Skip to main content

House GOP Spends $50 Million of Taxpayers Dollars in Effort to Repeal Obamacare

Since January of 2011, when the Republican Party took over control of the House, they have attempted to repeal what is now known as Obamacare 33 times, which has cost taxpayers an estimated $50 million. I find this almost comical in a way, because one main reason why Republicans claim they want to repeal Obamacare is because it wastes taxpayers' money. So, let me get this straight - it's more beneficial to Americans for the GOP to spend their/our tax dollars attempting to repeal a bill which has absolutely no chance of being fully repealed at this time (more of a symbolic notion) than it is for our tax dollars to be spent to help insure the uninsured and decrease the price of premiums?

The Democrats still hold control of the Senate. While Republicans know full well that any effort to repeal Obamacare in the House will pass, it will fail in the Senate. Sure, Republicans can use this as a talking point in the coming elections, saying they've tried to repeal Obamacare, yet did so wasting $50 million, knowing full well it had no chance of being repealed. It's also estimated that the House GOP has spent 89 hours attempting to repeal health care reform. That's time and money well spent, right there! That's money as well spent as when I bet $50 million that Sloth from "The Goonies" would win Sexiest Man of the Year in 2009.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/health-care-law-repeal_n_1666917.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=735358,b=facebook
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more