Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rachel Maddow mocked Rand Paul for plagiarism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rachel Maddow mocked Rand Paul for plagiarism

    Rachel Maddow mocked Rand Paul for plagiarism, but she’s been accused of it too

    Kurt Wallace, Rare Contributor
    Posted on October 31, 2013 4:21 pm

    SNBC host Rachel Maddow created headlines this week when she alleged that Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had plagiarized a recent speech from Wikipedia, but it turns out the liberal cable news host has been accused of plagiarism herself.

    In 2010 on his blog “Open Salon,” Michael Rodgers of North Port, Fla., wrote a blog post titled “Rachel Maddow Plagiarized My Blog!”

    “Don’t get me wrong, I love Rachel Maddow,” Rodgers wrote. “Truth be told, I’m a huge fan. So, if she wanted something from my blog, all she had to do was ask. I would have given willingly because that’s the kind of guy I am.”

    The plagiarism in question involves a comparison Rodgers made between the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 with the often-forgot about 1979 Ixtoc I oil spill in the same area. The liberal blogger noted that “the oil industry hasn’t advanced their methods of plugging holes in the ocean floor or cleaning up their messes.”

    Rodgers then became perturbed upon seeing his own unique angle being copied on Maddow’s program: “I’m sitting there Wednesday evening watching MSNBC and there is Rachel Maddow…TELLING THE SAME DAMN STORY!!”

    Rodgers complained, “she stole my scoop of a lifetime and now it’s plastered all over MSNBC with Rachel getting all the credit. Granted, the segment she did Wednesday night covered more ground and was more professional than my little feature, but then she has more resources at her disposal than I do.”

    Another blogger made a similar allegation against Maddow just this month. In a post titled “A Remarkable Coincidence,” an anonymous poster writes:

    A friend of mine emailed me a link to a short video from the Rachel Maddow Show. He had just read my previous piece on the debt crisis, entitled “Nantucket Sleigh Ride.” Several days after I posted, Maddow and Co. had created a little skit about the debt crisis using an obscure metaphor from the days of whaling: the so-called “Nantucket Sleigh Ride.”

    The author of the post notes,

    I have to admit that they took the metaphor somewhere I did not, focusing on the axe available to cut the line between the boat and the whale. It’s all about the judgment of the captain and the crew. I focused on the whale as a combination of the wounded insurance industry and the wounded conservative worldview.

    “Still, a remarkable coincidence,” he writes.

    Rare contacted MSNBC and Rachel Maddow for comment and have yet to receive a response.

    On her program Monday night, Maddow pointed out similarities between a speech Sen. Rand Paul made during the day at a campaign event for Virginia gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli. During the speech, Paul discussed the plot of the 1997 movie “Gattaca” in a way that read similar to the language for the movie’s entry on Wikipedia, a crowd-sourced site.

    “She’s been spreading hate on me for the last three years,” the Kentucky senator said to Fusion’s Jorge Ramos of Maddow’s attack.

    Paul’s representatives note that Maddow limited the video portion of his speech, without sufficiently highlighting that Paul had indeed credited the primary sources. In a statement to Rare Thursday afternoon RAND PAC Executive Doug Stafford clarified what actually occurred.

    “In the course of a 25-minute speech, Senator Paul described the plot of a movie attributed it to the primary sources – the movie – in no way insinuating they were his own thoughts or ideas,” Stafford said.

    “If the text had been submitted for academic publication, of course it would have been footnoted. Only in Washington is something this trivial a source for liberal media angst.”
    How often does the media cherry-pick a speech to make the speaker look bad? It's a lot. This example isn't just wrong, it's wrong for completely trivial reasons.

    - See more at: http://rare.us/story/rachel-maddow-m....wCfk8c07.dpuf
    "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

  • #2
    Rachel Maddow is a serial liar. This is far from the first time that she's been caught in bald-faced lies.
    Bask in the warmth of the Deep South
    No one will be denied:
    Big law suits and bathroom toots;
    We're all getting Dixie-fried.
    But somewhere Hank and Lefty
    Are rollin' in their graves
    While kudzu vines grow over signs that read "Jesus Saves."

    Comment


    • #3
      “In the course of a 25-minute speech, Senator Paul described the plot of a movie attributed it to the primary sources – the movie – in no way insinuating they were his own thoughts or ideas,” Stafford said.
      Lemme get this straight. Rand lifted several sentences of the plot synopsis word-for-word from Wikipedia without attribution to Wikipedia, but that isn't plagiarism because he attributed the plot to the correct movie.
      Enjoy.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Norm dePlume View Post
        Lemme get this straight. Rand lifted several sentences of the plot synopsis word-for-word from Wikipedia without attribution to Wikipedia, but that isn't plagiarism because he attributed the plot to the correct movie.
        Lemme get this straight. deudyurondame lifted several sentences of the plot synopsis word-for-word from Norm dePlume without attribution to NotEverythingIsPolitical, but that isn't plagiarism because deudyurondame attributed the plot to the correct post.

        Yeah, works really well.

        Comment


        • #5
          The man is a serial sloppy quoter.

          Three Pages Of Rand Paul’s Book Were Plagiarized From Think Tanks

          An entire section of Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s 2013 book Government Bullies was copied wholesale from a 2003 case study by the Heritage Foundation, BuzzFeed has learned. The copied section, 1,318 words, is by far the most significant instance reported so far of Paul borrowing language from other published material.

          The new cut-and-paste job follows reports by BuzzFeed, Politico, and MSNBC that Paul had plagiarized speeches either from Wikipedia or news reports. The book was published in August 2013 by Center Street, a division of Hachette Book Group.

          In this case, Paul included a link to the Heritage case study in the book’s footnotes, though he made no effort to indicate that not just the source, but the words themselves, had been taken from Heritage.

          A Paul aide defended the senator, saying he makes clear in the book’s “notes and sources” that he didn’t individually research each case.
          Enjoy.

          Comment


          • #6
            Serial sloppy quoter... ? OK, so, he's misquoted a shitload of stuff.

            List?

            Comment


            • #7
              http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczyn...befor?s=mobile

              http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczyn...rized?s=mobile
              Enjoy.

              Comment


              • #8
                So somebody grabbed the plotline from Wikipediam and Rachel Maddow grabbed the plotline from a blog. Stones, glass, and houses.
                Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
                Robert Southwell, S.J.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Norm, do you really think people are going to change their policy positions because a politician has been exposed to be a politician?

                  Perhaps that's how your views are formed but my politicians that I support are those who are educated by me, not the reverse.
                  "Faith is nothing but a firm assent of the mind : which, if it be regulated, as is our duty, cannot be afforded to anything but upon good reason, and so cannot be opposite to it."

                  -John Locke

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    What, really? Rand Paul: "In the movie, Gattaca..." No reference made? Plagiarized? WTF?

                    Starting at 2:38 , in Maddow's embedded clip.

                    Better hurry, all the other references on Youtube are disappearing.
                    Last edited by deudyurondame; Monday, November 4, 2013, 10:38 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      ...and the straw flew fierce upon the forum. And great was the smell of BS.
                      Enjoy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I haven't been following this whole thing because ... well ... it seems like generic political porn with no actual insight or relevance to the political debate in this nation and the world.

                        But there is this from a liberal (real, not imagined) site which is kinda wierd.

                        Sorry for furthering the decline of political discourse in the United States.
                        "There are four lights!"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Billy Jingo View Post
                          I haven't been following this whole thing because ... well ... it seems like generic political porn with no actual insight or relevance to the political debate in this nation and the world.

                          But there is this from a liberal (real, not imagined) site which is kinda wierd.

                          Sorry for furthering the decline of political discourse in the United States.
                          What is weird, that a liberal site is reporting on it?
                          Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
                          Robert Southwell, S.J.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by phillygirl View Post
                            What is weird, that a liberal site is reporting on it?
                            Awkward sentence structure. I meant the report of the senator's reaction was weird.

                            Even worse sentence structure. The senator's reaction is weird.
                            "There are four lights!"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Billy Jingo View Post
                              Awkward sentence structure. I meant the report of the senator's reaction was weird.

                              Even worse sentence structure. The senator's reaction is weird.
                              Pointing out that these people who are full of shit are full of shit is weird?
                              Bask in the warmth of the Deep South
                              No one will be denied:
                              Big law suits and bathroom toots;
                              We're all getting Dixie-fried.
                              But somewhere Hank and Lefty
                              Are rollin' in their graves
                              While kudzu vines grow over signs that read "Jesus Saves."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X