Republicans use SC Governor's mansion as Motel 6

Newt Gingrich, presidential candidate, is spending the night in the South Carolina governor's mansion tomorrow night, as Governor Nikki Haley's guest.

And that's perfectly fine, if she wants guests. But can I see the books, please? Who is paying for this? And what's on the menu? Laundry service included? WiFi, continental breakfast and hot showers will be readily available, one assumes. All of that will run you a good $200 a night at a Hampton Inn... and at a nice Columbia-area bed-and-breakfast, would likely be even higher. (Meals not included.)

Perhaps that isn't a lot of dough to Marie Antoin---oops, I mean Governor Haley, but to us unemployed people out here, it sure is.

Is the governor cleaning the room herself, after the Gingriches depart? Who is? And who pays THAT person? Wait, let me guess.

And why are WE being used as a Motel 6 by Newt Gingrich? Is his campaign so bedraggled that he can't pay his own motel bills? After staying the night in Nikki's swanky digs, Newt will truck his useless ass on down to Hilton Head (and where else!?!) to "host" a movie at Coligny Theatre. Thus, staying at the Governor's Mansion is a nice little cost-cutter for his campaign. Nice work if you can get it!

I don't think I should have to pay for that, as I recently paid for a similar slumber party featuring Nikki and Michele Bachmann. As I ALSO PAID for Nikki to party in Europe and stay at the nicest hotels in France.

WE CAN NOT AFFORD this so-called "fiscal conservative"--this FAKE, who admits she intends to steal pensions from hard-working police, teachers, librarians, road-construction workers and firefighters, all so she can support her friend's presidential aspirations. HOW DID WE GET STUCK WITH THIS PERSON?

Exactly like State Senator David Thomas, Haley is opposed to "government spending"--unless the spending is on Nikki Haley. These people are abject phonies. GREEDY, self-serving phonies, at that.

The next time you hear them nattering on about "government spending"--ask to see the books. I assume most of them are just as phony as Haley, Bachmann, Gingrich and Thomas. Liars, all.

Otherwise, the Motel 6 for you tomorrow night, Newt. I don't like paying your bills, although I realize you have your (third) wife's hefty jewelry debts to pay! I can see why you are trying to save a buck, just not at MY expense.

Maybe you should start managing your money the way you self-righteously tell everyone else to?

Dear Netroots Nation

Why did your fabulous, hoity-toity blogger conference cost $335 to attend (NOT including travel and lodging costs) when you are supposedly allied with the LEFT?

Do you see the irony here?

Is there some reason it has to be so expensive? Exactly where does all this money GO TO? You aren't paying rich people to give speeches, are you? As leftists, why aren't you paying poor people to give speeches instead? (PS: Do you know any? Do you need a list?)

If the RightOnline conference is in the same venue, how come they could charge $49 for their conference? Why does the right wing understand that these are harsh economic times, but you don't?

Do you see the irony here?

And yes, I realize there are "scholarships"* for us unfortunate poor schlubs who can't afford your exclusive, cool-kids conference. (Do we have to officially certify our poverty, as when applying for welfare?) My question: Why can't you charge $49 so you won't need to peddle "scholarships" in the first place?

Do you understand there is a very serious problem, when LEFTISTS (who supposedly care about the poor) cannot afford to attend a leftist conference of elitists who have deliberately closed them out? Do you understand there is a very serious problem, when the RightOnline conference WANTS to include the poor people that you have deliberately excluded? What do you make of that?

What does it mean that I can afford the RightOnline conference and not Netroots Nation? It means they care about me and welcome me, and you don't.

Why don't you? And where do you get off calling yourselves progressive, when in reality, you are exclusionary, exclusive elitists?

THIS is why the Tea Party is winning. THIS. IS. WHY.

And when they say the Left does not care about regular Americans? When they say that you only care about identity politics and theory? What is your answer to them? Your answer is: The difference between $335 and $49, which to you probably doesn't amount to much, so you don't get it. Its the difference between Banana Republic and Walmart. Your conference attendees will wear the first brand, the RightOnline attendees will wear the second.

And you still think you are the compassionate ones.

~*~


(*) Who thought up this offensive terminology? "Scholarships" are for kids going to school. The juvenile term "scholarship" reduces the seeker of charity to being a child. Why don't you just call it a voucher and show poor folks a wee bit o' respect? (Of course, true respect would be to make it affordable and accessible to everyone, and I think we know you have no such intention.)

Yes, I've written about this before. (sigh)

Love, Devotion, Surrender... and other stuff

The hits on Amanda Knox's infamous "Foxy Knoxy" photograph are coming in, so that's how I know there is something happening with Amanda... as I've said before, I don't even need Google alerts. And yeah, there sure is. The Italian police are suing her for slander, since she claimed they roughed her up during interrogation.

Cops can sue perps and convicts? Oh, wait, this is Italy. You know, where the Vatican is. Their justice system appears to be running on Vatican time.

If American cops could sue us simply for badmouthing them, well, there might not be anybody left to pay taxes and hence, their salaries. Italian police need to get a clue, grow up and stop being babies.

And since they had no case against Amanda (which, take note, does not mean I think she is innocent; it means the state did not prove their case), they need to TURN HER LOOSE. Let her go.

Italian "justice" ... now we see how the Mafia was born. Gotta get justice some kinda way, right?

~*~

Everybody is mad at Carlos Santana for standing up at Turner Field and letting them have it in no uncertain terms.

Balls, Carlos has em. Or should I say cajones? :)

Needless to say, here at DEAD AIR, there is NO personal criticism of Carlos Santana allowed in any form, just like there is no criticism of The Who or the Dead or the Beatles, or musicians of that stature who have played an important part in Daisy's life. Okay? So: Watch your mouths! (seriously) If you want to argue against his position, that's okay, but we will not allow Fox News androids to come here and trash the 6th (possibly 7th; I'll argue the point) greatest guitarist in the history of the world (yes, I do rank them). This is not permitted; show some respect please.

Fox has been trashing him all day... just came from the JIFFY LUBE, where I was subjected to Fox blather about how Carlos has grown rich off the USA, when any fool knows that whoever recorded Love, Devotion, Surrender has earned the right to do whatever the hell he wants and of course DESERVES to benefit.

Now, if you'd like to argue his points, feel free. But no unkind words about Carlos.

Here is what he said:

Saying he represented immigrants, the Grammy winner said at Turner field, “The people of Arizona, and the people of Atlanta, Georgia, you should be ashamed of yourselves.”

On Friday, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal signed a bill that requires many employers to check the immigration status of new hires and authorizes law enforcement officers to check the status of some suspects. The law, one of the toughest in the nation, is similar in some respects to one enacted last year in Arizona.

“This law is not correct. It's a cruel law, actually,” Santana, who emigrated to San Francisco in the 1960s, said after the ceremony. “This is about fear. Stop shucking and jiving. People are afraid we're going to steal your job. No, we aren't.

...

“This is the United States. This is the land of the free. If people want the immigration laws to keep passing, then everybody should get out and leave the American Indians here.”

If people want to have a respectful and intelligent conversation about immigration, I'm up for that. But we will not repeat the mistakes of THIS AWFUL THREAD. You must be able to account for the fact of the RICH hiring impoverished campesinos on the cheap. If you do not address that fact, it'll be the trap door for you. And no simple-minded bullshit like, "But it's already illegal to hire undocumented workers!" Yes, and monkeys might fly out of my ass... go to the rich golf course right next to my apartment building and try to strike up a conversation with one of the yard-caretakers. Just try it. Oh yeah, I'm sure they're all LEGAL as the dickens.

The rich vote for anti-immigrant Republicans, and without missing a beat, turn around and hypocritically hire illegal nannies and yard-workers. Then they watch Fox News and fuss over Carlos.

The nerve. The sheer nerve.

So, yes I'd like to have a discussion about the golfers and the other rich people like them, who say one thing and do another. Add up enough nannies, and you can see why poor Latinas climb fences to get here. It's not rocket science. If you are unable to address the DEMAND for immigrants as workers, do not attempt discussion.

But if you can, I'm listening.

More at Renee's!

~*~

Eminem, who can be a real misogynist and homophobic dolt, showed himself to be A HERO today, and DEAD AIR approves!!! (((applause))) At least he has himself some excellent CLASS AWARENESS, if nothing else... I assume it's because he comes from a good union town like Detroit. (My late father's license plate was the number of his UAW local, so yes, I am biased.)

Eminem took his millions and put his money where his mouth is. He has now earned the right (like the late Frank Zappa) to be politically incorrect and DEAD AIR will allow it, unless, you know, he turns into a serial killer or something:

Eminem Lawsuit May Result in Higher Royalties for Older Artists | Rolling Stone Music

The outcome of a lawsuit on behalf of Eminem against his record label Universal Music Group could radically change the way many artists are paid for digital sales. Eminem's suit argued that at least according to the language in his record contract, individual songs sold online count as a license rather than a sale. This may seem like a minor semantic argument, but according to Eminem's contract – and many others drafted before digital sales were realistic – it is the difference between the artist being paid 50 percent of royalties for a license or 12 percent for a sale.

And he WON, boys and girls!

I listened to a panel discussion on WNCW today, concerning the lawsuit and music licensing. This took years and teams of lawyers... only a multi-millionaire could even attempt such a thing. (Aside: It was so much fun to hear bluegrass artists praise Eminem... I imagine he is a star in all music communities today!) Short version: If your contract was drawn up before the dawn of the digital era, you are getting royally screwed. All of the older artists living off one or two hits, particularly. This means every time your song is sold online, they are keeping most/all of it, since it just wasn't covered in the original contract.

Old artists who started their careers before the days of computers? Record companies are stealing from them, basically. The resolution of this lawsuit creates a precedent and opens the doors for all of them to get what is rightfully theirs. Yeah!

Apparently this will also change the royalty-rules for other kinds of licensing, like for TV shows and movies... but I didn't hear all of that discussion. If anyone knows anything else, feel free to link in comments.

~*~

And finally, on a rather ominous note... Watermelons are exploding in China.

You think I could make that up?

Watermelons explode like 'land mines' in China thanks to chemical calamity

Chinese farmers discovered how science can go bad after fields of watermelons exploded like "land mines" after being over-pumped with growth chemicals.

The chilling chemistry calamity struck after a group of 20 farmers in Jiangsu Province used a growth accelerator for the first time during a period of heavy rains.

That caused hundreds of groaning melons to pop like balloons, state broadcaster CCTV reported.

See, this is why people eat organic.

Michele Bachmann received $251,973 in public farm subsidies

It's right there on Wikipedia! Why is no one calling out hypocritical Miss Tea Party on her anti-government yammerings?:

Bachmann also has an ownership stake in a Waumandee, Wisconsin family farm. From 1995 through 2006, the Bachmann family farm has received $251,973 in federal subsidies, chiefly for dairy and corn price supports.[17] Since the death of her father-in-law, the farm and its buildings are rented to a neighboring farmer who maintains a dairy herd on the farm.

Pretty good welfare, Michele! I could use bucks like that, but after my only foray into AFDC back in the early 80s (thanks to your president), I try not to live off of other people, as you do.

Not only does she take big money from taxpayers, without apology (via her nice salary and her farm subsidies), she actually MADE HER CAREER by DEFENDING THE INFERNAL REVENUE against THE PEOPLE! Do you believe this? And she continually presents herself as the brave anti-tax heroine of the right?

Liar, liar, pants on fire:

From 1988 to 1993, Bachmann was a U.S. Treasury Department attorney in the US Federal Tax Court located in St. Paul. According to Bachmann, she represented the Internal Revenue Service "in hundreds of cases"[10] (both civil and criminal) prosecuting people who underpaid or failed to pay their taxes.

Why would someone who (supposedly) believes the federal government is a bandit, professionally defend the government against hardworking folks who can't pay off the bandits? Sounds like someone is just another common political opportunist!

And of course, by now, you have heard that she has re-written history?

Speaking at an Iowans For Tax Relief event, Bachmann (R-MN) also noted how slavery was a "scourge" on American history, but added that "we also know that the very founders that wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States."

"And," she continued, "I think it is high time that we recognize the contribution of our forbearers who worked tirelessly -- men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country."

It's true -- Adams became a vocal opponent of slavery, especially during his time in the House of Representatives. But Adams was not one of the founders, nor did he live to see the Emancipation Proclamation signed in 1863 (he died in 1848).

See, folks, this is why it's bad to attend a "college" like Oral Roberts "University"... yes, that's her alma mater, are you surprised?

I knew it had to be something like that.

~*~

NOTE: Above graphic from HYPERVOCAL, who had more to say about Michele and her rather shaky grasp of American history.