GOP Ramps Up Campaigns Against Ron Barber, Ann Kirkpatrick, Just 18 Months Before Election

Categories: Election 2014
barber-billboard.jpg
nrcc.org
It's never too early for campaign season.
With just 18 months and change left until the 2014 election, the National Republican Congressional Committee is heating up its campaigns against Democratic Congressmen Ron Barber and Ann Kirkpatrick.

The NRCC's been actively campaigning against the two since at least April, a whole four months into the two-year term, but they're dropping a bit of cash now that we're getting down to the wire.

See also:
Ann Kirkpatrick: Sequester Is Bad; Also, Got a Few Bucks for Re-Election?

New Times has previously pointed out that a couple Dems, Kirkpatrick and Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema, were hardly two months into their terms before they were hitting up constituents for re-election cash.

Apparently, "election season" means the time from ancient Greece up until the present, and, for Republicans, railing against the so-called "Obamacare" is still a concern.

That's why Republicans are hitting Kirkpatrick's and Barber's sprawling districts with mobile billboards. It only gets worse, folks (unless you have a fetish for political campaigns, in which case it only gets better).

Kirkpatrick-press-conference.jpg

Per the NRCC, "These Democrats need to be held accountable for their continued support of ObamaCare, especially now that the scandal-ridden IRS has been put in charge of overseeing the health care law's implementation," yadda-yadda-yadda.

Send feedback and tips to the author.
Follow Matthew Hendley on Twitter at @MatthewHendley.



My Voice Nation Help
16 comments
Cozz
Cozz

The sad part is, they are all full of shit.

LittenJX
LittenJX

Given the non-stop attacks on Senator Flake 54 months before he is up for re-election, I would say this is a bipartisan issue.

JohnQ.Public
JohnQ.Public

Unfortunately, the next campaign begins the day after the previous campaign ends - before the county elections commission has even finished county the provisional ballots.  Campaigns, especially for Members of the House, are driving by campaign contributions and they only have 2 years in which to reward donors from the past campaign and make promises to the donors for the next campaign.  That is why we end up with the best Congress that (lobbyist and PAC) money can buy.

MandyMountain
MandyMountain

Heh. The Republicans have probably just ensured their re-election. 

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@MandyMountain  No, this will hurt them.  There are a LOT of people in Arizona who are unhappy about Obamacare.  I don't know these districts well enough to guess how much impact it will have.


WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@valleynative @MandyMountain In other words, there are a bunch of clueless and uninformed folks in AZ that swallow anything the GOP tells them about Obamacare.  They are unable to research it themselves.

shrink
shrink

 @valleynative Really? So Medicare should be discontinued and retired seniors should pay for healthcare completely out of pocket? By your logic, the VA and the military should "stay completely out" of providing health care for veterans and soldiers.  Yes, let's privatize that, too, and make the soldiers pay for their healthcare out of pocket! What a great system you propose.  

The IRS fining someone $300 annually is much preferable to the for profit health insurance executive who gets a bonus for refusing payment for needed treatment.  I guess you're okay with people going bankrupt for getting sick.  

Obamacare is hardly perfect, but in your view, I guess it's okay for someone with health insurance to get dropped from their policy for receiving treatment that reaches the policy limits, then becoming uninsurable.  Obamacare stops that and also prevents the pre-existing conditions nightmare.  

Oh, and the Supreme Court disagrees that "adding a tax penalty for noncompliance" is an "overstep of powers."  Continue your denial if you wish; however, it has been determined to be a constitutional law of the land.  

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@valleynative @WhoKnows The Public option would mean EVERYONE is covered, and there would be IRS involvement.  Now, it's up to "for profit" companies.  NO ONE should make a profit based on what it costs for your heath care!

WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@valleynative @WhoKnows So valley, you'd rather have your health and survival driven by a "for profit" company?  What if they say it's too expensive to let you live?

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@WhoKnows  No.  The government should stay completely out of the business of providing health care.  It's far too important to be in the hands of bureaucrats and politicians.  Believe it or not, it's actually better off in the hands of people trying to maximize their profits.

When the feds have to enforce a policy by adding a tax penalty for non-compliance, that's a pretty sure sign that they've overstepped their powers and are creating a nightmare of legal red tape.

JohnQ.Public
JohnQ.Public

@WhoKnows I agree with you about talk radio, but I've encountered plenty of both conservative and liberal idiots who are just as happy to parrot the last thing that they read or heard as they are to have done any in-depth, balanced reading on a topic.

valleynative
valleynative topcommenter

@WhoKnows @valleynative @MandyMountain  I don't listen to the GOP, I don't listen to talk radio.  I research for myself and think for myself, and Obamacare is absolutely the wrong way to reform healthcare.


WhoKnows
WhoKnows topcommenter

@JohnQ.Public @WhoKnows There is a difference, as right wing talk radio reaches farrrrrrrrr more uninformed folks than progressive/left wing radio.  We need someone  like Walter Cronkite to simply tell people the truth.

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...