This is going to get you upset. The Republicans, with an upcoming majority in the House and a greater presence in the Senate, want to bring an end to the congressional moral bankruptcy.

This is going to get you upset. The Republicans, with an upcoming majority in the House and a greater presence in the Senate, want to bring an end to the congressional moral bankruptcy.

What was their No. 1 principle in doing so? They vowed to deal with the Bush-era tax cuts first, or else no other bills would get passed. All 42 GOP senators signed a letter pledging to prevent a vote on any legislative item until the tax issue was resolved.

What issues were of so little import Senate Republicans refused to vote on them until they were sure the marginal tax rate on the richest Americans wouldn't be raised from 36 to 39 percent?

The Senate initially rejected an effort to open debate to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" and the Dream Act, which offers citizenship to some illegal immigrants who entered the U.S. as children. And they also stalled a bill to offer health benefits to 9/11 first responders.

I understand the first two, but since when does the Republican party make 9/11 first responders stand over in the corner with the gays and Mexicans?

Since Republicans took to the floor to discuss the Dream Act and "don't ask, don't tell," I can't wait to hear what they said about why their party hates first responders.

But only two Republican senators even showed up to defend their principled stand.

Of course, Republicans wouldn't be so cowardly as to not vote for the bill without justifying their actions. Just cowardly enough to not do it on camera.

That's why Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi explained in an op-ed that his real concern was proper oversight of the money already spent on 9/11 workers. He claims $475 million has gone missing, saying, "The nation can't afford careless spending, no matter how well-intentioned."

Yes, mismanagement and waste is unacceptable, but the bill they were going to vote on actually fixes that problem - just like in May 2008, when the Pentagon announced it couldn't account for $15 billion that disappeared in Iraq.

What did Enzi, the tireless fiscal watchdog, say when he was asked to vote for more Iraq funding?

"This isn't a perfect bill. The fact remains, however, that we need to fund our troops, so I will support the supplemental bill," he said.

Unless any of those troops are 9/11 responder s. I n that case , screw those guys!

I've got bad news. All of our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq are technically 9/11 responders - not the first responders, but the second and third.

So here's the deal, Republicans: Your "we're the only party that can understand 9/11 and its repercussions" monopoly ends now.

No more co-opting 9/11 images to get re-elected. No more using 9/11 as the date when, magically, your policies became right. And no using 9/11 as an excuse for why Bush tax cuts never stimulated the economy.

You know what, Republicans? You use 9/11 so much, if you don't owe the responders health care, you at least you owe them royalties.