Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[CofCinci]

Does anyone know or want to take a guess at what Josh's FRC salary was?

The CEO of FRC only makes $174,454 annually.  Josh most likely received under $100,000, which in DCland does NOT go far at all.

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3685#.VcAEHRNViko

 

You can look at all the salaries of top FRC employees on charitynavigator. http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/521/521792772/521792772_201409_990.pdf

 

Duggar isn't listed, but an intern stipend of $60,000 is reported.  Could that be him?

Edited August 4, 2015 by CofCinci

[Satchels of gold]

To my mind Josh is not one of thousands of minions who could make the sausage behind the scenes. Josh is one of only several people from across the globe who was a pop culture figure accused of molesting children. The only others that came to mind are Gary Glitter and Jimmy Savile. Unfortunately Salviles actions only became known after his death so he never To face any consequences. And even in that group he stands alone because none of the other's espouse family values nor did they molest their own sisters. Josh really is one of a kind, the cheese stands alone. Are there other people in DC with shady past? Of course! Undereducated? Yep. Obtained their job from political ties or nepotism ? All the time. Molested their sisters? Perhaps. But Are any of them reality TV stars? No. Are any of them on the cover of in touch? No. Are any of them being tweeted about to a nation wide audience . It's like a huge venn diagram and Josh overlaps many of the circles but no one over laps his.

Edited August 4, 2015 by nc socialworker

[JoanArc]

 

Duggar isn't listed, but an intern stipend of $60,000 is reported.  Could that be him?

Don't forget, He was paying at least two grand in rent, plus all other living expenses.

 

60 grand is like 175 grand in rural Arkansas.

[Churchhoney]

To my mind Josh is not one of thousands of minions who could make the sausage behind the scenes. Josh is one of only several people from across the globe who was a pop culture figures accused of molesting children. The only others that came to mind are Gary Glitter and Jimmy Savile. Unfortunately Salviles actions only became known after his death so he never To face any consequences. And even in that group he stands alone because none of the other's espouse family values nor did they molest their own sisters. Josh really is one of a kind, the cheese stands alone. Are there other people in DC with shady past? Of course! Undereducated? Yep. Obtained their job from political ties or nepotism ? All the time. Molested there sisters? Perhaps. But Are any of them reality TV stars? No. Are any of them on the cover of in touch? No. Are any of them being tweeted about to a nation wide audience . It's like a huge ven diagram and Josh overlaps many of the circles but no one over laps his.

 

This is all very true! But your point of view echoes that of the general public because you, and many of us, find child molestation so unacceptable that it would trump anything else.

 

Unlike most of the world, though, a big group of political insiders trying to enact laws to their liking, though, tend to see their political game as by far the most important thing. And if they found someone useful for the game they'd grab onto any reason to tell themselves that the molestation isn't as important as all that. And in Josh's case the family has presented reasons for them, right there in the Megan Kelley interview: He was a young teenager, not an adult, and therefore he's not terribly culpable; he's confessed and done penance; Jesus has forgiven him; and his so-called victims didn't even notice what happened and consider what he did to be no big deal. 

 

To me, it's the exact same case as the Catholic Church, where you have members high and low of the hierarchy molesting tons of kids for years and years, while virtually everybody in their in-group looked the other way because they deemed what was happening far less important than the things the priests and brothers did when they weren't molesting children (and other people in their parishes). And tons of people quite credibly accused of multiple molestations have been given all sorts of additional jobs and duties, including high-level ones and ones in which they had contact with children, because others in their organization prioritized many other things above children's welfare. Many in the Church are still looking the other way and haven't ever stopped being surprised that most people, all over the world, have been beyond outraged.

 

I'd just be really surprised if conservative political interest groups and PACs and so on weren't like the Church in that regard. If somebody might possibly help them politically and can present himself as being "one of them," some will find a reason to look the other way because those things -- and not what happens to kids -- are what matter most to them. I don't think a lot of people will necessarily see Josh as all that useful. But if somebody does, I'd expect them to act just like the cardinals and archbishops.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Churchhoney

[Satchels of gold]

Thank you church honey I found that post educational, insightful and terrorizing. I guess it really is a clash of cultures. I am firmly planted on my side but that post at least helps me understand what the otherside may be thinking. I had already concluded that there was a large chasm in the two groups perception. That validated my conclusion. In the fullness of time one of the two sides will have the satisfaction of a hardy " I told you so".

Edited August 4, 2015 by nc socialworker

[Quilt Fairy]

I don't get how he even goes out in public. Doesn't he get harassed??

 

I bet most people don't even care or choose not to get involved. 

He probably goes out much easier than we think.

I suppose in their corner of Arkansas the Duggars are instantly recognizable, but I find them very unremarkable and unmemorable in appearance. Josh is the very definition of 'average-looking".

 

I'd stay in Summer nights in the 60s and 70s to watch the conventions on TV with my dad, back when they still really were conventions

I did that, too. (It does take the excitement out of the conventions when the candidates have everything wrapped up during the primaries.) But don't forget that one of the reasons people watched the conventions back then was because they were aired simultaneously on all 3 national broadcast channels all evening for 4 days. And no cable. Those were the days. ;-)

Edited August 4, 2015 by Quilt Fairy

[Wellfleet]

Well, I dunno. I guess the possibility of Josh remaining "in politics" in the future is no doubt feasible, but it just seems so very unlikely. The FRC managed before him, he was active less than two years, and they'll manage again without him now. I just don't see the draw. He doesn't have the education - he's not a thinker, or an Idea Man. And he couldn't have absorbed it at home either. He's not even an orator. He just follows the script - a script he never would have been given if his oversized family hadn't had a TV show-slash-platform of their own first.

 

All good points. Now we just need Time to tell us. It certainly will be interesting to see what is next for Josh. Maybe he WILL back in politics at some point. Maybe he'll slink back to doing something else Daddy has planned for him. As I've said his working in politics again would really surprise me, for many reasons. I mean, look at Monica Lewinsky, who after nearly 20 years is still having trouble finding a job and making a life for herself, one that makes her happy. And IMO, she really didn't do anything close to what Josh did. Of course, in Monica's case I think we do need to allow for the fact that she's female - and females are often judged more harshly, even by other females. But as Jerry Seinfeld would say,  "Really - really?"  Yep Jerry, after nearly 20 years, Monica is still walking around with her own scarlet letter. I wonder how long will Josh have to wear his?

[GEML]

The media saturation for Monica Lewinsky is a thousand times that as it has been for a C list reality star. Plus, She didn't come from a world that could reabsorb her.

We might know, but I'm skeptical. He could be working for IBLP in some capacity now, setting up meetings of people or arranging fundraisers. We would have no way of knowing.

Josh worked for FRC Action, which might have been paid out of a different filing altogether. As I said, I've always somewhat suspected it might have been funded by someone in the Fundy world. Someone like the Hobby Lobby guy.

Edited August 4, 2015 by GEML

[Churchhoney]

Thank you church honey I found that post educational, insightful and terrorizing. I guess it really is a clash of cultures. I am firmly planted on my side but that post at least helps me understand what the otherside may be thinking. I had already concluded that there was a large chasm in the two groups perception. That validated my conclusion. In the fullness of time one of the two sides will have the satisfaction of a hardy " I told you so".

 

Thank you, nc socialworker. Sorry about the "terrorizing." I know what you mean. I can't think of anythng much more horrifying than how the Catholic church has "handled" its own gigantic molestation problem. You wouldn't think there'd be a rug big enough to sweep all of that under. But they went on sweeping for decades (centuries, really, I suppose). The thing is, I think that they're far from unique and that anytime you have an in-group or an institution that looks on itself as important, chances are high that its people will do the exact same thing.

 

I hope there's a chance someday for someone to say "I told you so." But I don't know if I hold out much hope for it. (This is maybe the biggest disadvantage of atheism. It leaves open no path for humanity to change for the better or learn lessons except through humanity's own action. And history may provide a tiny sliver of hope for that, but not much. So I hope the "I told you so" happens, but I only have about a teaspoonful of hope. Kind of depressing. But, to me, it's also what gives life meaning -- the absolute imperative to try to do well and make life what it could be, since ain't nobody gonna do it for us.)

Edited August 4, 2015 by Churchhoney

[Satchels of gold]

The perception is that fundies will forgive most sins but not sexual ones. I have no idea if that is true, but that's the perception of the larger world. I was born and raised in NYC and was brought up Catholic. I knew people of all religions but never was exposed to Christian fundamentalism until well into adulthood. Even now, the only person I know who is a fundie is my sister. This forum is definetly a Margaret Mead experience for me.

[GEML]

Well, I am of the philosophical opinion that sexual sins aren't different from any other sins. And I know a lot of Christians of all sorts, Fundy, Evangelical, Mainstream and Progressive, who take a similar point of view. I think we have a media fixated on sexuality, so we consequently get a skewed perspective of religions through that lens when they are portrayed. (I think most religions are portrayed very badly in the media because most positive stories make for very boring viewing.)

That said, it's no secret that criminals of all sorts find Christians easy pickings. There is a fine line between forgiveness and naïveté. That said, as atheists become more of a group and less individual, I believe they, too, will become more susceptible to such criminals. Group identities allow for people to only reinforce what they are already hearing, and it's the bubble that allows for re absorption of a sex offender or con artist to take advantage. Not the message itself per se.

[Churchhoney]

The perception is that fundies will forgive most sins but not sexual ones.

 

It kind of seems to me that most groups (from families to institutions to political parties to ideologies to religions to nations etc.) will forgive pretty much any sins committed by those they think of as close and welcome parts of their group. But are very reluctant to forgive the exact same sins when they're committed by somebody in a different group or somebody who's in the group but on the outs with it. To me, it looks more like it's the sinner not the sin that decides whether forgiveness will be granted, most of the time.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Churchhoney

[GEML]

It kind of seems to me that most groups (from families to institutions to political parties to ideologies to religions to nations etc.) will forgive pretty much any sins committed by those they think of as close and welcome parts of their group. But are very reluctant to forgive the exact same sins when they're committed by somebody in a different group or somebody who's in the group but on the outs with it. To me, it looks more like it's the sinner not the sin that decides whether forgiveness will be granted, most of the time.

Bingo. See politics. And members of party who forgive internally by rant and rave if the other side does it for a non-religious example.

And you get into a self-perpetuating loop. If someone like the Duggars doesn't forgive Josh, then they can be criticized for not living up to their own Christian standards of forgiveness, too. So you have multiple things at once:

People who genuinely forgive because that's what the tenets of the faith require.

People who claim to forgive but are really only protecting their brand.

People who don't forgive exactly, but bring someone back in because they feel attacked by the outside world's lack of understanding of who they are.

People who deliberately use nefarious people in these communities to gain power and control.

But what they have little incentive to do is kick someone to the curb unless that person has spoken out against the community itself

[kokapetl]

To my mind Josh is not one of thousands of minions who could make the sausage behind the scenes. Josh is one of only several people from across the globe who was a pop culture figure accused of molesting children. The only others that came to mind are Gary Glitter and Jimmy Savile. Unfortunately Salviles actions only became known after his death so he never To face any consequences. And even in that group he stands alone because none of the other's espouse family values nor did they molest their own sisters. Josh really is one of a kind, the cheese stands alone. Are there other people in DC with shady past? Of course! Undereducated? Yep. Obtained their job from political ties or nepotism ? All the time. Molested their sisters? Perhaps. But Are any of them reality TV stars? No. Are any of them on the cover of in touch? No. Are any of them being tweeted about to a nation wide audience . It's like a huge venn diagram and Josh overlaps many of the circles but no one over laps his.

I dont think Josh is in the same league as Saville and Glitter, those two were undeniable child rapists and pedophiles, who committed extensive child sex abuse acts while adults. They both actively and clearly sought children. I don't know what Josh's motivation for his acts were. Edited August 4, 2015 by Kokapetl

[galax-arena]

It kind of seems to me that most groups (from families to institutions to political parties to ideologies to religions to nations etc.) will forgive pretty much any sins committed by those they think of as close and welcome parts of their group. But are very reluctant to forgive the exact same sins when they're committed by somebody in a different group or somebody who's in the group but on the outs with it. To me, it looks more like it's the sinner not the sin that decides whether forgiveness will be granted, most of the time.

Yep, it's tribalism at its finest - er, worst.

 

Of course, when it comes to the rest of the world's perception, I think that we - as outsiders - are quicker to "get over" something if it doesn't come attached with a big blazing dose of moral hypocrisy. Not that we're necessarily quicker to forgive, just that it doesn't blow up in the larger realm of consciousness and linger the way it does. I think what's really killing people like Josh and his ilk is that they've set themselves up as the arbiters of morality and traditional family values, and so they have a much narrower path to walk. They open themselves up to that type of careful scrutiny. For example, if I rag on a "traditional family values" person for getting divorced, it's not because I think that divorce is a sin - I don't - but because they've made a career out of blasting people for not living up to their moral standards while failing to live up to those standards themselves.

 

We're all hypocrites to a degree, I think. But the sort of moral hypocrisy being peddle here (with people being called deviants and perverts) is something else.

[bigskygirl]

The Coast Guard has sent the mods a message. They got a report about one of the threads being too far from land due to being off topic in the will Josh be accepted again in the real world and will he have a political career again discussion. We need to bring the thread back to shore by leaving out other molesters or Monica aka I got caught with a married president. In other words, this is the Josh and Anna Smuggar thread, not compare Josh to Catholic Church priests, how the Catholic Church handled the molestation scandal compared to the Duggars, a young intern who was "helping" a certain political leader or why Josh did what he did. Lets get out the life preservers and bring the thread vessel back to land. Posts who send the thread back to a place in the open water where it cannot be seen without a periscope aka off topic posts will be hidden by your mods. Thank you.

[farmgal4]

The Coast Guard has sent the mods a message. They got a report about one of the threads being too far from land due to being off topic in the will Josh be accepted again in the real world and will he have a political career again discussion. We need to bring the thread back to shore by leaving out other molesters or Monica aka I got caught with a married president. In other words, this is the Josh and Anna Smuggar thread, not compare Josh to Catholic Church priests, how the Catholic Church handled the molestation scandal compared to the Duggars, a young intern who was "helping" a certain political leader or why Josh did what he did. Lets get out the life preservers and bring the thread vessel back to land. Posts who send the thread back to a place in the open water where it cannot be seen with out a periscope aka off topic posts will be hidden or edited by your mods. Thank you.

LMAO!

[Sew Sumi]

This makes me sad. Especially given that the best place for this foto op was the laundry room? At this point, I don't think Smuggar has much control over anything and is clinging onto Daddy's money teats for all it's worth. 

 

Poor, poor Mack. 

 

https://instagram.com/p/59sHd9GlT-/?taken-by=duggarfam

[kokapetl]

This makes me sad. Especially given that the best place for this foto op was the laundry room? At this point, I don't think Smuggar has much control over anything and is clinging onto Daddy's money teats for all it's worth.

Poor, poor Mack.

https://instagram.com/p/59sHd9GlT-/?taken-by=duggarfam

Johannah & Kynzie love matching!

No one in this family seems to have Aspbergers, yet they post stuff that makes them seem incapable of reading a face. Edited August 4, 2015 by Kokapetl

[GeeGolly]

Looks like Hannie may have had the chicken pox.

[JoanArc]

 

No one in this family seems to have Aspbergers, yet they post stuff that makes them seem incapable of reading a face.

It's not a disorder, they just don't believe in any emotions other than happiness, love, and unquestioning obedience. Nothing else is allowed to exist (unless one of the parents is feeling it).

[Vaysh]

This makes me sad. Especially given that the best place for this foto op was the laundry room? At this point, I don't think Smuggar has much control over anything and is clinging onto Daddy's money teats for all it's worth.

 

Poor, poor Mack.

 

https://instagram.co...en-by=duggarfam

 

I'm actually quite thrilled about this photo because Hannie looks a bit battered. In a good way, as in dirty feet and legs, bit of tan, scabs and bruises all over etc. She looks like she's been out playing in the sun and quite vigorously too, which I consider a good thing since she's seemed a bit subdued in later photos. Not too much ladylike embroidering or diaper changing for her yet I hope. (Hannie has always come across as more of an Arya than a Sansa to me but I've had the feeling they're trying to mould her into a sister-mom for a while now).

 

I also have to point out that both of the girls have absolutely adorable hobbit feet!

[Churchhoney]

Looks like Hannie may have had the chicken pox.

 

"Well, that's good cause now she won't get shingles." TM Jim Bob Duggar.

[kokapetl]

It's not a disorder, they just don't believe in any emotions other than happiness, love, and unquestioning obedience. Nothing else is allowed to exist (unless one of the parents is feeling it).

But those kids don't look happy, they look a little embarrassed, how can the Duggarfam think that implies the girls love their matching outfits?

[Ljohnson1987]

Even if the girls didn't love the matching outfits, they do not have the power to say how they feel. That's taken from them at a young age.

[Churchhoney]

But those kids don't look happy, they look a little embarrassed, how can the Duggarfam think that implies the girls love their matching outfits?

 

So far from accurately reading anybody's emotions, it's probably a victory for childkind that they even knew which ones these kids were and didn't refer to them as "Whatshername" and "That Other One."

[BitterApple]

But those kids don't look happy, they look a little embarrassed, how can the Duggarfam think that implies the girls love their matching outfits?

I agree, especially Hannie. She's aged out of that stage where it's cutesy to match your siblings. The outfit is babyish and she knows it.

[JoanArc]

 

But those kids don't look happy, they look a little embarrassed, how can the Duggarfam think that implies the girls love their matching outfits?

To us outsiders, sure, they're damn unhappy. To their parents, not at all. Everyone is happy OR ELSE.

[Churchhoney]

I agree, especially Hannie. She's aged out of that stage where it's cutesy to match your siblings. The outfit is babyish and she knows it.

 

I'm of two minds about this. I think she may know. But then I also think that the Duggar kids all act about three or even three-plus years younger than their non-isolated peers.

 

I'm certainly biased by my own experience, but as another kid isolated within my own family, I was very very out of step with many milestones of social awareness and social development. And I even went to public school, and held some jobs from quite an early age. But because I didn't have actual social interchange with regular people or regular kids, I was incredibly immature in speech and action and concept -- I would say and do things that were horribly childish/childlike (or old-lady-like) and only a few years later would think of the thing and be flooded with embarrassment when I realized how completely weird I must have seemed to outsiders. I didn't fully catch up for about a decade after I left home, either.

 

I agree that both kids look kind of uncomfortable to me in the picture. But I'm really unsure about whether Hannie would have the feelings about dressing like a relative that the average girl her age might be expected to have. I frequently have seen things coming out of the older girls' mouths, for example, that suggested they had the adolescent feelings and approaches of girls way younger than they are. I'd be interested to know whether Hannie's more in step with the real world or whether she's behind, too, the way they have been.

[SomePity1066]

To us outsiders, sure, they're damn unhappy. To their parents, not at all. Everyone is happy OR ELSE.

So true ! The forced happiness of the Duggar children has always been a sad, even tragic, issue for me. They have to be ready with their game face 24/7, behaving like everything is puppies and rainbows, sublimating any of their REAL emotions, which they certainly have, in order to be the awesome, neat, amazing family that "does things a little differently, but somehow makes it all work..."

 

And Anna, poor Anna. She's been cornered into a relationship that she is now incapable of getting out of, so it's all smiles and banana splits with DoughBoy as they Instgram their new lives in NWA without a hint of what has happened. 

 

Their lives are based on the Bible, right ? Has Anna ever read the parts where Jesus, her savior, got mad, like really angry ? Or was sad and in despair ? Experienced sorrow, self-doubt, and even self-pity ? 

 

If Jesus himself can experience and demonstrate the whole range of human emotions, why is Anna expected to, literally, grin and bear it ? She may be smiling in the pics, but it never reaches her eyes, and she looks like she's made of glass and piano wire. 

 

She could certainly benefit from some therapy - if nothing else, to be able to speak her mind in a confidential forum without fear of reprisal. Is that something allowed in Duggar/Gothard circles ? I'd imagine it's verboten, but that's just a guess. 

 

In any case, I hope she can keep herself together and continue taking care of the 4 little ones she now has. I'll say this - she does seem to be a good mother, so I hope she can focus on that - it just may enough to get her through until the dust settles and she can trust Josh again, or, by some miracle, can escape and start a new life on her own. 

 

I'm probably crazy for typing that, but I can hope, can't I ?

[Oldernowiser]

 

Their lives are based on the Bible, right ? Has Anna ever read the parts where Jesus, her savior, got mad, like really angry ? Or was sad and in despair ? Experienced sorrow, self-doubt, and even self-pity ? 

 

If Jesus himself can experience and demonstrate the whole range of human emotions, why is Anna expected to, literally, grin and bear it ?

Jesus had a penis.

[SomePity1066]

If Jesus himself can experience and demonstrate the whole range of human emotions, why is Anna expected to, literally, grin and bear it ?

 

 

Jesus had a penis. 

 

Well, damn, Oldernotwiser, you've got me there ! I don't know if I should laugh (which I actually already did) or cry because the whole gender issue is at the heart of this. The women - the "weaker" sex - are strangely expected to be infinitely stronger than the menfolk but remain childlike and "sweet" about it. Meh.

[Micks Picks]

I think somebody lobotomizes these women.  Anna was in full on baby mode right after the move to DC, when their baby was only weeks old.  And she kept on about it for a few episodes, then shut up for a year and a half, and then went back into baby mode.  It was obvious Josh was not on board and we even felt bad for him.  He seemed to be a good father to the 3 he had, but was not interested in another at that time.  Anna was not to be deterred.  We all just wished he'd have gone and had a snip snip on the sly.  Anna was brought up Gothard and has the happy, happy, and adoring look, and blessings, precious, language down.  This time last year Josh seemed to be getting tired of her, like he was starting to branch out in his interests, and Anna just wasn't there.  It's a more complex situation than I would want to deal with.  But I guess it's what allows Anna to be cool with Josh now, as far as we know.  And I think she is ok with him, supports him, and is ok with moving back to Arkansas.  She didn't take advantage of the DC life, is totally home and baby centered, so there you go.  Blah.

[Sew Sumi]

Anna confirms Meredith's actual birthdate, and as many of us suspected, it wasn't the day that they announced. Meredith was, in fact, born the day the show was canceled (again, as many guessed).  eta: How SLY they were withholding details about a baby's birth that are usually given without a second thought (date/weight/length).

 

https://instagram.com/p/6DnHbkmrRb/?taken-by=annaduggar

 

From Anna:

 

Throwback to three weeks ago today when Meredith was born! So glad Jill was able to FaceTime and "be there" for Meredith's birth all the way from Central America! Love you Aunt Jill & Uncle Derick!!! #ThrowbackThursday

Edited August 6, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[ChocolateAddict]

If I was Anna, I would have been thrilled that not only were there no cameras but also no "trust me guys, I'm super qualified" Jill.  Plus no toilet (we think)!

[JoanArc]

 

Anna confirms Meredith's actual birthdate, and as many of us suspected, it wasn't the day that they announced. Meredith was, in fact, born the day the show was canceled (again, as many guessed).

Can't tell the truth about anything. That was probably a hell of a day.

[amitville]

Can't tell the truth about anything. That was probably a hell of a day.

Shame on Josh and Anna , lying about there own child.  Do they have morals or does that fall into the Jim Duggar category of morals.  They disgust me all of them.

[Almost 3000]

Shame on Josh and Anna , lying about there own child.  Do they have morals or does that fall into the Jim Duggar category of morals.  They disgust me all of them.

I can't fault them for this. Having the baby near the time of the cancellation announcement (was it really the same day?) had to have been hard on Anna. I'm glad that they are being quiet on social media because pretty nothing Josh could say would set well and frankly I don't think he really gets it anyway. Letting him sit in the background of family event pictures and keeping his mouth shut is the only smart move the Duggars have made.

[JessDVD]

Oh my word, I cannot believe it was the same day. I surely hope for Anna's sake that she was able to put all of that out of her mind and focus on laboring/delivering/enjoying her sweet baby. And I hope that the lack of cameras was helpful for her too. 

[JoanArc]

I just realized it could have triggered labor.

[Marigold]

Good point,

It was annouced that day but the Duggars knew the day before.  All the drama probably brought on labor. 

 

Since that was the case, if I had been Johs and Anna, I wouldn't have announced right away either.  I wouldn't LIE about the date. Just omit the date on all their social postings etc. 

 

Did they say the wrong date or omit? I forgot what they actually did. How many days is the difference?

 

That would explain why Josh was at the baseball game the day the baby was born.  She was born earlier than the baseball game. 

[sometimesy]

Duggars have been in the media game for a decade. Holding off on the birth announcement might have just been a way to avoid having it overshadowed by the cancellation of the show.

[ShaNaeNae]

If a baby was born with Anna's nose, it's definitely Meredith.

[kathe5133]

I would think it silly for them to lie, but at this point, if they had announced it on the same day as the cancellation they would have most likely been accused of lying to detract from the cancellation.  That's the problem with lying.  You are as good as your word.  Whatever you believe.  If you tell the truth, it becomes part of your past, if you lie it becomes your future. 

[Churchhoney]

I guess this is the position you put yourself in when you make your whole life into PR.

 

Horrible that they've raised a bunch of kids who know nothing but this "everything is a PR calculation" mentality. If you're a politician or a movie star, even, you can try to reserve the PR-is-everything approach to your career-oriented activities while at least trying to make some parts of your life private. But when you're a "reality tv star" you've made your life into your career, so there doesn't seem to be any separation between PR moves and regular living. That has to be unbelievably warping for the kids, seems to me.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Churchhoney

[Defrauder]

Duggars have been in the media game for a decade. Holding off on the birth announcement might have just been a way to avoid having it overshadowed by the cancellation of the show.

This is what I think.  The cancellation trumped the birth announcement.  I really think JB and Mechelle were hoping the fans would complain and cause an uproar over the cancellation and they didn't want the birth announcement distracting them from that.  Decent grandparents might have said - the show is cancelled BUT we have some GREAT news!  Nope.  

[Guest]

Did they actually say she was born the day they announced? I thought I remembered people speculating at the time because they didn't say "born today" or give a time.

 

I can't really blame them for delaying the announcement.  It was probably a crazy day for them.

[Defrauder]

Every day is a crazy day for them.

[kokapetl]

If a baby was born with Anna's nose, it's definitely Meredith.

Anna's nose is really dominant in a Mendelian way. Anna's nose uber alles.

[mimionthebeach]

Good point,

It was annouced that day but the Duggars knew the day before. All the drama probably brought on labor.

Since that was the case, if I had been Johs and Anna, I wouldn't have announced right away either. I wouldn't LIE about the date. Just omit the date on all their social postings etc.

Did they say the wrong date or omit? I forgot what they actually did. How many days is the difference?

That would explain why Josh was at the baseball game the day the baby was born. She was born earlier than the baseball game.

IIRC there was no date mentioned. If the dob was actually the day the cancellation was announced, I understand why they wouldn't want to detract from the birth by associating it with that date. I can totally give them a pass on this one. Edited August 8, 2015 by mimionthebeach