Rand Paul faces another plagiarism claim

Indigo5

In reality they pander to a political base that is a combination of both those who don't know they are being lied to and those who don't care. I have a hard time figuring out the breakdown of each. In the real world, the ignorant likely dominate, but for the politically aware crowd, like ATS the "don't care" folks likely dominate.

Either way the far right seems to have a much, much greater immunity to "ethics" than the left.

I couldn't agree more and that difference in unethical acceptability was clearly demonstrated in some very recent elections.

While Mark Sanford hiked the famous Appalachian Trail all the way down to S. America and came back just to get elected to the U.S. Senate, Anthony Weiner the "selfing" tweeter, couldn't be a bigger loser in the eyes of what was, his Democratic constituency and turned out to be "the biggest loser" in his NYC mayoral bid.

Yeah, I'd say there is indeed a little bit of difference in how the political parties handle ethics.

reply to post by Indigo5


Since this thread is on Paul, I will stay on topic and state that he should own up to it.

This plagiarism has got to stop. It illustrates that while politicians often see themselves as higher beings, they (like us) have feet of clay.

Blaming others for your own faults is indicative of a weak moral character and is not a sign of leadership.

The right hypocrisy has shown it's face again,

When Obama was does something perceived wrong, the left shows prior acts also committed by the right..what do they say...just because others have done it, does not excuse him.

Low and behold they are on here showing links ..etc showing that supposed left also may be guilty of such acts in order to excuse Rand Paul for his plagiarism.

Hypocrites..

All politicians have speech writers. Sometimes those speech writers plagiarize, then the politician says it, or signs his name to it if he agrees with the content or trusts the writer. It's not the same as being paid to write new stuff--like professional journalists are supposed to do.

Onslaught2996
Low and behold they are on here showing links ..etc showing that supposed left also may be guilty of such acts in order to excuse Rand Paul for his plagiarism. Hypocrites..

Um ... no.

1 - The OP is going around basically saying that the right is morally bankrupt but the left isn't. The information given shows that to be dead wrong.

2 - Showing that the OP is wrong in no way excuses Rand Paul from his plagiarism.

3 - 'supposedly left also may be guilty' you say.... ??? Nothing 'supposedly' or 'may' about it. The left has people who ARE guilty of doing the exact same thing that Rand Paul is accused of doing.

4 - Hypocrites you say? That's those on the left who say Rand Paul is morally bankrupt for plagiarizing but then give the left a free pass for doing the exact same thing. It's partisan blindness.

BOTH parties have people who have plagiarized. And none of the people who have plagiarized .... Obama, Biden, Bush43, Eric Cantor etc etc ... have had it negatively effect their political careers. It's unfortunate, but true. If it had, then we wouldn't be stuck with Obama and Biden in the White House and we wouldn't be having to deal with the Obamacare disaster, or Fast and Furious, or Benghazi gate, etc etc

reply to post by Onslaught2996


Prove it. Flyersfan NEVER suggested that because the left does it as well that it is excusable for Rand Paul and the right. It is equally reprehensible from both sides of the aisle. Get off your moral high ground because you found someone on the right who plagiarizes. Your side is just as guilty of it as well. Flyersfan demonstrated that with her links, but I know you. You can't rise above the partisan bickering and toe that Democratic line like your feet were nailed to it.

FlyersFan

As the impressively well-read Felzenberg documents, Obama lifted lines or ideas from the speeches of Dwight Eisenhower, Woodrow Wilson, Mario Cuomo, Margaret Thatcher, Franklin Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy without attribution.

Lines or ideas?...for a speech?? Here let me explain the difference in magnitude by bolding only the words VERBATUM Rand Paul plagiarized in the passage for a PUBLISHED ARTICLE HE CLAIMED TO AUTHOR.

Paul wrote in one section of his September piece:

“By design, mandatory-sentencing laws take discretion away from prosecutors and judges so as to impose harsh sentences, regardless of circumstances. Since mandatory sentencing began in the 1970s in response to a growing drug-and-crime epidemic, America’s prison population has quadrupled, to 2.4 million. America now jails a higher percentage of its citizens than any other country, including China and Iran, at the staggering cost of $80 billion a year. Drug offenders in the United States spend more time under the criminal justice system’s formal control than drug offenders anywhere else in the world.

“Most public officials — liberals, conservatives and libertarians — have decided that mandatory-minimum sentencing is unnecessary. At least 20 states, both red and blue, have reformed their mandatory-sentencing laws in some way, and Congress is considering a bipartisan bill that would do the same for federal crimes.”

That compares to editor Dan Stewart’s op-ed in The Week:

“By design, mandatory sentencing laws take discretion away from prosecutors and judges so as to impose harsh sentences, regardless of circumstances. Mandatory sentencing began in the 1970s as a response to a growing drug-and-crime epidemic, and over the decades has put hundreds of thousands of people behind bars for drug possession and sale, and other non-violent crimes. Since mandatory sentencing began, America’s prison population has quadrupled, to 2.4 million. America now jails a higher percentage of its citizens than any other country, including China and Iran, at the staggering cost of $80 billion a year.

“Most public officials — including liberals, conservatives, and libertarians — have decided that it’s not. At least 20 states, both red and blue, have reformed their mandatory sentencing laws in some way, and Congress is considering a bipartisan bill that would do the same for federal crimes.”

RADICALLY different than borrowing a line for a speech or an "idea".

This is outright plagiarism.

reply to post by Indigo5


1 - Rand Paul plagiarized. It's very clear.
2 - You didn't look at all the links I provided, did you? Nope. Didn't think so. I't's very clear that your buddies Biden and Obama also 'lifted' and plagiarized. Heck, at least Biden manned up and admitted it. There are many others, both on the left and the right, telling lie after lie and being corrupt. I could spend all day providing links ... but you'd not bother to look at them so I won't waste my time.
3 - The partisan blindness being displayed here is mind numbing. We are in the middle of an Obamacare meltdown and lie after lie; Benghazigate; Fast and Furious; Holder purjuries; Rosengate; IRSgate; APgate; etc etc and you have the audacity to try to claim that the left isn't just as bad as the right? That's just absurd.

It is cases like this which make me wonder what has happened to al that "put on your big boy pants and man-up" that I have heard in the past. Not just from the Republicans, who are high on intergrity and personel responsiblity, but from the Libertarians.
I would think, if a man could not put forth his own ideas in a coherent fashion, he would not make a very good leader of other people.

beezzer
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Since this thread is on Paul, I will stay on topic and state that he should own up to it.

This plagiarism has got to stop. It illustrates that while politicians often see themselves as higher beings, they (like us) have feet of clay.

Blaming others for your own faults is indicative of a weak moral character and is not a sign of leadership.

Agreed. Partisanship aside, Rand Paul to me represents a false caricature of Right-Wing Libertarianism. Honestly, there are a handful of real and honest Libertarians running in local elections that might make their way forward in the coming years to better represent the view (though dramatically ideologically different than myself).

Rand Paul seems to me to fail on ethical grounds, a panderer, a political stunt-man and yes blatant plagiarist and that precludes everything else he says IMO.

In contrast, I always listened intently to his father, who despite having different ideas than myself, appeared to have an unusual honesty and directness. He believed what he said and owned his own ideas. His honesty demanded attention, if not agreement.

FlyersFan
reply to post by Indigo5

 

1 - Rand Paul plagiarized. It's very clear.

Would you care to tell me what you think about that? Since it is the OP topic?

Without derailing to other topics like IRS, Benghazi, yada, yada?

You have yet to actually weigh in on the actual, specific topic of the OP? Rand Paul plagiarizing long and specific passages for a published article under his name?

Is this OK with you?

Indigo5
Would you care to tell me what you think about that? Since it is the OP topic?

Already did. I said .. yes he plagiarized. And basically I said ... that sucks and they all suck.

Without derailing to other topics like IRS, Benghazi, yada, yada?

Oh comeon .. YOU derailed it by making it a left = wonderful, right = evil thing.
If you didn't want people to prove you wrong ... you shouldn't have gone uber-partisan.
Ya' know?

Lots of them plagiarize ... both Democrats and Republicans.
It hasn't effected their careers.
I gave examples of both Democrats and Republicans who have 'lifted' and/or plagiarized.
They were elected to office without so much as a blink from their supporters.

I imagine the same thing will be for Rand Paul. It won't effect his political career.
Heck, if Joe Biden can be elected Vice President after he plagiarized,
I'm sure Rand Paul can be elected Senator even with this plagiarizing.

truth to tell
its a simple matter......they both steal each others words or anyone elses which they think will get them votes...left/right...
what a farce.....Obama has continued and deepened every Bush policy so far.....drones,war in afganistan, etc....
Theres no difference between the thieves, liars and montebanks we call our public servants .....they are all there to serve themselves....................

reply to post by FlyersFan

Tu Quoque Fallacy
Explanation

The tu quoque fallacy is committed when it is assumed that because someone else has done a thing there is nothing wrong with doing it. This fallacy is classically committed by children who, when told off, respond with “So and so did it too”, with the implied conclusion that there is nothing wrong with doing whatever it is that they have done. This is a fallacy because it could be that both children are in the wrong, and because, as we were all taught, two wrongs don’t make a right.

www.logicalfallacies.info...

Indigo5
You have yet to actually weigh in on the actual, specific topic of the OP? Rand Paul plagiarizing long and specific passages for a published article under his name?

WRONG. I responded to that in the very first post.

FIRST POST -

FlyersFan
Rand Paul needs to fire whoever is doing his writing for him. Either that, or he is doing the writing himself, he needs to do a better job of stealing other peoples work. Either way, it won't hurt his run for the White House.

AND AGAIN ON ANOTHER POST -

FlyersFan
2 - Showing that the OP is wrong in no way excuses Rand Paul from his plagiarism.

AND AGAIN ON THIS POST -

FlyersFan
1 - Rand Paul plagiarized. It's very clear.

I said very clearly .... he plagiarized; there is no excuse; it won't hurt his run for office because many others do the same thing and they get elected. So how you get that I haven't addressed the topic is very strange. It is very clear, that I did at least three times.

reply to post by Indigo5


I say this is nothing new for any politician, Is it going to change or affect anything of real importance? No it won't, this is just another non-issue you are making a big deal about.

But lets not dare talk about the lies coming out from the left as FF had mentioned because those are real issues that truly have a negative effect for a lot of Americans.

reply to post by Indigo5


Not a surprise from a fake Doctor.

Looks like the only medical certification Dr. Rand Paul may have is his own.

Tea Party favorite Dr. Rand Paul is NOT a board-certified doctor, claims report

Paul’s only certification was provided instead by something called the National Board of Ophthalmology, which is very convenient because he operates that organization himself. As the Courier-Journal explains drily, the American Board of Ophthalmology, which maintains a fully staffed headquarters in Philadelphia, has existed for roughly a century and currently lists about 16,000 doctors on its rolls. (Most hospitals and insurance companies strongly prefer doctors who are board-certified because certification indicates that they have kept up with changes in technology, best practices and so on.) The National Board of Ophthalmology has existed since 1999, when Paul “founded” it, lists no more than seven doctors, and its address is a post-office box in Bowling Green, Ky. He had claimed to be certified by both boards, but Courier-Journal reporter Joseph Gerth quickly discovered that claim was false.

Dr. Paul: Not board-certified, but self-certified

(P.S. Please note how, unlike Paul, I have supplied links and given full credit to those who wrote the articles quoted.)

reply to post by Indigo5

IRRELEVANT. And deflection on your part.

- I never said that it was okay for Rand Paul to do it because others did it. Not once. Not even close. Epic fail on your part. Try again.

- I posted that information to show others doing it because YOU WENT UBER-PARTISAN and tried to say that the left = good and the right = bad. It was absurd. So I proved you wrong.

stirling
truth to tell
its a simple matter......they both steal each others words or anyone elses which they think will get them votes...left/right...

...

Theres no difference between the thieves, liars and montebanks we call our public servants .....they are all there to serve themselves....................

False equivalence
A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.

en.wikipedia.org...

thesaneone
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I say this is nothing new for any politician, Is it going to change or affect anything of real importance? No it won't, this is just another non-issue you are making a big deal about.

But lets not dare talk about the lies coming out from the left as FF had mentioned because those are real issues that truly have a negative effect for a lot of Americans.

We're not talking about my great recipe for Jambalaya, either...cuz it ain't the topic here, eh?