|
| |||||||||||||||
Ron Paul,election08 Don't Vote For Ron PaulDon't Vote For Ron Paultags:IF YOU VOTE FOR RON PAUL, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO PROTECT YOU FROM YOURSELF ANYMORE. THINK OF YOUR FAMILY, YOUR DUTY TO US, AND YOUR SAFETY. WE PROTECT YOU FROM DRUGS, TERRORISM AND POLLUTION. WE ARE YOUR SAVIOR. DO NOT VOTE FOR RON PAUL. YOU ARE SAFE WITH US. WE PUT EVERYONE IN JAIL SO THEY CAN'T HURT YOU. WE KILL EVERYONE SO THEY CAN'T HURT YOU. DO NOT VOTE FOR RON PAUL.
Comments  playlists with this video Libertarian by my15minutes
who voted for this video 8867
- my15minutes
- siftbot
x79 - EndAll
who has this post bookmarked deedub81
- ronin165
- firedoggod
Don't Vote For Ron Paul Related Videos
| Watch this Video NextFriends O' the Sift Top New Videos by Vote  Subscribe Top 15 Sifters of All Time Top 15 Sifters of the Past Week 6. lore_weaver
(227 votes) 14. Nonbrainwashed
(182 votes) Newest Appreciated Comments          | ||||||||||||||
Stumble This
-George Orwell, 1984
(That includes socialist Republicans like Governor Arnold.)
I can take care of myself, thank you very much. I don't need you to decide what health care I get, or who I want to donate money to. I can select my own charities.
personally, I'd like to decide whach "recreational supplements" I can ingest, which countries we invade.
Both of those decisions were made for me, primarily by republican administrations, and both of which cost the country far, far more than things like education and health care.
For example:
The War on Drugs costs the federal govt $19,000,000,000 per year, or $600 per second. The states combined spend more than that, bringing the total up to 50 billion.
the GBU-39 bomb costs $70,000 per bomb.
the JDAM tailkit, which isn't even a bomb, but a guidance system, costs $21,000, with a projected inventory of 240,000 ($5,040,000,000 total cost).
Tomahawk cruise missiles cost $1.3 million each.
Consider that the median annual household income in the US is $48,000. A single GB-38 bomb vaporizes more US dollars than 1.5 citizens earn in a year.
Personally, given a choice between funneling huge amounts of money to multi-national companies owned by billionaires, or towards improving the lives of Americans (self included), I'd rather go with the latter.
Also, let us examine federal deficit, which has risen under every non-democrat administration in the past 30 years. the only administration to actually demonstrate fiscal responsibility and generate a surplus was Clinton, a Democrat.
I am protected