That's noo surprise. The media is also saying Obama's pick shows a lack of confidence  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080823/ap_on_el_pr/veepstakes_analysis;_ylt=AuBDdrUiyEvgJSun68xzZfBh24cA After   calling him arrogant for months.

It is NOT an “allegation” like the MMFA headline states, it is fact. Biden admits that he gave speeches and did not credit the original source. It is even stated in this very story. MMFA can say what ever they want, but Biden committed the offense, and it is fair game in this campaign.

This should be very easy to understand.  If you write 3 different books, and publish them, you need to cite the source in all three of them - even if the source is exactly the same - or its plagiarism.  You don't get to cite a source in 2 books, then release a third not citing the source.

Exactly… It is like the liberals are claiming that yes he murdered 3 people, but he also saved two as well. Unbelievable how MMFA and the left refuse to acknowledge any wrongdoing on the left. You have to do the right thing not once or twice, but every time.

Exactly… It is like the liberals are claiming that yes he murdered 3 people, but he also saved two as well.

What does murder have to do with this?

What does murder have to do with this?

LOL

Nothing, but when you have no point, change the subject.

Per usualy Pear, you address no issues or points made, and add nothing to the discussion.  Oh well, it is lights out time in the nurising home, so you should be asleep soon. 

POV, you are not credible at all.  "You speak ill about that which is fair beyond the reach of your thought...and only little wit can excuse you."*

Quoting J.R.R. Tolkien

at least you cited the author

"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind."

-Bob Marley

"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind."

Damn, I'm a plagiarist.

Good illustration ;-)

You're a dick and a jackass to boot.

Me.

Per usualy Pear, you address no issues or points made, and add nothing to the discussion.  Oh well, it is lights out time in the nurising home, so you should be asleep soon. 

LOL

Sorry POV, did you address any issues or have a point?

Oh and by the way, the next time you want to make a snarky suggestion,  "light's out at the nursing home", at least learn how to spell it correctly. 

I'd help you with the "Per usualy Pear" spelling, but I have no idea what you're trying to say. 

 

Odd that he'd call himself "point of view" when there is no point...maybe he meant to spell "pint of brew."

What does murder have to do with this? - Loonz

It's clear to me.  POV is murdering the art of analogy.

a good one-- he's clearly from the Sean Hannity school of idiocy.

Well, you're one of those moral relativist liberals so you don't get the obvious forgeting-a-cite-equals-murder link:)

Exactly… It is like the liberals are claiming that yes he murdered 3 people, but he also saved two as well.

I love how sourcing is analogous with murder. God these people are stupid. 

Don't you know? Every time you forget to cite a source when you paraphrase in a speech, God kills a kitten.

Please, think of the kittens.

I know this won't get anywhere near penetrating the rock you call a skull but your analogy is not even close to accurate.  If Biden had used those words without ever crediting the source, it would be plagiarism.  If he only gave credit after being discovered in the paraphrasing, that would be plagiarism.  But neither of those things were the case.  He credited the source most of the time and failed to on at least one occasion.  The pattern of giving credit shows no intent to plagiarize, only a failure to cite.

So, back to your ridiculous analogy.  It isn't like writing three different books and only citing your sources in two of them.  It's like having three different editions of the same book published but in one of those editions the bibliography is left out.

Stupid and thoughtless mistake, yes.  Malicious intent to deceive, hardly.

And any student who did the exact same thing would be failed for Plagiarism, plain and simple. I am not saying Biden is an evil or a bad guy, but he is guilty of this, and it is fair game in a campaign.

 

Moonbats example would not hold up in a court of law.  It is what it is, and they can spin it as much as they want, but won't change history.

Moonbats example would not hold up in a court of law.

I think it would hold up.

but won't change history.

What will change history is the election of another bunch of psychopathic, lying, warmongering, hypocritical republicans. 

And any student who did the exact same thing would be failed for Plagiarism, plain and simple.

And how exactly would that go?  He writes the same paper three times to his professor and what happens next?

It is very simple. He writes the same paper 3 times to the same professor, or to different professors. Biden gave his speech to different audiences, so that analogy is very fitting. The student passes the work of as his own in the third paper, as Biden did in his speeches., and he is failed for the act. Very simple, and it happens more than you think.

Yes, intent is important. But Biden failed to credit his sources, and that what is at issue here.

It is very simple. He writes the same paper 3 times to the same professor, or to different professors. Biden gave his speech to different audiences, so that analogy is very fitting.

So the professor would cite him with plagerism even though he has in his possession the two other papers with the accreditation?  A more reality-based conclusion would be the professor saying: "You forgot the accreditation in this version.  Write it in".

Exactly. Don't try to argue with these nutcases.

Besides, it's doubtful if any of them went to college during a time period when clear-cut 'plagiarism' rules were extant. Or if they went at all.

So they have NO IDEA WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. 

A student who quoted something 3 times but only credited two of those citations would not be failed for plagiarism, they'd be downgraded for incomplete references.   The two cited instances make it clear that the student knows that he is paraphrasing someone else and is not making an attempt to hide that.

Oh, and idiot #101, courts of law have all kinds of rules about showing intent, some crimes can be thrown out completely if lack of intent can be proved and others have the charges adjusted if that is the case.

But hey, if we want to go back 20 years to dig up trivial and ultimately meaningless digs at the candidates, let's go.  McCain isn't exactly wihtout skeletons in his closets.

Sorry, but you are incorrect. Students are failed for that very act, and even much less serious types and examples of plagiarism. Passing off another persons work or ideas as your own is not an oversight, it is intellectual theft.

Agree with your last sentence, dsiagree that that is what the hypothetical student or Biden was doing.  What plagiarist would provide the evidence of what he was doing in his previous work?  Does that even make sense?

Sorry, but you are incorrect. Students are failed for that very act, and even much less serious types and examples of plagiarism.

Sources? 

oh, but he is a bad guy.

"With the selection of Senator Joe Biden as Senator Obama's vice president, the Democrat's ticket has now become an even greater gamble for the Jewish community.  Throughout his career, Senator Biden has consistently been wrong on Iran and his voting record on Israel has been inconsistent.  Like Obama, Biden fundamentally misunderstands the threat posed by an Iran determined to obtain nuclear weapons.  Biden has continuously demonstrated poor judgment on Iran.  He has voted against significant legislation that would pressure Iran to stop pursuing nuclear weapons.  Biden has failed to recognize the serious threat that Iran poses to Israel and the US and its allies in the Middle East," said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks.  

In 1998, Sen. Biden was one of only four senators to vote against the Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act, a bill that punished foreign companies or other entities that sent Iran sensitive missile technology or expertise.  Biden was one of the few senators to oppose the bipartisan 2007 Kyl-Lieberman Ammendment labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.  In a December 2007 debate, Biden said "Iran is not a nuclear threat to the United States of America."  On MSNBC's "Hardball," Biden said he "never believed" Iran had a weapon system under production.  

"The Jewish community was already gravely concerned with Senator Obama's naïve understanding of the Iranian threat.  An Obama-Biden ticket has proven that it is ill-equipped to deal with this threat. By selecting Senator Biden to join his ticket, voting for Senator Obama has now become an even greater risk," said Brooks

Oh look, 101 changed his log in.

b.s. this has nothing to do with 101, i am hstybuf.

Well, that's Brooks opinion and I'm sure the far right would agree with it.

"We seek to foster and enhance ties between the American Jewish community and Republican decision makers.  We work to sensitize Republican leadership in government and the party to the concerns and issues of the Jewish community, while articulating and advocating Republican ideas and policies within the Jewish community.  We are committed to building a strong, effective and respected Jewish Republican voice in Washington and across the country."

Not that there's anything wrong with that at all, but it makes it pretty clear that the Executive Director of the RJC isn't going to have an unbiased or impartial opinion of a Democratic politician and his opinionis definitely not going to be fact.

And any student who did the exact same thing would be failed for Plagiarism, plain and simple.

Hardly. If a student had cited a quote twice, but neglected a third time, the only thing that would happen would be that it would get circled.

What school do you go to? 

Only if McCain is an idiot.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/27/mccain-plagiarized-foreig_n_93769.html

.  If you write 3 different books, and publish them, you need to cite the source in all three of them - even if the source is exactly the same - or its plagiarism.  You don't get to cite a source in 2 books, then release a third not citing the source.

Another clueless rightie.

First of all, these aren't books, just verbal remarks. Second, if someone has attributed an over-and-over again quote, and then uses it again, the attribution has already been made. No reasonable person would call it "plagiarism" either, if credit has already been given.

And, it was TWENTY years ago, for chrissakes. 

Don't you just love how the right imposes such a scholarly concern on Dems, but their own people are always immune from criticism?

And, 20 years ago, the previous attributions were NEVER mentioned by the MSM. 

I hope McCain's campaign does bring up Biden's speech issue from1988. Cause then Obama's campaign can open up ye olde Keating Five.

Didn't take the wingnuts long to get around to this did it. How long before we get long drawn out unattributed rants from Newsmax posted by our resident right wing plagiarists? No need to name names--we all know who they are.

I heard it last night. kinda thought they had their malevolent fingers on the trigger. personally, it is a good choice, out of the many competent choices.

So, please tell me which is more egregious.  Not attributing something in a speech or taking part with others in the Keating 5 scandal.  If McCain is willing to be stuck on the topic of malfeasance, tell me does McCain think he can win on this issue.

Well if egregious is what you want the Keating 5 scandal (bad though it was) barely registers in comparison to the crimes of Dubya and the lying scumbag wankers he has surrounded himself with.  This page of links should get you started. I really want to see the VP nominee of "don't know how many homes and not rich till your worth 5 million" McCain bring this up in a face to face with Biden. That would be fun.

The two main sources that come up are:

motherearth.org, commondreams.org

Those are credible sources? lol

Evidently you don't know that impugning the source is a variant of the genetic fallacy. But posting without knowing what you are talking about is what we have come to expect from you. The source of an argument is logically irrelevant with regard to its merits. Don't laugh too hard. Your lack of logical coherence isn't really that funny. Scencetroll frags himself again.

When one of the top sources states: Common Dreams is a national non-profit citizens' organization working to bring progressive Americans together to promote progressive visions for America's future.

 

Its no longer a credible source.

A progressive organization makes a truthful statement of its mission and it is no longer credible? Hopefully the bartender will flag you soon.

Their mission statements makes their writings, opinions, and spin purely biased, and that makes them not credible as a factual source.

Nonsense. Again you argue using the genetic fallacy. If you want to be taken seriously take the material presented and provide a factual refutation of it based on facts, logic, and credible evidence. You haven't done that so go away.

"Their mission statements makes their writings, opinions, and spin purely biased, and that makes them not credible as a factual source."

Will you apply this same partisan statement to the right wing sources like the right wing conservative Newsmax (or Newsmuck), or the right wing WorldNet Daily, or the right wing Accuracy In Media, or the right wing conservative Little Green Footballs/Little Green Fascists, or RedState.org, or does your criticism only apply to left wing/liberal progressive sites? 

Really...wish you could really take in what that mission statement is all about. It's telling that you think this is a negative. Progressive suggests progress: forward thinking and acting.

Nice try.  But did you know that using root words from latin and greek that Republican and Democrat mean the same thing?  Hmm.  

Can't have a better answer than what Blueneck just posted:

Nonsense. Again you argue using the genetic fallacy. If you want to be taken seriously take the material presented and provide a factual refutation of it based on facts, logic, and credible evidence. You haven't done that so go away.

- Blueneck / Saturday August 23, 2008 6:40:28 PM EDT

If the biased source is stating fact, an unbiased source can also be located, and it would be courteous for the asserter to find it.

Would you want to slog through a dozen freerepublic postings and carefully refute them so as to avoid the genetic fallacy, or would you have better things to do?

Hmm…a little hard to get what your point is. Actually that is not the way it works. If a source assumed to be biased is presenting a falsehood as a fact it is the obligation of anyone wishing to dispute the assertion to present contrary evidence or demonstrate logical inconsistencies. If the assertion is false this should be relatively easy. No need to slog through a dozen posts on any site. We all have better things to do than deal with the inane.

I really want to see the VP nominee of "don't know how many homes and not rich till your worth 5 million" McCain bring this up in a face to face with Biden. That would be fun

Yes it would.  I'd just continue to ask Joe, after every line he says, if he came up with that himself or if he'd like me to pause so he can give credit to anyone.

Treat yourself to watching Biden rip Blitzer a new one. No plagiarism here.

A textbook during my sophomore year in high school gave a page and a half giving the plagiarism story. This is the first I've ever heard that he gave credit where it was due.

 

... and I always thought there was a left-wing bias in our government educational system...

define ' left wing bias ' for the rest of us.

Think "right wing bias" only instead of promoting the, uh, right wing agenda, it's the left wing agenda that's, uh, being promoted

just what I thought, you are unable to tranfer your thoughts to words, so you resort to babble, thinking i am impressed by your ability to creative babble.

... and I always thought there was a left-wing bias in our government educational system...

- DAWUSS / Saturday August 23, 2008 3:53:14 PM EDT

Perhaps the result of an underlying right-wing bias you're too obtuse to acknowledge?

Most education in the US is neither left leaning or right leaning. Although some teachers might slant somethings when thy can, most teach to the text books.

The text books are mostly non-partisan due to the fact that the same books are used in many different states and areas.

What is used as an example of left wing bias is usually something thrown out by right wing anti-science, pro religious agitators. Science has no bias.

History is another subject that's targeted by right wing zealots who can't accept that, as great as our country is, it does have it's faults. Until recently those faults were overlooked in history class.

What every parent, school kid and citizen should do it to think for themselves. Research everything they're taught and accept nothing as gospel.

Most education in the US is neither left leaning or right leaning. Although some teachers might slant somethings when thy can, most teach to the text books.

 

I only can name ONE* (8th grade US history) who didn't give a one-sided slant in their teachings (not including math teachers), out of those who actually taught (in other words, maybe they should let coaches and teachers be in separate groups)

 

*I will give an honorable mention to another (high school world history) who tried - it wasn't his fault that he couldn't (primarily a problem of the school schedule structure)

 

The text books are mostly non-partisan due to the fact that the same books are used in many different states and areas.

I was under the impression that many of them were state-specific. I don't think an "Indiana edition" textbook would be seen in Long Beach Poly High School.

What is used as an example of left wing bias is usually something thrown out by right wing anti-science, pro religious agitators. Science has no bias.

On the subject of evolution, I think that's one issue that's been distorted to the point where it is controversial. Evolution today isn't what it was in, say, Darwin's time. And as it has become a controversial issue (when reached to certain levels), the views of both sides should be expressed in an educational manner.

Science may have no bias, but it sometimes has a biased agenda.

History is another subject that's targeted by right wing zealots who can't accept that, as great as our country is, it does have it's faults. Until recently those faults were overlooked in history class.

But at the same time, can't we highlight the highs as well as the lows? I think there's too much emphasis on the lows of this country. And then someone like Rush Limbaugh can use that to further his argument that the left is trying to teach American children to hate this country.

I remember at the end of high school US history, I left disappointed over all the things we didn't cover...

 

What every parent, school kid and citizen should do it to think for themselves. Research everything they're taught and accept nothing as gospel.

But the problem is, schools don't educate people to think for themselves. They indoctrinate people to become useful idiots.

 

“Let's drop all of that talk about our failing "public" schools. The truth is that these schools are doing exactly what they were designed to do. They are "educating" Americans to the point that they can actually hold down a job and pay taxes, but not to the point that they become a threat to the ruling class.” – Neal Boortz

 

In school, I was someone who didn't take everything the teachers said as gospel. I know in high school freshman biology class I got into some very fun debates over the fraud called global warming (I was the only one debating that - everybody else just sat there and didn't question what was being said), and several times in sociology (I have a very hard time being convinced that didn't have a left-wing bias to it), I was the only one who disagreed on several issues with the teacher and rest of the class.

 

 

And as one last aside, I could easily tell which teachers were conservative. I could tell a couple that were moderate, but it wasn't as easy as the conservative ones.

Just a guess, were the conservative teachers the ones who tried to say that Evolution was bunk and that you should trust your theories on the begining of life to two nudists and a talking snake?

Nope. The conservative ones were outside the biological sciences dept.

I suppose then they were the history ones who told you that Reagan won the Cold War after one speach in Germany and that the US defeated the Axis in WW2 after the discovery of an Enigma machine on U-571? 

Well that obviously didn't say the French won WWII....oh geez, did that just change everything you thought you knew?

I studied EUROPEAN HISTORY. A lot of what we are taught here doesn't seem to reach your text books. Maybe you should leave this one alone and continue your Sysiphian attempts to browbeat everyone into your faulty logic that blastosysts are babies? 

Hi UK,

Please don't judge us or our schools by what this clown posts. Most of us learned European history in addition to US History and World History.

You can always tell the poor students. They're the ones who harp continuously about France. There would be no US without France.

This idiot lacks the ability to see any problem through the eyes of someone other than a 28 year old, spoiled, racist, idiot sitting in his basement with his PS3.

worrierking:

 

Thank you for your post. It's always heartening to hear for someone in the US who knows about the effects the French Navy had to the defeat of Cornwallis's army at Yorktown. It's obvious however, that Moron101 is a friend of this guy:

 

Olympics Protest

Only one substitute teacher covered the Cold War (providing us the version described above). He also called NATO the "good guys" and the Soviet Union "the bad guys".

 

I don't think we was a "permanent sub", just one of those people who did it as a part time post-retirement activity.

Science itself evolves. It's all about review and being able to study and repeat experiments and get the same result.

It changes constantly. Schools and science teach the current prevailing theories which are always challenged. The challenges are reviewed and the theories change if proven wrong.

The other side in the evolution debate has nothing to do with science and everything to do with religious beliefs. By all means, teach ID in religion classes. But it has no place in a science curriculum. It has been reviewed. It's theories cannot be repeated. It is not science.

You knew everything before eighth grade?  You're a genius.

If you're just here to pick fights go away.

Actually, most High School textbooks are accepted based on that bastion of Liberality the Texas School Board.

I would love to see your textbook; most don't even give a page and a half to WW2 much less a plagiarism story.

High school speech class. Devoted a little over a page to Joe Biden, providing the featured quotes from both of them, driving home the whole plagiarism point and the effects of it. It had a photo of Biden behind a mic, and there was I think a blond woman standing to his left. I actually thought he was a Republican the whole time. (I was under the impression that IOKYAD at that time)

Must have been a wonderful high school, a right-wing teacher with a nutcase agenda, going after Biden for a non-story.

No wonder you're f'd up. 

Our high school was more worried about winning national championships in basketball, a sport I don't care about (I'm only interested in football)

This proves that you have to be a former POW for the press to ignore charges of plagiarism.

(IRONY, you've just been plagiarized) :-)

As a former POW, John McCain, knows the heartbreak of plagiarism. Or maybe he just read that somewhere...

Darn, and I thought plagiarising was the sincerest form of flattery. How could I be so wrong ?

I always thought there was a left-wing bias in IRONY's posts...

That's just another rumor started by the right wing smear merchants who work for the former POW, John McCain.

I actually heard Kinnock's speech before I heard Biden use his words.  It was a brilliant speech.

Biden did stop the buck where it belonged;  at his own feet.  Whatever a candidate's staff does falls to the candidate.  The man has more honour and integrity than most of our politicians.

Yes, Kinnock had some great speeches. The fact is that he was an insufferable blowhard who's rambling, long winded diatribes streached the 15 minutes of  Prime Minister's question time to make it seem as if you were sitting through  an amature version of Wanger's Der Ring des Nibelungen (The Ring of the Nibelung, for those who don't speak German ;-) ). It was remarked that if you offended Kinnock he would have you strapped down and forced to listen to him practice speaking.

 

I'm surprised anyone  would have chosed to use any of his. This was reported on this side of the pond and, unlike a lot of others caught out he had the grapefruits to take the blame for it. He may not have been correct on this point but l respect him more than others who did not do what he did when found out.   

Болшое спасибо

On this side of the Pond, we say "Sprechen zie Deutsch?" Devastating pick-up line. ;-)

Parlez-vous allemand?

No entiendo

Damn immigrants .... Why don't ya go back to France or Ireland or Italy or whatever decent country your forefathers got kicked out of .........

now that is funny ( and probably very true )

dad's from the Philippines actually... which just happens to have one of the largest English speaking populations in the world, go figure :-)

Did you just equate France with "decent"? lol

Those goes your credibility in history.  Go pick fights on Drudge's website.

It's called Nintendo in this country pal!!!!

Now THAT's teh funny ;)

The US purchased the Philippines in Eighteen Ninety something or other at the end of the US-Spanish war,even as it annexed Panama and took over Puerto Rico. That is why it has such a large English speaking population.  

Hey UK, check your history on the canal - not part of the Spanish-American war deal. The Canal Zone was part of the treaty between Panama and the U.S. immediately following the Panamanian "revolution" whereby it broke away from Colombia. 

No offense UK, (as I'm sure you intended none) but the history surrounding why the Philippines has a large English speaking population is far bloodier and horrific than "purchasing and annexing." The defeat of the Spanish in the Spanish-American war resulted in the confrontation between the victorious Americans and the independent-minded natives that wanted freedom after Spanish rule had been overthrown. The result was a bloody and savage conflict between U.S. armed forces and native Filipino "freedom fighters" struggling for an independent nation. U.S. forces were guilty of atrocities, massacres, torture, and establishment of concentration camps during this period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine-American_War

In interesting bit of trivia is that the .45 caliber pistol was developed in part because U.S. servicemen found that the old .38's lacked the stopping power to prevent charging Filipino fighters from continuing to advance on their positions after being hit by the smaller round.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_ACP

Eventually, the U.S. "pacified" the islands and took possession of them, imposing their language, customs and institutions on the Philippines. English became a language of instruction in the Philippine school system. That's why the majority of the population speaks English.

Despite this history of bloody conflict, the majority of Filipinos are exceptionally friendly to Americans and don't hold a grudge over the mistakes of the unfortunate past.

So the LA Times says it was "much of [Biden's] stump speech," the New York Times says it was "part of a speech," and the Associated Press refers to "lines" from a speech.

Well, I'm glad that's cleared up.

From my own memory of the event, the AP's description is the most accurate; it was a brief passage in his standard speech. And he had credited Kinnock before. This was a classic media-magnified "gotcha!" - a minor matter turned into A BIG DEAL far beyond its actual importance solely by being hammered repeatedly. So I'm not surprised that this came up so quickly - I imagine the stories had been prepared ever since Biden's name was raised for VP.

It also occurs to me that had the Dukakis campaign dealt as aggressively with Bush as it apparently did with Biden, the outcome of the election might have been different.

Well said, thanks. The fact that they use this kind of nonsense is proof that they aren't seriously challenging Obama or Biden on their policy positions.

Obama has policy positions?  Are you sure they aren't above his pay grade?

You really are a muppet!!!

 

Pity you don't have a salient point to make.

Oh, sir, he does have a point, at least if you count the one on top of his head...

I've been posting and reading posts here for a few years. I've come across some real asses from the right, left and center.

I don't remember any other poster with as little to add to any discussion as Science101. That's not his original name.

He's been coming around under a different name each time he gets booted for violating the terms of service.

We've got many people from all areas of the political spectrum who post. Most have a lot to add, even if all they do is argue (are you reading this Tommy ( only kidding) ). Everyone will defend their views and be civil. We all lose it at times. I'm as guilty, if not more so, as anyone. But it's only after butting heads with someone going back and forth for several posts. This guy goes right to insults and humiliation.

From now on I won't respond to anything he says. He's trying to hijack MMFA with his childish nonsense.

I'd advise anyone who's interested in discussion to do the same.

I don't remember any other poster with as little to add to any discussion as Science101. That's not his original name.

I don't know--Shoes gives ColombianScience a pretty good run at the "I'm a Pluperfect Moron" award...

This is simply typical conservative discussion.  Pick a fight, scream mindlessly, like a four year old, over and over, until everyone gives in just shut you up.

From now on I won't respond to anything he says. He's trying to hijack MMFA with his childish nonsense.

King, I agree.

Most of the time Science is simply an a** but today it appears he's constipated.

I recommend warm prune juice. 

The former POW, John McCain, believes that words deserve the fullest protection of the law at their moment of conception. He particularly finds late-term plagiarism an abomination.

I find, the Former POW©, John McCain's creepy smile that punctuates each point he makes an abomination.

John McCain's creepy smile

Creeps me out, too...it makes him look like some weird guy who was like held captive for a while and abused, you know...and then came back all creepy and demented and like has all kinds of dark secrets, you know... like somebody who leaves his crippled wife for a young babe who he marries for her money and uses it to get elected to Congress which like he planned all along while he was being held captive, you know...creepy.  ;>)

I never see Cheney crediting Satan when ever he crawls up from his undisclosed (he double hockey stocks) location to speak???

It's not hard to have soaring rhetoric if you borrow it from someone else. Biden is an empty suit - a perfect match for the man with no resume. It's hard to imagine a weaker team. Not since McGovern has the democratic ticket been so pathetic.

The Democrats don't want to believe this, but abortion is a major issue in this election, and both Obama and Biden are on the losing side of that issue. Obama has effectively 'thrown the Catholic vote under the bus' with the choice of Biden (apparently his own Bishop would refuse him communion <http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20080823.CLSA001&show_article=1&catnum=3>). Other than a record of plagiarism and a presidential sized ego, what does Biden bring to this ticket?

You opened the plagarism door.

Care to discuss Gramps lifting a POW story from Alexander Solzhenitsyn?

 

Give him a moment, King. I think his knee may have jerked up and knocked the pile of Rush Limbaugh 3" x 5" flash cards off of the orange crate his kumpooter sits on.

EDROSS, If all your words are the truth, I would guess that the McCain offices, Fox news, McCains media outlet, and all of the radio conjobs, will just close up shop. If it is over, it is over.

Thank You for your Sparkling Analysis of the Election. Call McCain, tell him of his victory and swear him in tomorrow. And the funny thing is he'll believe it. Are you using the same Rovian math as Kriminal Karl  used in 2006. Or are you KKarl and you are just having fun here?

Now, Edross, when McCain picks his VEEP and the Dems use exact quotes from the Cons to attack his new man, don't come here and cry about it. My sources tell me that McCain heard Bidens' speech and told his staff that Biden would be a perfect pick for his VEEP.

I think we shall wait until November. Then, you may be correct but for now, your Sparkling Analysis is just talk.

Reporters hear a standard stump speech so many times they can cite it from memory. Say "lockbox" to anyone who covered Al Gore in 2000, and you will get a reaction.

So how did the reporters know that the words Biden spoke belonged to Kinnock? Either they were knowledgedable about losing Brit politicians, or they noticed that the standard attribution they had memorized was missing.

I'm betting the latter.

This is such nonsense. THe RNC wants to label Joe with something, anything negative and gee why not the word "Plagarism". Tomorrow it will be another word.  One word they won't use is OLD. It is really good news in a way, that the first thing the Repugs donate to the public discussion is something that happened 30 years ago.  I guess that means John McCain's return from Vietnam and his dive into self indulgence and adultery is fair game. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJMkMRrGKco          i wonder who she is singing about

Prince-

I know this is awfully slow in response,but being a Rush-billy from a red state, I actually go to bed early on Saturday night so I can wake refreshed and go to church on Sunday.

I don't think McCain is any 'shoe-in' in this election.McCain is a weaker candidate than Bob Dole, who was as weak as Gerald Ford. My point is that, facing as weak a field as the GOP has been able to muster in recent memory, the Dems have made it a contest, and continue to make it a contest. It's like neither side really wants to win.

This is BS on both sides.  If McCain or Bush did the same thing the trolls would be saying "He gives dozens of speaches a week.  Anyone can make a mistake like that.  He attributed it to Kinnick every other time."  And we would probably be saying "Plagaism is plagarism..."  The press OTOH should do their job and tell the whole story.  It clearly wasn't plagarism.

Really, though, the left has much better things to throw at Bush then a single incident of a stump speeched with bad verbal editing. Big things like unneeded wars, huge deficits, massive corruption, poisoning the political dialogue with a deliberate policy of flogging fake and or trivial talking points endlessly and repitively to avoid discussing serious issues.

There are two differences between Biden and Republican plagiarizes.  First of all the GOP do it more often.  The second is that they never resign for it even when confronted with the charge.  A prime example is the Gulag cross story of the late Nobel winner being ripped by McCain in church of all places.  If anything, MacCain should have known that the only One to plagiarize from the pew is God himself, though Goppers plagiarize God very poorly