Republicans Consistently Vote against their own policies... because...

[dorksied]

It isn't about ideology. Its about power, and money.

check this out.

Republicans would have Americans believe there is a socialistic war in American politics as if the social programs of public schools, police and fire departments, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and programs for the less fortunate are anti-American and anti-Christian. On the other hand Republicans and their fellow teabaggers lack the principles or any constructive ideas to move America forward. Their political arrogance of ‘NO’ is couched as “We’re doing this for you” and is the bastion of hypocrisy as the Republican Party was the genesis for the economic collapse in the U.S.Cases in Point:

1. President Obama proposed a bipartisan fiscal commission, a panel of Democrats and Republicans who would hammer out concrete deficit reduction proposals over the medium and long-term, an idea that had strong bipartisan support and was initially co-sponsored by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-ND, and Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, the committee’s top-ranking Republican and had a lot of Republican cosponsors.

After the President endorsed this idea, all of a sudden, Republicans started to think of it as a bad idea. Six Republican senators who originally cosponsored forming a deficit commission voted against it once President Obama signed up for the idea. Sam Brownback, Mike Crapo, John Ensign, Kay Bailey Hutchison, James Inhofe, and John McCain, profiles in courage against their own policies.

more here... a very informative read.

http://www.americaforpurchase.com/republicans/republicans-consistently-vote-against-own-policies/

[elleng]

1. Yes. Power

[LuvNewcastle]

2. The primary function of Republicans is

to make rich people richer. They might campaign about abortion or immigration or gun rights, but they are only using those issues as ways to get themselves elected. Once elected, their only real concern is figuring out ways to get more money for their wealthy supporters.

[dorksied]

4. What I don't get is how people don't see this... Its so clear

[RickFromMN]

3. Is FEMA a necessary program or a government handout?

I guess it depends...if you get money from FEMA, it's a necessary program.
If you do not, it's wasted government pork.

Please see the article,
http://northdakota.areavoices.com/2011/06/16/fema-denies-n-d-application-for-individual-assistance/
Governor Dalrymple was unhappy with FEMA's response to the flooding in Minot.
I am certain FEMA's response will be changed to be more friendly to North Dakota,
if it hasn't already. This article is almost a month old.

Wouldn't the Republicans and the Tea Party argue one should have private insurance for floods and other disasters. They argue one should have medical insurance, even to those who can't afford medical insurance because of medical conditions or age.

Why should they welcome government intervention, FEMA, in one case, but not another, Obamacare?

Is it true, government handouts to "us" represent good and necessary programs, government
handouts to "others", like the elderly or the less fortunate or the sick, are wasted pork.

If you are going to get sick in this country,
die quickly so you don't run up a big medical bill.