Flap's Blog – FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog

The is quite a FLAP brewing over Air America radio and the diversion of money from the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club. Blogger Brian Maloney Owns the story and has the goods here, Scandal Heats Up. Read it all.

So far, in seeking to determine whether Air America benefited from taxpayer money meant for a community youth center, we’ve accomplished two things: sending the blogosphere into action mode and compelling the company to respond to the developing firestorm.

Early Friday morning, I was made aware of a new, second press statement on the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club scandal. A number of emails and blog comments quickly followed, leading me to wonder if there was some kind of organized effort to turn the tables.

Hugh Hewitt has his take, John Campbell for Congress and Air America for Congressional Hearings.

Air America is fingered as looting public funds from kids’ programs. Air America responds by saying the fingerees left a year ago.

But what did Al Franken know, and when did he know it? Is Al returning his salary that was paid at least in part from the basketball funds of a Boys and Girls Club?

A Congressional hearing into this “transfer” of funds would be quite interesting. Perhaps Franken would lunge over the table at his questioners.

Ed Morrissey has more. Space for Commerce urges us “to think of the children.” DiscerningTexan translates the Air America response. Updates as they occur throughout the day.

Heh. Stuart Smalley was getting paid with funds that ought to have gone to seniors with Alzheimer’s.

The Washington Post wrote about all the “unsolicited offers [Janeane] Garofalo has received” after the actress went very public with her opposition to the war. Maybe the Post will go back and categorize the tax dollars diverted from the poor to the on-air rich at AA. Was that an “unsolicited offer” as well? Invite Janeane to the hearings as well.

Michelle Malkin has AIR AMERICA IS SCRAMBLING.

Late last night, I received an e-mail from Air America’s webmaster and former Howard Dean staffer, Adam Mordecai. He wrote “Some answers to your questions” and included a link to/text of a new statement from the beleaguered liberal radio network about the New York City corruption probe of alleged diverted funds from inner-city non-profit clubs to the network.

Radio blogger Brian Maloney, who forced this story into the open along with the community newspaper Bronx News, fisks Air America’s statement here. Read the whole thing.

Macho Nachos has some legal analysis of corporate liability issues raised by Air America’s statements.

And the Washington Times weighs in with an editorial.

Still no coverage of this from the MSM. Big surprise.

***
Previous:

Air America: Don’t blame us
Air America: Stealing from poor kids?!

Captain Ed over at Captain’s Quarters has Air America Rethinks Its Position.

Not that they have much to worry about on that end. No major media outlets have bothered to look into Air America’s role in the misdirection of federal funds at a time when they struggled to stay afloat. The only mention it gets comes from the editorial pages of the Washington Times. The Times keeps its eye on the blogosphere — it has mentioned CQ a number of times — and rightly credits Brian and Michelle for doing what the Exempt Media either couldn’t or wouldn’t do….

I doubt that Franken will ever comment on this story in his role as on-air personality. If he decides to run for office here in Minnesota as rumored, however, we should ask him about this scandal and what he did to correct it once it became known. Voters should shun candidates who manage to demonstrate a callous disregard for spending government money without even being in office.

Interesting how the New York Times nor the Washington Post have picked up this FLAP.

Franken has some explaining to do.

Technorati Tags: Air America, Al Franken, New York City, Janeane Garofalo, theft

Former California Governor Gray Davis says he supports taking the process of drawing legislative and congressional district lines away from the legislature and governor.

“I believe it is a mistake to have the Legislature and the governor draw the district lines,” Davis said in a call to Sacramento radio station KTKX. “It’s basically a conflict of interest.”

Davis did not specifically endorse the measure Schwarzenegger is trying to put on the November ballot. That measure would have retired judges draw the lines starting in 2006. The former governor said he thought the change should occur at the next regularly scheduled census in 2010.

It looks like California Governor Schwarzenegger has picked up an unlikely ally.

However, the devil is in the details since Davis did not specifically endorse Proposition 77 or Schwarzenegger’s special election.

Davis said he thought the issues Schwarzenegger were raising were good ones, but said he did not support the idea of a special election in November. He also is opposed to the other two measures Schwarzenegger had put on the ballot — one to change teacher tenure and another to restrict state spending.

The former governor, who was ousted by Schwarzenegger in the 2003 recall election, said he thought his successor should work with lawmakers to find a bipartisan compromise that could then be presented to voters.

The equitable apportionment of California’s legislative and Congressional districts is a laudable goal. But, isn’t former and recalled California Governor Gray Davis being just a bit disingenuous since he signed the blatant gerrymander of 2000?

On the other hand, the Democrat legislative leaders and unions cannot be too happy with ANY support of Schwarzenegger.

Technorati Tags: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Gray Davis, Proposition 77, California, California Special Election

Cross-posted to The Bear Flag League Special Election Page

Update #1

Dan Weintraub has a take and the links to a transcript and audio, Davis backs remap reform.

Former Gov. Gray Davis, taking a spin on conservative talk radio, gave conflicting comments on his support or opposition of Prop. 77, the disputed initiative proposal that would take the job of drawing district lines away from the Legislature.

Davis, speaking Thursday on KTKZ in Sacramento, first said flatly that he supported the initiative. Then he said he supported the concept of judges drawing the district lines. Then he backed away further and said he wouldn’t support drawing new lines mid-decade, as Prop. 77 proposes. But he never squared those concerns with his stated support for the measure and his desire to see it voted on in November.

The one thing he did make clear is that he believes it is a conflict of interest for the Legislature to draw its own political boundaries.

Here is a full quote from a transcript prepared by the station:

“And my concern is that every elected official should have some sense of jeopardy in a November election. They should have some obligation to the general interest and not just having to win their primaries. And so I think its better off having people who are not combatants in this process, retired judges, draw those lines. Actually, I think of the last 4 reapportionments, Eric, 2 were drawn by judges because the courts threw out the redistrict plans and they turned out fine. So, uh, I’m for that initiative. I’m not for it starting in 2006, but I’m for the concept of having judges draw the lines.

“I’d like to see it on the ballot in November, but worst case it should be on the ballot in June. People should have the opportunity to decide whether or not they want the legislature and the governor to continue to craft reapportionment plans or take it out of their hands and put in the hands of what I believe would be less partial decision makers, retired judges.”

Davis, by the way, opposed the governor’s teacher tenure and budget reform initiatives and the “paycheck protection” measure that would limit the ability of public employee unions to raise political money through unions dues.

You can hear or read the whole thing here.