Dems Put War Costs At $21K Per Family
New Report Estimates Total Price Tag For Iraq, Afghanistan Wars At $1.6 Trillion
-
(AP)
-
Interactive Battle For Iraq The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.
-
Interactive Rebuilding Afghanistan Learn about the nation's geography, history and people and find out what is being done to rebuild.
The report, released Tuesday, attempted to put a price tag on the two conflicts, including "hidden" costs such as interest payments on the money borrowed to pay for the wars, lost investment, the expense of long-term health care for injured veterans and the cost of oil market disruptions.
The $1.6 trillion figure, for the period from 2002 to 2008, translates into a cost of $20,900 for a family of four, the report said. The Bush administration has requested $804 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined, the report stated.
For the Iraq war only, total economic costs were estimated at $1.3 trillion for the period from 2002 to 2008. That would cost a family of four $16,500, the report said.
Future economic costs would be even greater. The report estimated that both wars would cost $3.5 trillion between 2003 and 2017. Under that scenario, it would cost a family of four $46,400, the report said.
The report, from the committee's Democratic majority, was not vetted with Republican members. Democratic leaders in Congress, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., seized on the report to criticize President Bush's war strategy. The White House countered that the report was politically motivated.
"This report was put out by Democrats on Capitol Hill. This committee is known for being partisan and political. They did not consult or cooperate with the Republicans on the committee. And so I think it is an attempt to muddy the waters on what has been some positive developments being reported out of Iraq," said White House press secretary Dana Perino. "I haven't seen the report, but it's obvious the motivations behind it," she added.
The report comes as the House prepares to vote this week on another effort by Democrats to set a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq as a condition for providing another $50 billion for the war.
Reid said the report "is another reminder of how Mr. Bush's stubborn refusal to change course in Iraq and congressional Republicans' willingness to rubberstamp his failed strategy - has real consequences at home for all Americans."
Perino, while acknowledging the dangers in Iraq, defended Mr. Bush's stance.
"Obviously it remains a dangerous situation in Iraq. But the reduction in violence, the increased economic capacity of the country, as well as, hopefully, some continued political reconciliation that is moving from the bottom up, is a positive trend and one that we - well, it's positive and we hope it is a trend that will take hold," Perino said.
Oil prices have surged since the start of the war, from about $37 a barrel to well over $90 a barrel in recent weeks, the report said. "Consistent disruptions from the war have affected oil prices," although the Iraq war is not responsible for all of the increase in oil prices, the report said.
Future economic costs would be even greater. The report estimated that both wars would cost $3.5 trillion between 2003 and 2017. Under that scenario, it would cost a family of four $46,400, the report said.
High oil prices can slow overall economic growth if that chills spending and investment by consumers and businesses. At the same time, high oil prices can spread inflation throughout the economy if companies decide to boost the prices of many other goods and services.
Meanwhile, "the sum of interest paid on Iraq-related debt from 2003 to 2017 will total over $550 billion," the report said. The government has to make interest payments on the money it borrows to finance the national debt, which recently hit $9 trillion for the first time.
The report was obtained by The Associated Press before its release. An earlier draft of the report, which also had been obtained by The Associated Press, had put the economic cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars at a slightly lower, $1.5 trillion.
"What this report makes crystal clear is that the cost to our country in lives lost and dollars spent is tragically unacceptable," said Joint Economic Committee Chairman said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
- RON PAUL FAVORS NON-INTERVENTIONIST FOREIGN POLICY
All of the other presidential candidates wants to continue our illegal police action in Iraq indefinitely, and they do not rule out a preemptive (nuclear) first strike against Iran. Conversely, Ron Paul voted against our (undeclared) war in Iraq, which was sold to us with lies. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies--the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. The war in Iraq has cost more than 3,500 American lives and almost a trillion dollars. We need a leader in the White House who will ensure this never happens again. Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have 750 foreign bases and troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America. And now, there are new calls for a draft. We can continue to fund and fight no-win police actions around the globe, or we can refocus on securing our borders against illegal aliens who are invading us from the South. No war should ever be fought without a Declaration of War voted upon by the Congress, as required by The Constitution. Under no circumstances should the U.S. again go to war as the result of a resolution that comes from an unelected, foreign body, such as the United Nations. Too often, we give foreign aid and intervene on behalf of governments that are despised. Then, we become despised. - Reply to this comment
- MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING: A GLOBALIST LIE
When I consider the claim that we should give-up our civil liberties in order to protect ourselves from terrorism, or that we should pay a global Carbon Tax administered and enforced by the U.N. (one world government), because mankind is somehow to blame for global warming, two quotes come to mind:
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
- Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propagandist
"We have nothing to fear but fear itself, and those who would exploit our fear for power and their own personal, selfish, cynical gain."
- Franklin D. Roosevelt
Earth is heating up lately, but so are other planets in our solar system. It''s scientific fact. The sun''s increased activity links all of these warming events. Fluctuations in solar activity effect the climate on Earth and other planets, and always will. No reputable scientist could deny that increased Sun activity causes an uptick in Earth''s temperatures. Man''s impact on the planet is exaggerated. All 6 billion people on Earth could fit into an area no bigger than New England. - Reply to this comment
- CLINTON PLANTS GLOBAL WARMING QUESTIONS
The Clinton campaign has admitted to planting questions at a college speaking engagement in Iowa. They have confirmed that a campaign staffer approached a student to ask Senator Clinton a question about global warming during a campaign stop in Newton, Iowa, on Nov. 6. The story was first reported by Patrick Caldwell, a junior at Grinnell College and the features editor of The Scarlet and Black college newspaper. He reported that student Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff was approached by the Clinton campaign to ask certain question about global warming and about the need for a global Carbon Tax. Gallo-Chasanoff also said that she "noted that staffers prompted Clinton to call on her and another student who had been approached before the event. Some of the questions asked were confusing and clearly off-message." Clinton Campaign spokesperson Mo Elleithee told ABC News that "on this occasion a member of our staff did discuss a possible question about Sen. Clinton''s global warming plan at a forum. This is not standard policy and will not be repeated again." The staffer still remains with the Clinton campaign, but they would not reveal the person''s name. The Clinton campaign refused to comment on whether this was the only time they have planted questions among audience members about the issue of global warming. - Reply to this comment
- YOU''RE A FROG IN A POT
My fellow Americans need to open their eyes to the fact that our republic, along with The Constitution upon which it was founded, is being flushed-down the toilet by our nations'' bought and paid for politicians and media. While the Oligarchs warn and incite fear in the sheeple about the prospect of terrorism, they at the same time leave our borders wide open, and then conduct illegal wars overseas that do nothing but incite the terrorism which their Orwellian Laws like the Patriot Act and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act pretend to protect us from. Wake up America! It''s not about protecting you from terrorism, or Global Warming, or any of that other fear-mongering garbage the sold-out, mainstream media feeds you 24/7. It''s about feeding the bankers and the military industrial complex, and facilitating the global elite''s ability to ratchet-down control over the American people, placing us into a total control grid where they can surveille, track and control everywhere we go and everything we do. It''s the groundwork for tyranny. It''s the New World Order plan of Bush, Clinton, Edwards, McCain, Giuliani, et.al., being executed quite beautifully. You''re a frog in a pot: In order to cook a frog, you don''t throw him into a pot of boiling water. If you do, he''ll resist and jump-out. What you do instead is, you turn the heat-up REAL SLOW, and by the time the water is boiling he won''t be able to jump out anymore, because it''s too late--he''s already doomed. - Reply to this comment
- CLINTON MAKES BUSH DICTATOR
With the full support of Senators Clinton, Obama and McCain, President Bush recently signed into Law the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which, according to Senator Leahy (VT), will actually "encourage the President to declare Martial Law." It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a Laws which limits the President''s ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act, helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic Law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush has now undone all of those prohibitions. The John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which was signed by the President in an unpublicized ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency," suspend Congress; The Constitution; and to take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of your Governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder." President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act. The two Laws compliment one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad of those who dissent and are stripped of their citizenship, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home by allowing the President to order the military onto our streets in a domestic Law enforcement role, which is already being done. Vote for Liberty. Vote for Ron Paul. - Reply to this comment
- CLINTON ALLOWS BUSH TO PARDON HIMSELF
Buried deep inside Military Commisions Act, which was FULLY SUPPORTED by Senators Clinton, Obama and McCain, is a provision which pre-pardons President Bush and all the members of his administration for any crimes which they may have committed all the way back to September 11, 2001. Why that far back? That kind of makes you wonder. Huh? I can''t help but recall what Nixon said during an interview following the Watergate scandal when he said, "If the President does it, by definition, it''s not illegal." History never repeats itself, folks. It only rhymes. At least Nixon had enough class to wait for another President to pardon him for his crimes against our country. Bush apparently doesn''t want to take that chance. He has to consider the risk that Ron Paul will become our next President. - Reply to this comment
- CAMPING OUT WITH HALIBURTION
The John Warner Defense Authorization Act, which was supported by Clinton, Obama and McCain, permits militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters ("potential terrorists") and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities which are already contracted for and under construction by Kellog, Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. This Law, which was sold to an "emergency managed" and willfully gullible public in the wake of the 9/11 attacks as a necessary measure needed by our President in order to fight his "global war on terrorism," permits the indefinite detention of American citizens who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of our President. The Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International reported recently that global engineering and technical services powerhouse, Kellog, Brown & Root announced during January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division had been awarded a (no bid) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract to build these detainment camps with a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term, and that this contract called for the company to build "temporary detention and processing capabilities" to augment existing U.S. government Detention and Removal Operations and to support "the rapid development of new programs." New Programs? Could it possibly get any worse? Why would the president be so concerned about Americans protesting? Aren''t we all happy campers? - Reply to this comment
- ARE WE A NATION OF LAWS?
Consider the Patriot Act. The Law is 342 pages long, or 57,000 words, making it a bit longer than Dostoevsky''s "Notes from Underground" or, if you''re partial to pigs, about twice the size of Orwell''s "Animal Farm." The Patriot Act is the reigning champion of our government''s recent un-American activities. When it was first paraded before Congress and the Senate following the 9/11 attacks, few Members, other than Congressman, Ron Paul dared to vote against it. Most in Congress simply gave it their rubber-stamp of approval, without ever reading it. Why bother? It was, after all, named the "USA Patriot Act." It must be a good thing. Right? Now in effect, the Law wrecks a generation''s worth of constitutional protections against government snooping, legalizing police-state tactics in searches and seizures, criminalizing certain forms of speech and political activity, and opening the way for the mistreatment of foreigners in government custody and wholesale expulsions and imprisonment. It is a repugnant, unnecessary Law that goes against the very principles its name wrongly implies. Yet, it remains unchecked and unbalanced by public opinion, Lawmakers or the Courts. So, yes, we''re a nation of Laws. But the Laws aren''t much to speak of when they''re designed to hoodwink the public to win its docility. Neither is public responsibility much to speak of these days when its docility is secured with nothing more than a ploy-riddled play on the word "patriot." - Reply to this comment
- DEMOCRATS HOODWINKED BY HILLARY
Sadly, even though Clinton voted for the war in Iraq, and a host of Laws aimed at removing civil liberties; and our country''s sovereignty, Democrats are so blinded by her cult of personality that I predict they will overwhelmingly vote to put her crime family back into office. While I''ve made some progress in educating Liberals as to the phony staged consensus of the left-right paradigm, the fact remains that a majority of Democrats still see the White House as some kind of political Super Bowl, where the success of their "team" is the be all and end all - to the expense of America as a whole. The Punch and Judy show theater that was the "troop surge" debate in the Senate characterizes Hillary''s role in hoodwinking Americans perfectly. The debate is framed as not whether the U.S. should get out of the Middle-East altogether, but the relative minutia of whether to feed thousands of more troops into the meat grinder or not. A Clinton presidency will mean more war, more dead Americans, and a further desecration of the tattered shreds of what''s left of our Constitution. Clinton is the ultimate global elitist and represents the Democrats supposed base: the poor and downtrodden, about as much as Lindsay Lohan represents grace and dignity. I''m sure she informed the likes of David Rockefeller and Queen Beatrix as to her presidential aspirations during her last visit to attend the Bilderberger conference. Vote for a REAL AMERICAN. Vote for Ron Paul. - Reply to this comment
- BILDERBERGERS RULE
The Bilderberg Group is a secretive gathering of global power brokers, which includes Hillary Clinton, and a virtual who''s who of other folks whose names you will recognize (Search Wikipedia: "Bilderberg Attendees"), has inspired layers of ridicule. In recent times, the deeds laid at the group''s doorstep have included the creation of the EU, the Iraq war, and the group''s current efforts to create a North American Union, which will erase U.S. borders and sovereignty. Their agenda: economic and political domination; one world government; and world population reduction. After it was leaked that a speech by John Edwards at their meeting in Italy, was one reason for his selection as John Kerry''s vice-presidential running mate in 2000, people began to ask, "Are the Bilderbergers now shaping the worldwide political scene?" Over 130 of the world''s most powerful monarchs, politicians and business leaders attend the annual, invitation-only gatherings in order to to discuss and orchestrate public policy worldwide. The hotels involved are closed-off to other guests and reporters. Guards are placed around the perimeter, and attendees promise to keep quiet about what they hear and say. "They do not have to sign anything, but they understand that they do not talk," said Maja Banck-Polderman, the group''s Secretary. Tony Gosling, a British reporter who has followed the group says, "I think that a forum where so many rich and powerful people meet should be open to public scrutiny." - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL WILL RESTORE U.S. SOVEREIGNTY
All of the trade deals and world government organizations, which all of the presidential candidates support (except Ron Paul), such as the ICC, NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA, are all a major threat to our nation''s sovereignty. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites. The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a prescription to take herbs and vitamins. The WTO has forced Congress to change our laws to meet their needs, and not our own. If anything, the WTO makes trade relations worse by giving foreign competitors a new way to attack U.S. jobs. The NAFTA superhighway, being built by a Spanish company, is just one part of a plan to erase our borders and create the North American Union, a single nation State like the EU, out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a new, unelected bureaucracy and money system. Forget about controlling immigration under the NAU scheme. There won''t be any borders anymore, or a free America. Our limited, constitutional government will be gone forever. Let''s not forget the UN either. It wants to impose a direct Carbon Tax on us. Ron Paul successfully fought this move in Congress last year, but if we are going to stop ongoing attempts of this world government body to rule over us, we need someone in the White House who knows how to say "No." We must withdraw from any organizations or treaty that infringes upon our nation''s sovereignty. - Reply to this comment
- WHO''S RON PAUL?
Ron Paul''s campaign has become a clearinghouse for voters like me who feel unrepresented by the Fascisct (globalist Republicans) and their Socialist comrades in crime (globalist Democrats). They''re actually one and the same. It''s all a phony, poorly staged left-right paradigm. Most people, though, are too distracted, dumbed-down, or outright brainwashed by mainstream media, which endlessly regurgitates scientifically-crafted streams of information aimed at keeping their eyes closed to the realities of the world around them, that they fail to recognize this. Those currently in power, and those being groomed to take [major] political power, are preselected by a "global elite," and whomever is eventually elected, will ultimately, serve their agenda, and not ours. People on the right and those on the left have many differences. Maybe irreconcilable ones. But they have a lot of common beliefs too, and our numbers and anger are of a considerable magnitude. No matter what happens in 2008, I personally believe Ron Paul will influence the national conversation about how much power our government should have over our lives; how much liberty we should give up for security; and whether we should continue moving along our current path towards a one world government. These are issues that, frankly, no one else is talking about as seriously and sincerely as Ron Paul. What''s for sure is that his growing army of supporters like me will be a force to be reckoned with in 2008. - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL IS NOT YOUR FATHER''S REPUBLICAN
Ron Paul represents a different Republican Party from the one that Iraq, deficits and corruption have soured the country on. It''s ironic that other GOP candidates are scared to death of his message, because his positions are more conservative than theirs. Being anti-war; pro-life; pro civil liberties; pro Second Amendment; pro States rights; pro secure borders; and in favor of a sound economics policy IS TOTALLY CONSERVATIVE. The Republican party has "lost its way," Paul said during a recent GOP debate. Like the limited federal government principles espoused by Dwight D. Eisenhower, his school of Republicanism stands for a certain idea of The Constitution that much of the power asserted by modern Presidents has been usurped from Congress, and that much of the power asserted by Congress has been usurped from the States. Though Paul acknowledges flaws in both The Constitution (it included slavery) and The Bill of Rights (it doesn''t go far enough), he still thinks a comprehensive array of positions can be drawn therefrom: against gun control; for the sovereignty of States; and against foreign-policy adventures like the ones currently being played-out in the Mid-East. After ten terms of service as a U.S. Congressman, Ron Paul has demonstrated a consistent track record of adherance to The Constitution unmatched by anyone in either party. Ron Paul does not represent your Father''s school of political thought. He represents your Founding Fathers. - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL RESPECTS YOUR PRIVACY
Like Ron Paul, I believe the biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding a citizens'' personal matters. We must stop the move toward a national ID card system (e.g., The Real ID Act). Under this new Law, states are currently issuing new driver''s licenses embedded with standard identifier data (RFID chips). Although, many states are refusing to comply. A national ID with new tracking technologies means we''re heading into an Orwellian world of no privacy. Ron Paul was one of the few members of Congess who voted against the Real ID Act. Also, under current medical privacy protection rules, which Ron Paul also opposed, insurance companies and other entities have access to your personal medical information. Finally, there''s the so-called Patriot Act, which Congressman, Ron Paul also voted against. As originally proposed, it expanded the federal government''s ability to use wiretaps without judicial oversight; allowed nationwide search warrants non-specific to any given location, nor subject to any local judicial oversight; made it far easier for the government to monitor private Internet usage; authorized sneak and peek warrants enabling federal authorities to search a person''s home, office, or personal property without that person''s knowledge; and required libraries to turn over records of books read by patrons. Ron Paul sponsored a Bill to overturn the Patriot Act. - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL KNOWS HOW TO STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. Ron Paul has a plan: (1.) Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals. (2.) Enforce Visa rules. Immigration officials must track Visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their Visa or otherwise violates U.S. Law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired Visas. (3.) No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That''s a lot of people to reward for breaking our Laws. (4.) No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules, but taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services. (5.) End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong. (6.) Pass true immigration reform. The current system, and those proposed by ALL other candidates, is incoherent and unfair, and would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country. - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL IS THE TAXPAYER''S BEST FRIEND
If he is elected President, Ron Paul will work to abolish the Federal Reserve System as well as the IRS, returning our country to the Gold Standard. He believes, as I do, that our current Income Tax System is unconstitutional, because it is a direct tax that is not equally apportioned as The Constitution requires. Whenever taxes are raised by the federal government, it should be done as The Constitution does require--in an indirect way, which is equally apportioned. This system would benefit all of us, creating more individual wealth, and allowing us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives. As President, Ron Paul will also work to abolish the Federal Reserve, a group of private banks, run by unelected officials, which loans our government unbacked money which they are allowed to essentially print out of thin air, making each dollar in your pocket worth less all the time, and increasing our national debt to these banks. Worse still. Most of our debt is owned by China (25%) and Saudi Arabia who finance our runaway military spending overseas. This is a threat to our nation. We need to bring our troops home from overseas, and use the trillions we would save thereby to reduce our debt, and to re-invigorate our currency. We can use this money to ensure that Social Security and other essential programs will still be solvent in the future. Vote for Ron Paul. He''s published three books on the topic of sound economics. ronpaullibrary.org - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL TAKES ON FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke appeared before the Congressional Joint Economic Committee Chairman, Congressman Ron Paul on November 8th, and had to face some tough criticism concerning the fact that the Fed has been increasing the money supply while at the same time refusing to raise the Prime Interest Rate in order to curb inflation and devaluation of the Dollar. Paul accused the Federal Reserve of "robbery," telling Bernanke, "There''s a dollar crisis out there and people''s money is being stolen," Paul said. "People who have saved, they''re being robbed. I mean, if you have a devaluation of the dollar at 10 percent, people have been robbed of 10 percent." Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke attempted to dispel that notion by explaining, "If somebody has their wealth in dollars and they''re going to buy consumer goods in dollars, then the only effect it has on their buying power is that it makes imported goods more expensive." Paul disagreed, reminding Bernanke, "Yeah, but not if you''re elderly and you have your wealth in CDs. Their cost of living is going-up no matter what your CPI says," adding finally, "Their cost of living is going up, and they''re hurting. And that''s why the people of this country are very upset." - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL: A GUN OWNER''S BEST FRIEND
Like Ron Paul, I share our Founders'' belief that in a free society each citizen must have the right to keep and bear arms. They ratified the Second Amendment knowing that this right is the guardian of every other right, and they all would be horrified by the proliferation of unconstitutional legislation that prevents Law-abiding Americans from exercising this right. Congressman, Paul has always supported the Second Amendment and these are some of the Bills he introduced in the current Congress to help restore respect for it: H.R. 1096 includes provisions repealing the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Federal Firearms License Reform Act, two invasive and unconstitutional Bills. H.R. 1897 would end the ban on carrying a firearm in the National Park System, restoring Americans'' ability to protect themselves in potentially hazardous situations. H.R. 3305 would allow pilots and specially assigned personnel to carry firearms in order to protect airline passengers, possibly preventing future 9/11-style attacks. H.R. 1146 would end our membership in the United Nations, protecting us from their attempts to tax our guns or disarm us entirely. In the past, he introduced legislation to repeal the so-called assault weapons ban before its 2004 sunset, and he has opposed all attempts to reinstate it. Congessman, Paul also recently opposed H.R. 2640, which would allow government-appointed psychiatrists to ban veterans experiencing any form of PTSD. - Reply to this comment
- RON PAUL WILL PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY
Our nation''s promise to its seniors, once considered a sacred trust, has become little more than a tool for politicians to scare retirees while robbing them of their promised benefits to pay for militarization. Today, the Social Security system is both broke and broken. Those in the system are seeing their benefits dwindle due to higher taxes, increasing inflation, and irresponsible military spending. The proposed solutions, ranging from lower benefits to higher taxes to increasing the age of eligibility, are NOT solutions; they are betrayals. Imposing any tax on Social Security benefits is unfair and illogical. In Congress, Dr. Paul introduced the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act, which repeals ALL taxes on Social Security benefits, to eliminate political theft of our seniors'' income and raise their standard of living. Solvency is the key to keeping our promise to our seniors, and he introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219) to ensure that money paid into the system is ONLY used for Social Security. Also, it is fundamentally unfair to give benefits to anyone who has not paid into the system. The Social Security for Americans Only Act, which Ron Paul supported, ends the drain on Social Security caused by illegal aliens seeking the fruits of your labor. In short, if we stop our runaway military spending overseas, there will be plenty of money available to keep Social Security solvent for decades to come. - Reply to this comment
- WERE HAVING A TEA PARTY! YOU''RE INVITED
As we all know, freedom isn''t free in this country. Therefore, in the wake of our successful fundraising event of November 5th, in which we all came together to raise $4.2 million dollars for Ron Paul''s campaign, we''ve set yet another date for an even bigger fundraiser. This one will take place during on December 16th: a very important date for people who love freedom and hate tyranny to ring the Liberty Bell, and let our sold-out, globalist, political ****** and their mainstream media enablers know that good Americans are mad as hell, and that we''re not going to take it anymore. December 16th is the 224th aniversary of The Boston Tea Party: an act of protest by the American colonists against the tyranny of Great Britain where the Sons of Liberty boarded British ships and dumped crates of tea overboard into Boston Harbor. It was a key event which helped to spark the American Revolution, and we hope this event will, likewise, add additional spark to our own 21st Century political revolution to restore peace, prosperity and freedom to our Republic by helping elect a President whose record of adherance to The Constitution is unmatched by anyone in American politics. Please join us this December 16th for the largest one-day political donation event in history. Our goal is to bring together 100,000 people to donate $100 each, creating a one day donation total of $10,000,000. The time to act is now. The time for Ron Paul is NOW! TeaParty07.com - Reply to this comment
Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more.




