ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Politics & Political Science

You Wanted the GOP.....You got 'em...

Updated on December 29, 2013
Boehner promises to run the chamber in a more "inclusive" and business like way.
Boehner promises to run the chamber in a more "inclusive" and business like way. | Source

The New Republican House....

how have they served you? They'll take away your voting rights, that is if you're a Democrat or an Independent. Over 4.5 million Americans in places like the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, etc; which are mainly our military and their families, will now have taxation without representation. So, in short, our soldiers fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan have just lost the freedom they are fighting for others to have.

Do you feel let down by the GOP?

See results

So much for fiscal conservatism....

The Tea Party GOP gave them an on "fiscal" responsibility. The GOP has taken the verse to heart...that is when it suits them.

The GOP, however has basically given millions or more like billions of tax dollars away and increased our deficit so that the wealthy could continue to get wealthier.

They defeated the Democrats, but more than the defeat, is the "fact" that they did it out of spite more than anything.

Those that are hurt the most by the GOP, the seniors who were to receive a ONE-TIME payment of $250, the veterans and the disabled people. But we can't completely blame the GOP, because there were a couple of Democrats and Independent lawmakers that voted along side the Republicans.

The house wanted the passage of this bill because these core, roughly 58 million people are not getting a cost of living increase. The bill needed a two-thirds majority for passage and the Democrats couldn't get the votes to push it through.

Sadly enough, Americans better get use to this type of hypocrisy, because that's what they voted for and they are most certainly going to get it.

Republicans argued that it would add $14 billion to the deficit. Where were those guys when they created an additional $600 billion dollars to the deficit so their wealthy friends and colleagues could continue to gain more wealth?

Since, Dec 8, 2010, they have been more concerned again about "money". So much so, that they decided that Americans with health issues brought on by the 9/11 fall out of toxic fumes and smoke from ground zero would have to take a back seat, once again. So, what more do the Republicans want for the wealthy before they will allow those less fortunate to have the health care they deserve? We'll just have to wait and see.


GOP members to include first time anointed Tea Party-GOP members have chosen "lobbyists" to run their staffs. Just another line item of hypocrisy that this party stands for. Why do they need "money makers and deal makers" running their offices? Maybe because that's what the party stands for. It's never been about the people, it's been about the power, the money and the influence.


it just gets more and more interesting. As the GOP are crying out to freeze federal salaries and are now even talking about taking a 5% cut in pay, they have not exactly been the greatest stewards of tax payer money. The leader of the pack, Eric Cantor has increased his staff's salaries by 81% since becoming a part of Washington politics. So, what is 5% of an 81% increase, not much. They probably invest more than that in their retirement accounts. Other Republicans who have increased their staff's salaries by about 8% annually are Michelle Bachman of Minnesota, Jason Chaffetz of Utah and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. When asked what they thought about their salary increase dilemma, they were o.k. with it, because they are still "under budget" and it's the "over all" numbers they are trying to control. The hypocrisy continues.......



Submit a Comment

  • Abecedarian profile image

    Abecedarian 7 years ago from These United States, Texas

    Thank you ma'am. As always I value your opinion because sometimes I get so irate about things that I'm not sure if I'm ranting or making sense. You help put it into prospective, cause I've been known to be wrong on many an occassion and have had to rethink things.

  • Jillian Barclay profile image

    Jillian Barclay 7 years ago from California, USA

    Taxing less and spending less is a great idea! Too bad that is not REALITY! You responded just fine to the comment by Rabid Puma on your own, but I just had to second your response. It is all about priorities, I guess, and right now (and probably for at least the next 2 years)vets, the disabled, seniors and the unemployed(5 for every available job) will not be the priority. You, GNelson and I just have our priorities screwed up! Yes, that's it! We just need to understand that! We do understand, but we will not stop speaking, nor will we stop trying to change it! Keep it up, Abecedarian!

  • GNelson profile image

    GNelson 7 years ago from Florida

    There is a disconnect between Washington DC and the rest of us. While we look for work they party on Government paid wages. While we lose our health insurance they have government provided health care. While we struggle to save for retirement they have one of the best retirement plans available, paid for by our taxes. They have wealthy Companys sucking up to them while we can't even afford to buy what the company sells. Life is good if you get elected.

  • Abecedarian profile image

    Abecedarian 7 years ago from These United States, Texas

    Those tax breaks for the wealthy are not paid for, so we are spending billions of dollars we don't have right now. They weren't paid for when Bush gave them out the first time either.

  • Rabid Puma profile image

    Rabid Puma 7 years ago from Illinois

    How does taxing less and spending less translate to "so much for fiscal conservatism"?