From my stack of stuff: well, wasn't Charle McMahon a bit smug and condescending? - Granite Grok

From my stack of stuff: well, wasn’t Charle McMahon a bit smug and condescending?

This is left over from the Windham (NH) Primary debate where one of the moderators was Ken Eyring – one of the most gentle, self-controlled, and smartest guys I know.  Always prepared, always does his homework; he was treated rather badly by one of the candidates in the debate: RINO, Charlie McMahon (an incumbent Republican).

I’ve put the full transcript of this clip after the jump.  I’m putting this up for a few reasons:

  • First, McMahon is aloof, smarmy, and certainly full of himself
  • He also doesn’t want to be held to account – listen to he words and watch his demeanor – it is clear he doesn’t want to be challenged like this in an open forum
  • Full disclosure – I consider Ken my friend and I can tell you, being called intellectually unready is about the biggest insult you could call Ken.  The fact that McMahon would say that and then deny that he was being respectful is the height of actually being disrepectful.
  • Listen to his arguments – they don’t match up with what Ken has said about the bill WHICH KEN HAS RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM. He knows he’s been caught and caught badly but attempts to bluster his way out of the trap he set for himself when he signed up for being a co-sponsor.

Finally, what the HECK is this “Republican” doing working to create an almost involuntary plan (we wrote about HB628 extensively here on GraniteGrok – we read the bill too!) and by definition, with an income tax? Somebody put an ejection seat under him and push the button, please:

So, IMHO, he’s lying through his  teeth (and you gotta admire the body language with the chest  pulled back up upward as to say “how DARE you challenge me, you peon – don’t you know who I am??  What schmucks you are, who believe I’m wrong – all I want to do is use your money to have Government give you something you must have (you just don’t know it).

Shades of Hillary Clinton in her ad of years ago sitting next to a Christmas tree and handing out free goodies to the American public – pretty much what McMahon is doing here. Just let me take your money and I’ll have you spend it in the way I believe you need to (but aren’t already).  What’s that old saw about “golden rain”?

Voters in Windham should be alarmed at both what he supports (bigger government, more costly government, more intrusive government, and a government that decides that he should make decisions for you) and in his demeanor as he makes clear that y’all are too stupid to buy  such a policy from the private sector.  In fact, the disdain he shows for the private sector in stating that “it hits all the benefits that we want to do” – shades of Obamacare where all the medical decisions are made by others – you only have to pay for yourselves and all the people we give it to for free.

Such a deal.  Tell me, how do I tell him apart from a Democrat in this – that Government should play that overriding and overarching force in your life?


Transcript: The fun starts around 3:49 but listen to it all to get the full flavor from His Majesty


The next question is regarding a bill that was voted on this year was HB 628, the Family Medical Leave Insurance Act. This was a bill to create a State program to provide family medical leave insurance but only for private sector employees. Even though this type of insurance is already available in the State, the original bill propose to create a state program to be funded with payroll deductions which would be the first direct tax on income here in NH. If this or a similar bill is introduced again next year, would you support it?

Charlie McMahon, a RINO that was a co-sponsor of this program that would enlarge NH government and institute an income tax, starts in with dribble

Very briefly, I was a co-sponsor of 628 and as one who believes in empowering families to take self-responsibility, self-reliance, and self-respect in taking care of their elderly and also their family members with severe medical conditions in their homes. The Family Medical Leave act was giving them that option.

The disingenuous spin that it was an income tax is fundamentally false. This was a choice to be made to employers, given the choice to an employee if they wanted to participate in this. The amount of economic review needs to be done further and to provide that benefit to our citizens in NH. Home and community based care, NH leads the nation in it. The was allowing people to take care of their family members in their home.

We have an opportunity to continue this discussion and to have a cost effective but it is not an income tax and it is not a pervasive tax on individuals without their own….by government largesse. That is a false statement.


I’d like to express a different opinion with you, respectively, Charlie. I have the original bill, the original text. I have it here in front of me and the cost to operate it, this is a financial note, and the analysis by the people up in the State level said that the cost to build, to operate the program, they estimate at least $10 million in the first few years to get it going and the Insurance Dept stated that insurnace plans currently in existence provide these kinds of benefits. It was a 0.5% tax on peoples’ income in order to fund it. And once people had enrolled in it, in the original text, they could never get out.

It was modified down the road but people were concerned because it was like Hotel California: you can check in but you can never leave. Those were the concerns I heard from other people. There were a lot of issues this and they’ve tried this in other States. The costs are much higher than what the funding would have been with the tax that would have been put on peoples’ income, as it was a tax on somebody’s income.

And the other issue is that it was only on people in the private sector, not the public sector. So, there were some issues there that clearly have to be addressed. I just wanted to share those thoughts. Because I’ve challenged what you said I’d like to give you a few seconds to respond to it just to be fair to you.



Well I appreciate the fairness because I was going to do it any case. The fact is if you want to debate then come fully armed intellectually. The fact that we have here is that we have…


Please be respectful


Oh, I’m being respectful, Ken, you know that.


Not when you just questioned my intellect.


I didn’t question your intellect.


You just questioned my intellect, sir


Let’s just stipulate that wasn’t the case. The issue here that we’ve had on this is a product cost and in this product cost is being part of a large group and anyone that has bought health insurance in the past, the smaller group has higher costs and vice versa. That’s what this was targeted. Now in terms of participation, it does require participation; that is how it would need to work and that what it was going through in this process. The different actuarial projections is what the debating point is with all due respect to my friend, Ken. And that being said more work has to be done to provide this opportunity for a cost effective insurance plan that could be purchased by choice.

That, I would be hoping, it will come back again for the due process and for review to make sure that it hits all the benefits that we want to do. You don’t have to be in that quo….it’s up to a company still to decide whether to participate or not. They’re not mandated. And that wasn’t the proposal in 628.

But that’s part of being great about being a Rep. You’re part of these things that can really help and benefit everyone in the State of NH but be a part of the process. It’s a lot of work and committment and you work together collaboratively even if you have a disagreement maybe we can come to a collaboration and move forward to help our fellow citizens. That’s the ultimate goal.