John Gage, International President of the American Federation of Government Workers, came to town today to take on the latest anti-labor tauntings of Tim Scott, the freshman representative of South Carolina's 1st Congressional District.

And joining Gage for demonstration outside of Scott's Charleston office were the local Longshoremen, Communication Workers, AFL-CIO, other labor unions, and even yours truly.

Recently, Scott introduced a bill he calls the "Employee Empowerment Act." Despite that title, it doesn't exactly give any power or freedom; in fact, it does just the opposite.

If passed, it would block federal employees from paying union dues directly from their paychecks. Thus, instead of providing any "empowerment," the act would only restrict the freedom of government employees to pay dues in a convenient format of their own choice. And taking away a freedom of choice ain't exactly empowering, now is it?

And H.R. 2145 isn't Scott's first anti-labor measure so far in the first months of his term. He submitted another that would prevent an entire household from food stamp eligibility should any member at the same address participate in a labor strike.

So what else can the local labor force - about 35 in number at today's demonstration - do but protest?

It wound up being a rather moving rally, too:

But these demonstrators weren't alone for long. Scott himself came out of the office. And he was joined by about 15 counter-protesters, some of whom were from the Summerville chapter of the 9-12 Project (an organization created by Glenn Beck, whose last show on FAUX News airs today, incidentally.)

Now, let me be clear that these other folks who supported Scott were not a violent, angry mob. They were very peaceful, respectful, friendly folks, overall. They came to state their side, just like we were there to offer ours. And it was rather congenial. I shook many hands and even traded jokes with a few. I met members of this group before, after all.

But there were a couple - and let me specify that I don't know if they were with 9-12, and I'm not insinuating that they automatically were - who were outright hostile.

After answering a question about what union representation has done for her, a woman with ILA found herself being insulted and taunted in a format that reminded me of the locker room in middle school. And she looked wounded by it, too.

One guy wanted to know what I did for a living, then what education I'd achieved, then where I went to school. He was apparently trying to fish for grounds to issue his own insults, which he then did after I answered his last question.

I was told my state university schooling was "union based" and deficient as a result, especially in comparison to his Harvard Univ. credentials. (I wanted to tell him I was absolutely certain that Harvard doesn't teach its students that Pres. Roosevelt - who died in 1945 - signed the bill enacting Medicare in 1965, which he'd just claimed.)  After he capped off his juvenile tirades with that foolish statement, I walked away from him.

I even spoke directly to Scott. That wasn't my intention, mind you, but after I wandered over to hear what he was telling folks, I wound up directly in front him.

Having his attention, I took opportunity to state my case - removing a freedom does not constitute empowerment. In fact, it's only the opposite. His consistent promotion of the so-called "right to work" has apparent goals to squash union representation, too, I said

Scott swore that his bill was not meant to be an attack on unions. Another person in the crowd challenged him on that, though, pointing out that his bill did not address other formats of automatic paycheck deductions federal government employees can make, such as charitable contributions. As a result, his proposal could only be viewed to be anti-union, since it only addressed union dues deductions.

I continued by reminding Scott and others nearby that, in today's complicated business world, representation is a vital need. The fields of labor and labor rights and labor laws are much more complicated today than when unions were first formed decades ago.  If they weren't so complicated, then why is that a majority of the members of this particular union in question (AFGE) have post-secondary education, many with masters' and doctorate degrees, and still openly seek union representation to help them figure it all out?

To block that representation, I offered, is like saying, "you have a right to a fair trial ... but not to an attorney."

That's when Scott recognized me. "What's your name?" he asked with an inquisitive squint. "Oh, yeah, I remember you now," he said. "I guess this is an announcement of your next campaign." (No, it isn't, Tim, you'll face much bigger weight than mine next year.)

Following that misdirection, he wanted to close the argument speaking on other irrelevant topics.

I tried to bring it back, though. To deny union representation - and give favor exclusively to companies in the process only in hopes it will increase corporate interest - resembles the economic theory of Karl Marx, father of communism, I pointed out.

Scott closed it after that. "We could discuss this forever," he said.

He then wandered over to speak to Gage from the AFGE. Local media surrounded them, and I didn't want to interfere or appear camera-happy, so I stayed back. I didn't hear the conversation, but it appeared to hold a serious tone.

I simply wandered over to join the union folks in their rally, which continued with the same spirit.

I spoke with some counter-protesters, too, and am glad to have had the opportunity.  Hell, it was fun. We shared stories of our mutual discontent with last week's congressional hearing in North Charleston, for example. And that made me overlook and ignore the angry Harvard-wannabe, who was then pursuing another soundboard to rant against (and who also peacefully walked away from him).

But it didn't help me feel any better about Scott's bill, though. This is a simple, basic right to representation that's under consistent attack. Not just in Wisconsin, but nationwide.

And we can't allow this cheap, meaningless, pointless bill to go through as a result.

I've always suggested Tea Party activists move to China, since the economic policies they support mirror its format of communism (albeit because the GOP is lying to them....).

This video, however, suggests a much more fitting wonderland for them -

Originally posted to YouTube by AntiSchiff

While a state representative, Tim Scott made no bones about the fact he held an anti-labor stance. He even sought federal funding to promote South Carolina’s “right to work” status (H 2453) and co-sponsored the bill that now restricts union formation in the state (H 3305 in 2010).

After recent election to federal government, he’s now taking his anti-union actions to the national level.  

But a national union is coming to Charleston tomorrow to protest Scott’s most recent stab.

And making it even more interesting, “Scott said he hopes to be there, too,” reports the Post & Courier.

Earlier this month Scott introduced H.R. 2145, which he calls the “Empower Employees Act.”  The goal of the bill is “to provide that agencies may not deduct labor organization dues from the pay of Federal employees(.)” 

In application, members of the American Federation of Government Employees and other federal government unions could no longer have their dues automatically deducted from their paychecks. 

This is nothing but a prank, though, says AFGE, which will have demonstration and press conference outside Scott’s local office tomorrow, June 30.

From 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., the local union chapter will be joined by AFGE International President John Gage at 2000 Sam Rittenberg Blvd in Charleston. Scott uses Suite 3007 at this address.

 “(T)his legislation would increase employees’ freedom by allowing them to choose to pay union dues rather than having them taken out of employees’ paychecks before the workers even see the money,” Scott states.

However, employees already have that freedom.  Automatic deduction of dues from government employees’ paychecks can only be instituted and authorized by those employees, who must issue formal document to authorize those deductions.   The same document also instructs employees how to stop the automatic withdrawals.

In other words, federal employees only have union dues withdrawn from paychecks by choice. They can always stop that deduction by choice, too. Thus, Scott’s bill would only eliminate freedom of choice.

Getting national attention since its introduction, H.R. 2145 has been called a “laughable” attempt at “union-busting(.)”

“It's time for lawmakers like Tim Scott to stop attacking our jobs, pay, pensions and the programs we all rely on,” says AFGE International President John Gage, who will conduct tomorrow’s press conference. “Instead, (he) needs to focus on creating good jobs and making the very rich and big corporations pay their fair share.”

Gage also points out Scott’s recent votes pertaining to Dept. of Defense employment, which would eliminate 500 jobs from Charleston, and a five-year pay freeze that would affect 9,000 in this congressional district.

Defending his bill, Scott cites an editorial from the conservative bi-weekly National Review: “When Indiana governor Mitch Daniels ended collective bargaining and the automatic collection of dues in 2005, the number of members paying dues plummeted by roughly 90 percent.”

What author and magazine editor Rich Lowry fails to note, as does Scott, is the end to collective bargaining by Indiana state employees eliminated the primary purpose of their union.  Being unable to perform its chief duty of employee representation, the union could no longer collect adequate dues.  Thus, this circumstance is completely irrelevant to Scott’s argument.

Scott also claims the paycheck deduction method “uses taxpayer resources” to collect union dues. However, the practice creates no expenses whatsoever.

Recent polling finds public sentiment against the concept of H.R. 2145, too. A recent study by Public Policy Polling found “Union households think public (government) employees should have as many or more rights than they do now by a 66/32 spread, but so do non-union households by a 51/45 one.”

Persons interested in attending tomorrow’s demonstration can find further details at the “We Are One” website. Attendees are encouraged to bring cameras and video recorders.

Aside from AFGE, other labor unions representing federal government employees include the National Treasury Employees Union and the National Federation of Federal Employees.

Earlier this year, Scott co-sponsored H.R. 1135, “The Welfare Reform Act,” which would prevent any household that has a member participating in a labor strike from collecting food stamps.

He also participated in a congressional hearing held in N Charleston that was supposed to pertain to the city’s Boeing facility, but was only an attack on the legal complaint a labor union has against the company in Washington State.

Bachmann’s bus busting ‘cross the border foretold of Armageddon.

Well, maybe not ‘end of the world’ (though she makes me wonder, sometimes), but right after the whacko congresswoman from Minnesota entered the state speeding on I-20 through Aiken County – really, just minutes after – the sunny skies all about the Lowcountry turned gloomy.

And then came the thunder. And plenty of lightning. And rains so heavy and hard my yard still has standing water five hours later.

It started like this: about 4 o’clock, I got a forwarded text message from a Carolinian returning home from Georgia. (That source will remain secret to protect her from the Angels from Hell leading the Bachmann entourage at the moment…)

“I was passed by a fine, motor home-type bus with Michelle Bauckman(sp) for President all over it. It looked like what she might use when campaigning. Was she supposed to be in the state??? My comment is...they were speeding. I was going 70, which is the speed limit, and they had to be going 85 or more."

Now, just reading of her entrance alone would give any progressive Carolinian a chill, I suspect, so I took that to be the reason for the Bachmannbumps appearing on my forearms at that moment. I didn’t stop long enough to notice the cause was a rapid drop in temperature. 

I quickly did a search to verify if Bachmann had such plans.  Sure enough, “We are starting a bus tour tomorrow in South Carolina,” she’d told Sean Hannity yesterday.

And then my internet signal wiggled. (I took that to be occurring simply because I was looking at a FOX News site…).

Right then, Fuzzy the Cat began rapidly pacing all about my feet, hissing and growling when I leaned over to find out what was wrong with her.

And then KaPOW! Lightning began striking frequently and powerfully, and very near my house. The clouds burst open to drop gallons – and I mean GALLONS – of rain. 

And the first thing that popped out of my mouth when the lights began to flicker was, “Damn – she really IS in South Carolina!” (Fuzzy responded with a wail as she clawed at the bedroom door, desperate to hide under the bed.)

When my internet reception was restored, I searched for Bachmann’s schedule. Sure enough, she’ll be in Myrtle Beach tonight, Charleston and Lexington on Wednesday, and Greenville on Thursday.  Her tour will close with a Town Hall Meeting in Rock Hill that evening.

And local weather reports covered the torrent, too; “it fell big,” said local meteorologist Bill Walsh from WCSC-TV, “with lightning.”

As I’d expect, the heavy rain is supposed to last through Thursday, and the Carolina skies will clear up again that night. That’s when Bachman’s bustling bus will leave to begin its beeline to Cedar Rapids, IA, where … wouldn’t you know it? … it’s supposed to rain this weekend, right when and where she'll appear.

But please, Bachmann, can you tell the bus driver to keep an eye on the speedometer? Especially on those wet roads you’re bringing everywhere you go. I mean, we can’t wait until you’re gone, but don’t want to see our residents run off the road by your entourage as you do so.

Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central’s “The Colbert Report” will be featured at a Charleston event this Friday, and not just to raise money for the Medical Univ. of South Carolina.

The benefit is also to preserve the name of his late father, who made his own contributions to MUSC during a career at the medical facility.

Beginning at 8 p.m. on Friday, July 1, tickets for “An Evening with Stephen Colbert Benefiting MUSC” range from $30 to $125 in orchestra level seating, and VIP tickets are $500.  The event will be held at Gaillard Municipal Auditorium, 77 Calhoun St in Charleston.

Jonathan Alter of MSNBC will also appear that evening, and to interview Colbert with questions from the audience.

Funds realized from the event will sponsor an endowed chair position, the Colbert Chair, which operates in support of the same two offices the political comedian’s father held at the university.

Dr. James W. Colbert Jr. was MUSC’s 1st Vice President for Academic Affairs for five years beginning in 1969, the first to the hold that position in the college’s then-145 year history. He also served as provost.

The school credits him for helping it “adopt the traditions of academic medicine,” and for successful aid in resolving a labor strike at MUSC that began during his first year with the facility.

Dr. Colbert’s career came to a tragic close when he was killed in the 1974 crash of Eastern Airlines flight 212, as were two of the comedian’s brothers.  

MUSC’s education center and library already carry the doctor’s name in his honor.

The popular comedian and actor made other contributions to MUSC in recent years. He spoke at its 2009 graduation ceremony, earning himself an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters degree, and in 2010 donated the original desk from the set of his television show for a fundraising auction.   

His own video promotion of Friday's event can be seen by clicking here.

Colbert grew up in James Island and attended the Porter-Gaud School in Charleston.

Chip Cravaack, a freshman congressman from Minnesota, wants to “just end Medicare."

After all, taxpayers can’t afford any such unwarranted burdens, he claims.

But that doesn’t stop Cravaack from billing taxpayers for the $1,000-a-month luxury SUV he’s leasing.

Check out the video from House Majority PAC:

And, by the way, Cravaack wants to lower taxes on upper-income, too, as you saw in the clip. Apparently, he thinks middle-class Americans shouldn’t get the benefits they pay for themselves; we need to pay entirely for his own luxury perks, though.

Click here to read more about it from Roll Call.

Opponents to offshore drilling are uniting worldwide, and with a novel twist in protest: simply holding hands.

The second annual “Hands Across the Sand” will be celebrated this Saturday, June 25, and at four different beachfront locations in South Carolina.

Interested persons in the greater Charleston area can simply take Folly Rd straight to Folly Beach, where the event will take place next to the pier.

In Myrtle Beach, participants can gather at Plyler Park at the end of Mr. Joe White Ave. Participants in N Myrtle Beach are requested to meet on the beach between Spanish Galleon and the Arcade.  The south end of Hilton Head Island, using Coligny Beach at the end of Pope Ave., is the fourth location in South Carolina.

Attendees should arrive at 11 a.m.; the joining of hands begins at 12 noon, and will last for 15 minutes.

“Hands Across the Sand” was created last year by Dave Rauschkolb in efforts to increase awareness of the risks of offshore drilling, and to promote clean energy alternates, too.

A beachfront restaurant owner and avid surfer, Rauschkolb founded “Hands Across the Sand” last year in protest to proposed offshore drilling off the coast of Florida, his home state.  He quickly gained support, as approximately 10,000 participated in last year’s event in Florida alone.  The protest was conducted worldwide, too.

His protest isn’t simply about the damage offshore drilling would do to his business or his hobby, though. And it’s not meant to be a declaration of personal political opinions.

“This movement is not about politics; it is about the protection of our coastal economies, oceans, marine wildlife and fisheries,” Rauschkolb says.  “The accidents that continue to happen in offshore oil drilling are a threat to all of the above. Expanding offshore oil drilling is not the answer, embracing Clean Energy is.

“Oil and coal are the largest polluters on the Earth threatening the quality of air we breathe, the water that we drink and the food that nourishes us,” Rauschkolb declares. “Safe food, clean water and clean air are the essential fundamental elements of our survival as a species. Offshore oil spills, the burning of fossil fuels and coal burning power plants present a threat to all of the above.”

The topic of Saturday’s demonstration is of high applicability in South Carolina.

In anticipation of removal of offshore drilling restrictions, in April a state senate panel passed measure directing the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee to improve the simplicity of drilling applications. 

A federal bill to expand offshore oil drilling failed to pass the U.S. senate last month, however, but is likely to be reintroduced.

Even if the federal bill remains stalled, South Carolina’s beaches would remain at risk to drilling for natural gas, however, which was included in the state bill. According to a study completed last year, deposits of natural gas could be obtained about 50-to-70 miles off the state’s coast.

How far offshore the drilling occurs is irrelevant, though, opponents say. As Rep. Jim Clyburn has stated at community gatherings with constituents, “they still need to bring it onshore,” leaving the same risk of coastal damage in the process.

According to the Southern Environmental Law Center, offshore drilling would not only be environmentally damaging – pollution, damage to wetlands and salt marshes – but it would be economically pointless, too.

Independent studies find that the crude oil potentially available from the entire Atlantic Coast would only produce six months’ worth of gasoline.  Natural gas extracted from the same region would only last 18 months, as well.

Any leaks or just the chemicals regularly used in operation on offshore drills would damage the fishing industry, too, SELC says.

Contact information for the hosts of each event can be obtained from the “Hands Across the Sand” website.

To date 39 states, Dist. of Columbia and Puerto Rico are scheduled to participate, as are 17 other countries across six different continents.

The Koch brothers make major contributions to Republican politicians and so-called "think tanks," which then turn around and tell the same lies over and over again.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont shows the series of slime in this video, which was produced by Brave New Foundation:

Here are the actual facts about Social Security (from KochBrothersExposed.com):

Cartoon by Barry Deutsch/Ampersand

It was pointless. Stupid. Aggravating as hell and insulting to my intelligence. 

Hell, my car got smacked in the parking lot of the Charleston County Council building that hosted the event on Friday, but even that wasn’t as bad as the supposed hearing of the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that took place.

This “hearing” was nothing more than a cheap circus event for the national Republican Party that somehow found its way not far from my home, and even though its subject is on the opposite side of the country.

What was the event about? A legal case regarding Boeing, the well-known aircraft manufacturer, and its union-represented employees at one facility in Everett, Wash. 

What was the subject of testimony? A new Boeing facility in N Charleston – which is of absolutely no relativity to the legal case involving the one in Everett.

Who gave the testimony?  Aside from the federal government employee who’s handling the case regarding Boeing in Everett, no one of any relevance.

And what did this hearing actually achieve? Nothing. Not one damn thing.

Okay, let me give you the background on all this –

In late 2008, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers were in contract negotiations with Boeing at its Everett facility. And they weren’t easy.

In fact, IAM had been on strike three times in the previous nineteen years to acquire proper respect for their work. Boeing had been steadily increasing its sales of new jets, its profits were increasing greatly, too – but worker pay and benefits weren’t. 

While the initial proposals for a new contract did include pay increases, Boeing insisted workers sign agreement to never strike again during the 10-year terms of the new contract.

Not giving in to such plutocratic demands, IAM hit the bricks for the fourth time since 1989, this time for almost two months before Boeing finally agreed to remove such terms.

Not long after in late 2009, Boeing decided to open another manufacturing facility to accommodate the high-order rate of its new 787 Dreamliner planes. And instead of adding to the Everett facility to build those planes, the company decided to take the business elsewhere, settling upon N Charleston.

Now, that’s no big deal, necessarily. But … in its own office communications and even in on-record statements to the press, Boeing executives candidly declared the opening of this new location was in retaliation against IAM in Everett. No other reason. Just revenge.  

And that, ladies and gentlemen and boys and girls (…and congressional representatives), is a violation of Rule 8(a)3 of the National Labor Relations Act. “Discriminating against employees to encourage or discourage acts of support for a labor organization” is against the law. Boeing obviously broke it – admittedly, even. And when you violate the National Labor Relations Act, you have to deal with the National Labor Relations Board.

This is a rather minor incident, let’s admit, though. I mean, it wouldn’t be like this right now if those CEOdiots had just kept their mouths shut.

And this action by Boeing doesn’t exactly take away jobs from Everett; any resolve of this matter won’t take any work from Charleston, either.  Both sides agree to these facts, too.  In fact, the only work the Washington plant would get from this project anyway is just potential overload from the new N Charleston facility, and due to the high rate of orders Boeing has for the new 787 Dreamliners.  Shoot, the Everett branch of IAM itself says so.

That doesn’t mean this violation should be overlooked, though. Letting Boeing openly and blatantly break a federal law could set precedent that would eliminate other workers’ rights in the future.  That’s why NLRB had to step in, not just to enforce federal law, but to protect federal law, too.

But the company refused to accommodate. In two rounds of negotiation talks that offered slap-on-the-wrist responses to the company’s legal violations, Boeing walked away from the table, leaving NLRB with no other option but an actual hearing.  For that reason only, NLRB now has to take this to court in Seattle.

But for some strange reason that makes absolutely no sense at all, the congressional committee had to have its own hearing. And right here in N Charleston, which also makes no sense.

While it was graced by progressive U.S. Reps. Dennis Kucinich, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Bruce Braley and Carolyn Maloney (all members of the Democratic Party), the committee was chaired by anti-labor Rep. Darrell Issa. And Republican Issa was joined by anti-labor Republican Rep. Blake Farenthold, along with South Carolina’s own anti-labor Republican Reps. Joe Wilson, Tim Scott and Trey Gowdy, the latter of whom chaired this freak-show side-show after Issa left later in the day. 

And these anti-labor goons staged a campaign so loony, I could’ve sworn every time any GOP committee member or selected “witness” spoke, I was watching last-minute emergency auditions for a low-budget soap opera.

Clearly establishing the pointless partisan ploy the GOP was trying to pull, their so-called “witnesses” would never be allowed to testify in an actual hearing on this situation, and for two reasons:

1)      Their testimonies about the NLRB and Boeing’s N Charleston facility were irrelevant to the case, which is only about Boeing and actions it took in its Washington State plant, and

2)      The presumptuous conclusions offered in their testimonies were completely false.

From those facts (and they are factual, dammit), I can only reach one conclusion about the true goal the Republican Party had for this event: to influence public opinion in sympathy for its campaign donor Boeing before the actually relevant hearing, and by spewing out irrelevant issues and false testimonies in this unrelated venue.

For example, the testimony from Cynthia Ramaker, who works at Boeing’s N Charleston plant? IRRELEVANT. The legal issue at hand isn’t Boeing in N Charleston; it’s what Boeing did to employees 3,000 miles away in Everett, Wash.   

Her complaint that “thousands of people would be unemployed if the NLRB pursues this”? FALSE. As was repeated over and over and over again, the N Charleston facility, its operation and its employment have no bearing. And they are in no way at risk.  Those jobs will still be here, and no matter what happens in the actual case.

The words of Neil Whitman, who owns the Dunhill Staffing employment agency that Boeing uses to find employees here? IRRELEVANT. The work Whitman does right now for Boeing in South Carolina is in no way related to what that company did three years ago in Washington.

And Whitman’s “this is an assault on free enterprise” offering? FALSE. Whitman’s workload with Boeing won’t be affected because – and let me repeat this as many times as it was iterated at Friday’s hearing – employment at the N Charleston plant is in no way at risk.

In an actual, proper hearing, these people would not be allowed to testify. What they have to offer has nothing to do with the case. Even if they were allowed to participate in the actual hearing, their testimonies would be torn to pieces since they’re flat-out wrong in presumptions.

But that’s the testimony we were subject to at this pseudo hearing-before-a-hearing.  And which was pointed out multiple times, and not just by the four legitimate representatives on the commission, but also by the only witness who had any relevance to the case.

Practically every other response from Lafe E. Solomon, NLRB general counsel who’s overseeing the case, was “as I’ve said repeatedly…the remedy that is sought will not affect South Carolina jobs.” N Charleston plays no part in this case, and its jobs are not at risk, Solomon confirmed.

That didn’t stop Joe Wilson from continuously making statements in agreement with those other “witnesses.” He kept offering sympathy to the non-existent woes of Ramaker and Whitman, and repeated their claims of job loss. 

And Rep. Gowdy seemed to try to back Solomon into a corner, asking him questions that required detailed responses, only to interrupt with “Yes or no! Yes or no! Yes or no!” every time the NLRB rep was offering him a specific answer that Gowdy didn’t want to come out.  Gowdy also asked many questions that Solomon explained he couldn’t legally answer at this time, which you’d think any attorney would know prior to asking. It seemed that Gowdy was hoping to spoil the upcoming hearing in Seattle by tricking Solomon into revealing information he actually couldn’t disclose.

After a brief recess, the committee hearing resumed, this time with Gov. Nikki Haley and state Attorney General Alan Wilson. And the complete foolery of this entire case became more and more apparent.

That foolery became most indicative in the testimony from AG Wilson (yeah … son of Joe “you lie” Wilson, who lied in the earlier session).  In his initial address, Wilson spewed out “when the labor mob …. oops (chuckle) … I mean ‘labor union’…,” as if it were some accidental error, and which it clearly wasn’t.

And even if it was an accident, the Freudian nature of that error just reveals more and more about the goals of the Republicans who somehow pulled this circus off.

By this time, Issa had left, leaving South Carolina’s own Gowdy in the chair seat of the commission. And when Haley and Wilson got backed into corners, revealing the irrelevancy and utter idiocy of their testimony, Gowdy tried to cut it off.

The lowest point of this sideshow was when Gowdy tried to shut up Congresswoman Norton. In a question she offered to AG Wilson (“Would any remedy to this situation affect South Carolina in any way?”), and which Wilson repeatedly interrupted seemingly in attempt to change the subject, Gowdy told Norton she’d run out of time and suspended her question – he refused to offer her extension, and told Wilson he didn’t have to answer. (“Name the misconduct!” Norton offered in last-stab attempt to bring the case back to actual relevance. “So, is Boeing the new Welfare Queen in South Carolina”? she asked, referring to the $900 million credit the company now has in state taxes.)

A high point of the event was what happened immediately after the very visible argument between Norton and Gowdy.  Rep. Braley of Iowa trapped Wilson in the corner Rep. Norton backed him into moments before. Going over practically every statement of Wilson’s original testimony, Braley corrected the AG on many points, even making Wilson admit errors in his statements (although You Lie Junior tried to misdirect his answers to those questions).

The event – which took up about four hours of that Friday afternoon – came to a close following some questions from Tim Scott who, even more so after this event, seems most apt to be a game show host. He asked meaningless, irrelevant questions of no applicability to the case of Boeing or its Everett, Wash. employees, and in a happy, robust, practiced voice that sounded in no way honest or earnest.  He tried to misdirect the topic to irrelevant bend. He asked the questions that Boeing probably instructed him to ask, and for which will he expect donations to his next campaign in exchange.

In summary of this very long entry, the whole event was completely irrelevant. Pointless. Of no practicality or fortitude. Its testimony had no bearing on the actual circumstance between Boeing and NLRB. And that actual circumstance will have no effect on Boeing’s operation in N Charleston.

The elected officials affiliated with the Republican Party told falsehoods and untruths, and through this “committee” format that eliminates any legal responsibility they would ordinarily face for misleading and lying.

The N Charleston facility will –unequivocally and without doubt – face no setback no matter what the result is of the NLRB complaint.

And you know what pisses me off most about the whole ordeal? Not only was it meaningless and misleading, pointless and partisan – it was also of meaningless, pointless cost upon us taxpayers.

The cheapest round-trip, same-day airfare from DC to Chucktown on that date comes to $624 (according to travelmeister Expedia.com – and yes, our congress members are supposed to fly in the cheap-seat format).  That means the minimum cost to transport the nine panel members of this circus event was $5,616. 

That’s not inclusive of any overnight accommodations they may or may not have needed; that doesn’t include any meals. It doesn’t include the costs for security or accommodation upon Charleston County, the host of the event, either. And it doesn’t include the taxpayer-funded costs for NLRB flying Solomon into town.

And what does this minimum cost of $5,616 amount to? One individual American’s total federal income tax paid for one year. 

Gee. Thanks, you “low taxes/low government spending”-wailing GOP folks who arranged this meaningless, pointless and useless hearing-of-sorts. At this circus show you pulled off, you proved yourselves to be hypocrites in more ways than one.

Now, stop wasting our time and our money. I’ve got enough expenses to think about as it is, especially since I have to get my car repaired for the damages incurred while sitting through this meaningless, pointless event.