster's views as to the fake news that has been promulgated by those with an axe to grind and parroted by others with a similar viewpoint.
Kim should have corrected the reporter (she usually never has a problem with this, and I think enjoys doing it) and let them know that she had already commented on it and still felt the same on it and for those that didn't hear the podcast that she was praying for BG and her family. That would have been the end of it and she wouldn't the s-storm that she has now.
Here's the thing, CKM rubs a bunch of people the wrong way, even me, but rather than say, "Oops, sorry, I now see that Mulkey has addressed this issue previously and was sympathetic to BG's plight. I should have checked before jumping on the pissy train," these folks instead just roll the narrative to, "Yes, but she should bring her previous comments to every reporter's attention that asks about BG." How about maybe a professional journalist should do a little research before asking a targeted snipe? How does that make the "s-storm" a CKM creation? If you are going to create a gotcha for clicks, then make sure it actually is a gotcha; otherwise you have a motive unswayed by actual facts. There's too much of that in journalism today, and too many "citizen" journalists working for the Twitter Gossip Rag. I have to say, I was drawn in by the protestations too.

If CKM is this vile, heartless hick that so many want to suggest, why is it necessary to use false information to feed the furnace? Seems to me that to do so, makes those folks just as petty as the one they target. And if CKM doesn't care what happens to BG, she wouldn't have said the opposite on the record to give any indication of a sympathetic stance. A hateful shrew would never want to create any semblance of sympathy for someone they hate. You should just say that CKM owes it to BG to bend over backwards and launch a crusade to repeatedly make everyone aware of how much she loves and appreciates BG. I doubt even that would do the trick though.
baylor1984
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Malbec said:

baylor1984 said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Mothballs said:


It's also bad publicity for LSU if Kim becomes involved in a back and forth with the press. She's moved on and so should you.
1. Back and forth with the press? If she just says, "We're all hoping for her safe return," it's over.
2. We shouldn't "move on" until BG is back. Even though we can't do anything about it, we don't need to forget about her. We need to keep the story in the front part of our consciousness.


Then why isn't it over?


Why didn't she say that she addressed it earlier? She could have told the reporter he was mistaken, but she said she wasn't going to say anything. And now it takes a tweet to point something out that she could have cleared up in 10 seconds. But that's what she does, she digs in her heels.
Wait just a minute. You said if she addressed it, "it's over." Now you are saying she has to continue to address the questions that she has already answered. Mulkey doesn't represent BG. She already made a kind statement on BG's situation, anything further should really be provided by those that speak on BG's behalf. And everybody that said Mulkey hasn't weighed in need to apologize and move on instead of doubling down or moving the goalposts, including those players that were flat out wrong about the subject.

*The above statements do not constitute an endorsement of any other Kim Mulkey positions or actions, but merely express the poster's views as to the fake news that has been promulgated by those with an axe to grind and parroted by others with a similar viewpoint.
Kim should have corrected the reporter (she usually never has a problem with this, and I think enjoys doing it) and let them know that she had already commented on it and still felt the same on it and for those that didn't hear the podcast that she was praying for BG and her family. That would have been the end of it and she wouldn't the s-storm that she has now.
Here's the thing, CKM rubs a bunch of people the wrong way, even me, but rather than say, "Oops, sorry, I now see that Mulkey has addressed this issue previously and was sympathetic to BG's plight. I should have checked before jumping on the pissy train," these folks instead just roll the narrative to, "Yes, but she should bring her previous comments to every reporter's attention that asks about BG." How about maybe a professional journalist should do a little research before asking a targeted snipe? How does that make the "s-storm" a CKM creation? If you are going to create a gotcha for clicks, then make sure it actually is a gotcha; otherwise you have a motive unswayed by actual facts. There's too much of that in journalism today, and too many "citizen" journalists working for the Twitter Gossip Rag. I have to say, I was drawn in by the protestations too.

If CKM is this vile, heartless hick that so many want to suggest, why is it necessary to use false information to feed the furnace? Seems to me that to do so, makes those folks just as petty as the one they target. And if CKM doesn't care what happens to BG, she wouldn't have said the opposite on the record to give any indication of a sympathetic stance. A hateful shrew would never want to create any semblance of sympathy for someone they hate. You should just say that CKM owes it to BG to bend over backwards and launch a crusade to repeatedly make everyone aware of how much she loves and appreciates BG. I doubt even that would do the trick though.
Kim in her comment made it seem like she had never spoken on the issue and that she never was going to. I'm not on the Kim is a vile human train but she didn't help herself or her school on how she handled it in the court of public opinion. Just think it would have been easier and better for her to correct the reporter and let her feelings be known (again) on the subject.
EvilTroyAndAbed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IowaBear said:

Yes!! They should fire her immediately and self impose a 5 year tournament ban! Good lord you people are so dramatic! All of the *****ing and morning from the usual Kim mob on here wanting her to say just 1 nice thing which she clearly did months ago
You say "clearly," and while she did say something, no one knew that it was on a local podcast. You didn't know, and I didn't know, and obviously no one else other than a few dozen people who listen to it knew. All she had to say two days ago was "I've already said something," because none of us, including you, knew that she had said something. And this wouldn't be a story.

I'm not part of a Kim mob. I didn't want her to go. But I go by what our players have said in the last couple of days. They know her better than you or I do, and they were pretty livid with her actions.
IowaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My point is a giant chunk in this thread we're and are *****ing because she hadn't said anything (not you) well now we know she has. So a good chunk on here look like total clowns for calling her things such as "trash" etc. the irony in all of this is that for a year these same posters ragging on Kim wanted everyone to move on and quit discussing her in threads. Yet here we are those same people bringing her up in threads just so they can take yet another dump on her.
EvilTroyAndAbed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And to clear something up: I know the reporter who asked the question. He's a good guy. He's not into "gotcha journalism." He also wasn't on the LSU beat months ago. He asked the question because BG is a huge story, and Kim has a connection to her. So to say that he should have scoured all the podcasts that Kim had been on to make sure she hadn't already said anything is kind of laughable. He's got other stories and other interviews to deal with. The question was asked innocently and with an assumption that he would get a benign response on how everyone is thinking of BG, etc. But instead he got a snarky reply.

I know this board is generally MAGA-centric and anti-media, but in this particular case, the reporter was just doing his job asking a simple question. It's not his fault that the ensuing storm was created.
Jeremy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The fallout from Kim not playing the PR game has already begun. Hannah Gusters has left the team. Her former players have been VERY outspoken over it and it is dragging into the media. This will give plenty of recruiters something to use against Mulkey. Whether you have a problem or not with what Kim did doesn't matter as it seems recruits and players do.
2022 Adopt-A-Bear: Tyrone Brown #36
RS Freshman, MLB, 5’11” 222lbs. Orange, TX
2022 Stats:
GP: 4
TOT Tackles: 10
Solo: 6
TFL: 0
Sacks: 0
FF: 0
FR: 0
INT: 0
PBU: 1

Have a wonderful day,

Jeremy
Malbec
How long do you want to ignore this user?
baylor1984 said:

Malbec said:

baylor1984 said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Malbec said:

EvilTroyAndAbed said:

Mothballs said:


It's also bad publicity for LSU if Kim becomes involved in a back and forth with the press. She's moved on and so should you.
1. Back and forth with the press? If she just says, "We're all hoping for her safe return," it's over.
2. We shouldn't "move on" until BG is back. Even though we can't do anything about it, we don't need to forget about her. We need to keep the story in the front part of our consciousness.


Then why isn't it over?


Why didn't she say that she addressed it earlier? She could have told the reporter he was mistaken, but she said she wasn't going to say anything. And now it takes a tweet to point something out that she could have cleared up in 10 seconds. But that's what she does, she digs in her heels.
Wait just a minute. You said if she addressed it, "it's over." Now you are saying she has to continue to address the questions that she has already answered. Mulkey doesn't represent BG. She already made a kind statement on BG's situation, anything further should really be provided by those that speak on BG's behalf. And everybody that said Mulkey hasn't weighed in need to apologize and move on instead of doubling down or moving the goalposts, including those players that were flat out wrong about the subject.

*The above statements do not constitute an endorsement of any other Kim Mulkey positions or actions, but merely express the poster's views as to the fake news that has been promulgated by those with an axe to grind and parroted by others with a similar viewpoint.
Kim should have corrected the reporter (she usually never has a problem with this, and I think enjoys doing it) and let them know that she had already commented on it and still felt the same on it and for those that didn't hear the podcast that she was praying for BG and her family. That would have been the end of it and she wouldn't the s-storm that she has now.
Here's the thing, CKM rubs a bunch of people the wrong way, even me, but rather than say, "Oops, sorry, I now see that Mulkey has addressed this issue previously and was sympathetic to BG's plight. I should have checked before jumping on the pissy train," these folks instead just roll the narrative to, "Yes, but she should bring her previous comments to every reporter's attention that asks about BG." How about maybe a professional journalist should do a little research before asking a targeted snipe? How does that make the "s-storm" a CKM creation? If you are going to create a gotcha for clicks, then make sure it actually is a gotcha; otherwise you have a motive unswayed by actual facts. There's too much of that in journalism today, and too many "citizen" journalists working for the Twitter Gossip Rag. I have to say, I was drawn in by the protestations too.

If CKM is this vile, heartless hick that so many want to suggest, why is it necessary to use false information to feed the furnace? Seems to me that to do so, makes those folks just as petty as the one they target. And if CKM doesn't care what happens to BG, she wouldn't have said the opposite on the record to give any indication of a sympathetic stance. A hateful shrew would never want to create any semblance of sympathy for someone they hate. You should just say that CKM owes it to BG to bend over backwards and launch a crusade to repeatedly make everyone aware of how much she loves and appreciates BG. I doubt even that would do the trick though.
Kim in her comment made it seem like she had never spoken on the issue and that she never was going to. I'm not on the Kim is a vile human train but she didn't help herself or her school on how she handled it in the court of public opinion. Just think it would have been easier and better for her to correct the reporter and let her feelings be known (again) on the subject.
Still missing the point. She DID say something nice concerning BG. Even @WBBWorldWide was able to find it. So if you want to rag on CKM for not directing the mob to that interview, go ahead. But, that doesn't excuse the vile comments and suggestions of CKM's hate for BG, which I gee-run-tee wouldn't be stopped by her pointing people to the audio.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.