Paula Abdul admits prior painkiller addiction, revealing lies to media, fans

To be honest, I always expected this revelation would come from a former housekeeper or jilted boy toy.

But American Idol judge Paula Abdul finally came clean in Ladies' Home Journal (?!) about an addiction to painkillers that she says nearly killed her.

Abdul, who has repeatedly and pointedly denied abusing drugs or alcohol in the past, now says that injuries from her dancing days forced her to take heavy amounts of painkillers that led to addiction. She has denied having a drug or alcohol problem for years, blaming exhaustion; see another ridiculous denial here.

I have written in the past about how my first two meetings with Abdul at the TV critics press tour in Los Angeles led me to conclude she was high on something.

During both interactions, she slurred words, seemed to lose her train of thought easily and generally acted as if her brain was wrapped in gauze. The last time we met, during the critics tour in January, Abdul offered another whopper of a denial, refusing to admit or discuss her past public criticism of Idol regarding how it handled an obsessed fan who eventually killed herself in front of Abdul's house.

 This behavior wouldn't be a surprise to fans, who have seen Abdul jump on the crazy train too many times during her appearances on Idol and in her own depressingly oddball reality show, Hey Paula.

 From thinking Idol contestants have sung more songs than they have to offering comments only she can understand, Abdul has stumbled through more public appearances and press conferences than any celebrity this side of David Hasselhoff.

But there is no celebrity cannier than a threatened one, and with her Idol contract ending this year, a fourth judge ready to fill the void and a new album dropping, Abdul recognizes the value in coming clean now -- both to make it harder for Idol to fire her and to stoke interest in her new work.

But now that she has admitted that all those previous denials were lies, fans and journalists have to ask: Why should we believe anything you have to say from now on?

*

Comments

[Peter O'Connell]

Eric

Its only Paula Abdul for God's sake! WHO CARES what she says.

Cover something worthwhile.

[drinklime]

"John Edwards, Elizabeth Edwards, Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, George W Bush, Paula Abdul"

wow

[beltwaybandit]

Is there anyone left who is not aware that celebrities and politicians have spent years and millions of dollars learning to manipulate the media and thus the audience?

Why is anyone astonished that Paula Abdul has lied to fans for years?

John Edwards, Elizabeth Edwards, Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, George W Bush, Paula Abdul, and countless more are just a sample.

To me, the real "implied conclusion" question is, "what's wrong that journalists would help perpetuate the lying by continuing to publish everything they say, much of it unchallenged? And as an extension, what's wrong with the audiences that keep demanding more of this kind of "reporting"????

[Eric Deggans]

I think in the world of journalism and writing that is a called an implied conclusion.

In other words: that was exactly my point, just not stated directly...

[MadDogUSA]

You wrote "Why should we believe anything you have to say from now on?"

Answer: You shouldn't.