Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize.

Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 5:41:19 PM)
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 7:53:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission? If the claims are accurate, Paul should face the consequences of the plagiarism. That being said, it might be nice to see how it's written in the book. I'm not saying he's innocent, but there might be more than buzzfeed is showing.

DomKen -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 8:22:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission? If the claims are accurate, Paul should face the consequences of the plagiarism. That being said, it might be nice to see how it's written in the book. I'm not saying he's innocent, but there might be more than buzzfeed is showing. I don't have the book but the speeches are on the web and his speechwriters very clearly copied material directly from wiki and an AP story.

EdBowie -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 8:23:44 PM)
OK, I'm a bit confused... I get the difference between small 'l' libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. But I seriously did think that one of the LP core values, was that government had no business getting involved in property disputes, as in the example of the person who moves upstream and dams it for his own use, while letting his neighbors go dry. Per Badnarik, et al. the nanny state should never force people to share and play nice, right? So how are intellectual property rights something that any big 'L' partisan is bound to respect? quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission?

DomKen -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 9:36:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie OK, I'm a bit confused... I get the difference between small 'l' libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. But I seriously did think that one of the LP core values, was that government had no business getting involved in property disputes, as in the example of the person who moves upstream and dams it for his own use, while letting his neighbors go dry. Per Badnarik, et al. the nanny state should never force people to share and play nice, right? So how are intellectual property rights something that any big 'L' partisan is bound to respect? The only way libertarianism can even be imagined working is if everyone has an absolute and total respect for each other's property and rights. Otherwise it is simple anarchy with who ever has the biggest guns wins.

EdBowie -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 10:10:27 PM)
People have said similar things about pure communism, and pure democracy, and those are different from the Democrat party and the Communist Party actually making policy in a real world government. I was simply asking about the LP's stated goal of 'hands off' when property disputes do arise. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie OK, I'm a bit confused... I get the difference between small 'l' libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. But I seriously did think that one of the LP core values, was that government had no business getting involved in property disputes, as in the example of the person who moves upstream and dams it for his own use, while letting his neighbors go dry. Per Badnarik, et al. the nanny state should never force people to share and play nice, right? So how are intellectual property rights something that any big 'L' partisan is bound to respect? The only way libertarianism can even be imagined working is if everyone has an absolute and total respect for each other's property and rights. Otherwise it is simple anarchy with who ever has the biggest guns wins.

cloudboy -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/2/2013 10:16:24 PM)
He sounds like a pseudo-intellectual. It looks like he collects information to plug and play into his belief system. It's hard to spot smart people in the GOP. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma sounds pretty bright to me, but most of the GOP are jingoists and ideologists. The are a cause without solutions.

Phydeaux -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 12:01:50 AM)
Reminds me of the Biden plagiarizing case.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 3:47:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission? If the claims are accurate, Paul should face the consequences of the plagiarism. That being said, it might be nice to see how it's written in the book. I'm not saying he's innocent, but there might be more than buzzfeed is showing. I don't have the book but the speeches are on the web and his speechwriters very clearly copied material directly from wiki and an AP story. It doesn't matter if he used the material word-for-word, unless there was no acknowledgement. Take the following two examples: quote: I believe that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed (Declaration of Independence). quote: I believe that "to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" (Declaration of Independence). I used the exact same words, but the use of the quotation marks indicates that portion wasn't mine, but that it came from the DoI. The first one simply shows where I got the idea, but not that I took the text itself. So, if you don't have the book (and I don't either), this could be spin more than an accurate accusation. If truly there is plagiarism, then the plagiarist should face whatever consequence is appropriate.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 3:52:49 AM)
It's not even 2014 and the PPLs are seem to be pretty up in arms about Paul. I can smell the fear ...

DomKen -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 4:45:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission? If the claims are accurate, Paul should face the consequences of the plagiarism. That being said, it might be nice to see how it's written in the book. I'm not saying he's innocent, but there might be more than buzzfeed is showing. I don't have the book but the speeches are on the web and his speechwriters very clearly copied material directly from wiki and an AP story. It doesn't matter if he used the material word-for-word, unless there was no acknowledgement. The speeches include no such acknowledgement. The book is vague. It has endnotes that imply the material is based on the works quoted. There is also a statement that the book is not original research.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 6:11:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission? If the claims are accurate, Paul should face the consequences of the plagiarism. That being said, it might be nice to see how it's written in the book. I'm not saying he's innocent, but there might be more than buzzfeed is showing. I don't have the book but the speeches are on the web and his speechwriters very clearly copied material directly from wiki and an AP story. It doesn't matter if he used the material word-for-word, unless there was no acknowledgement. The speeches include no such acknowledgement. The book is vague. It has endnotes that imply the material is based on the works quoted. There is also a statement that the book is not original research. Without the book, you know this... how?

Moonhead -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 8:03:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie OK, I'm a bit confused... I get the difference between small 'l' libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. But I seriously did think that one of the LP core values, was that government had no business getting involved in property disputes, as in the example of the person who moves upstream and dams it for his own use, while letting his neighbors go dry. Per Badnarik, et al. the nanny state should never force people to share and play nice, right? So how are intellectual property rights something that any big 'L' partisan is bound to respect? The only way libertarianism can even be imagined working is if everyone has an absolute and total respect for each other's property and rights. Otherwise it is simple anarchy with who ever has the biggest guns wins. That's chaos, not anarchy. Anarchy as a political philosophy is based on voluntary co-operation, and is rather less "simple" in practice than anything LIbertarians or Randians are capable of coping with. [:D]

DomKen -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 8:19:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/entire-section-of-rand-pauls-book-copied-verbatim-from-case Rand Paul has built his political appeal around a claim of honesty and being firm in his convictions. How can a libertarian justify the use of others work without their explicit permission? If the claims are accurate, Paul should face the consequences of the plagiarism. That being said, it might be nice to see how it's written in the book. I'm not saying he's innocent, but there might be more than buzzfeed is showing. I don't have the book but the speeches are on the web and his speechwriters very clearly copied material directly from wiki and an AP story. It doesn't matter if he used the material word-for-word, unless there was no acknowledgement. The speeches include no such acknowledgement. The book is vague. It has endnotes that imply the material is based on the works quoted. There is also a statement that the book is not original research. Without the book, you know this... how? The article I quoted includes scans of the pages in question.

cloudboy -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 8:48:19 AM)
A Congressman pulling a high school trick is both funny and disturbing.

TheHeretic -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 9:37:01 AM)
FR And the great Obamabot spin machine goes on. Words which came out of the President's mouth are causing a bit of a stir, so words from a Republican must be the counter. It's a little better than the pot-smoking state level Repub getting a ticket, to push former Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr.'s sentencing off the front page, but the principle is exactly the same.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 9:51:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The article I quoted includes scans of the pages in question. My apologies. I didn't read the entire article, so I missed the scans. I stopped reading when the article started alleging plagiarizing in his speeches. So, now the question has to be, who is to blame here? If Paul didn't write the book or speeches, then he shouldn't bear the full brunt of the consequences. That should not be interpreted as his not having to face any consequences, just that if he's not the one that plagiarized, then he shouldn't bear the full brunt. If he put his name to the book, then he certainly does have some responsibility to verify that things are on the up and up.

DomKen -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 10:20:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The article I quoted includes scans of the pages in question. My apologies. I didn't read the entire article, so I missed the scans. I stopped reading when the article started alleging plagiarizing in his speeches. So, now the question has to be, who is to blame here? If Paul didn't write the book or speeches, then he shouldn't bear the full brunt of the consequences. That should not be interpreted as his not having to face any consequences, just that if he's not the one that plagiarized, then he shouldn't bear the full brunt. If he put his name to the book, then he certainly does have some responsibility to verify that things are on the up and up. He should at the least get speechwriters who can write original material. And he should stop this sort of violent craziness: http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/week-transcript-dan-pfeiffer-sen-rand-paul-nate/story?id=20758560&page=5 Saying he'd challenge the people pointing out this stuff to a duel? Really? What is wrong with this guy?

Yachtie -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 10:55:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen He should at the least get speechwriters who can write original material. And he should stop this sort of violent craziness: http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/week-transcript-dan-pfeiffer-sen-rand-paul-nate/story?id=20758560&page=5 Saying he'd challenge the people pointing out this stuff to a duel? Really? What is wrong with this guy? Nothing. The problem is yours.

Phydeaux -> RE: Rand Paul's speechwriters and ghost writers plagarize. (11/3/2013 11:41:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy A Congressman pulling a high school trick is both funny and disturbing. And that's worse than a Vice President?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125