Ron Paul Releases Four-Part Statement On Budget Targets And Restoring Fiscal Discipline

Tyler Durden's picture

Ron Paul, who over the weekend won the straw vote at the Republican Leadership Conference held in New Orleans, with 40% of the vote, has just released a list of 4 points that will frame his budget priorities if elected president. As Jesse Benton, Paul campaign chairman says “The American people want and deserve someone who will tell them the truth, tell them what needs to be done, and who has an untouchable record of consistency to back it up." Whether everyone will agree with the proposed framework is unclear. However, what is true is that Paul, of all politicians on either side of center, has been the most steadfast in his message over the years, and the fringe benefit, naturally, will be the gradual elimination of Paul's arch-nemesis: the Federal Reserve.

From Ron Paul:

A four-part statement on restoring fiscal discipline

Today, 2012 GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul issued a statement on what his budget priorities will be if elected. See statement below.

“As President, I will not be able to waive a magic wand and solve all of our problems overnight. I will have to work with Congress and build consensus from the American People.

“But, there are several things that I will do right away to strengthen the fight for Constitutional government.

“First, I will veto any spending bills that contribute to an unbalanced budget.

“During these tough times, the American people are tightening their belts and making sacrifices to make ends meet. So should government.

“Second, I will veto any spending bill that contains funding for Planned Parenthood, facilities that perform abortion and all government family planning schemes.

“Like millions of Americans, I believe that innocent life deserves protection and I am deeply offended by abortion. It is unconscionable to me that fellow Pro-Life Americans are forced to fund abortion through their tax dollars.

“As a Congressman, I’ve never voted for any budget that includes funding for Planned Parenthood. Instead, I’ve introduced the Taxpayers’ Freedom of Conscience Act to cut off all taxpayer funding of abortions, so-called “family planning” services and international abortionists.

“Third, I will direct my administration to cease any further implementation of ObamaCare.

“And fourth, I will on day one of my administration begin to repeal by Executive Order unconstitutional and burdensome regulations on American business. I will be the first President to shrink the size of the Federal Register. We must create a favorable regulatory environment for U.S. business. This cannot be stressed enough.”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Ahmeexnal's picture

Is Ron Paul also a descendant from John Plantagenet?

http://12160.info/video/12-yr-girl-discovers-all-us

King_of_simpletons's picture

He is John Plantagenet. Ron Paul's real age is 1100.

Transformer's picture

i am very disappointed in this statement by Ron Paul.  His statement on abortion will alienate 50% of the population.  It was my understanding that his position on this was to leave the issue of abortion to the states and to women.  Furthermore he says nothing about ending all the wars and bringing home the military.  This is the number one thing that can be done about the budget.  85% of America wants the wars to stop.  I can't help but wonder if his organization is compormised and whoever is running his campaign us trying to destroy him.

AnAnonymous's picture

Alienate 50pc of the US citizens?

If indeed as a pro lifer he claims to be, he would have called explicitly for military budget cuts, with as much persistence as he called for non abortion, yep, he would have endangered that but he did not.

Paul is a professional politician. He has tons of experience and knows how to play the game.

wanklord's picture

By appealing to tons of bullshit about the Constitution and other patriotic crap, Congressman Ron Paul is able to seduce his brute and ignorant constituency and most important, to perpetuate himself in that position for years to come (a clever way to make easy money).

AnAnonymous's picture

Better to say that Paul is a niche politician who knows how to flatter his politics market segment. They can be intelligent or not. All it matters is that Paul serves them what they want to hear.

Warranteeing him his position as a long term, carreer, dynastic politician.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

All it matters is that Paul serves them what they want to hear.

Ron Paul simply tailors his message for his audience without altering his actual intentions or principles. In this day and age most people need  to have someone explain to them just exactly how important liberty can be to them personally.

For example he might say, "Liberty is good for you, Johnny, because you want to buy a gun with your own money in order to protect your family. Liberty is good for you Mary because if you want family planning services you can get them simply by paying for them yourself. Liberty is good for you Tommy because marriage is a contract between individuals and not the state so if you want to marry your lover Joey just go ahead and do it. Etc."

 

Warranteeing him his position as a long term, carreer, dynastic politician.

Dr. Paul had a real job as an OB-GYN and did not spend his life in DC. But aren't we all glad that he's put his personal desires aside and has made the effort to champion freedom for all of us?

 

eureka's picture

1 So, US citizens need kinder garden level explanations from their presidential candidates?

Wonder what good freedom will do such kinder garden level intellengences?

2 So, is Ron Paul going to liberate taxpayers from the military industrial corporatocracy, which sucks up 20% of every US tax dollar - and if so, he is going to a switch-aroo on all the fundamentalists who love empire and war?

damage's picture

I've got a better question... are you a moron?

 

I guess Ron Paul should always say the exact same thing to every audience even if it means he has less of a chance of winning the primary. You do realize... he has to WIN the Republican primary. If bashing on FEDERAL FUNDING of planned parenthood and abortions to placate the fundamental christian voter, while not compromising any of his principles is a problem for you... then seriously... drink some pragmatism juice to temper your retard level idealism.

Keep in mind this is coming from someone who considers himself to be VERY idealistic. However, there is always room for pragmatism. Stop being stupid, enough said.

akak's picture

Ron Paul declares that this press release not only "frames the debate" on  his federal budgetary priorities if elected president, it was not tailored to, nor delivered to, a select or paarticular audience, but to ALL Americans. 

Color me disappointed.

damage's picture

No, I'll just color you a political ignoramus.

Thanks.

You're probably so stupid you think that Ron Paul actually wrote this himself, and not just someone in his campaign targeting the typical Republican primary voter.

 

akak's picture

What is going on here today in this thread?  Where did all these unprincipled, no-nothing, kneejerk defenders of every jot and tittle of Ron Paul's campaign staff come from?

No, you are the ignoramus "my friend", and a particularly stupid and disingenuous one to boot, if you cannot see that this press release marks a RADICAL departure from the straight-talking honesty of Ron Paul in his last campaign, and in every other one to which I have been a witness. Whether written by him or by staff, his name is on it, and it was and is his responsibility.

To not address the two most fundamental federal budgetary black holes --- our aggressively interventionistic foreign policy and the war spending it engenders, along with so-called "entitlement" spending that is blowing up exponentionally --- is mind-bogglingly disappointing, coming from Ron Paul.  This is absolutely the lowest level to which Ron's national campaign staff (who undermined his last campaign at almost every opportunity) has ever sunk.  They have already cost him my financial support, and if this bullshit keeps up, they will cost him my vote as well.

Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

It's one press release among thousands which was designed to help position Ron Paul for the Republican caucuses and primaries. You're really overreacting to a minor event.

He didn't say anything he hasn't said before and he has not contradicted his principles. I really can't fathom what you're upset about.

akak's picture

What I, and MANY other Ron Paul supporters, are upset about is the fact that this press release was NOT in fact just "one among thousands", but was intended, as he stated in it, to "frame the debate" surrounding solving the federal budgetary morass and out-of-control spending.  To pointedly include one trivial issue, while neglecting to even discuss two vastly more important and monumentally greater issues, is utterly incomprehensible to me --- not incomprehensible if it had come from unprincipled political opportunists like Huckabee or Romney, but very much so coming from Ron Paul.  Stop trying to pretend that there is no issue here --- there is, and it is a major one.

eureka's picture

Akak - you are correct. It is, as you state, a matter of principle, and without principle, one has nothing, and is, nothing.

damage's picture

But he didn't break any of his principles, that's the thing. This press release doesn't say anything he hasn't said before. You're just upset the press release wasn't focused on the stuff you're worried about specifically, but instead the typical Republican primary voter. Get over it.

You're both trolls anyways, so I wonder why I even let myself get baited into responding to this crap.

akak's picture

You have no idea what you are talking about, or to whom you are (unsuccessfully) trying to rationally converse.

I was already donating to Ron Paul while you were probably still shitting in your diapers.

damage's picture

Sure, buddy. We all know you're too young to vote.

Rhodin's picture

Some might claim the wars are covered by item one..ie no adding to the deficit, and that may well be what is intended. 

All his previous statements have been explicit on closing bases, ending wars etc.  Perhaps it is a matter of timing, ie. this addresses immediate action, and it will take some time to close bases.   However, if he is backing off on those promises, and that will be evident soon enough, he becomes one of them.

damage's picture

Continue to watch his TV interviews then. I somehow doubt the message will change. As far as I can remember every single recent TV appearance he's had or speech he's had (including the one at RLC over the weekend) included his positions about bringing the troops home from overseas, as the top priority.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

It's one press release among thousands which was designed to help position Ron Paul for the Republican caucuses and primaries. You're really overreacting to a minor event.

He didn't say anything he hasn't said before and he has not contradicted his principles. I really can't fathom what you're upset about.

AnAnonymous's picture

It's one press release among thousands which was designed to help position Ron Paul for the Republican caucuses and primaries. You're really overreacting to a minor event.

 

US citizens are so full of themselves they are fighting desperately lost causes.

On one hand, the Paultards are  proud of the 30 year long straight political public record.

On the other hand, they are fighting the very consequence of seeing Paul upping a minor topic over major topics.

They should get a grip: Paul's position is by their own words well known and well assured.  I know that flip floping is US citizenish by nature but still...

 

What is the Paul's point by not putting forward his well known positions, hold for now 30 years, front and center? This guy can not fool anyone in doing so.  Republicans know his record and wont swallow the bait, other non Paultard can only observe the stupidity of uttering a flattery that can not sell.

damage's picture

I don't think he's trying to fool anyone. God the trolls came out en masse over this shit.

If it was mothers day, knowing you aren't fooling anyone. Would you bring up all the things about your mom that you hate? or the good things? LOL... I guess you'd have to mention all the things you hate about her infront of her face cause otherwise you'd be trying to be "dishonest" huh? Yeah right, buddy.

Turn off the computer and go back to your hobby of smoking crack.

eureka's picture

Dear "damage",

Thank you for your kind words.

Oh btw, I suppose "The Truth Shall Set You Free" isn't quite pragmatic enough for you?

damage's picture

Try again when you have something other than a strawman to work with.

eureka's picture

Who's the "strawman"...? As akak said above, you're out of your bounds.

damage's picture

"Who's the strawman?"

LOL - I wasn't referring to a person as a "strawman".

You two keep warping the press release and his campaign's position into something it is not. Then arguing against that "strawman". That is by definition a strawman argument.

For example you two keep making silly ass arguments like the following:

"Because Ron Paul's campaign manager focused on cutting funding to planned parenthood and didn't mention the things more important to me in a release meant for Republican primary voters in Iowa... This somehow means he's gone back on his word regarding them."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this appears to be your issue, right?

You're attacking something which isn't even real.

As I said in another comment, if his audience is fundamentalist Christians should he focus on the fact he wants to legalize prostitution and drugs at the federal level? Or focus on the fact his ideology would ALSO dictate he should cut federal funding to planned parenthood?

Out of what bounds? For calling you two out as the mindless trolls you are? You're either obviously a troll or just stupid. There is no other explanation.

eureka's picture

FYI: my point is, that as a matter of priciple, the whole truth and nothing but the truth should be stated, not just in court, but also in every political address.

No pandering. No manipulation.

If you can construe that an anti-centralization, anti-empire statement is "trolling" - you can get a Nobel price for New-Speak.

damage's picture

facepalm.jpg

But Republican primary voters in Iowa won't vote for him because he wants to end the fed, end their ethanol subsidies, end the wars, or legalize prostitution and drugs. Those that will vote for him already already know his positions about the wars and everything else. You're being retard level paranoid, or rertard level idealistic.

I don't even know if this was the wisest choice by his campaign manager, but the reason why he focused on such issues should be obvious.

Winning a Republican primary will be far harder than winning the general. Get over it, troll.

Edit: Also, I wouldn't quite call this "pandering" to Christian Fundamentalists. If it were he'd be saying the stuff should be illegal... not just ending federal funding for it. He isn't modifying any of his principles.

akak's picture

What is more important here: Ron Paul winning an election, or the advancement of the pro-liberty movement?

If Ron is going to start playing the same cynical and shitty games that all the other, sociopathic politicians routinely engage in, then liberty has already lost.

damage's picture

If all it takes is one press release to derail the liberty movement then it stood no chance anyways. Get a grip.

AnAnonymous's picture

As I said in another comment, if his audience is fundamentalist Christians should he focus on the fact he wants to legalize prostitution and drugs at the federal level? Or focus on the fact his ideology would ALSO dictate he should cut federal funding to planned parenthood?

 

Paul can not fool anybody with this charade.

damage's picture

I don't think he's trying to fool anyone. God the trolls came out en mass over this shit.

 

If it was mothers day, knowing you aren't fooling anyone. Would you bring up all the things about your mom that you hate? or the good things? LOL

AnAnonymous's picture

Liberty is good for you Tommy because marriage is a contract between individuals and not the state so if you want to marry your lover Joey just go ahead and do it. Etc."

 

Marriage is a contract between individuals? And? It is ages since the marriage contract is guaranteed by society. People marry before society.

US citizenism is really on the loose if they now go back on what they said on contract. The contract is not an individual notion (individuality does not lead to contract) Contract is a societal notion.

Individuals do not need any kind of contract to live together. Marriage is a contract and by such is done before society. Now if US citizens are led to repudiate that part, it would really show how messed their stuff was.

Keep the face...

 

But aren't we all glad that he's put his personal desires aside and has made the effort to champion freedom for all of us?

 

Freedom for all? Paul is certainly not an advocate of freedom for all. He for instance thinks that some people's liberty might be bought (and it would be better for everyone this way) while other people's liberty can not be negociated through financial means but be earned by armed struggle.

Paul does not advocate freedom for all.

infotechsailor's picture

" It is unconscionable to me that fellow Pro-Life Americans are forced to fund abortion through their tax dollars."

are you clowns all new to zerohedge?

paul is only against tax funding of abortions, that includes all other medical operations.

Second, paul is one of the largest critics of the wars in congress! Holy Shit.. and

@AnAnonymous... saying Ron Paul should be more critical of the war? AYFKM? do you know anything about Dr. Paul? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bromwich/bipartisan-antiwar_b_880404.html?ir=World

ZakuKommander's picture

Paul himself set his priorities in this release.  If he wants to focus our attention on wailing about Planned Parenthood's drop-in-the-bucket expense (and bringing up the divisive abortion issue), and neglecting to discuss how we're wasting hundreds of billions on Maintaining the Empire, don't blame ZHers for rightly taking him to task.

Watauga's picture

You may want to characterize Planned Parenthood's share of the slop in the trough a "drop-in-the-bucket," but the 50 MILLION dead since Roe v. Wade should not be considered anything but a horrible, national tragedy of our own making.  Admittedly, PP did not cause or assist in all of these deaths, but PP gets TAXPAYER money to promote such deaths. Certainly all Americans can agree that killing 50 MILLION fellow Americans in under 50 years is a disgraceful and shameful stain on our nation's character. 

minosgal's picture

Oh, I see. So lets de-fund a reliable source birth control.

Sounds like you're shocked, shocked that unprotected sex leads to pregnancy.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

Display some sincerity. Abort yourself now.

Rynak's picture

Leave this community, zombie fanboy - you contribute nothing intellectually benefical.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries.

akak's picture

I fart in your general direction.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

 

Finally some common ground! I was afraid I'd have to bring out the Holy Hand Grenade to deal with you.

"One, two, five!"

"Three, sir."

"Three!"

akak's picture

'The lobbest thou the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch at thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it."

 

Actually, we most likely have a vast amount in common, which is why I find this debate, and the subject of this thread, so painful.

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

 

 

 

 

 

Sovereign individuals can agree to disagree.

 

akak's picture

I will agree, and leave it at that.

crosey's picture

Watauga, I'm with you.  Our culture condones the murder of the most helpless of our citizens.  90+% of abortions are merely "lifestyle decisions".  So, with this mindset, it is not a wonder to me that so many other socio-economic issue are screwed up.  Root-cause?  We are too damned narcissistic, on so many levels.

 

eureka's picture

Would you rather:

A:  be born to parents who are ready & able to love and care for you?

OR:

B:  be born to a destitude or raped parent?

Do you know how many millions of kids suffer under abuse, rape, malnourishments etc etc?

What Lifestyle choises do abused, raped and malnourished kids have...?