Biden/NYT article[
What was Clinton accused of plagiarizing?
Obama/Snopes article
Melania's and Hillary's plagiarism scandals is a funny take on it:
That’s sloganeering, not speechmaking or writing a thesis. And the ideas aren’t exactly original.
[sarcasm]At least Trump came up with something original.[/sarcasm]
He also keeps rigidly saluting on his public appearances for that special “tough military guy” look but as far as I can find he’s not served a day in his life, not even in the Natty Guard reserve or similar weekend warrior outfit. I don’t give a shit about stolen valor and I don’t think being in the military is a badge of honor rather than one of being impulsive, stupid and/or out of options ; but the ridicule gotta be ridiculed. Say what you will about across the board cynical mockery, at least it’s an ethos.
I think what Clinton did to Bernie was more on the speechmaking plagiarism side of things than sloganeering. It’s particularly embarrassing for her because of her past criticism of Obama for borrowed phrases.
[QUOTE=Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama, 2008]
I think if your candidacy is going to be about words, then they should be your own words. That’s, I think, a very simple proposition. Lifting whole passages from someone else’s speeches is not change you can believe in, it’s change you can Xerox.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton, 2016]
I think I said it many months before she said it, but thanks for copying a very good idea.
[/QUOTE]
It was enough of a controversy that SNL even poked fun at her over it.
Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” seems clearly in the “sloganeering” ballpark.
As always, YMMV.
Seems that four others in his department are likely to be indicted. We can then call them the Dave Clarke Five.
That news makes me glad all over.
Catch us if you can.
If someone puts footnotes, but not quotation marks, that speaks sloppiness.
If someone omits footnotes altogether, then that may speak to a deliberate attempt at cheating, but this sounds like sloppiness.
47 times?
Some people are consistently sloppy?
Yes. It is obvious that he just didn’t know the proper way to do things precisely because he did it 47 times.
The alternative that you seem to be pursuing is that he deliberately cheated 47 times and also took the time to direct the reader to evidence of his crime each of those 47 times. That’s not how cheaters cheat.
I’m done defending Sheriff Clarke. This is a man who most likely does seven despicable things before breakfast. In 2015 he called for the suspension of habeas corpus so we could round up the millions of ISIS supporters in the US and put them in Guantanamo. I don’t really see the need to blow his inadequate use of punctuation out of proportion when he is currently actively doing some actual awful things.
Except I didn’t call him a douche (NTIRC, anyway). I called him a narcissist to the Nth degree.
On top of running huge overtime related deficits and cutting essential services, and ruining the morale of every individual working for him to the detriment of county safety, another thing that should have gotten him booted out of office can be summarized in 2 words: Nancy Evans.
Clarke broke serious civil service rules by putting her through an academy as a sworn Deputy and then promoting her to Major over other candidates in violation of established protocol. In order to get her certified he put her through the recruit academy in another counties technical college because the Sheriffs academy was not running any classes. A large agency putting 1 specific individual through like that is unheard of here.
Then it was 1 scandal after another involving her. Follow this lead backwards and you’ll be stunned that he stayed in office for so long. Evans, BTW, is one of the people named in the current case of the inmate that was murdered by dehydration.
But Clarke goes on the radio waves and tells people to gun down criminals and be ruthless towards them and the public eats it up. That message would be fine if he hadn’t also gutted the Sheriffs Office.
I would like to have been a fly on the wall in the meeting between Sheriff Clarke and President Trump. Two extreme narcissists like them in the same room together? Wellll doggies!
Yeah, clearly the Naval Postgraduate School is a bunch of snowflakes that got their panties in a wad. :rolleyes:
I am not saying it was deliberate but a cheater might easily cheat this way. If his paper was riddled with direct quotes it could easily be judged to not contain enough original work. So you remove the quote marks, change it up a little but leave the footnotes for plausible deniability.
Yes, some people are.
If this was some guy, unless I was his teacher or otherwise his superior in academia, I wouldn’t care.
The fact that this is a person who is being elevated to have a very large impact on the direction and enforcement of leo activity in the county does make me care, at least a little bit, about how sloppy he is.
Does it not bother you at all?
Hurr’s right, his lack of academic politesse is of no consequence next to his wretched lack of human decency. Good catch!
No, but it’s WAY down my list of concerns. For a comparison (perhaps too high-profile, but I think you’ll get the idea), I suspect that the fact that HRC set up her own private email server bothered a lot of liberals, at least a little bit. They probably thought it was dumb of her, and mildly disconcerting that she’d do such a dumb thing, but it wasn’t a big concern to them, and they generally felt that all the hubbub over it was a bullshit distraction from real serious issues. If you felt / can imagine that feeling, that’s probably roughly analogous to how I feel about Sheriff Clarke’s “plagiarism scandal.”
Please note, I’m not trying to rehash the HRC email story here, or derail the thread, just making an illustration that I think you will be able to relate to that more-or-less explains how I feel about the matter.
Clarke strikes me as a compassion-free killer, even a monster, based on his lack of interest and apparent negligence in how his jails are run, leading to the deaths of a handful of detainees in his care (including one who died of thirst after the water was turned off to his cell, and a pregnant woman who went into labor and lost her baby, among others). Compared to that, this plagiarism thing is virtually nothing.
Not to rehash or anything, but Hillary wasn’t an IT professional, and was not getting a job in IT, therefore, her server may have been bad judgement (from optics, if nothing else), but it was not something that was actually in her bailiwick of things that she needs to understand to be an effective leader. All she needs to know is not to do that again.
Sheriff clarke’s plagiarized thesis was on law enforcement. Does that have anything to do with the job he is in these days?
It’s not a matter of the ethics of plagiarizing, it’s a matter that, with his thesis being invalid for the purposes he submitted it for, he has not demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of law enforcement. Probably good enough for a cop, or even a county sheriff, but for a national post with this much influence?