So will Republicans still consider Rand Paul after this?

[2MuchMark]

Rachel Maddow: Rand Paul PLAGIARIZES



Rachel Maddow: Rand Paul PLAGIARIZES, Again!


Lol! What a fucking twit.

Good luck in 2016.

[Robbie]

In politics anything is possible.

Look at Joe Biden. He left the Pres. race in 1988 in disgrace over plagarism and no Democrat wanted anything to do with him.

Now he's a hero to Democrats.

All of us sheeple will just accept any goddamn thing that any politician says or does I guess.

I blame Bush for Rand Paul's plagarism by the way...

[noshit]

Holy crap you are a more than a complicit operative, useful idiot.
The brainwashed-mind of the useful idiot is psychologically incapable of receiving information which is counter to the world-view within which it has been inculcated and more importantly, do they allow smoking in Mr. Maddow world?

[bronco67]

Yes Republicans will still consider Ran Paul after this. For the same reason they ran the recent (losing)election on anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-education, anti-healthcare, anti-immigrants, anti-gun control, anti-minorities. They're too fucking stupid to get out of their own way. Most of them aren't even smart enough to know what plagiarism is. Ran Paul obviously isn't.

This guy is a doctor. I wouldn't ask him to pop a pimple for me.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

More examples of Rand Paul plagiarizing have started coming out:





Rand Paul's Op-Ed column in the conservative Washington Times was terminated as a result of the recent plagiarism charges:

Source: Washington Times

Washington Times ends Sen. Rand Paul column amid plagiarism allegations

Sen. Rand Paul acknowledged Tuesday that he had failed to properly source material in published writings, including a column in The Washington Times, after a string of embarrassing plagiarism accusations surfaced in recent days.

Mr. Paul took personal responsibility for the oversights, which he and aides said were caused by staff providing him background materials that were not properly footnoted. But the Kentucky Republican, a possible 2016 White House candidate, also said he was being held by the news media to a higher standard than other politicians.

?The standard I?m being held to is a little different than everybody else,? Mr. Paul said on CNN?s ?The Situation Room.? ?They?re now going back and reading every book from cover to cover and looking for places where we footnoted correctly and don?t have quotation marks in the right places or we didn?t indent correctly.?

The Washington Times said Tuesday that it had independently reviewed Mr. Paul?s columns and op-eds and published a correction to his Sept. 20 column in which the senator had failed to attribute a passage that first appeared in The Week.

The newspaper and the senator mutually agreed to end his weekly column, which has appeared each Friday since the summer.

?We expect our columnists to submit original work and to properly attribute material, and we appreciate that the senator and his staff have taken responsibility for an oversight in one column,? Times Editor John Solomon said.

?We also appreciate the original insights he has shared with our readers over the last few months and look forward to future contributions from Sen. Paul and any other members of Congress who take the time to help educate our readers,? Mr. Solomon said.

The website BuzzFeed reported that a section of Mr. Paul?s 2012 book, ?Government Bullies,? appeared to have lifted sections of an earlier Forbes article.

The site also first reported that Mr. Paul copied sections of an opinion piece on mandatory sentencing, ?The devastating effect of a drug-war weapon,? in The Washington Times from an article in The Week.

Mr. Paul has been a prolific op-ed writer in recent years, penning hundreds of pieces in The Times and other media outlets. But the body of his work is getting fresh attention from journalists as they uncover multiple cases of lifting other people?s work without giving them credit.

In a statement to The Times and multiple other media outlets Tuesday, Doug Stafford, an adviser to Mr. Paul, said the senator?s ideas were all his own. But he said Mr. Paul had relied on staff to provide ?supporting facts and anecdotes ? some of which were clearly not sourced or vetted.?

?Footnotes presenting supporting facts were not always used,? he said. ?Going forward, footnotes will be available on request.?

In the case of The Times piece, Mr. Paul wrote, ?By design, mandatory sentencing laws take discretion away from prosecutors and judges so as to impose harsh sentences, regardless of circumstances.?

That same sentence appeared in The Week in a piece by Dan Steward, BuzzFeed found.
While Mr. Stafford initially told BuzzFeed the questions about Mr. Paul amounted to a witch hunt, additional examples continued to surface. And Tuesday?s announcement appeared to signal a shift in Mr. Paul?s strategy to put the episode behind him.

Read more: http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/20...#ixzz2k7lq0I1k
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

ADG

[Mutt]

I don't consider borrowing a 'plot synopsis' of a movie or book from a website to be serious plagiarism, the 'writers/editors' of Wikipedia aren't even attributed. If I'm a public speaker preparing a speech and a movie, book, a historical event comes to mind to illustrate a thought I want to communicate, of course I'm going to do a little research and consult an encyclopedia/wikipedia/website/newspaper archives - I'm sure not going to just trust my memory off the top of my head. His only mistake and it's not a big mistake was copying the movie description word for word, rather than describing the exact same movie synopsis in his own words.

Serious plagiarism in my opinion is stealing somebody else's original thoughts and the words used to convey them. I don't consider a movie synopsis to be anybody's orginal thoughts.

Lazy yes, unethical no.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

Got to love Jon Stewart...

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by Mutt

I don't consider borrowing a 'plot synopsis' of a movie or book from a website to be serious plagiarism, the 'writers/editors' of Wikipedia aren't even attributed. If I'm a public speaker preparing a speech and a movie, book, a historical event comes to mind to illustrate a thought I want to communicate, of course I'm going to do a little research and consult an encyclopedia/wikipedia/website/newspaper archives - I'm sure not going to just trust my memory off the top of my head. His only mistake and it's not a big mistake was copying the movie description word for word, rather than describing the exact same movie synopsis in his own words.

Serious plagiarism in my opinion is stealing somebody else's original thoughts and the words used to convey them. I don't consider a movie synopsis to be anybody's orginal thoughts.

Lazy yes, unethical no.

Check the other examples of Rand Paul plagiarism that are beginning to surface, such as the 3 pages of plagiarism caught in a Rand Paul "authored" book.



ADG

[MrBottomTooth]

He's talking about the movie. What's the problem with taking excerpts from the wiki about the movie? Seriously this is supposed to end his career? I don't even see the issue here.

[RandazzoXXX]

Much ado about nothing.

I heard the attribution for all the quotes in his book are indexed, they just weren't all footnoted on the individual pages. He's already promised to do a reprint right?

[vdbucks]

sheeple herders - 1,395,447
sheeple - 0

"Baaaa, Baaaa... Baaaa, Baaaa... Baaaa, Baaaa..." said the sheeple.

[Minte]

If people can accept a president that bold face lies to the people, they will accept anything.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

ADG

[tony286]

Originally Posted by Minte

If people can accept a president that bold face lies to the people, they will accept anything.

you are right Bush lied and soldiers died.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by Mutt

I don't consider borrowing a 'plot synopsis' of a movie or book from a website to be serious plagiarism, the 'writers/editors' of Wikipedia aren't even attributed. If I'm a public speaker preparing a speech and a movie, book, a historical event comes to mind to illustrate a thought I want to communicate, of course I'm going to do a little research and consult an encyclopedia/wikipedia/website/newspaper archives - I'm sure not going to just trust my memory off the top of my head. His only mistake and it's not a big mistake was copying the movie description word for word, rather than describing the exact same movie synopsis in his own words.

Serious plagiarism in my opinion is stealing somebody else's original thoughts and the words used to convey them. I don't consider a movie synopsis to be anybody's orginal thoughts.

Lazy yes, unethical no.

It runs a lot deeper than you know. Look into it.

[Minte]

Originally Posted by tony286

you are right Bush lied and soldiers died.

Turn on the news, Tony

They are still dieing. 5 years later. But they will get great insurance when they rotate back to the world.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by tony286

you are right Bush lied and soldiers died.

And people wanted to impeach him, should we then want to impeach Obama for lying to the American public to get his agenda through?

[Vendzilla]

I don't think Rand is serious contender

I believe Chris Christie is what the democrats don't want to see run against Hillary

[winter_]

excuse me? is this the same rand paul who represents the extremists of the right? the extreme right who think god blames homosexuals and homosexuals only for the category 5 hurricanes sweeping across the mid-west or up and down the east coast? you only have to follow the right wing watch blog on youtube to know how dangerous and downright stupid those right wingers are. that is the real republican party, an organisation of christian religious nutters who will shoot you for being a bum or a fag.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Mutt

I don't consider borrowing a 'plot synopsis' of a movie or book from a website to be serious plagiarism, the 'writers/editors' of Wikipedia aren't even attributed. If I'm a public speaker preparing a speech and a movie, book, a historical event comes to mind to illustrate a thought I want to communicate, of course I'm going to do a little research and consult an encyclopedia/wikipedia/website/newspaper archives - I'm sure not going to just trust my memory off the top of my head. His only mistake and it's not a big mistake was copying the movie description word for word, rather than describing the exact same movie synopsis in his own words.

Serious plagiarism in my opinion is stealing somebody else's original thoughts and the words used to convey them. I don't consider a movie synopsis to be anybody's orginal thoughts.

Lazy yes, unethical no.

Thats exactly what he did....more than once.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I don't think Rand is serious contender

I believe Chris Christie is what the democrats don't want to see run against Hillary

Hahaha - good luck with that, talk about the elephant in the room, Christie is a moderate Republican from Jersey, he'll be up against the same group of religious right and Tea Party loons ganging up against him in the early primaries that Romney had to deal with. Even if he survives that they'll have made him look like a liberal in conservative's clothing and probably worse.

"Double Down", the just released book on the 2012 Presidential race goes into great detail regarding Romney's process of picking his running mate. Romney's right hand man wanted Christie, so did Romney, but what his campaign dug up about Christie scared Romney off, he's got a lot of baggage and I'm sure the Clintons are already following up on the dirt found by Romney's people.

And Romney is quite the classy guy, he was making fat jokes about Christie in front of everybody, in Christie's presence - 60 year old rich douche acting like he's the captain of the high school football team ridiculing the fatso.

I'd like to see Christie run, would make for great political theater.

[dyna mo]

funny how all the drama currently in canadian politics still can't get the op off his obsession with usa reublicans. plenty there to start a thread about but nope.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Thats exactly what he did....more than once.

Let's see this serious offense of plagiarism he's committed.

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I don't think Rand is serious contender

I believe Chris Christie is what the democrats don't want to see run against Hillary

i think Chris Christie is what most Republicans don't want to see running against whoever..

[Magnetron]

4 years of Christie ripping on his own party would be entertaining.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Mutt

Let's see this serious offense of plagiarism he's committed.

I'm not going to get into a debate over the subjectiveness of what is serious or not. The guy took complete paragraphs word for word and played them off as his words. That my friend is what plagiarism is.


pla·gia·rize
verb \ˈplā-jə-ˌrīz also -jē-ə-\

: to use the words or ideas of another person as if they were your own words or ideas

[Minte]

I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN! - impeachable lie

You CAN keep your existing health insurance policy - impeachable lie?

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

i think Chris Christie is what most Republicans don't want to see running against whoever..

Here's something you don't know about American Politics

Majority of Americans are moderate

Independent voters make up 40% of the electorate.

If somehow Christie could bring the full force of the republicans together and with 4.5 million people having to pay higher insurance costs ( in 5 states they are double ) I think he would have a chance, unless they didn't learn from the mistakes Romney made.

The key is uniting republicans and getting the independent vote

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Magnetron

4 years of Christie ripping on his own party would be entertaining.

The republican party needs it, or don't you agree?

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Mutt

Hahaha - good luck with that, talk about the elephant in the room, Christie is a moderate Republican from Jersey, he'll be up against the same group of religious right and Tea Party loons ganging up against him in the early primaries that Romney had to deal with. Even if he survives that they'll have made him look like a liberal in conservative's clothing and probably worse.

"Double Down", the just released book on the 2012 Presidential race goes into great detail regarding Romney's process of picking his running mate. Romney's right hand man wanted Christie, so did Romney, but what his campaign dug up about Christie scared Romney off, he's got a lot of baggage and I'm sure the Clintons are already following up on the dirt found by Romney's people.

And Romney is quite the classy guy, he was making fat jokes about Christie in front of everybody, in Christie's presence - 60 year old rich douche acting like he's the captain of the high school football team ridiculing the fatso.

I'd like to see Christie run, would make for great political theater.

The Clintons I think could not survive a good debate if done right.
Hillary really did a shitty job as secretary of state.

and as a senator she did some fine work, like her crusade again the video game Grand Theft Auto

[Magnetron]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

The republican party needs it, or don't you agree?

Christie is already a Democrat.

He stands a better chance of becoming prez if he defects.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Magnetron

Christie is already a Democrat.

He stands a better chance of becoming prez if he defects.

You didn't answer the question!

[MaDalton]

in the current state of the republican party, a moderate has no chance to survive the preliminaries - the crazies have taken over

Edit: but it would be great if that changed

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

in the current state of the republican party, a moderate has no chance to survive the preliminaries - the crazies have taken over

Edit: but it would be great if that changed

The republican party needs change, Christie seems to be the kind of person that could do just that. Being a moderate, he is more likely to work with both sides. That makes for a good leader. Unlike what we have now, someone that only works with one side and gets nothing done to help the economy. He's done more to separate than to bring together

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I don't think Rand is serious contender

I believe Chris Christie is what the democrats don't want to see run against Hillary

You mean the same Chris Christie whom the right wing was trying to vilify and burn at the stake, because he dared to talk with Obama.. Now the guy, whom the tea party tried to bash relentlessly is now the only hope? :lol

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by crockett

You mean the same Chris Christie whom the right wing was trying to vilify and burn at the stake, because he dared to talk with Obama.. Now the guy, whom the tea party tried to bash relentlessly is now the only hope? :lol

So you have a problem with a republican that wants to work with the democrats?

Forgive me for saying this, but hasn't that been your biggest complaint about the GOP, is that they don't work with the president?

[madm1k3]

The problem with Rand Paul will be how do you run on a premise of personal freedom when your path to the white house is dependent on christian voters.

How do you reconcile the position that drugs are a personal choice but abortion isn't. How do you say the government has too much power in peoples lives then stand against gay marriage.

The other main issue will be how do you propose to cut the military when there are evil Muslims looking to harm America. The GOP has deep military ties and Paul's proposed budget cuts and his opinion of the military in general will be a tough sell to the GOP establishment.

Paul's ideology is not in step with core Republican principles so I have a hard time thinking his presidential fate will be any different from his Dads

The plagiarism is a minor problem, many politicians have overcome

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by Minte

I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN! - impeachable lie

You CAN keep your existing health insurance policy - impeachable lie?

You can talk all you want about being neutral -- but you have political axe to grind that slants in one hard direction.

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

funny how all the drama currently in canadian politics still can't get the op off his obsession with usa reublicans. plenty there to start a thread about but nope.

Sorry, but come on... Don't you think that American politics is just so much more... colourful?

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by **********

Sorry, but come on... Don't you think that American politics is just so much more... colourful?

no way.-

come on, a crack schmoking mayor who talks smack about killing people? that;s just the tip of the iceberg too,

why limit yourself and gfy? bring us the good stuff from up northtoo eh!

all the potential threads and comments.........it's a treasure trove for you, heck look at all the fun mutt's having with it. plenty to go around!

[Axeman]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

in the current state of the republican party, a moderate has no chance to survive the preliminaries - the crazies have taken over

Edit: but it would be great if that changed

He might survive the primaries, as McCain and Romney did, but he would suffer the same fate in the general as the two moderates did. Enough of the base in the swing states would choose to stay home. Christie wouldn't win any NE State vs Clinton. So it's back to a swing state / base election. And a squishy moderate doesn't bring out the Republican base.

[Magnetron]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

You didn't answer the question!

That the GOP needs someone to teach them how to work with some of the people and not against most of the people? Agreed.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by Magnetron

That the GOP needs someone to teach them how to work with some of the people and not against most of the people? Agreed.

What people are you talking about, your statement is a little strange, some and most?

[Magnetron]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

What people are you talking about, your statement is a little strange, some and most?

Democrats and Americans.

[2MuchMark]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

What people are you talking about, your statement is a little strange, some and most?

I think what he means is to make the GOP stop being anti-women, anti-black & minority, anti-gay rights, anti-abortion, anti-voting, anti-science, anti-poor, etc. The only thing GOP seems to be Pro about is christian nut jobs and warming up the planet.

[theking]

Originally Posted by Minte

I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN! - impeachable lie

You CAN keep your existing health insurance policy - impeachable lie?

Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath in a court of law.

No...it is not an impeachable lie.

[MediaGuy]

All the politics is turning really fun lately no matter the country. Talk about a friggin' circus. This stuff didn't used to come out for decades, if not centuries. Now it's daily.

The US spies on everyone - Germany gets really peeved.

Then turns out Germany's been spying on the US as well.

Rob Ford gets so drunk he does crack. He rants. He's a phreak! Canadian politics now include a pothead, a coke sniffer and a drunk potential crackhead.

Just in Montreal we have a commission investigating the highest level of corruption and organized crime implicating the construction industry since Prohibition and Jimmy Hoffa. Three mayors have been booted, resigned or taken out in handcuffs - and these were the interim guys until the most recent election.

Stephen Harper, our current Prime Minister, is sitting on a probable conspiracy report between Canadian and American intelligence/military agencies regarding rendition of supposed terrorism suspects.

Harper is also at the head of a wonderful coverup not really being investigated where he or his office is covering up his covering up senators he appointed bilking public funds for their personal purposes.

There's also an endless oilspill that's destroyed Alberta wild lands which was covered up since it started, and which they have no idea when or why or how it happened or how they can cap it...

Italy's Berlusconi is being railroaded on fraud after getting whacked for partying with one of the hottest (underage) escorts since Cleopatra.

The Israelis are doing everything they can to derail any rational outcome or transparency for the Iranian talks with the international community regarding their non-existent military nuclear ambitions.

The Russians declare war on homosexuality. The Russians arrest protesters in international waters.

The Japanese government aren't soliciting the help of the international community to move the superhot nuclear fuel rods from their precarious broken down reactor because of... politics!

It's just not stopping! Fun fun fun!

Entertainment, as George Carlin called it...

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

All the politics is turning really fun lately no matter the country. Talk about a friggin' circus. This stuff didn't used to come out for decades, if not centuries. Now it's daily.

The US spies on everyone - Germany gets really peeved.

Then turns out Germany's been spying on the US as well.

Rob Ford gets so drunk he does crack. He rants. He's a phreak! Canadian politics now include a pothead, a coke sniffer and a drunk potential crackhead.

Just in Montreal we have a commission investigating the highest level of corruption and organized crime implicating the construction industry since Prohibition and Jimmy Hoffa. Three mayors have been booted, resigned or taken out in handcuffs - and these were the interim guys until the most recent election.

Stephen Harper, our current Prime Minister, is sitting on a probable conspiracy report between Canadian and American intelligence/military agencies regarding rendition of supposed terrorism suspects.

Harper is also at the head of a wonderful coverup not really being investigated where he or his office is covering up his covering up senators he appointed bilking public funds for their personal purposes.

There's also an endless oilspill that's destroyed Alberta wild lands which was covered up since it started, and which they have no idea when or why or how it happened or how they can cap it...

Italy's Berlusconi is being railroaded on fraud after getting whacked for partying with one of the hottest (underage) escorts since Cleopatra.

The Israelis are doing everything they can to derail any rational outcome or transparency for the Iranian talks with the international community regarding their non-existent military nuclear ambitions.

The Russians declare war on homosexuality. The Russians arrest protesters in international waters.

The Japanese government aren't soliciting the help of the international community to move the superhot nuclear fuel rods from their precarious broken down reactor because of... politics!

It's just not stopping! Fun fun fun!

Entertainment, as George Carlin called it...

**********'s head just exploded.

[kane]

Originally Posted by Axeman

He might survive the primaries, as McCain and Romney did, but he would suffer the same fate in the general as the two moderates did. Enough of the base in the swing states would choose to stay home. Christie wouldn't win any NE State vs Clinton. So it's back to a swing state / base election. And a squishy moderate doesn't bring out the Republican base.

If he were running against Clinton he might have a decent chance. If there is one thing the conservative christian right hates more than a moderate candidate it is a Clinton.

Their hatred of all things Clinton could get some of them to turn out and support him.

Also, he could put New Jersey in play which would force the democrat to spend time and money defending a state that would normally be an easy win.