The Rand Paul story - Can we agree that it was Factual?

[Cigar]

Say whatever you want about Rachael Maddow or MSNBC, but she and her staff at least took the time to research a story before reporting it.

Every single speech she reported, was a verified word-for-word match with the Videos she showed Rand Paul speaking.

Can we all first agree ... that the text that anyone of us can Google, match exactly with the actual Words the were coming out of rand Paul's mouth?

Journalist who actually takes the time to research a story before reporting it should be expected.

Let's hope the people at Fox News learns and not just repeat talking points.


:wink:

[Peter1469]

Which story are you talking about. Many of us don't watch the MSM.

[Chris]

Yet another thread on the same story. What is this, thread 351?

But I understand, you didn't like where the other threads were going.

[Cigar]

Yet another thread on the same story. What is this, thread 351?

But I understand, you didn't like where the other threads were going.

The ONLY Main Stream Media Story about Rand Paul this week. :laugh:

You'd have to be living under a Rock not to know ... based on the FACT he's only Publicly commented about it 3 times in 3 days.


After Being Canned for Plagiarism At Washington Times-Rand Paul's Opinion Column moves to Breitbart
Following allegations of plagiarism that caused a shake-up in the senator's office, Rand Paul's (R-KY) opinion column has found a new home at Breitbart News.

"Paul is pleased to partner with Breitbart News and looks forward to the new, wider audience for his columns," Paul advisor Doug Stafford told Breitbart in Wednesday's announcement.

"We are pleased to add Senator Paul to our lineup of fearless, original thought leaders," Breitbart News CEO Larry Solov said in the announcement. "Most of all, we think the fighting spirit he has become known for is a perfect fit for Breitbart News Network and reflects that of our founder, Andrew Breitbart.”

The announcement made no mention of the plagiarism allegations that led Paul and the Washington Times to "mutually" end their relationship Tuesday.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/post-plagiarism-restructuring-rand-paul-s-opinion-column-moves-to-breitbart

Rand Paul is sinking fast — but hopes we won’t notice
Attacked for plagiarism, he takes his column to the Breitbart fringe and pummels Chris Christie as a distraction
Joan Walsh - Nov 7, 2013 - http://www.salon.com/2013/11/07/rand_paul_is_sinking_fast/

If you’re wondering why Sen. Rand Paul is doing Democrats’ dirty work for them, attacking Gov. Chris Christie’s self-promoting $25 million post-Sandy advertising campaign, it’s simple. He’s hoping he can get reporters to cover the intra-party feud as an early sign of GOP titans warming up for 2016, so they stop Googling his old speeches and columns and books for more evidence of plagiarism.

Paul flatters himself. He’s no longer Christie’s peer in the top tier of likely 2016 candidates. Not only has he faced at least four separate charges of plagiarism in eight short days, he’s shown himself incapable of mounting a serious presidential candidacy with his whiny, entitled, self-righteous response.

First he bizarrely suggested he would like to challenge his critics to “a duel.” Then he told the New York Times he’ll start footnoting and fact-checking “if it will make people leave me the hell alone.” What a baby. Eventually he’ll get what he wants, and he’ll be left alone when it comes to 2016 coverage. This man would never survive the rigors of a national campaign.

The best evidence of Paul’s stature-slide is his new home as a “writer.” After he was terminated by the Washington Times after multiple examples of plagiarism unearthed by Rachel Maddow, BuzzFeed and Politico, Paul was picked up by that bastion of journalism ethics and achievement, Breitbart.com, which of course peddled the phony “Shirley Sherrod is a racist” story as well as the hoax that former Sen. Chuck Hagel had been paid by a non-existent group called “Friends of Hamas.”


I understand the Rand Paul disciples maybe felling attacked just like Mr. Paul himself, but that don't mean it's not news. :wink:

[Alyosha]

http://reason.com/archives/2013/11/07/how-can-the-nsa-spy-on-merkel-the-pope-t


Why does the government, which has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, find ways to short-circuit it? The answer goes to the nature of government. Even in a free society, government always grows, always expands and always wants to control more human behavior. But government that operates in secrecy, where no one can see it and criticize it, will do whatever it can get away with -- like spy on the Pope, share unconstitutionally acquired evidence with law enforcement or sate the president's curiosity.


As if all of this were not bad enough, we learned just a few days ago that the NSA has hacked into the enormous computer servers of Google and Yahoo. These two companies, which have been coerced into and rewarded for their cooperation with the NSA, have now been betrayed by their spying partners in the government. They must have been gullible enough to believe that all NSA access to their hardware had been by consent or at least by court order and with their knowledge. It is almost inconceivable that any judge of the FISA court ordered hacking, as that is expressly prohibited by federal statute. Hacking is criminal no matter who orders it.


Even some of the president's congressional supporters now acknowledge that the NSA is out of control and destroys more liberty than it protects.


Why would the NSA do all of this? Because in secret it can cut constitutional corners with impunity. And it no doubt believes it is easier to tap into the telephones and computers of all 330 million of us who live in the United States in order to monitor the few dozen among us whom it really wants to watch than to develop probable cause against its true targets as the Framers intended and the Constitution expressly requires. And as well, who knows what teasing cute morsel its agents can deliver to the president before his next Oval Office visitor arrives?
Is this the government the Framers gave us? Is this the government to which we consented? Is this the government most conducive to personal liberty in a free society? The answers are obvious.

[Chris]

That's not the government the framers intended. It's the government partisan hacks and hackers want.

[Ravi]

but, but, Obama!

[Green Arrow]

Don't care.

[Alyosha]

but, but, Obama!

Something else I care more about than this:

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/1003230_503501033090478_1709911229_n.jpg

[Alyosha]

Something else more important and incidentally has something to do with Rand

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/555972_503500189757229_28178165_n.jpg

[Mister D]

Why is this progressive left so threatened by Rand Paul?

[Alyosha]

Why is this progressive left so threatened by Rand Paul?

Because he isn't "normal" and takes on issues that progressives argue they should take on themselves.

[Mister D]

Because he isn't "normal" and takes on issues that progressives argue they should take on themselves.

Hmmm possibly. May be his age too.

[Mister D]

That is, he is likely to connect with younger voters.

[Alyosha]

That is, he is likely to connect with younger voters.

Yes. In September a few different political mags did polling and the 18-30 overwhelmingly picked Rand Paul over anyone else in Washington. I posted the link somewhere. Anyway, they certainly want to take him down before 2016.

[Mister D]

Yes. In September a few different political mags did polling and the 18-30 overwhelmingly picked Rand Paul over anyone else in Washington. I posted the link somewhere. Anyway, they certainly want to take him down before 2016.

Obviously. The pettiness of these attacks betrays their desperate character.

[Alyosha]

Obviously. The pettiness of these attacks betrays their desperate character.

I want to talk about real things that effect the future and most people want to bog down in pettiness. Like at the other site it was always about Michelle Obama's ass or petty stuff about Obama. Like they were livid over the price of some jacket she wore and I'm like: Who Cares?

[Mister D]

I want to talk about real things that effect the future and most people want to bog down in pettiness. Like at the other site it was always about Michelle Obama's ass or petty stuff about Obama. Like they were livid over the price of some jacket she wore and I'm like: Who Cares?

I have to admit I don't frequently engage in threads about American politics anymore. They're usually ridiculous.

[Common]

Yet another thread on the same story. What is this, thread 351?

But I understand, you didn't like where the other threads were going.


Chris why dont you ever complain about never ending obamacare threads and obama sucks thread, could it be because you dont like Obama and you like Rand Paul.

[Alyosha]

Chris why dont you ever complain about never ending obamacare threads and obama sucks thread, could it be because you dont like Obama and you like Rand Paul.

I'm tired of the Obamacare threads. It's done.

Besides I want everyone to sign up. I swear to you right now in front of all these people that I DO want every single Democratic voter to have Obamacare. I pledge from now on to support Obamacare, to do everything I can to see that everyone signs up for insurance by March.

[Ravi]

Why is this progressive left so threatened by Rand Paul?
You mistake laughter for fear.