Rand Paul Addresses Plagiarism Claim

[jct74]

audio at link


Rand Paul Addresses Plagiarism Claims: 'I Gave Credit'

By Paige Lavender
Posted: 10/30/2013 6:52 pm EDT

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) addressed claims that he plagiarized a speech from Wikipedia in an interview with Fusion.

On Monday, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow pointed out that Paul spoke about the plot of "Gattaca" using words similar to that of the film's Wikipedia page in a speech in support of Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli.

In his interview with Fusion, Paul admitted he "borrowed" from the movie -- but said he gave credit to the people who wrote the film, not the people who wrote the Wikipedia entry on the film.

“We borrowed the plot lines from Gattaca. It’s a movie,” Paul said. “I gave credit to the people who wrote the movie... Nothing I said was not given attribution to where it came from.”

Entries on Wikipedia are crowdsourced and can be edited by anyone that has access to the site. The Wikipedia entry on Gattaca was likely written collaboratively by volunteers.

...

read more:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/30/rand-paul-plagiarism_n_4179395.html

[jct74]

Rand Paul rips Maddow over Wikipedia questions: ‘She’s been spreading hate on me for three years now’

By Arturo Garcia
Wednesday, October 30, 2013 18:38 EDT

Without mentioning her by name, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) dismissed MSNBC host Rachel Maddow’s questions surrounding his use of Wikipedia in campaign speeches in an interview with Fusion anchor Jorge Ramos on Wednesday.

“Nothing I said was not given attribution to where it came from,” Paul told Ramos, arguing that he has credited “the screenwriters” for the movie Gattaca — though he did not name writer/director Andrew Nichol — and author Ray Bradbury for referencing their work.

“The rest of it’s making a mountain out of a molehill for people, I think, who are political enemies and have an ax to grind,” Paul added.

...

“If you look at my speeches, there’s never been any indication that I’ve tried to take credit for someone else’s work,” Paul told Ramos. “So really, this is about information and attacks coming from haters.”

Paul then alluded to Maddow more directly, saying, “The person who’s leading this attack, she’s been spreading hate on me for three years now, and I don’t intend for it to go away. But I also don’t see her as an objective news source.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/30/rand-paul-rips-maddow-over-wikipedia-questions-shes-been-spreading-hate-on-me-for-three-years-now/

[WD-NY]

lol, oy vey.

Can someone quickly explain to me how restating the premise/synopsis of a movie = bad/evil/newsworthy ??

#seriousquestion

[Matt Collins]

nonstory

[WD-NY]

nonstory

Obviously.

But the deeper question is why lefty hacks like Maddow think this is worth their time. What's their angle? Why are they dinging him for lifting a couple throw-away sentences in a speech from wikipedia?

Are they building towards / laying the groundwork for something bigger??

[eleganz]

Obviously.

But the deeper question is why lefty hacks like Maddow think this is worth their time. What's their angle? Why are they dinging him for lifting a couple throw-away sentences in a speech from wikipedia?

Are they building towards / laying the groundwork for something bigger??

Her audience loves it when she attacks republicans, is my guess for motive.

[whoisjohngalt]

This is hilarious. We should try to make it into a story, so that it can blow up in their faces. They are too stupid to do the most basic research.
This isn't plagiarizing Wikipedia. Wikipedia took it form IMDB, that took it from the back of the DVD.

I'm banned from commenting on HuffPost, but I really wish I could jump in. The liberal attack dogs are so rabid. Oh my.

Unfortunately, I think the speech was pretty awful and don't want to draw attention to it. But this is the sort of thing that Rand will turn into an Aqua Budha and smash the opponents with. Off base ad hominem is one of the most powerful tools we can be given by the other side.

[specsaregood]

“So really, this is about information and attacks coming from haters.”

Did Rand really use the word "haters"? Nice.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Note the sources for this "news": Huffington Post and Raw Story.

Desperation is just sad.

[Jackie Moon]

Did Rand really use the word "haters"? Nice.

Haha, yeah, I like it...


“So really, this is about information and attacks coming from haters.”

http://scontent-b-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc3/552328_383017101764763_1992000414_n.jpg

[cajuncocoa]

It's a story because Rachel Maddow made it a story. She's doing what the Left does: attacking a Republican.

[Natural Citizen]

Obviously.

But the deeper question is why lefty hacks like Maddow think this is worth their time. What's their angle? Why are they dinging him for lifting a couple throw-away sentences in a speech from wikipedia?

Are they building towards / laying the groundwork for something bigger??

Wikipedia is becoming a playground for special interests. People are delusional if they think it's just some site that anyone can edit any more. So then when someone say's non story this means they're scared to death that the cat's out of the bag where it really counts.

Things happening with wiki these days are most definitely worthy of discussion.

[pulp8721]

...And Maddow responded to Rand tonight by basically calling him an idiot.

med iaite.com/tv/maddow-tears-into-rand-paul-for-response-to-wikipedia-plagiarism-charges-absolute-incoherence/

[dannno]

I have made at least 20 posts or so absolutely destroying people, but the comments flow like a river so it is tough.

[satchelmcqueen]

so the girl version of hannity tells another lie?