I've seen Con Air America and Air Ameriquiddick, but I'm sticking with Err America.

lol -It's clumsy but Air Ameriquiddick is funny.

Shorten it to Airiquiddick and it works.

But then so would Airiquiddickless.

Michelle is also using "Air Deadbeat".

It doesn't sound pretty, but it fits.

I've also seen "Air Scamerica" which I think is easiest to pronounce.

Another vote here for Err America.

So the fact that this whole thing is a manufactured smear campaign doesn't seem to bother you?

I thought not.

Do, please, carry on...

"Air Amerecant"? (as in disavowing previous statements/beliefs)

"Air American't"? (as in, well, it's just too obvious)

I dunno. "Err America". Homonystic, concise, pointed. It's a natural. Who's making the logo?

Does the winner get a prize? You know, like a tour of the Wizbang International Headquarters? Or a mousepad? Or specially-tagged dishonorable mentions? Or a Googleable reference for ignominious linguistics beyond the call of duty?

Err America does have a nice ring to it. Simple yet elegant... well, maybe "elegant" isn't the right word. But you know what I mean.

(sitting slack-jawed, eyes glazed over)

Googleable?

Don, it might bother us if it was a manufactured smear campaign. One problem though, Air America has responded to the allegations and admitted they owe the money, several times. Unless your tinfoil hat has somehow detected that these responses are some kind of clever forgeries and someone is holding the Air America board of directors hostage somewhere while issuing press releases in their name it's not a manufactured smear campaign. I know you lefties aren't all that bright, but come on, you can't possibly be that stupid and still be able to type, can you?

RE: fatman's post (August 2, 2005 02:26 PM)

It took you until the last sentence for the eyes to glaze? Most people's peepers glaze as soon as they recognize my post.

Actually, I thought I'd get called on the "homonystic" creation. "Googleable" is Googleable. Yahooable too.

So the fact that this whole thing is a manufactured smear campaign doesn't seem to bother you?
Wow, that just took a huge dump on this entire story. LOL @ The Bronx News. It would be hilarious if that became the new Paris Business Review.

Googleable.

Yahooable.

I'm too old for this world.

Hee, I thought "Air America" was already a scandalous name - the CIA's airline company during Vietnam, running heroin.

Here's the first item that came up when Googling "Air America CIA drugs": link.

"Scare America"!

http://www.gopinion.com/

Err Scamerica

cstmbuilder Says:

August 2nd, 2005 at 1:32 pm
But this just exemplifies the misdirection technique Righties are so good at. The Commissar does not address or disprove my point, which is that this entire “swarm” is based on the word of ONE writer, published in a very minor “newspaper,” and this one writer says he got the information from two anonymous “informed sources” of unspecified origin. All other news stories that claim Air America is under investigation are basing this claim on the Horowitz article

Thank you for pointing this out, specifically the items in bold. How anyone could believe a source that is anonymous is beyond me. Come on, if you are going to listen to an anonymous source they must be, at the VERY least, “an unimpeachable source”, because “an unimpeachable source” could never be wrong, especially one used by a MAJOR TV network…huh?…he was wrong?…really….Burkett was a flake?…..he was really a completely impeachable cource?…Rather ignored his experts or twisted the words to fit his view?…..uh, hmmm….

Well, can someone bail me out here? How about you Don Myers?

My vote goes for "Frankengate," inspired by the Left's continal scandal-mongering and their clumsy attempts at making individual conservatives into scapegoats even if those individuals are not involved in any wrong-doing. Besides, I think Al Franken deserves it.

For me it is based on two things:

1) the shifting sands of Air America Radio's press releases which appear to acknowlege the truth of the allegations without saying that explicitly, and for even stating that they had decided to pay the money back.

2) the sheer schadenfreud of seeing the Left respond to a "they want to close down the community center and throw kids and the elderly out on the street" sentiment.

I fully admit that #2 is not fair at all--no more fair than any of the similar slime jobs the Left has dumped on Republicans for the last few decades. But then I did say it was a 'shameful joy.'

The sooner Piquant/AAR pays the funds back, the better it will be for them.

Why not just call it Air America? The name will stand for itself. They have gotten more publicity in the last few days than in all the rest of their sordid history. The scandal's name is Air America. Air America is the scandal's name.

I'm closer to center-right, so I'd advise against Airiquiddick, since Chappaquiddick is a wingnut bugaboo. The Air America scandal has nothing to do with Teddy. Besides, if it really did bother you so much, you wouldn't reach so far to make a joke of Mary Jo Kopechne's death.

It taints a story that will do damage all by itself. The moonbats are masters at this sort of self-defeat through public seething. Don't emulate them.

Air Enron is really quite excellent, I think, because like Enron, Air America exists as an enterprise in theory only.

Oh, please - Air America has corrected the error, nobody was hurt, nobody cares. It's time for you to move on.

That might have been the smartest thing ever said on this blog, Maezeppa.

The money was paid back? Nope
Air America admitted there was a scam/questionable deal? Nope

Seems to me the only reason anything has been done by Air America is because of bloggers. Bloggers will "move on" when everything has been investigated and corrected.

No one was hurt? really... I understand the Gloria Wise Club lost grant money because they were unable to come up with matching funds..(i honestly do not know if this is true, but if it is)..wonder if $800,000+ would have helped?
Typical, liberal reply though, "forget our transgressions, but we'll remember yours(conservative) and bring it up from now on."

And, btw, are liberals now admitting this really occured?

I don't think anyone ever denied something occured. What we have been denying is the claim that AAR is somehow responsible for what's happening.

Has there been any proof at all that anyone from the AAR side, other than apparent douchebag Evan Cohen, was responsible? I mean serious evidence, not inference and assumption by bloggers. I haven't read all the articles/PR, so I can't say for sure. Because if it's only Cohen, you guys have nothing. Cohen and Progress Media are long gone.

A year ago is not long gone. That's not the way the world works. A name change does not exonerate you from fraud.

Air Enron has been struggling, and if they've resorted to shell game financing once, and to the tune of $800,000, then further forensic accounting is in order. It's not a matter of what the blogosphere has, it's a matter of Air Enron coming clean.

If Air Enron is still operating, it is still responsible for its debts. If it cannot repay its debts, it needs to shutter itself.

I didn't say a year ago was long gone. I said Evan Cohen and Progress Media are long gone. Lets assume Progress Media and Piquant are/were just shell companies meant to house AAR. Even then, if Cohen didn't tell anyone about what was going one, how can you blame AAR? That's why we have to wait and see what the DOI says.

And your persistent use of Air Enron is hilarious. Only three times? It's only too transparent you're desperately trying to popularize it. Ken Lay stealing millions upon millions of dollars from his investors and workers is SOOOO similar to this situation.

Jim Jones: much or your confusion seems to be in misunderstanding who "Air America" is. It is only a trade name, not a group of people. Air America was originally run by the group that Evan Cohen et als headed, when they finagled an unsecured loan from the charity, which expected that it would be paid interest on their "investment." When Cohen et als ran Air America into the ground, the assets (but not the liabilities) of Air America (e.g., equipment, furniture) were sold to the new ownership group (several of whom may or may not have been connected to the original management group).

I understand that perfectly. So legally, since the liabilities were not sold to the new ownership group, they aren't required to pay anything at all? Great.

Holy shit, the ever-beastly Michele Malkin linked to this page. I'm proud to have posted in it.

Evan Cohen and Progress Media are long gone, but that does not let the rest of the board and owners off the hook. Even if they knew nothing about it they still hold some responsibility. It's very hard to believe that they had such poor business and financial management that no one else knew about it.

But even supposing that is the case an extensive audit would have been done when the financial malfesence was discovered and before the reorganization/sale to Piquant. Most of the other board members and owners are the same in both organizations. Some of the money was directly wired into AAR's account so it would have shown up in financial records. Also if it can be shown that the reorganization was done to hide borrowing the money then they are in much more trouble. When the audit was done they had to have known it was wrong to borrow money from a non-profit org. (and illegal for the non-profit to loan it out), yet they did nothing. They didn't inform the authorities and they didn't start paying the money back.

Yes we will have to wait for the investigation to be done. It's pretty stupid though for you to say that it isn't a story, or that AAR had nothing to do with it. Even if AAR is not legally charged with it they still bear some responsibility for what happened.

Now since you said that we should wait for the investigation to be done to say anything about it, I have a question. You liberals are waiting to declare Rove, Liddy, Bush et al guilty until the investigation is in and it is proven they are guilty, aren't you?

Even if they knew nothing about it they still hold some responsibility.
How can they be responsible for something they didn't know was going on?

At most, they bear some ethical responsibility to correct what was done under thier name. And if anyone that was involved in this is still working at AAR or Piquant, they should be fired. However, I don't think they should be forced to pay anything if it turns out it was only the top guy(s) involved in this. And since legally, it was a different company at which this happened.

Has there yet been any indication that anyone other than Cohen has been involved in this from the AAR side?

I don't speak for all liberals, but I haven't ever said anything about Rove. I'm waiting to see how that turns out.

Why don't you just click your mouse three time and say,"there's no truth like ours, there's no truth like ours, there's no truth like ours" and you'll be back at Kos where you belong. Reality isn't exactly working out for you.

Great post, bullwinkle. Just as I was starting you think you guys were a tad smarter than the imbeciles at the Hannity forum. Thanks for the correction.

Don Myers said,

So the fact that this whole thing is a manufactured smear campaign doesn't seem to bother you?

Don, have you stopped taking your medication again?

Then, Jim Jones blerted this doozy,

How can they be responsible for something they didn't know was going on?

At most, they bear some ethical responsibility to correct what was done under thier name.

OK Jim, you do realize you contradict yourself from one sentence to the next?

Maybe you might realize that, when something is done in the name of any board of directors, they are responsible. Seems like an easy concept to grasp, what part were you having a hard time with?

What I mean is, they shouldn't be held financially respobsible (paying the money back) but now have the responsibility to fix their name.

And you're right, they were also responsible to know what was going on with Cohen.

If they failed their responsibility to know what Cohen was doing doesn't that make them responsible for the money? If they don't feel they are responsible for the money why make arrangements to pay it back? They got caught, plain and simple, we know it, they know it, why can't you figure that out? They aren't trying to protect their "good" name, they don't have one. If that was the case they would have returned the money when they claim to have learned about it, months ago. Had they done that they could have been half-way to the point of having a good name. OK, 1/4 way, but still, the ddamage to them would have been substantially less. If anyone on the left was saying that they won't rest until they see they see Evan Cohen frog-marching in handcuffs the left might be even seem like something less than a bunch of hypocrites. The best they seem to be able to come up with is pointing out that he once claimed to be a republican. We all know if the left was buying into that myth they would have been demanding his head long ago and he would never have been able to found a liberal network to begin with.

Have no fear....VP Al Gore's new TV network is sure to be as big a hit as the internet, and they'll be able to either pay off AA's fubars, or hire the staff once their outtawork.

"Have no fear....VP Al Gore's new TV network is sure to be as big a hit as the internet"

I actually flipped to channel 366 and watched some of that last night. ?!?! I couldn't even figure out the tempo. Maybe I'm showing my age (being too old for MTV or VH1) but all that cutting and cinema noire slanting (like a batman episode) just had me tilting my head in confusion.

Tob

bullwinkle:

Who is this left you are taking about? Me? A certain faction of liberals? All liberals? You're knowledge of how an entire political wing is thinking is amazing to me.

If they failed their responsibility to know what Cohen was doing doesn't that make them responsible for the money?
Yes, but indirectly. They were responsible for Cohen and he was responsible for the money-movement.

If they don't feel they are responsible for the money why make arrangements to pay it back?
Because they fell they have to pay it back. I don't think they should have to pay it back unless the DOI orders them to.

They're name is perfectly clean and they want to keep it that way.

How about...

"FrankenScam" !

I have an Air America Scandal news ticker.

Ping it and it displays your post.

Jim Jones (8-3-2005 @ 10:45 AM) said:

"(AirAmerica's)...name is perfectly clean and they want to keep it that way."

ROFLMAO!!!

(wiping tears from his eyes) Seriously Jim, the function of a board of directors is to monitor the CEO/ CFO/COO/whatever and make sure that they're abiding by the law and not running the organization (profit or non-profit) into the ground. If they don't fulfill their duties then they can and should be held civilly (and maybe criminally) liable. Particularly in this case, since many of the members of Piquant LLC's board were also members of Progress Media's board.

Thanks fatman, I've been unable to reply to that, half because I was laughing so hard and the other half out of sheer pity. The best thing I could come up with is asking how often Jim reused toliet paper. There's something not quite right about anyone who's spent a lot of time and nine of his eleven brain cells attempting to justify the actions of someone like Air America then blow the last two trying to convince someone they had a good name.

I meant before this situation, their name was clean. And they're gonna try to keep it that was by paying the money back. What dirtied their name before this?

someone like Air America
Air America isn't a person, genius.

RE: Jim Jones' post (August 3, 2005 07:44 PM)

...was...

Um, way. Did you really get confused by bullwinkle's term and not figure out that he was probably thinking of listing particular names and then might have subconsciously substituted "Air America" in their stead? Is such pettiness really where you want to go with the debate? If it is, then you know how badly you've lost.

Are you for real? How the fuck am I supposed to know what bullwinkle was planning to do?

Somebody ask for a logo?

RE: Jim Jones' post (August 4, 2005 10:25 AM)

How the fuck am I supposed to know what bullwinkle was planning to do? [re: "someone like Air America"]

I guess I've been giving you too much credit for comprehension skills. I'll try not to make that mistake again. Your pettiness quotient, in contrast, remains untarnished. Congratulations.

RE: DepecheNode's logo post (August 4, 2005 11:18 AM)

That'll do nicely. Will Franken et al don the T-shirts? Someone is making T-shirts? Proceeds to go to the GWB&GC...