NC-02: Jim Duncan is “testing the waters.” (It begins?)

February 25th, 2015 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives No Responses
NC-02: Jim Duncan is “testing the waters.” (It begins?)

181477_4887315982703_432071545_nIt appears that outgoing Chatham County GOP chairman Jim Duncan is hearing the calls for change in the Second Congressional District.  He’s formed something called a ”testing the waters committee” — quite similar to the exploratory committees that you hear about in presidential races. The committee’s web site can be found at 

I talked with a source very close to Duncan who offered up some details on this development.  The committee allows money to be raised for an eventual Duncan congressional campaign, and provides a vehicle for him to communicate his views to district residents and gauge support for a potential primary campaign against incumbent Renee Ellmers. 

Duncan’s name came up in 2014 as a potential primary challenger to Ellmers.  (He bowed out of that cycle due to some private family matters.)  This latest development puts him a lot closer to pulling the trigger on a campaign for Congress than he was prior to 2014.

Duncan has quite the Horatio Alger life-story.  Born and raised in low-income housing in New York City to parents recently transplanted from South Carolina, Duncan rose to the top of a successful technology company with an international clientele.  He retired from that position to Chatham County, North Carolina, whereRenee Ellmers he and his wife currently reside.

As Chatham County GOP chairman, Jim Duncan has been credited as a major force in revitalizing that organization’s fiscal and political fortunes.  In that position, he has regularly knocked heads with Pittsboro mayor and outgoing NC Democrat Party chairman Randy Voller.

Duncan — or any primary opponent, for that matter — should have plenty of ammunition to use against Ellmers.  She has angered GOP base voters by double-crossing them on issues ranging from spending to ObamaCare, amnesty for illegal aliens, and — most recently — late term abortion.

Any GOP primary election for the 2nd district would be held in May 2016.

Complaint filed against judge in Brannon civil suit-Judge pro Hagan

March 20th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives One Response
Complaint filed against judge in Brannon civil suit-Judge pro Hagan

Boy, have the political winds shifted.  Last month, obituaries were being drafted for the campaign of Republican US Senate candidate Greg Brannon in the wake of an unfavorable court decision.  Then, we heard from Brannon’s co-defendant in the civil suit, who told us all about some strange goings-on in the courtroom — including some rather bizarre interactions between the judge and the jury.  THAT gets followed up with a gb12revelation that the judge was a 2008 campaign donor to Kay Hagan — who Brannon just happens to be running to unseat this year.

Now, it appears a formal complaint has been filed with the state Judicial Standards Commission against the Brannon case judge,  Bryan Collins of the Wake County Superior Court, by Jodi Riddleberger, a leader with the Tea Party-affiliated Conservatives For Guilford County.

We’ve obtained the text of the March 19 complaint submitted by Ms. Riddleberger:

To: The Judicial Standards Commission

This matter needs immediate attention:

According to the North Carolina Code of Judicial Conduct judges should “uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary.”

Canon 2

A. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should conduct himself/herself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
B. A judge should not allow the judge’s family, social or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment. The judge should not lend the prestige of the judge’s office to advance the private interest of others;

Canon 3


On motion of any party, a judge should disqualify himself/herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality may reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: (a) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, (c) The judge knows that he/she, individually or as a fiduciary, or the judge’s spouse or minor child residing in the judge’s household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding,

Cannon 5

C. Financial activities.
(1) A judge should refrain from financial and business dealings that reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of the judge’s judicial duties….


I am writing to make a formal complaint against Superior Court Judge Bryan Collins – there is a clear violation of this code of conduct in his presiding over the Greg Brannon civil case, if this information is true:

“A jury verdict on February 18, 2014 found US Senate Candidate Greg Brannon liable for giving “misleading or false information in 2010 to investors regarding a mobile application being developed by Neogence Enterprises, a now-defunct tech company he helped start.”
As a result, Superior Court Judge Bryan Collins, who presided over the case, found Brannon must reimburse the two investors who were plaintiffs in the case over $450,000. There is controversy sounding the merits of the case, and Brannon is appealing the ruling.
But who is Judge Bryan Collins? According to, “Collins is a superior court judge for the 10th Judicial District of the Third Division of the Superior Court, serving Wake County in North Carolina. Collins began his legal career as an attorney in private practice from 1985 to 2005. In 2005, he became the Public Defender for Wake County. He was then elected a superior court judge in 2012 and his current term expires in 2020.”
According to a November 6, 2012 article in the Raleigh News and Observer, “Collins, 52, said he was approached last year by Don Stephens, Wake County’s senior resident Superior Court judge, about running for judge. So, late last year, he moved from his condominium in downtown Raleigh to an apartment in North Raleigh just so he could run in the newly created District 10E.”
Collins is a registered Democrat.
By conducting an FEC search for political campaign contributions, we see that a Bryan Collins in Raleigh who listed his occupation as Public Defender contributed the sum of $500 to the Hagan Senate Committee in 2008.
I’m no lawyer, and I can’t possibly pretend to understand all the technicalities of impartiality. That said, does anyone think it smells a little funny that a Judge known to support one candidate for office would be allowed to try a case involving that candidate’s potential future opposition?”

This article was posted on the Pundit House ( on March 18th 2014.

Obviously if Judge Collins is a financial contributor to Kay Hagan, then he should not have presided Dr. Greg Brannon’s court case — as he was clearly not able to be unbiased towards her fore-running Republican opponent in the US Senate race. Please work to remedy this situation and help build confidence in the justice of the NC courts system.

Greg Brannon Discusses Lawsuit

March 20th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives No Responses
Greg Brannon Discusses Lawsuit

Greg Brannon speaks with the guys on Glenn Beck’s radio show on March 19, 2014

SHOCKER! Kay Hagan votes in favor Debo Adegbile.

March 6th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives No Responses
SHOCKER! Kay Hagan votes in favor Debo Adegbile.

Today the Senate voted down a particularly noxious Obama nomination. Debo Adegbile, whose only claim to fame was agitating on behalf of a convicted, unrepentant, and vicious cop killer, was voted down 47-52. Pressing this nomination was a stupid act by the White House, though it has become boring to write that phrase over the course of the past six years. The nomination was toxic with no greater purpose than for Obama to demonstrate that he has stump broke Harry Reid and thereby further cow Mitch McConnell. It forced Red State Democrat senators to make a difficult vote. Some took the easy way out:

Other Democrats who voted against the Obama nominee were Chris Coons (Del.),Bob Casey (Pa.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), Joe Manchin (W.V.), Joe Donnolly (Ind.) and John Walsh (Mont.).

Manchin, Pryor, and Walsh are all on the endangered species list, voting against Adegbile was mandatory for them even if it meant embarrassing the Man-God at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. More curious is who is on the list voting yes: Mary Landrieu and Kay Hagan. Even though both are floundering and all indications are that Kay Hagan is circling the drain a vote against Adegbile would have helped, or worst casing it been neutral, while a vote in favor would hurt.

The conclusion is obvious. Both Landrieu and Hagan have avoided Obama when he visited their states. This indicates that they are not members of the Obama fan club. Why make this counter-intuitive vote? Because they want jobs in the Obama Administration after they are defeated in November. Rather than making a vote for the benefit of the voters back home, they made their vote to curry favor with Obama.

U.S. Senate debate for Republican primary candidates

March 6th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives 2 Responses

The Charlotte Observer is holding a U.S. Senate debate with the Republican primary candidates on April 22 at Davidson College. The debate will be co-sponsored by Time Warner Cable News (formerly News 14) and The (Raleigh) News & Observer.

Declared Republican candidates Ted Alexander, Alex Bradshaw, Greg Brannon, Heather Grant, Mark Harris, Edward Kryn, Jim Snyder and Thom Tillis have been invited to participate.

TWC’s “Capital Tonight” anchor Tim Boyum will moderate the hourlong debate two weeks before the May 6 primary. Observer Editorial Page Editor Taylor Batten will be among the journalists asking the candidates questions.

The debate will be open to the public. Registration will open in early April. Time Warner Cable News will broadcast the debate live. Jennifer Rothacker

Read Article Here

The Tea Party Just Turned Five — and It’s Not Going Away

March 5th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives No Responses
The Tea Party Just Turned Five — and It’s Not Going Away

Some date the advent of the tea party to 2007, when then-presidential candidate Ron Paul held a “tax day tea party” fundraiser to fill his campaign coffers. But the broader movement began five years ago last week — shortly after Barack Obama was sworn into office.

Theda Scokpol is a sociologist and political scientist at Harvard, and co-author, with Vanessa Williams, of The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism. spoke with her about the movement’s past influence over the Republican Party and its future. Below is a transcript that’s been lightly edited for clarity.

Joshua Holland: There have been a number of recent columns proclaiming the death of the tea party — or its diminished influence, at least — and they generally cite the passage of a clean debt limit hike, or the passage of a budget deal. We’ve heard about how the US Chamber of Commerce and the so-called moderate wing of the Republican Party are fighting back against tea party extremism. What’s your view?

Theda Skocpol: I think it’s true that we’re seeing some activism on the part of business Republicans who used to completely control the Republican Party, with an occasional sop to Christian right activists. They woke up to find themselves with about half of Republican lawmakers devoted to a no-compromise, no-bargaining style of politics, and some very hefty right-wing funders who are mounting challenges to traditional conservative Republicans. So we’re seeing more of a two-sided battle, rather than simply the tea party calling the tune.

But we shouldn’t get too carried away here, because already the Republican Party has galloped to the right on a whole range of issues that grassroots and elite tea party forces are promoting. We’re not really seeing compromises on anything except preventing the country from plummeting into an international financial crisis. And we’re seeing no movement on cooperation with Barack Obama on immigration reform, or a whole series of other things that are quite popular with the public but which the tea party opposes.

Joshua Holland: How has the tea party wielded such influence? Liberal activists certainly don’t have that kind of sway over the Democratic party.

Skocpol: That’s right. It’s an interesting phenomenon. I describe it as a pincers movement. Even though the tea party is a label we all use, it’s really a combination of forces pushing on Republican officeholders and Republican candidates. Part of those forces are aroused and fearful, older, white, conservative-minded activists — who are good citizens in the sense that they turn out for primary elections, they pay attention, they write letters, they put pressure on their representatives. They’re a force that Republican officeholders and candidates have to worry about in primary elections, if no other time.

In addition to that, there are these opulently funded ultra-right ideological operations that are pushing on the same Republican candidates and officeholders from the top and can send money to challenge them in primaries if they don’t follow the policy lines they prefer.

Holland: We know from various polls that some share of Americans — or some share of Republicans — have a favorable view of the tea party. Do we have a sense of the number of people who we could properly call “activists” — those who are really engaged in the tea party movement?

Skocpol: Vanessa Williamson and I, in our assessment of the situation back in 2011, estimated that the 900 regularly meeting local tea parties were personned by about 200,000 activists who went well beyond expressing sympathy, or even sending an occasional financial contribution or note or letter. They actually organized these groups, which is really an impressive accomplishment.

Holland: I want to ask you two related questions. First, what do you think is the biggest misconception liberals have about the tea parties?

Skocpol: There are two. First, I think many people on the left have wanted to comfort themselves with the idea that this is just the Koch brothers creating a fake movement and sending checks to grassroots activists. And that’s just not correct. The Koch brothers and other ultra-right billionaires are certainly very, very active, and they matter, but it’s not true that they completely control or that they completely created the grassroots activists.

The other misconception that more moderate liberals usually have is that because the tea party label is not popular with most Americans, that means it’s dying. But that’s not how this movement operates. This is leverage on one of the two major political parties, and it’s minority leverage, but it’s very effective.

Holland: What do you think is the thing that neutral political journalists tend to get wrong?

Skocpol: I think there was the sense that once Barack Obama was reelected, which was certainly a defeat for Republicans of all stripes, including the tea partiers, that meant this thing was going away. And then, when the government shut down led to a temporary drop in Republican popularity in the polls, they said the movement is going away. It’s just a failure to understand that majority expressions of opinions in surveys are not the same thing as political power.

Holland: There have been countless articles that claim that they eschew social conservatism for this laser-like focus on economic issues. Do you think that’s an accurate characterization?

Skocpol: No. We found, both in our visiting of local tea party groups and interviews with people — and in our analysis of national survey data — that about half of tea party sympathizers and activists are also Christian conservatives. And Christian conservatives, with their commitment to making abortion illegal and fighting gay rights, represent a deeper phenomenon. Some of them will call themselves tea partiers and attend tea party meetings. They may sit in the same room with people who are not particularly religious or who are secular. So they’re not the entirety of the tea party, but they’re there, and they’re still pushing elected Republicans, and elected Republicans often find it easier to vote on anti-abortion measures than on anything else.

Holland: In The Whites of Their Eyes: The Tea Party’s Revolution and the Battle over American History, historian and journalist Jill Lepore argued that the tea partiers have been fed a version of our history that’s basically 180 degrees away from reality. For them, the framers were like Glenn Beck; they were diehard Christians, they shared a strong belief in states’ rights. And none of this is remotely the case. Is that consistent with your research, and to what degree does that belief system animate the movement?

Skocpol: You know, all social movements like to align themselves with potent historical symbols. The very name of the tea party invokes a very potent symbol, the tossing of imported tea into Boston Harbor. There’s no question that, strictly speaking, tea partiers’ beliefs about the Constitution resemble something closer to the anti-federalists of the founding era — and the secessionists and nullification supporters of the era leading into the Civil War. But where I depart from Professor Lepore is that she wrote as if it were something special to the tea party. I don’t think the right way to understand the uses of history by social movements is to get into the weeds about whether they’re entirely accurate in the sense that would pass muster in a Harvard history seminar. You have to understand this is symbolic language about who “we” are and who “they” are. And what tea partiers are saying is, “We are the real Americans, and they — the Barack Obama supporters — are not really Americans.”

Holland: Do you think that it’s trivializing to look at those older tea party members saying “keep government out of our Medicare” that kept us from understanding this movement?

Skocpol: Definitely. Vanessa and I did something that nobody else has done. In addition to pulling together a lot of public information and using the best journalism and the best national surveys, we managed, in three regions of the country, to sit down for confidential face-to-face interviews with tea party people. And that gave us a setting in which we could hear the tone of what they were saying, get into the nuances and find out things that might not be obvious from public demonstrations where a few people are carrying angry signs. We asked people about Social Security, Medicare and veteran’s benefits. Tea partiers are almost all either on Medicare, Social Security or veteran’s benefits — or about to be. And like most other Americans, they tend to believe these are legitimate programs, and they know they are tax-funded public programs. They’re not deluded about that.

So what they oppose is public spending — and taxation to support public spending — on ‘them,’ on the moochers, on the freeloaders. And, like all conservative populist movements, when you listen to what they’re saying, the moochers and the freeloaders are often people of color and low-income workers. But we also discovered that for many of them, the moochers are young people, including at times their own grandsons and granddaughters.

Holland: Now, I’m going to ask you to gaze into a crystal ball for a moment. This movement has been highly effective for advancing the interests of deep-pocketed conservative individuals and organizations. Do you think they’re going to be a permanent feature in American politics or will they die off?

Skocpol: Well, the top concerns of grassroots tea partiers and the top concerns of elite funders are not exactly the same. For example, elite funders want to privatize and do away with Social Security and Medicare. Grassroots tea partiers are on Social Security and Medicare and consider these to be legitimate programs. That particular contradiction was squared by Congressman Paul Ryan when he came up with a scheme to privatize Medicare for people under age 55.

A deeper contradiction between many grassroots tea partiers, or pretty much all of them, and some, but not all, of the elite funders, is over immigration. We found that grassroots tea partiers are highly aroused about immigration. They believe that most immigrants are undocumented or illegal and they want them to be rounded up and sent back. They are fiercely opposed to a legal route to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented. Elite funders are partly in that camp — Heritage Action, for example — but the Koch brothers’ organization, Americans for Prosperity, favors some kind of immigration reform bargain.

Now, will they still be around? You can bet that those elite funders will still be around. They’re not going anywhere. The activists are committed, organized, fiercely aroused people, but they are older. And they’re not recruiting others, so they’re not going to last forever.

But they’re not standing down anytime soon.

Dave Camp: How to Fix Our Appalling Tax Code

February 27th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives One Response
Dave Camp: How to Fix Our Appalling Tax Code

There have been so many changes to the tax code over the past decade that it is now 10 times the size of the Bible, but with none of the Good News. That factual statement usually gets a good laugh back home in Michigan. What isn’t funny is the effect that constant tinkering with taxes has had on the people who pay them, and on the economy.

According to Nina Olsen, the National Taxpayer Advocate at the IRS, Americans overall spend over six billion hours and $168 billion every year to file their returns. This is stark testimony to the complexity of the tax code. Meanwhile, owners of small businesses face tax rates as high as 44.6%, while the total (state and federal) U.S. corporate rate, 39.1%, is the highest in the industrialized world.

Martin Kozlowski

The last time the U.S. enacted a comprehensive tax reform was 1986. But many of America’s major competitors have been actively reforming their tax laws in recent years. Even our closest neighbors are getting ahead of us. Canada has already reformed its tax laws and Mexico is doing so right now. If Congress doesn’t take action, the U.S. risks falling further behind.

The tax code should make it easier for American companies to bring back profits earned overseas so they can be invested here. It should not hinder small businesses from growing into large businesses. And the individual income tax needs to be simpler, fairer and flatter for everyone.

On Wednesday, I am releasing what a simpler, fairer tax code actually looks like. The guiding principle is that everyone should play by the same rules—your tax rate should be determined by what’s fair, not by who you know in Washington. Here is what it would look like:

First, the tax code will be made simpler—so every family can do its own taxes confidently, without fearing an audit, or wondering if someone else who can afford an expensive accountant is getting a better deal.

Today there are 15 different tax breaks for education—nine for current expenses, two for past expenses and four for future expenses. The IRS instructions explaining it all come to almost 90 pages. That isn’t a tax code designed for working families; it is a tax code designed to make money for accountants.

Last year, my Democratic counterpart on the Ways and Means Committee, Sandy Levin of Michigan, and I created 11 bipartisan working groups to tackle different parts of the tax code. One of those, headed by Diane Black (R., Tenn.) and Danny Davis (D., Ill.), looked into those education provisions. After months of work, the leaders of the working group recently came forward with a plan that consolidates four of these provisions into one improved credit, making it easier for families and students to afford a college education.

Related Video

Heritage Foundation chief economist Steve Moore on Republican Dave Camp’s new plan to overhaul and simplify the tax code.

Paired with more commonsense reforms like increasing the standard deduction and the child tax credit will mean that nearly 95% of the country can get the lowest possible tax rate by just filing the basic IRS 1040A form—no more itemizing, no more keeping track of all those receipts, and no more filling out all those extra schedules, forms and work sheets.

Second, the tax code will be made more effective and efficient by getting rid of special-interest handouts, which will mean lower tax rates for individuals, families and all businesses. Under this plan, over 99% of tax filers will face a top tax rate of 25%—allowing small and large businesses alike to expand operations, hire new workers and increase benefits and take home pay. On the individual side, there will be an introductory bracket of 10%.

Nonpartisan, independent economists at the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation have already analyzed this plan. According to those estimates, after this streamlining of the tax code, the size of the economy will increase by $3.4 trillion over the next decade, or roughly 20% compared with today. This will lead to nearly two million new jobs—and producing up to $700 billion in additional federal revenues that can be used to lower taxes even further or reduce the debt.

What does this mean for you and your family? Because we will have a healthier economy, wages will rise. With more income but lower tax rates, families with a median income ($51,000 for a family of four) will have on average an extra $1,300 in their pocket at the end of the year.

Third, make the tax code fairer and more accountable. That means no more hidden provisions that benefit a favored few, and no more tax increases to fuel more spending.

We can clean up provisions like “carried interest” that allow certain private-equity firms to get the investment-income tax rate on what anyone else would call normal wage income. We’ll also put an end to special depreciation benefits related to corporate jets and close, once and for all, the infamous “John Edwards” loophole that allows a select few to avoid employment taxes on their income. The revenue gained from that provision, and many others like shifting to Roth-style retirement accounts for those contributing more than $8,750 (only 5% of the workforce) can be used to lower tax rates across the board.

The tax code changes in my plan are not intended as a means of raising revenue. If loopholes are closed, Americans should get the benefit by way of lower rates.

Tax reform needs to be about strengthening the economy and making the code simpler and fairer. That’s what Republican President Ronald Reagan did when he worked with Democrats in Congress in 1986. We need to get to work and repeat that success.

Mr. Camp, a Republican, is chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Read article from WSJ here.

Big Tax Reform Making It’s Way Through Congress – We Must Now Pressure Senate

February 27th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives One Response
Big Tax Reform Making It’s Way Through Congress – We Must Now Pressure Senate

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Wednesday that he welcomes a conversation on tax reform, even though the issue is unlikely to go anywhere in Congress in this midterm election year.

The issue was pushed to the forefront by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., who has been working on a comprehensive tax overhaul proposal for years. The plan he introduced would drop the top income tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent and would reduce the number of income tax brackets from seven to two. It would also impose a surtax on some income above $450,000, though that would not apply to capital gains or investments.

The reforms would be revenue-neutral, which will won’t appeal to Democrats who wanted to raise more money by closing loopholes. Instead, the new tax code would necessarily have to eliminate or reduce some popular tax breaks.
Plan to simplify tax code to be revealed by Ways and Means chairman

“My job is to present this option to the American people,” he told CBS News congressional correspondent Nancy Cordes. “They’ll ultimately decide if we’ll move forward on this or not, but I think when people see we can make their lives better through a simpler, fairer, flatter tax code, I think they’ll be excited about it.”In a Wall Street Journal op-ed out Wednesday, Camp said the guiding principle of the reform is that “everyone should play by the same rules—your tax rate should be determined by what’s fair, not by who you know in Washington.”

Though a complex issue like tax reform could put internal pressure on the GOP, Boehner was careful not to dismiss it out of hand at his weekly press conference Wednesday.

“We all know our tax system is broken, we all know that it frankly gets in the way of economic growth,” he said. “It’s time to have a public conversation about the issue of tax reform, and so I welcome the conversation, frankly I think it will be healthy, it will be informative, and I look forward to it.”

But Boehner stopped short of calling Camp’s draft the official Republican position, saying that would be, “getting a little bit ahead of yourself.”

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who is poised to take over the Ways and Means Committee when Camp’s chairmanship expires at the end of the year, congratulated Camp for putting a proposal on the table and called the plan “the beginning of a good debate.” But as for whether there would be a vote on the plan this year, Ryan said, “That remains to be seen.”

A major obstacle: the Senate leaders of both parties, who have already indicated tax reform has no future in Congress this year.

“I think we will not be able to finish the job, regretfully, in 2014,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday. “Now, if we had a new Republican Senate next year, coupled with a Republican House, I think we could have at least a congressional agreement that this is about getting rates down, and making America more competitive.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., seemed to agree – but blamed the GOP. “The truth is we should have tackled tax reform years ago,” he said. “It would be extremely difficult… with the obstruction that we get here from the Republicans on virtually everything.”

Sen. Hagan runs from Obamacare question on canceled plans

February 26th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives No Responses
Sen. Hagan runs from Obamacare question on canceled plans

On Monday, Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC) repeatedly refused to answer a simple question on when she knew people wouldn’t be able to keep their current plans under Obamacare.

Sen. Hagan promised on at least 24 separate occasions people in North Carolina would be able to keep their current health care plan — once Obamacare went into effect — if they wished to do so.

However, she dodged the question at her press conference after she made it official she’d be running for re-election.

One reporter asks, “Much has been made about if you like you health care plan you can keep it, but what we’re still not sure about is, when exactly did you learn that wasn’t the case? Because you were on a lot of committees that helped write the bill. Was there a specific time frame — a day, a month, a week — that you can narrow it to when you learned that wasn’t going to be the case?”

Hagan avoids the question. Instead, she talks about a bill she is sponsoring that will allow people to keep their plans.


After the press conference, she was once again pressed in the parking lot. This time, she walked away from the reporter without answering the question.

Visa wants to Re-Elect Kay Hagan

February 26th, 2014 by NC Tea Party Staff Categories: Archives No Responses
Visa wants to Re-Elect Kay Hagan

A woman representing Visa’s Government Relations Office in Washington DC says “Let’s get her re-elected to a group of students”. Kay Hagan was there to teach students about financial literacy, in reality she should have been sitting in the audience. But Visa is telling students to re-elect Kay Hagan.