CNN story says Ron Paul is racist, homophobic

Here's the thing. What if it was being actually produced by someone else regarding political news related to Ron Paul, thus the "Ron Paul Political Report." That would explain him not having the control or knowledge of it.

I'm not saying that is the case, but it is plausible.

*update*

OK I just saw the thread about the RP worker, which confirms my suspicion that it was something done by an individual removed from Dr. Paul. He did not write it and should not have to take responsibility for something someone wrote without his knowledge or consent.

As I've been saying: integrity.

reply to post by The Axeman


We can keep going back and forth like this until Ragnarök. With respect to Paul, my point remains that the fact that a newsletter like this could be published for ten years without him realizing what is in it is critically irresponsible, and I don't think he has addressed that particular issue. I'm not accusing him of being a racist because he hasn't said anything to that end.

With respect to the polling, Luntz' groups are heavily influenced by instrument error; by virtue of being subject to such close, televised scrutiny they think about things differently than they would if they were watching the debate in their own homes. I have done political polling so I am familiar with their methods and techniques. I can say that the focus groups on television need to be taken with a grain of salt. But do I think they're intentionally trying to sabotage anything? You'd have to prove that.

With respect to the text message polls, I have addressed those on this site in the past. They are not scientifically valid because there is no control over the sampled population. All those polls show is that Paul's supporters are more likely to answer phone text message polls. You can’t draw any scientifically valid conclusions about the greater universe.

With respect to the debate, I thought Paul's answer to the 9/11 truth question was pretty poor. His answer to the electability question, on the other hand, was really good. I didn't come away thinking that he was a big loser. But I didn't think he was the big winner. In a sense, it is hard to pick a winner because Paul has such different ideas; of course his supporters are going to think he won and those supporting others are going to think he lost. They're predisposed to their opinions.

NAACP president: Ron Paul is NOT a racist - prisonplanet.com...




Hopefully this breaks out into more mainstream media, and hopefully the NAACP will step up and endorse Ron Paul.

Couldn't find the specific figures on the others, but info can be found at source site: www.ontheissues.org...

Paul vs. McCain on Civil Rights Issues

Source: www.ontheissues.org...

Rated 39% by NAACP, indicating a mixed record on affirmative-action.
Paul scores 39% by the NAACP on affirmative action
OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 NAACP scores as follows:
• 0% - 33%: anti-affirmative-action stance (approx. 177 members)
• 34% - 84%: mixed record on affirmative-action (approx. 96 members)
• 85%-100%: pro-affirmative-action stance (approx. 190 members)
__________________

Rated 67% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record.
Paul scores 67% by the ACLU on civil rights issues
The mission of the ACLU is to preserve protections and guarantees America’s original civic values - the Constitution and the Bill of Rights:
• Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.
• Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.
• Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.
_______________

Rated 38% by the HRC, indicating a mixed record on gay rights.
Paul scores 38% by the HRC on gay rights
OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 HRC scores as follows:
• 0% - 20%: opposes gay rights (approx. 207 members)
• 20% - 70%: mixed record on gay rights (approx. 84 members)
• 70%-100%: supports gay rights (approx. 177 members)

Source: www.ontheissues.org...

Rated 0% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record.
McCain scores 0% by the ACLU on civil rights issues
The mission of the ACLU is to preserve protections and guarantees America’s original civic values - the Constitution and the Bill of Rights:
• Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.
• Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.
• Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs.
___________________

Rated 33% by the HRC, indicating a mixed record on gay rights.
McCain scores 33% by the HRC on gay rights
OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 HRC scores as follows:
• 0% - 20%: opposes gay rights (approx. 207 members)
• 20% - 70%: mixed record on gay rights (approx. 84 members)
• 70%-100%: supports gay rights (approx. 177 members)
___________________
Rated 7% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance.
McCain scores 7% by the NAACP on affirmative action
OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2005-2006 NAACP scores as follows:
• 0% - 33%: anti-affirmative-action stance (approx. 177 members)
• 34% - 84%: mixed record on affirmative-action (approx. 96 members)
• 85%-100%: pro-affirmative-action stance (approx. 190 members)

So, I guess all this talk about Paul being a bigot and a racist is... BS. Like we didn't know that already. perhaps people are barking up the wrong tree?

0% from the ACLU? tsk, tsk.