Roy Herron effectively supports Obamacare‏

Rep. Mike McIntyre, a Blue Dog Democrat from North Carolina, supports repealing Obama’s healthcare takeover:

“One of the Democrats who voted against health care reform in Washington D.C. lent his support Monday to the discussion of repealing the legislation. U.S. Congressman Mike McIntyre (D-NC) says he would favor repealing the entire health care bill that President Obama recently signed into law.” (Gavin Johnson, “McIntyre supports repeal of health care bill,” WECT-TV, 3/29/10)

So do most Americans:

“Currently, two weeks after passage, 54% of the nation's likely voters still favor repealing the new law.” (“54% Favor Repeal of Health Care Bill,” Rasmussen Reports press release, 4/5/10)

But not liberal politician Roy Herron – he wants the president’s package of Medicare cuts, tax hikes, abortion funding and budget-busting government handouts to remain law:

“Dr. Lee Carter questioned if Herron will help clean-up the recently approved health care reform…Herron said he would work to keep the good and change the problematic areas.” (Joel Washburn, “Herron brings jobs tour to Carroll County,” The McKenzie Banner, 4/6/10)

He also defended the bill last month, claiming it’s not as bad as Americans are making it out to be:

“…[Herron] added that the legislation is not as terrifyingly bad as the GOP has painted it…” (Nicholas Beadle, “Fincher, Herron talk health care reform in early morning campaign stops in Jackson,” Jackson Sun “Motion Carried,” 3/22/10)

And no wonder: Roy has a long record of supporting government-run healthcare.

In 1993 – when President Bill Clinton and Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) offered up similar government healthcare takeover plans – he supported their efforts:

“‘Do not give up on universal coverage,’ asked Clinton. Cooper followed Clinton and said his approach was much closer to Clinton's bill than either the single-payer plan proposed by liberal Democrats or the moderate Republican plan. ‘We are also committed to achieving universal coverage, and I think it should be on the President's timetable of 1998,’ said Cooper…Tennesseans and Mississippians attending the DLC's annual conference said they believe Clinton is now on the right path after a rocky start…‘The big issue for a lot of us is health care reform,’ said Tennessee State Rep. Roy Herron of Dresden. ‘I hope he and Congressman Cooper would continue to talk and find a solution.’” (James Brosnan, “Clinton, DLC tout success; health care split looms,” Memphis Commercial Appeal, 12/4/93)

“‘Our bills are very similar,’ Cooper acknowledged last month. ‘(They) have a lot in common and we’re very proud of that’…Indeed, like Clinton, Cooper would turn over control of America's health care system to the government.” (Joseph Perkins, “Clinton Lite: `Rival' health reform plan is just as ill-advised,” San Diego Union Tribune, 3/11/94)

“Alternatives rising in Congress, as support for President Clinton's original health care reform plan dwindles, have flaws…One, called ‘Clinton-Lite’ because of its resemblance to Clinton's proposed Health Security Act…would force people into government-approved health care plans, severely limit health care options, make employees pay more, and limit choice of doctors and access to specialists…With other features similar to Clinton's plan, Cooper-Grandy would move relentlessly toward greater regulation and more taxes - things lawmakers claim they want to avoid.” (“Beware ‘Clinton Lite,’ Daily Oklahoman EDITORIAL, 4/19/94)

And Roy Herron was a vocal supporter of TennCare, a disastrous state-level precursor to Obamacare:

“Tennessee in a year has done what Washington talks about doing in a decade. Washington aims for 95 percent of our citizens to have health insurance in the next millennium. Tennessee will achieve it next month.” (Roy Herron, “A ‘Tennessee Treasure,’ Memphis Commercial Appeal, 12/25/94)

“Sen. Herron said that TennCare has been beneficial to the state in a number of ways.” (Michael Finn, “Legislator Cites Difficulty In Obtaining Tenncare Info,” Chattanooga Times Free Press, 10/10/97)

“In 1994, Tennessee launched an ambitious public insurance program to cover its uninsured. The plan, TennCare, fulfilled that mission but nearly bankrupted the state in the process. As originally envisioned, the Tennessee plan expanded Medicaid, the government health-care program for the poor, to cover people who couldn't afford insurance or who had been denied coverage by an insurance company. With an initial budget of $2.6 billion, TennCare quickly extended coverage to an additional 500,000 people by making access to its plans easy and affordable. But the program became so expensive that Tennessee was forced to scale it back in 2005. Now, as Congress debates a national health-care overhaul, state experiments like Tennessee’s are informing the discussion.” (Avery Johnson, “Tennessee Experiment's High Cost Fuels Health-Care Debate,” Wall Street Journal, 8/17/09)

“Years ago Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, called it a ‘disaster.’ Today President Obama calls the same idea ‘reform.’ Both the president's prescription for the uninsured and Tennessee's TennCare program are premised on the same sugar pill: a vast expansion of health insurance coverage without affecting cost or quality…Given Tennessee's predictable experience, one wonders what ObamaCare cheerleaders have been smoking. No wonder attorneys general in so many states have gone to court.” (“The TennCare lesson: A national disaster,” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review EDITORIAL, 3/27/10)

Indeed, Roy campaigned on universal healthcare while running for state Senate in 1996:

“He also stressed support for ‘better schools for our children, better jobs for adult, and affordable health care for all citizens’…‘Every citizen should have access to affordable, life-saving health care.’” (“Representative Roy Herron announces for Senate,” Dresden Enterprise, 7/24/96)

------

Andy Seré

Regional Press Secretary

National Republican Congressional Committee

Census used as 'gay gimmick'

Jim Brown and Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 4/7/2010 6:00:00 AM

Traditional marriage proponents are warning that homosexual activists and the Obama administration are once again working in concert to "manipulate" federal law.

The Associated Press reports that the Census Bureau plans to count same-sex couples who say they are married, regardless of whether they have a marriage license (see AP article). Even though only five states and the District of Columbia have legalized same-sex "marriages," the Census Bureau says same-sex couples should feel free to check the "husband" or "wife" boxes on the census form, rather than "unmarried partner."

Story continues below ...

---

Results from our related poll

Why would the Census Bureau be so bold about encouraging homosexuals

to lie about their marital status on their census forms?

---

Peter LaBarbera, executive director of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, argues that the Bureau is clearly violating the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which does not recognize same-sex marriages.

"What they're obviously trying to do is magnify the numbers of homosexuals in the society," he suspects. "This dates way back in the gay movement. There was a time when homosexual activists just lied and said that ten percent of the public was gay -- that was a bald-faced lie. It took decades to finally disprove that lie, but here again we see them calling themselves married because they want to be called married. Well, that's not what the law says."

LaBarbera believes homosexual activists are using the census as their latest "gimmick" to seek affirmation of their lifestyle, and he challenges Congress to "step up" and prevent the Obama administration from promoting the "gay" agenda by dictate.

Marriage by opinion is not marriage by law

Similarly, Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs at Liberty Counsel, believes the source for the Bureau's instructions can perhaps be traced as far as the White House. (Listen to audio report)

"It's a shame that the Census Bureau, in tangent with radical homosexual activists, are choosing to use the census, which is supposed to provide objective, quantifiable information relative to varying demographics around the country, that they're using this as a tool for political activism," Barber laments.

He notes that just because a homosexual couple might call their relationship a marriage, that does not make it so. "It is directly contrary to probably the letter, at least the spirit, of the Defense of Marriage Act," he adds.

The federal law recognizes marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and the cultural affairs director believes the purpose in the census campaign is to "create an impression in the minds of the American people" that the movement for legalizing homosexual marriage has more steam behind it than it actually does.

All Original Content Copyright 2006-2008 American Family News Network - All Rights Reserved.

Now that he’s running for Congress, liberal politician Roy Herron talks as if he’s an Independent – not a Democrat:

“But Herron also seemed to try to distinguish himself this morning as a moderate…‘Republicans think you should cut taxes no matter how big the deficit is and Democrats think you should increase spending no matter how big the deficit is,’ Herron said. ‘Neither one is right in my opinion.’” (Nicholas Beadle, “Fincher, Herron talk health care reform in early morning campaign stops in Jackson,” Jackson Sun “Motion Carried,” 3/22/10)

But – as Roy reminded Democratic activists when he was running in a heated gubernatorial primary last year – he’s a Democrat, alright:



“‘I’m not just a little bit Democrat and I’m not just a new Democrat,’ candidate Roy Herron said. ‘I’m all way through Democrat.’” (Brad Hicks, “Candidates muster at Rocky Mount,” Johnson City Press, 7/12/09)



And a “partisan” one at that!



“…Herron has been a Democrat partisan.” (Tom Humphrey, “Lawmaker's book offers slices of life,” Knoxville News-Sentinel, 10/7/99)



“…if by partisanship you mean a commitment to a set of principles and values, and the determination to work to see them find expression in the real world, then I am all for partisanship.” (Roy Herron, God and Politics, p.115)



“Herron really threw out the red meat, basically tarring Republicans as racist retrogrades.” (Jeff Woods, “Who hates Republicans more? Kyle and Herron debate the question,” Nashville Scene “Pith in the Wind,” 6/18/09)



“Al Gore on Monday appointed state Sen. Roy Herron, a longtime friend from the same county where the vice president's mother was born, as state director of his presidential campaign.” (“State senator named state Gore campaign director,” Associated Press, 8/7/00)



“Senate Democrats also re-elected Sen. Jim Kyle, D-Memphis, as minority leader and chose Sen. Roy Herron, D-Dresden, as caucus chairman.” (“Berke tapped for Senate Democratic leadership post,” Chattanooga Times Free Press,” 11/26/08)

Democrats Make up Rules as they go along

Blue Dog votes examined: exposed as total frauds

Blue Dogs' Moment of Truth
Some Democrats claim they're fiscally conservative but don't vote that way.

By Michael G. Franc

Barely 100 days in, this session of Congress has already seen a number of consequential votes.

Some involve major changes in bankruptcy and labor law. For example, one would give bankruptcy judges unilateral authority to rewrite the terms of mortgage contracts, including the amount of principal and the interest rate. Another would give a new lease on life to the oft-discredited labor theory of "comparable worth"; the Paycheck Fairness Act would require employers to justify all pay disparities between their male and female workers.

But the real action has been on the spending front. As Bloomberg News reported, "In this crisis, the U.S. government and the Fed alone have spent, lent or guaranteed $12.8 trillion to try to prop up the banking industry and overall economy to stem the longest recession since the 1930s." The House has approved legislation to release an additional $350 billion for the Troubled Asset Relief Program; borrow $787 billion to "stimulate" the economy; borrow another $410 billion to expand domestic spending programs; expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program by tens of billons of dollars; and triple the level of government funding for volunteerism (even as the president proposed restricting deductions for private charitable giving).

Oh, and let's not forget that $3.5 trillion budget blueprint for next year. It increases spending, raises taxes, and incurs debt at a rate that even the most jaded Washington insiders would have thought impossible just a few months ago.


Where will it end? A top priority will be to refocus Congress on balancing the budget and ridding taxpayers of the burden the debt places on them. The prospects for these goals will depend largely on the Blue Dogs, a coalition of 51 House Democrats.


According to the Blue Dogs' website, they have "been particularly active on fiscal issues, relentlessly pursuing a balanced budget and then protecting that achievement from politically popular 'raids' on the budget." But just how "relentlessly" have they pursued a balanced budget during this year's spending blitzkrieg?


To answer that question, I reviewed nine recent House votes related to the following issues: the release of the second half of the TARP funds, the expansion of SCHIP, the economic-stimulus package, the omnibus spending bill, the expansion of government funding for volunteer activities, and the FY2010 budget.


To determine whether each Blue Dog had voted in a fiscally conservative manner, I looked at whether they voted against Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.), the poster child for the views and policy instincts of today's House Left. Frank missed the vote on the omnibus appropriations bill, so on that vote, lefty representative Barbara Lee (D., Calif.) took his place.


The extent to which members of the Blue Dog Coalition agree with Frank and Lee is nothing short of astounding. Eleven sided with them 100 percent of the time. Ten others stood with them all but once, eleven more all but twice. Bottom line: Two of every three of these self-proclaimed fiscal hawks voted pretty much in lock-step with the biggest spenders on the Left.


Frank-Lee's 100 percent clones include Reps. Leonard Boswell (Iowa), Bart Gordon (Tenn.), Dennis Moore (Kan.), Patrick Murphy (Penn.), and Earl Pomeroy (N. Dak.). Those who strayed from the Frank-Lee axis only once include Reps. Jason Altmire (Penn.), Melissa Bean (Ill.), Ben Chandler (Ky.), Lincoln Davis (Tenn.), Mike Ross (Ark.), Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S. Dak.), and John Tanner (Tenn.). Reps. Jim Costa (Calif.), Gabriella Giffords (Ariz.), Baron Hill (Ind.), and Charles Melancon (La.), were among those who voted the big-government line all but twice.


Some of the most outspoken members of the Blue Dog Coalition also scored points with the big spenders, voting with Frank and Lee six out of nine times. They include Reps. John Barrow (Ga.), Dan Boren (Okla.), Allen Boyd (Fla.), Jim Cooper (Tenn.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), and Jim Matheson (Utah).


Only six Blue Dogs (four of them freshmen and all representing districts that John McCain carried in the 2008 presidential election) voted against this spending more than half the time. They are Bobby Bright (Ala.), Parker Griffith (Ala.), Frank Kratovil (Md.), Walt Minnick (Idaho), Colin Peterson (Minn.), and Gene Taylor (Miss.).


To be sure, the Blue Dogs include a disproportionate number of House Democratic dissenters. The two House Democrats who opposed the SCHIP expansion, for example, were Blue Dogs (Bright, and Jim Marshall of Georgia). Blue Dog Marion Berry of Arkansas was the sole Democratic dissenter on the bill to triple the federal government's role in subsidizing volunteerism. And all but one of the eleven Democrats who opposed the economic-stimulus bill hail from the Blue Dog Coalition.


But most of the time, the large majority of Blue Dogs have been enablers of the Big Government agenda. Ultimately, the extent of their alliance with House uber-liberals reflects the Democratic leadership's most remarkable and overlooked accomplishment: the use of a form of legislative triage. On the big issues, the Democrats quietly condone the loss of an "acceptable" number — but only an acceptable number — of Blue Dog votes. For example, Tennessee representative Jim Cooper recently said the White House had encouraged him to work against the stimulus bill. He claimed the encouragement came because the White House itself didn't like the bill, but changed his tune when the administration objected. The incident fits the Democrats' modus operandi of letting Blue Dogs demonstrate their fiscal austerity — so long as the votes don't affect the ultimate outcome.


Is there a limit to how often the Blue Dogs will trade their bib overalls for the trendy attire of their liberal House colleagues? We already have seen them blanch at the prospect of cap-and-trade legislation that would wreck havoc on the heavy concentration of manufacturing and agricultural jobs in their districts. The same trepidation may soon become apparent with respect to universal-health-care legislation.


As with any addiction, however, the first step to overcoming the obsession with bigger and bigger government is the recognition that, yes, there is a problem. If their votes are any indication, our Blue Dog friends are not there yet.

Obama says, "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation"

See for yourself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIVd7YT0oWA&feature=player_embedded

 

With roughly 80% of Americans that identify themselves as Christian, President Obama tells the Turkish P.M.

that "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation." This after the President saying we will "never be at war with Islam."

I'm glad he clarified, the United States liberating 50 million muslims from the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq,

and from the control of the Taliban in Afghanistan, they might have gotten confused.

Does anyone think that a leader from a muslim country would ever come to Washington D.C. and make a speech saying

"we don't consider ourselves a muslim nation?" What would be the response from his country?

This is what happens when you elect an untested, inexperienced man who had no problem being friend with a domestic

terrorist, and sat in the pews of a church with a hate filled pastor for 20 years.

Why not just say, America values freedom of religion for every citizen?

Elections have consequences....

Who is this guy? Has he ever studied history? Read anything from the Founding Fathers?

I understand "freedom of religion", but should he be saying this in a Muslim country?

Oh... that's right! This is Barack Obama who hates America, hates capitalism and wants to destroy us from within!

This is nice; now he's attacking religion and our Judeo-Christian value system this country was built upon.

 

Auditions for "The Women"

A TCWatcher reports:

Auditions for "The Women" next Wednesday, March 11 from 6 - 8 p.m. at the Masquerade Theatre.

This play is set in the 30's not like the recent movie.

Google "1939 The Women"  to see a b&w trailer of the old movie...it's a hoot!

There are 40+ parts for all levels of experience and even some non-speaking parts for those just wanting to just get their feet wet.  Plus Johnny is so fun to work with!

All women are encouraged to come try out!