GOP launching anti-Obamacare ads at Dems

GOP launching anti-Obamacare ads at Dems

I predicted more than a month ago Republicans’ top three strategies for 2014:

“1. Attack Obamacare.

“2. Attack Obamacare.

“3. Attack Obamacare.”

Of course, that didn’t exactly take the talents of Nostradamus. But now my prediction is coming true.

It’s not even January and here’s an ad launched in New Hampshire, where Sen. Jeanne Shaheen faces a tough battle. She won with just 52 percent in 2008, the year Obama won big as the economy tanked and voters turned against President Bush and Republicans. That’s the year Democrats won their 60-vote, filibuster-proof Senate majority, allowing them to pass Obamacare. New Hampshire’s other U.S. Senator is Republican Kelley Ayotte, who garnered a hefty 60 percent in 2010. However, President Obama won the state both in 2008 and 2012.

California Democrats should consider themselves lucky no U.S. Senate seats from here are up for grabs next year. Even in this heavily Democratic state, their recent blowouts might not have been repeated.

Whether the Obamacare debacle continues for Democrats through to 2016, when Sen. Barbara Boxer’s seat is up for renewal, will become more clear later. And we never should discount the California Republican penchant for locking and loading in a circular firing squad.


Write a comment
  1. Ted Steele, CEO
    Ted Steele, CEO 21 December, 2013, 09:42

    It’s sad to watch the repubs set up yet another election cycle loss…….

    Reply this comment
  2. Queeg
    Queeg 21 December, 2013, 15:58

    It will not be pretty….Rove and Hannity and Dick Morris had Romney up a few ticks a couple days before election….then Christy bear hugged Prophet Obama at the seaside storm devastation…..end of story… out candy always works!

    Doomers have no candy, no ideas, no assistance for the poor….and they love the greedy globalists….so there.

    Reply this comment
  3. LetitCollapse
    LetitCollapse 21 December, 2013, 18:32

    Have you read about the latest ObamaCare scam? You’ll probably need to read an out-of-state newspaper to find about it like I had to. If you live in California the local media has been very silent. lol. In fact, I couldn’t find a single news story about this in a California news publication. I guess they figure what you don’t know won’t hurt you until it does. lol.

    Of course, Californians who fall in the age bracket of 55-65 are required to sign up for ObamaCare. No choice. It’s mandated. And there’s a fair number in that age bracket who have acquired assets in their lifetimes (homes, cash, investments, etc..) but, for one reason or another, are low-income.

    The out-of-state news report discussed a man 62 years of age who was looking for a health plan under ObamaCare. He owned his home and had other significant assets that he collected in his lifetime but his good-paying job was outsourced a few years back and he became unemployed. Today he has a little flunky part-time job I guess for beer money. So his earned income for 2012 was reported to only be about $8000 or so. He went on-line in Washington State to shop for ObamaCare health coverage. He learned that he only qualified for Medi-Caid (Medi-Cal in Ca) due to his limited income. No other option. He simply wasn’t eligible for the subsidized private insurance on the exchange due to his low income. lol. ObamaCare looks only at your INCOME when determining what options you have for coverage. lol. So if your income is less than $16000 (approximately) – you could have a net worth of $15 million and still end up in Medi-Caid or Medi-Cal! lol. Very true. if you don’t believe me do you own research.

    Now, this 62 year old man read the fine print in the ObamaCare law. He learned that once he’s forced into Medi-Caid (Medi-Cal) that the government has the power to seize his estate after he dies and to recover every single penny it spent on him for his medical expenses. So if he had a major surgery that cost the government $100,000 the gov would recover that amount from his estate after he died and BEFORE any assets could go to his loved ones. lol. Naturally he said ‘BS on that!’.

    Instead he and his long-time GF decided to beat the system by getting married. lol. Once their 2 incomes were combined their household income was still limited but enough to put them over the threshold and make them eligible for a SUBSIDIZED private insurance policy on the exchange. lol. So they went shopping after they got married. They found a mid-level silver plan (not bad) with a reasonable deductible and low co-pay for BOTH of them that required a monthly premium of only $76 a month. Yes, $76 a month after the government SUBSIDY (free money). Now, had they shopped in the free market for a HC insurance for two 62 year olds the monthly premium would be over $1000/mo for an equivalent mid-level silver plan. So the government subsidy received by a couple was SUBSTANTIAL.

    Here is the kicker: The huge SUBSIDY (free money) provided by the government to this couple for their private health insurance policy is NOT subject to state asset recovery after they die under ObamaCare law! All free and clear! lol.

    Many low-income adults 55 to 65 with assets are being herded into Medi-Caid or Medi-Cal without even knowing that the government has the power to seize their estate after they die to recover every penny it spent on them BEFORE their estate goes to their children!

    But if the Medi-Caid or Medi-Cal adult is 40, 45 or 50 years old their estate is NOT subject to the state asset recovery program! How stupid and unfair and discriminatory is that?

    Oregon faced this problem and the Oregonians complained. The Oregon State legislator changed the law and repealed the asset recovery law for Medi-Caid under their state run ObamaCare program.

    The Washington state legislators caught wind of this too after the citizens and newspapers brought it to their attention. Those legislators are in the process of following Oregon’s lead and changing the law striking the asset recovery under Medi-Caid.

    To the best of my knowledge, this huge inequity isn’t even being discussed in the California legislature! Heck, I can’t even find one story about it in the California news!!! lol. If you can, let me know.

    With such a large impoverished population in California and 2 million or more NEW enrollees expected to join Medi-Cal in the next year or so, the California lawmakers need all the money they can get their hands on to keep Covered California solvent! lol. So if it means legally swiping the estates of 55-65 year old former Medi-Cal patients after they turn to room temperature I guess that’s exactly what they’ll do!!! lol.

    I did check by phone with a well-informed long-time insurance agent and licensed Covered California agent about this. He told me that under ACA the law changed. Prior to the change only those who recieved state-funded long-term care (ie, nursing home care) under Medi-Cal were subject to state asset recovery after death. But now those between the ages of 55 and 65 who are enrolled in Medi-Cal under Covered California (ObamaCare) are subject to state asset recovery from their estates after death for whatever medical expenses were incurred by the government while they were treated under Medi-Cal.

    Of course, don’t take my word for it. I’m no expert. Do you own research. All I know is what I read in the newspapers! I’m just your average gullible American who does as I’m told!

    Keep voting!

    Remember, the government works for YOU!

    Keep consenting!

    Most importantly, keep paying your darn taxes. Give until it hurts!!! Then take a NSAID and give some more!!! lol.

    Reply this comment
  4. Donkey
    Donkey 22 December, 2013, 12:03

    Wow!!! We are being controlled by a den of thieves!!! 🙂

    Reply this comment
    • LetitCollapse
      LetitCollapse 22 December, 2013, 14:33

      It’s the unfairness and the concealment and the targeting of only a certain segment of our population for asset recovery by the state that should be condemned, Donkey. Those low-income 55-65 year old seniors I described are being FORCED into Medi-Caid or Medi-Cal since they are not entitled to a subsidy on the exchange. Then the state government legally steals their estates after they’re dead! lol. It’s amazing that this is not a big story in California with an aging population.

      Now, if they had a comprehensive law that allowed the government to swoop in and recover ALL monies paid out for ALL government handouts I would actually be in favor of it. For example, if someone collected food stamps or welfare at age 30 but died with money – seize his or her estate too and recover those funds that the government spent on him or her. As it stands now, to my knowledge, that money is not recoverable under the law.

      And if the government goes after the 55-65 crowd for ObamaCare Medi-Caid or Medi-Cal benefits it should certainty apply asset recovery to government subsidies provided for private health insurance under the ObamaCare exchange too. Heck, a subsidy is free money too! Why should it be exempt?

      Otherwise they should not apply asset recovery to any of it. It should either be ALL or NONE.

      Those people in the 55-65 age bracket make up a large percent of the voting population. I think that’s the reason the Oregon and Washington State legislators repealed that portion of the law. The targeted group in California will figure this out sooner or later when their estates start getting seized by the government the democrats better watch out. Their kids (generally the heirs of their estates)will be especially mad. lol.

      Reply this comment
  5. LetitCollapse
    LetitCollapse 22 December, 2013, 15:18

    If you like your ‘equality under the law’ you can keep your ‘equality under the law’. No matter what. Period! lol

    Reply this comment
    • Ted Steele, CEO
      Ted Steele, CEO 25 December, 2013, 09:57

      Let it collapse– yet another dull doomer who hates Article Three!—-If you were not so insignificant John Adams would cringe in his grave little buddy!

      Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Andreessen: Does company HQ in CA violate fiduciary duty?

You might remember Marc Andreessen. He co-authored Mosaic, the first decent Web browser, which I remember using when I got

Rialto police: Inspiration for the nation. Really.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! The city of Rialto is an odd mix of nice new subdivisions, industrial grayness and rundown neighborhoods.

Media Booted From GOP Convention

Katy Grimes: Just a few minutes ago at the Republican party convention in Sacramento, as convention guests began filling the