The Dynamic Duo has recently tried to make it sound like Douglas and Murphy are trying to pull something underhanded regarding the Challenger Learning Center (CLC). That is supposedly indisputable because they reportedly met after a board meeting with Mary Lynn Kelly (CLC Exec Director) at the Denny's just down the street from the DAC.
That is the partial truth they use to spin their tale of deceit. Here's the rest of the story...
What they conveniently "forgot" to mention is that Mary Lynn Kelly has had at least one private conversation (all but one in person) with EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF THE BOARD, not just Douglas and Murphy! Does that mean they all "violated open meeting laws" (absurd - it takes a majority at one time & place to do that) or "divulged privileged executive session" information. Of course not!
But it does fit the Dynamic Duo's political agenda to express selective outrage about the "bad" board members talking to her. I have been told that both Douglas and Murphy have known Mrs. Kelly for years. Oh no, maybe they're friends! Douglas and Murphy might have a "conflict of interest" and should resign right away! (That is the Dynamic Duo's newest refrain). Gimme a break.
Check back for more juicy Challenger-related tidbits in the coming days. I promise it will be worth your effort.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Well, "Truthteller," you're off to an awful start. Neither Frank or Michael have backed the recall effort. In fact, Michael recommended not doing it. Michael also has not suggested that anyone resign.
Perhaps you should actually read what's on the blogs before commenting on them.
My apologies about not approving your comment sooner. Several other comments, more supportive of me than not, have waited as well. I was simply unable to check the blog for the past several days.
Unfortunately, you attached your comment re: the recall to the wrong post. Since others have come to the same erroneous conclusion about my post, I'll clear it up with a new post.
As for the substance of your comment, I started the post by referring to "Several anonymous bloggers," which includes those who comment on the Duos' blogs, Newszap and AzCentral. There was a separate paragraph about the "duo" that doesn't even reference the possible recall. The paragraph that references the possible recall refers to the "several" bloggers, as does my mission statement at the top of the blog.
So my "facts" are not wrong, after all. You and others simply misinterpreted what I said. To avoid pointless discussion about tangental issues, I will grant that a reasonable person might have read it that way in good faith.
Since this is unclear to some visitors, I will be happy to clarify it with a new post and a re-wording of the statement in the page header.
Post a Comment