Taxpayers Pick Up $700K Tab for Obama to Pimp Out Andy Griffith

Of course $700,000 is mere pocket change considering Obama is recklessly racking up trillions in debt. But if ObamaCare is so wonderful, why does he have to prop up an aging actor to sell it for him?

Was it not enough for President Obama to saddle future Americans with billions of dollars in new health benefits and entitlements that they simply cannot afford?

He also had to go and corrupt one of America's most beloved figures of the last half-century. And stick you with the $700,000 bill.

Before Obama started pimping him out last week to sell the highly unpopular health-care law, actor Andy Griffith was about as all-American as you could get.

Grew up during the Great Depression.

Award-winning gospel singer.

As widower Sheriff Andy Taylor, he was thoughtful, big-hearted and always gently right.

As Matlock, he always won his cases.

Yet in a sick deal with the Obama administration, Griffith shatters his credibility, promising all roses with a health-care law that even Barney Fife could tell you is a disaster in the making.

"This year, like always, we'll have our guaranteed benefits," Griffith says in the gauzy ad, as if today's seniors are America's last generation.

"And with the new health-care law, more good things are coming. Free checkups, lower prescription costs. and better ways to protect us and Medicare from fraud."

Yeah, as if the real problem with today's economy is that people aren't paying enough in taxes and the government has too much money on its hands.

Here's a letter from five GOP senators to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius demanding answers. An excerpt:

We are writing to express our profound concern regarding the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) television ad campaign touting the benefits of the new health care law for seniors. According to press reports, the ad campaign cost taxpayers $700,000.

We request that you cease the ad campaign immediately and reimburse the U.S. Treasury for any expenditure of taxpayer funds related to this effort. We also request you provide documentation outlining which HHS account these funds came from.

We believe this ad is a clear violation of the spirit of federal laws that prohibit the use of taxpayer dollars for campaign purposes. The justification for this ad, as expressed by Stephanie Cutter, an Assistant to the President, demonstrates the clear political motivation for the ad.

Ms. Cutter wrote on the White House blog: “As we worked to pass the Affordable Care Act, seniors were the target of a major misinformation campaign that was designed to scare and confuse older Americans about the real impact of reform….We are committed to correcting the record and ensuring seniors have the information they need and get the high-quality care they have earned and deserve.”

The Administration’s claim to “correct the record” is misleading and offensive. We can debate the relative merits of the new law, but co-opting public funds during a recession, to make a political, poll-tested argument about the new law, is wrong. While we understand the intensity of the Administration’s faith in this new law, “correcting the record” through the use of a taxpayer-funded ad campaign is highly inappropriate and breaks with the spirit of the law.

They want an answer by tomorrow. Good luck with that.