All Star Panelist Crom Carmichael and Senator Mark Pody Discuss Tennessee General Assembly Agenda and Vaccination Exemption

All Star Panelist Crom Carmichael and Senator Mark Pody Discuss Tennessee General Assembly Agenda and Vaccination Exemption

 

Live from Music Row Wednesday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed the original all-star panelist Crom Carmichael and Senator Mark Pody (TN-17) to the studio to discuss the Tennessee General Assembly’s remaining agenda and upcoming vaccination bill which advocates for governmental exemption status.

Leahy: In studio the original all-star panelist, Crom Carmichael, and State Senator Mark Pody from Wilson County. Senator Pody, what’s on the agenda for the remaining month of the Tennessee General Assembly?

Pody: Well, to start with today is a big day because we have a vaccination bill that is going to be heard in the health committee.

Leahy: Now, when you say vaccination bill, tell us what that bill is and does.

Pody: Alright. So what that bill is going to do and is being carried by Senator Janice Bowling Aad it’s going to say that if you have a religious exemption or if you have a conscience that says you don’t want to get that vaccination, you cannot be forced by the government to take that vaccination.

Leahy: Now, that seems to me like a common sense and individual liberty bill. This bill died, didn’t it and then it came back?

Pody: Yes. A similar bill died, and there was one that I was actually carrying earlier this year and it died in the House. So we had the votes in the Senate to pass the bill, but it died in the House. And we currently have this exemption right now in the state of Tennessee. However, if the governor calls an emergency, then that exemption goes away.

And for whatever reason, just because we call it an emergency does not mean that our constitutional rights or religious freedoms should be stepped on. And that’s what this bill does. It’s going to say even underneath an emergency, that we have the right to say we don’t want that vaccination.

Leahy: What are the prospects of it passing the health committee in the House today?

Pody: I think it’s a pretty good chance right now. I talked to the chairman of that committee, and he is for it and he’s on board with it. And I know Joey Hensley is on that committee, and he’s going to be for it. So I think we have a good shot. But there’s going to be a rally down there at the Capitol today with Gary Humble and Tennessee Stands.

Leahy: He was in studio here with Ben Cunningham on Wednesday when I was out of town in Tallahassee putting together The Florida Capital Star deal.

Carmichael: You know, what’s interesting about that bill is that I think you said that government does not have the right to do that.

Pody: Yes.

Carmichael: If you watch what the Biden administration is trying to do with this so-called health card passport, he says they’re working with private industry. So what they’ve done is they’ve kind of looked at the way that if you’re protected by Section 230, then corporations are able to do the bidding of the Democrat Party by canceling and demonetizing people who disagree with progressive policies.

So rather than have the federal government try to pass a national bill on a COVID passport, they’re working with big companies to try to get those companies to force it. So it’s the private sector. So what the Senator is saying here is the government won’t be able to do it. But it sounds like that under your bill, a large private company or private employer could impose a restriction on everyone who doesn’t carry a COVID passport.

Pody: That’s correct.

Carmichael: Whether over a religious exemption or not, they would still have to carry the passport, which means they have to go have the vaccine.

Pody: That’s correct. Now, this bill is only focused on government. There is another bill that’s coming that would actually address the private industry as well. But that’s not the one that’s up to date. This is the one that’s coming today. And we’re working through that. The other issue that’s coming up is money. We’re going to be passing the budget in April, and we have money in Tennessee. Tennessee is a well-run state, one of the best in the entire nation. Unlike the federal government, we only spend the money we have. We don’t go into debt. We are one the lowest debt in the nation.

Leahy: Crom, you might want to weigh on this.

Carmichael: Well, what’s interesting is this because the Senator is right. We are a very well run state. We’re a very low tax state. We have no income tax. We have no estate tax. We don’t even have a tax now on interest in dividends. And the people on the left said if you eliminate those taxes, you’ll lose your revenue.

Leahy: They were wrong.

Carmichael: They were wrong. Because when you eliminate those taxes, you become more attractive to people to move to your state who create wealth. The states with the highest income taxes are the ones that run the biggest deficits. The corollary is just as clear as it can be. California and New York are terribly run states with huge deficits, as is Illinois. Please, go ahead.

Pody: I got to tell you, the people that are moving here out of those kinds of states because of their tax problems are coming here. We just don’t want them to bring their same politics here because they’re going to turn us into that kind of taxing state.

Carmichael: If there’s any extra money, have it to fund an educational program for newly minted Tennesseeans. (Laughter)

Leahy: That’s actually not a joke, because, as it turns out, there’s an idea called The Welcome Wagon.

Carmichael: I love it.

Leahy: Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit has put this out. There’s some teeth behind it. And State Senator Pody, we’re going to bring this to you when it is fully developed in the next couple of weeks.

Pody: I look forward to it.

Carmichael: I love that. That’s right.

Leahy: We’re in the business of finding out ideas that Crom will love. (Laughter)

Listen to the full third hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Author and Co-Creator of the Theology Home Project, Carrie Gress Talks About the Importance of Homemaking and It’s Devaluation by Radical Feminism

Author and Co-Creator of the Theology Home Project, Carrie Gress Talks About the Importance of Homemaking and It’s Devaluation by Radical Feminism

 

Live from Music Row Monday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed author of the Anti-Mary Exposed and co-creator of the Theology of Home project to discuss the importance of homemaking as a foretaste of heaven and its destruction by way of the radical feminist movement.

Leahy: We are delighted to welcome to our microphones on our newsmaker line a new friend, Carry Gress, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and author of a new book and a new project. The book on the Theology of Home. They’re actually two books and the Theology of Home II. Welcome, Carrie Gress.

Gress: Thank you. Good morning. Thanks for having me on.

Leahy: So you have a PhD from Catholic University. You’ve co-authored a book with a great Catholic theologian George Weigel. Did I pronounce that right?

Gress: W-E-I-G-E-L. Weigel.

Leahy: Perhaps the leading Catholic theologian of the 21st century it seems to me. But he’s a great guy from what I can tell.

Gress: He is a great guy. He’s definitely one of the best known out there, that’s for sure. It was a real privilege to write a book with him.

Leahy: So talk to us about the Theology of Home project, just announced a couple of days ago by the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Basically, we’ll focus, it says on the website, on equipping, biblically Orthodox Americans in living out the faith under the challenging new circumstances of 21st century America. What is the main point of this project, Carrie?

Gress: Well, the main point is really to look at the importance of the home. And I think this is something that we can all agree has really been decimated over the last five decades, largely because of radical feminism and just kind of the message in the air that the home doesn’t matter and that women are going to be fulfilled outside the home and not inside the home.

But we also have this amazing trend going on where the home is now incredibly popular as far as renovating them and all these home projects like knitting and cooking and things like that. So what we really want to do is just connect the dots and say these things are important and popular, not just because of the lockdowns. They were certainly making a comeback before that.

But because people recognize that there’s something important about the home and that it is a sanctuary. It’s meant to be that and it’s meant to be the place where we’re really known and nourished and loved. And it can’t be done without a homemaker. A home doesn’t make itself. My co-author Noelle Mering and I just really wanted to look at that idea and see how important this is in terms of public policy and law and all of these things, instead of it just being an invisible reality that all of us take for granted.

Leahy: Isn’t perhaps the most important element of it in the formation of the character of young children?

Gress: Oh, absolutely. I think that is so much of it. I think if you look at some of the societal ills that we have today, so many of them go back to this reality that children just haven’t been well-formed and haven’t been loved in a way that they need to be loved. And we’re really paying the price for it as a culture right now.

Leahy: From a public policy point of view, what kind of things would come out of the Theology of Home project?

Gress: Well, it’s going to be interesting to see, because nothing’s really been done like it at this point. Much of it will be writing op-eds and things like that that Noelle and I have been doing already in both Catholic and secular and Protestant outlets. But I think that we also will look at just how do we help inform people and our influencers on the Hill through workshops and things like that?

This is what typically think tanks have done. But we also like to extend it larger. We have an online magazine called Theologyofhome.com. We’d love to grow that into something that has a much further reach just to help women in particular know that it’s okay that we have these desires of the heart to have a beautiful home. It’s meant to be that way. Our home is really supposed to be a foretaste of heaven. So it’s important that we recognize that.

Leahy: I have never heard that. Carrie, you caught my attention when you said the home is supposed to be a foretaste of heaven. I never heard that. Where does that come from?

Gress: Well, it comes from our first book, Theology of Home: Finding the Eternal in Every Day. We really developed a mini theology related to that. But I think that what we call the domestic church really is meant to be where we can see the things that are in the home are also in the church. But we can also see them in heaven.

Things like light, nourishment, hospitality, safety, and comfort. All of these things are transcendentals that are not just meant to be at the home, but we see them again in these different ways, supernaturally. So that’s really the idea. But we also know well, what we can imagine well what hell would be like in our homes too.

Leahy: Crom Carmichael is our all-star panelist here in studio. He has a question for you.

Carmichael: Carrie, you mentioned that the radical feminists have done much to destroy the home. When you say home, I’m assuming that family is synonymous with the word home.

Gress: Oh, absolutely.

Carmichael: So it’s not just a physical home, it’s a family. And my sense of it is that radical feminism was not so much, it may have started with a goal to help women in the workplace, but it grew to be anti-family. Go ahead, please.

Gress: Well, I would just say I’ve actually written a whole book on the topic looking at the early second wave of feminism, and I actually think the roots were very very Marxist. I don’t think that the intention was as pure as that. And so I think that there has been an effort to destroy the family, but part of that has been destroying the actual material aspect of our homes.

Taking the woman out of the home. So the two are really synonymous. I think that you need both to really build up a family well. You can’t do that and sort of abstractly. So I think it’s important to really recognize the actual home itself and the importance of that material element.

Carmichael: Yes. Well, the family and the home are on kind of one side of the political divide. And then the destruction of the family and the state are on the other. Because you can’t really empower the state as much as the left would like to without destroying the importance of the family.

Gress: Right. But I think that radical feminism started out with things like saying how awful it is to be a homemaker. That you have to be mentally ill, to be a homemaker, that children don’t need a homemaker, that they just raise themselves. These are the things that have been told to us for 50 years. And, of course, destroying the patriarchy as part of that. These are very old talking points that we’re still hearing 50 years later. So, yeah, I think it’s part and parcel. I think both of the things go together.

Carmichael: Right. But I guess what I’m asking you is and I think you and I are agreeing that feminism was really designed, as you say, as a Marxist tool to destroy the family rather than a tool to lift up women. In other words, they were flying under a false flag.

Gress: Absolutely. I think that is the case and I go into that in detail in my book called Anti-Mary Exposed: Rescuing the Culture from Toxic Femininity, where there are absolutely both Marxist elements as well as strong elements of the occult that we’re very much aimed at destroying the family.

Carmichael: Now, your organization, how do you communicate with people who are interested in your point of view? Are you being attacked on social media? Are you being canceled on social media? Are you being allowed to communicate or is Big Tech throttling you also?

Gress: Well, Big Tech came after my book, The Anti-Mary Exposed right after the inauguration actually. And both Facebook and Instagram banned it from their marketplaces. So that’s been kind of an ongoing story that’s been happening. But the actual Theology of Home books have not been touched largely because they’re very unpolemical.

We designed them to be very positive and for people to really find something or anybody to find something in them that would be edifying to them. So that we haven’t been attacked yet. And our Theologyofhome.com website has also been untouched. But of course, we have a subscriber list. We know that probably down the road we will end up just having to be a newsletter that we send out to people. So we really like to build it up that way just so we can stay in touch with people. The biggest piece has certainly been the censorship that I’ve experienced with my specific book.

Leahy: Carrie Gress, a fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center and co-author of books about the Theology of Home. Now, the Theology of Home projects. You can go to Theologyofhome.com to learn more. Carrie, thanks so much for joining us. And please, come back.

Gress: Thank you. I love it. Thanks so much.

Leahy: All right, now that was interesting.

Carmichael: That was very interesting. I really enjoyed that.

Leahy: Yeah, well, we try to keep it interesting here.

Carmichael: Well, she’s a tinker.

Listen to the full third hour here:


– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Photo “Making a Home” by Theology of Home.

 

 

 

 

Nashville Taxpayer Protection Act: Attorney Jim Roberts Comes Up with More Petitions Than Legally Needed, Metro Legal Moves Goalpost

Nashville Taxpayer Protection Act: Attorney Jim Roberts Comes Up with More Petitions Than Legally Needed, Metro Legal Moves Goalpost

 

Live from Music Row Friday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed Nashville attorney Jim Roberts to the newsmakers line to discuss his receipt of more than enough signed petitions to put the Nashville Taxpayer Protection Act on the ballot yet informs of Metro Legals attempts to change the rules.

Leahy: We are joined on our newspaper line by the triumphant Jim Roberts. Good morning, Jim.

Roberts: Good morning, sir. How are you doing today?

Leahy: So tell us what you did yesterday afternoon.

Roberts: Well, we were very excited. Yesterday we went down to the courthouse and handed over to the Metro Clerk more than sufficient signatures to place the Nashville Taxpayer Protection Act on the ballot. And they were waiting for us, even though we didn’t tell them we were coming, they knew we were coming. And they already had the forms ready. And it was just a wonderful feeling to unload those thousands and thousands and thousands of petitions with the signatures on them.

Leahy: I saw the picture. You had a lot of them. Now the number that you submitted was a little over 14,000. Is that correct?

Roberts: That’s right. 14,000 valid signatures.

Leahy: Now, there’s a little dispute coming on what the right number is. Tell us what your interpretation of the Metro charter is as to what the number needs to be.

Roberts: Certainly. There was a little confusion first, because, quite honestly, the Election Commission was putting out some incorrect information. And it’s really all based on how many people voted in the last general election. And that term general election is defined as the last Metro election.

Leahy: And let me just pause here for a moment. When people use the term general election, the general election for state and federal offices was held in November 2020.

Roberts: That’s right.

Leahy: But the general election for Metro Nashville County government offices was at the August of 2019 election?

Roberts: No, it was the August of 2020 election.

Leahy: And the charter says you need 10 percent. And so what is 10 percent of the August 2020 general election?

Roberts: About 11,500 signatures.

Leahy: And you turned in 14,000.

Roberts: That’s right.

Leahy: So game over right? If they get approved by the Metro clerks, you should be on the ballot except your counterpart accept. And now we have the rest of the story. (Roberts chuckles) Jeff Roberts, no relation to you. Jim Roberts is the election administrator for Davidson County. He says no. He says when they say general election, they mean the November 2020 general election for federal and state offices. And 10 percent of that number is 32,000. He said in an article in The Tennesseean where he said he’s going to challenge you. What happens next?

Roberts: Well, what’s going to happen is that we’re actually going to fail a lawsuit Monday. I must admit I didn’t expect this sort of legal shenanigans that we had last time. The unbelievable dishonesty of the Metropolitan government in the department of law. I was caught off guard by that. We’re not really going to put up with that nonsense.

The law is very clear. In fact, Metro argued in a very similar situation that it would have been the August election, not just two years ago when the Community Oversight Board referendum was on the ballot it was Metro that argued that the prior August selection was the right election and that Metro argued that the intervening federal election didn’t count.

That was Metro’s argument. And I expected them to be hypocrites and to change their position. But the law is completely clear. This case is less than two years old, and it says very clearly that the November federal and state election isn’t the election you count from. So Jeff is just wrong. And either he doesn’t know he’s wrong or he doesn’t care he’s wrong.

Carmichael: Are you going to file for a declaratory judgment on Monday?

Roberts: That is probably what we’ll do. If you remember last time that the Election Commission stalled and delayed. We found out that Metro legal was meeting illegally and secretly with the Election Commission to conspire against the voters. We’re not going to put up with that nonsense this time. My goal is to file for a declarative action and an injunction prohibiting Metro legal from engaging in any more unethical behavior. We’re going to make it very clear that this is serious. This is what the people want, and we’re not going to have a lot of illegal and unethical behavior by the Metropolitan government to try to stop it.

Carmichael: When you say this is what people want what you’re really saying is people want to have a right to have a say on their own tax rates. Now whether or not they want to have them or not. If this vote goes against the way that you would like it to, you’re still satisfied with that as a result, because the people have spoken. Is that accurate?

Roberts: Absolutely. And obviously, I hope they look for these six good things because they’re all good government amendments but I want to put it in the people’s hands. They have a right. This is what’s so dishonest about what Metro legal is doing. It is that they’re not just trying to say it’s a bad idea they’re trying to prevent and have been trying to prevent the people from voting on it. And when your government is telling you, you don’t get to vote on something that should bother everybody. And it bothers me a lot.

Leahy: So, Jim, the precedent you’re talking about, tell me if I’ve got it right. So the controversial Community Oversight Board, which was placed on the ballot because community groups gathered signatures that were more than 10 percent

Carmichael: Of the previous August.

Leahy: Previous August general election back in 2018. And they got it on like 1,500 signatures or something at 10,000. And I think the number was 8,500 or something like that. And the fraternal order of police filed a lawsuit that went through many, many cases and many iterations. And they said, no, that’s not enough. It needs to be the general election in the November election. Metro legal argued, no no no it has to be August in that. Do I have that right?

Roberts: That’s exactly right. That’s what they ordered. The phrase in the charter says proceeding general election. So in a sort of legal way, there was a dispute. What does proceeding general election mean? Well, one of the bills is very clear. In an election just Metro offices are being decided, not just people in Davidson County are voting but a true Metro election. And that was August of 2016 in that particular case. And for us, it’s August 2020. Metro knows this, and they’re just purposely spreading false information.

Leahy: So it’s interesting. They argue that it should have been the August election back to get the Community Oversight Board referendum on the ballot. It got on the ballot and was passed by the voters. Now we have a community oversight board. Are they going to literally make exactly the opposite argument when you go to court to get this on the ballot?

Roberts: Not only do I expect them to do that, which is incredibly dishonest, but one of the things that they argued in the oversight board case was that the people should have a right to go ahead and vote on it. And if there’s a problem with it, that can be determined later in court. But they should let the people vote on it. They were all about letting the people vote on that referendum. I am pretty certain that they won’t be as happy about letting people vote on this one.

Carmichael: Well, you’re going to see. I think that the strategy of filing for a declaratory judgment to move the thing along quickly is probably the wise course of action because the last time you kind of you waited for them, and now they’ve already pretty much said they’re going to sue over this. So you’re going to sue first and bring it to a head quickly.

Roberts: That’s right.

Carmichael: It will be interesting to see how the judge rules given the other recent ruling.

Roberts: That’s right. That gives us more time. If you remember last time they said they were going to sue and they never did. I finally had to sue Metro to force them to put it on the ballot because they clearly had no intention of actually doing anything. They just wanted to sort of stall and delay. We’re going to go forward.

I’d like to do it today, but I just think I’ve got too much work to do to get it done today. But maybe Monday or Tuesday or at the latest next week. We’re going to force Metro to put this on the ballot. The people deserve the right to vote on it. And if they vote yes on some of these, and no on some of these, that’s fine. I’ve given the people the opportunity to vote. They’re all good and they all should be voted for. But people’s minds differ sometimes.

Leahy: When do you think that the chancery court, which is, I guess where this will go, when do you think they would rule on whether your numbers right or the other number is right?

Roberts: We’ll file everything on an expedited basis. We’ll be pushing this very quickly. Almost certainly when Metro loses, they’re going to want to go to the court of appeals to try to tie up our resources. And remember, they’re using your tax dollars to fight this. They have unlimited resources to spend. They probably spent two or 300,000 dollars last time trying to keep you off the vote. I don’t think they won’t spend that or more.

Leahy: Yes, probably. They want to just nip it in the bud, that’s for sure.

Carmichael: Do you know which judge you’ll get?

Roberts: No, it’s supposed to be random. I do tend to get Chancellor Lyle more often than not, but it’s supposed to be random.

Carmichael: How many chancellor court judges are there?

Roberts: There are four.

Leahy: Okay, so you got four chances. Jim Roberts come back next week at the same time. Tell us what’s happened. Thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for all your hard work to roll back the 34 percent property tax with the Nashville Taxpayer Protection Act. Jim, thanks for joining us.

Roberts: Thank you for having me. Have a good day.

Listen to the full third hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Background Photo “Nashville City Hall” by Nicolas Henderson. CC BY 2.0.

 

 

Star News Network’s Washington Correspondent Neil W. McCabe Weighs in on House Anti-Gun Vote and If Biden Will Fall or Fail in Upcoming Press Conference

Star News Network’s Washington Correspondent Neil W. McCabe Weighs in on House Anti-Gun Vote and If Biden Will Fall or Fail in Upcoming Press Conference

 

Live from Music Row Wednesday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed Tennessee Star National Correspondent Neil W. McCabe to the newsmakers line to weigh in on the potential anti-gun vote in the House and whether or not President Biden will fall and fail at tomorrow’s press conference.

Cunningham: Crom, we’ve got Neil back on the line. Neil thanks so much for calling in again. I know you are overseas. Hopefully, you can hear us ok.

McCabe: Absolutely.

Cuningham: Great.

McCabe: Let me just say that obviously, what’s gripping Washington right now is the shooting in Boulder, Colorado. And President Joe Biden is now coming out of the shadows. He has been hesitant to make a push to restrict gun rights, but he feels the confidence to exploit the crisis and make that push. And he’s going to run into some significant headwinds in the Democratic Party. You were talking before about Joe Manchin.

There are five Democratic senators who are up in 2022 who won with less than 52 percent of the vote. I’ll just read them off for you: Colorado, Mike Bennett, New Hampshire, Maggie Hassan, Nevada, Catherine Cortez Masto, Arizona, Mark Kelly, and then Georgia, Raphael Warnock. These are five senators in culturally conservative states who do not want to take a gun vote.

And Schumer has been very good about protecting his Democratic senators from having to take bad votes on abortion, immigration and guns. And so it’ll be very tricky to see if the president pushes this thing. It will go through the House and Nancy Pelosi has a tight grip on the House. She will pass whatever she wants to restrict gun rights in the House. But those are five senators right there who do not want to take an anti-gun vote.

Cunningham: Can we depend on the Republicans to stay with us?

McCabe: There’s always going to be Republicans who flake. Of course, the Republican leadership, the staffers, and the consultants they’re all culturally left-wing. They are opposed to gun rights. They think that people who support gun rights are nut jobs. And so they’re personally hostile to it. And there’s a lot of social pressure in Washington, D.C. to sort of go along to get along. But as I’ve said this before, I wouldn’t count on McConnell to advance anything from step one to step two.

Cunningham: Hallelujah.

McCabe: But on defense, there is no equal. And so if McConnell can hold the line long enough so that these Democrats start to flake, that’s where you’re going to have a problem because there’s a razor-sharp margin in the House. And it’s more so in the Senate and they might run into some problems. The other problem you run into is that Biden hasn’t even given a State of Union address.

And so that’s supposed to be the kick-off of his legislative season. The Biden administration is running out of runway. And I’ve written about this in The Tennessee Star, and I’ve talked about it before. But this three trillion-dollar infrastructure bill, there just isn’t enough runway to get it done. And so your program is already getting stalled out.

You’re already running into problems where he’s having trouble getting his people confirmed. He doesn’t even have a confirmed director of Office of Management and Budget. And to throw a gun vote in the middle of all this is just going to create chaos. And that’s sort of been the hallmark of Biden’s career. And it’s the hallmark of his failed presidential campaign, chaos. And that’s what we’re starting to see right now in Washington.

Cunningham: Well, I sure hope you’re right about the gun legislation. I hope we can push that off. By the way, Neil, congratulations on your scoop of the John Kerry Photo on the plane. That was amazing.

McCabe: Was that fun? (Laughs)

Cunningham: It showed for everybody in one clean photo, the hypocrisy of the left, and it was just a beautiful thing. Thank you. As a reader of The Tennessee Star, thank you so much for that scoop. Crom’s got a question, but I just want to ask you real quickly, do you know anything about the press conference tomorrow? Everybody’s got so much anticipation about how it’s going to come off. Are the questions going to be given to him in advance? You got any information about how that’s going to happen? Surely they’re going to try to protect him.

McCabe: It’s we saw that during the debate. He had an iPad with him that was basically feeding him answers live. And so we’ll see if they’re able to feed him the answers that he needs. It’s really going to be interesting because the expectations game is such that if this guy can put one foot in front of the other, everybody says congratulations. I mean, the expectation game is it’s like people are just thrilled that he doesn’t drool and fall (Laughter)

Cunningham: If he remains upright.

McCabe: Yeah, it’s a huge win, huge win.

Cunnigham: Crom, you had a question.

McCabe: What’s your question.

Carmichael: Well, I had two questions. One Neil, when you’re walking into the press room or wherever he’s going to be sure that there’s not a single step that he has to negotiate in order to get into the room. Is it as flat as I think it is?

McCabe: Oh, Yeah. The Oval Office is actually a little higher than the briefing room. So there’s a floor that a bunch of the floors are on. And then he has to come down some stairs. But that’s that’s very much behind the scenes. I haven’t seen if they’re going to have it in the East Room or not. But this thing will be very tightly controlled. Remember the vast majority of the White House press corps are committed leftists and they’re not going to do anything to jeopardize their guy. And it’s just so funny, the same people who are chirping and hollering and interrupting President Trump, they just clap like seals now.

Cunningham: That’s a great phrase. Neil, thanks so much for calling in from overseas. We sure do appreciate you taking the time this morning. I know, it’s got to be a considerable amount of effort to get a call through and we really appreciate you calling. And we’ll look forward to see what happens tomorrow.

McCabe: Take care guys. Be good.

Listen to the full third hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.

 

 

 

The Tennessee Star Report: Crom Carmichael Talks Strategy and the Abomination of Section 230

The Tennessee Star Report: Crom Carmichael Talks Strategy and the Abomination of Section 230

 

Live from Music Row Monday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed the original all-star panelist Crom Carmichael to the studio to weigh in on the abomination of Section 230 and the strategy to right it.

Leahy: In studio, the original all-star panelist, Crom Carmichael. Crom, you say it’s time for the Republicans and Conservatives to get smart on tactics?

Carmichael: Yes. Why is it that big tech is able to do what they do and get away with it legally?

Leahy: They have protection from Congress.

Carmichael: And that is called Section 230. If Republicans regain the power of the House, the Senate, and the presidency, first of all, the filibuster is a very important Senate institution. And one thing that is often misrepresented is that when Republicans did control the House twice, they didn’t have 60 votes in the Senate. And so the House passed an immense amount of legislation that never saw the last day in the Senate because the Democrats could use the filibuster, even when the Republicans had a majority. But you can’t use the filibuster in reconciliation.

Leahy: Now just for our listing audience, explain what reconciliation means.

Carmichael: I’m going to take a stab at it. But I think it has to do with budget bills.

Leahy: It does.

Carmichael: And spending. Because this big COVID bill that just passed wasn’t a budget, but it was spending. And it passed with a 50 to 49 majority, which Republicans could filibuster that. Here’s what I would do if I were the Republicans, and I get control of all three because I think that Section 230 is an abomination.

The protection that it affords allows these platform companies to have a political agenda. I would increase taxes to 80 percent for all companies that are protected by Section 230. I could do that through reconciliation. And I might even impose a huge tax on the net worth of executives that have money because of Section 230 because they’re getting all of the benefits because of that law.

Leahy: Yes. The significance of reconciliation in the Senate, it’s the budget process where they’re trying to finalize the budget. There are limitations only on the reconciliation process in the use of the filibuster. That’s why it’s important in the Senate.

Carmichael: Yes. And so the point that I’m trying to make is that if you put that in legislation, the executives who are protected by 230 would go nuts and the Republicans could go to them and say this is going to pass unless you go to your Democrat buddies and get them to do away with Section 230. So we’ll break the filibuster, you’ll help us break the filibuster, or we’re going to tax your butts and ruin your value.

Leahy: Well, that’s awful. (Chuckles) 

Carmichael: And they’ll do it, Michael is what I’m saying is they will give up Section 230. They’ll give up Section 230. So what is the goal here? The goal here is not to tax them. The goal here is to get Democrats to agree to get rid of Section 230. So the way to get rid of Section 230 is to get the people who are protected by Section 230 to have more pain from the protection than they do by giving it up.

Leahy: Now, that’s a good tactical strategy.

Carmichael: Yes.

Leahy: However, how do you get Mitch McConnell to adopt such a strategy?

Carmichael: If you want to get rid of Section 230, that’s the strategy.

Leahy: I know.

Carmichael: If Mitch McConnell wants to get rid of Section 230, if he does, then Mitch, here’s how to do it. You put so much pressure on the people who are protected by Section 230. You put so much pain as long as they keep that protection that they run the Congress and say we’re willing to give up the protection.

Leahy: But Crom, here’s my problem with this and Mitch McConnell.

Carmichael: Don’t talk about Mitch McConnell.

Leahy: Somebody has to implement this strategy in the Senate.

Carmichael: Well, of course, you and I are just talking here. Well, I understand, but the Democrats do a great job putting pressure on people that they want to behave differently. Does big business support Democrats now?

Leahy: Totally.

Carmichael: Why?

Leahy: It’s in their self-interest.

Carmichael: It’s not just in their self-interest to send their self-interest because they don’t want to be punished. They fear the Democrats. They fear them. So they do what the Democrats want them to do. That’s just the way it is. I don’t like it. But if those are the rules and if that’s the playing field that I’m on, then I have a choice. I can either be highly principled and accomplish nothing. In fact, my side will always go backward.

Because the other side gets to use the fear of things like what we were talking about earlier. critical race theory. and all of these things to use power over others. Republicans, Unfortunately, it’s the world we live in today. Unfortunately, Republicans need to learn how to put pressure on other people that they want to change their behavior.

Leahy: I cannot disagree with you at all. The question is, how do you do that?

Carmichael: I just told you how you do it. I just told you.

Leahy: You’ve got to get a Mitch McConnel to change the behavior.

Carmichael: I understand that. But first of all, if you don’t understand if you don’t even understand the tactic and the reason for the tactic. In other words, you don’t know what you don’t know. What you and I are talking about here is that if there is a tactic that would work, what would it be? Because you also want to maintain the filibuster.

Leahy: I’m with you. Terry in Knoxville.

Carmichael: We have Terry in Knoxville…

Leahy: Who wants to join us. Terry, you want to weigh in on our lively discussion here this morning? Terry, Welcome

Caller Terry: Morning.

Leahy: Good morning.

Terry: Morning. As usual, I agree wholeheartedly with Crom. (Laughter)

Leahy: Terry, you’re such a smart guy.

Terry: I agree with everything he says. But, well, first of all, how can you tell who’s smarter? You can tell who’s smarter by who’s winning. And who’s winning? Well, it isn’t us.

Carmichael: That’s right.

Leahy: That’s a good point.

Terry: But you have to get back to the point where he said you control the House, the Senate, and the presidency. Well, we need the tactics to do that first before you can get to the point he’s talking about. And they had the opportunity to get rid of Section 230…

Carmichael: No, they didn’t. That’s the point. They couldn’t get rid of it because Democrats would not go along with it. You have to get 60 votes to get rid of Section 230.

Leahy: Terry, thanks for your call.

Carmichael: And thank you for your wonderful comment and call in anytime, Terry.

Leahy: You have plenty of fans and Terry’s one of them. We’ll be back with Naomi Wolf. That will be fun.

Listen to the full second hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio