Nalita Media: Why McCain May Not Want a Debate

Although I am somewhat certain that someone has already posted this, I am going to post this again.  It's clear to me that McCain's modus operandi is to follow Obama's lead, and there is nothing wrong with that.  One of the marks of success is to duplicate excellence, NOT re-invent the wheel.  However, this? This? Come on!

Note: this is Wikipedia.  Unlike Senator McCain, I take NO CREDIT for this writing. 

__________________________________________________________

Saturday, August 23, 2008

2008 United States Presidential Election

2008 US Presidential Election stories
3 September 2008: Questions raised about McCain's choice of Palin, aides insist "thorough vetting" process
2 September 2008: News agencies suggest that campaign operative for Republican Party edited article on vice presidential nominee
1 September 2008: US presidential candidate Barack Obama's lead increases after Democratic National Convention
30 August 2008: Barack Obama accepts US presidential nomination from the Democratic Party
29 August 2008: Alaskan governor Sarah Palin chosen by McCain as Vice Presidential running mate
On August 11, United States Senator and 2008 presidential Republican candidate John McCain gave a speech regarding the crisis between Georgia and Russia. Following the speech, a regular Wikipedia editor noticed that his speech was very similar to an article on Wikipedia also regarding the crisis, in what could be considered plagiarism. Wikinews was able to talk to that editor about how he found out about the similarities and what he did in response. Wikinews also took a deeper look at the claim and investigated further.

McCain gave his speech in Erie, Pennsylvania and was speaking to citizens, giving a warning to Russia stating, "Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin must understand the severe, long-term negative consequences that their government's actions will have for Russia's relationship with the U.S. and Europe."

McCain continued his speech saying, "Georgia is an ancient country, at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and one of the world's first nations to adopt Christianity as an official religion. After a brief period of independence following the Russian revolution, the Red Army forced Georgia to join the Soviet Union in 1922. As the Soviet Union crumbled at the end of the Cold War, Georgia regained its independence in 1991, but its early years were marked by instability, corruption, and economic crises."

While reading the first few paragraphs, the Wikipedia editor Killing Vector, (who wishes to be called by his contributor name in fear of retribution for coming forward with the claim)*, noticed a striking similarity to McCain's speech and the Wikipedia article on the country of Georgia. Not only did he notice the similarities, but after reading through the article's edit history, 'Killing Vector' noticed that his speech might have been lifted from Wikipedia, with some of the material in McCain's speech dating prior to the start of the Georgian and Russian crisis.

*[Why?  Why would this person "fear retribution" in a country where there is "freedom of the press, and freedom of speech? In fact, the Framers thought it so important, it was first in the Constitution, (Article I), and must have been primary in their ideals.  Think about that.]

"I began reading the text of McCain's address on the Georgia crisis, and as I was browsing it the irregularity jumped out almost immediately. The paragraphs which discussed the history of Georgia simply didn't fit with the rest of the speech; the rhetorical style was jarringly different. I figured, "where's someone in a hurry going to get basic information on the Republic of Georgia?" I opened up Wikipedia, went to the article, picked a recent but not current revision more or less at random (July 24th), and hit gold on the first try; McCain's speech and the Wikipedia article had significant strings of words in common, emphasized the same events, made largely the same word choices," Vector said to Wikinews.

Although other media outlets reported the alleged plagiarism, the two passages below were dated at least one week prior to the Georgian and Russian crisis. The first two paragraphs of McCain's speech appear to resemble the Wikipedia article in the history dated July 24, 2008.

"Two paragraphs, about an eighth of the full speech, contain material directly copied from Wikipedia or superficially modified from its text. Those two paragraphs constitute the entire factual background of the speech, though - the rest is reaction and proposed policy," added Vector.

Example (identical wording is in boldface.):

Wikipedia - ....one of the first countries in the world to adopt Christianity as an official religion.

McCain - ....one of the world's first nations to adopt Christianity as an official religion.

Wikipedia - After the Russian Revolution of 1917, Georgia had a brief period of independence as a Democratic Republic (1918-1921), which was terminated by the Red Army invasion of Georgia. Georgia became part of the Soviet Union in 1922 and regained its independence in 1991. Early post-Soviet years was marked by a civil unrest and economic crisis.
McCain - After a brief period of independence following the Russian revolution, the Red Army forced Georgia to join the Soviet Union in 1922. As the Soviet Union crumbled at the end of the Cold War, Georgia regained its independence in 1991, but its early years were marked by instability, corruption, and economic crises.

McCain's campaign denies they plagiarized Wikipedia, but also didn't state whether they used it as a source for his speech.

"We did not copy Wikipedia in Sen. McCain's remarks. There are only so many ways to state basic historical facts and dates and that any similarities to Wikipedia were only coincidental," said a spokesman for the McCain campaign, Brian Rogers to The Politico. Wikinews contacted McCain's campaign, but has yet to receive a response.

Wikinews e-mailed Jay Walsh, the director of communications for the Wikimedia Foundation to see what they thought of the situation, and what if anything they planned to do about it.

"We aren't particularly concerned with this," said Walsh who also added that "I'm only aware of this situation through media coverage I've seen, nor do we or I have any in-depth detail about the situation."

"I would say it's a good practice to attribute text or content whenever possible. Obviously when it's a matter of copyright then there are legal considerations, but the Foundation is not able to examine individual cases," added Walsh. Wikinews attempted to contact Mike Godwin, the legal counsel for the Foundation, but has yet to receive a response.

Vector stands by his claim and also notes what he calls 'dishonesty' on the part of McCain's campaign.

"What concerns me more, as a voter, is the ethical issue. Plagiarism comes from dishonesty and intellectual laziness on the part of an individual, but McCain's campaign's later denial adopts that individual's dishonesty," stated Vector.

___________________________________________________________

Remember what happened to us at University if we EVER got caught plagiarizing?  It was the THIRD RAIL!  Immediate ejection -- POOF! You're out, and guaranteed to never get into another college again.  Yet, those who would run for the highest office in this country?  Nooooo problem. 

Why might John McCain not want a debate?  No time to duplicate, no time to supposedly be late for a meeting while you certainly have the opportunity to listen to your rival speak instead of being in a booth (where you would not being able to hear the questions put to him in his interview).  No time to analyze what your rival has done, and then pick a Hillary wannabe; no time to take his campaign slogans and use them --  it's all impromptu, and LIVE. 

The Presidency requires a LIVE, active, quick-thinker, who need not look it up, someone with good judgment, and not -- to use McCain's own words -- someone who wants to be President because they are a "62 year old man" who want his "last shot at the prize" who is doing this for "ambition", and not due to "Patriotism".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eKwTL8SwbI&feature=related

and thank YOU, Ron - Tired of this whole crap enchilada we call an election! W.

for reposting your article: http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?memberId=81274&articleId=281474977454223&nav=Namespace

_______________________________________________________________
 

"We did not copy Wikipedia in Sen. McCain's remarks. There are only so many ways to state basic historical facts and dates and that any similarities to Wikipedia were only coincidental."

Brian Rogers, McCain campaign spokesman

_______________________________________________________

Uh-huh.

McCain ought to be happy for Wikipedia's "GNU/free licensing" terms.  Then again, so should I.  The difference is that I am not running for President, and I DO credit Wikipedia when I use their content.

_______________________________________________________

And finally . . .

I know that some of you are thinking: "that Nee woman is a radical, a dissident . . ." or even worse.  Well, I am in good company.

Jesus was considered quite the radical in his day, talking like this:

34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
~~Matthew 10:34-37

_____________________________________________________

Here is some more RADICAL, DISSIDENT thinking:

We hold these truths to be self-evident,

that all men are created equal,

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,

that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

--That to secure these rights,

Governments are instituted among Men,

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends,

it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,

and to institute new Government,

laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form,

as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;

and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer,

while evils are sufferable,

than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations,

pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,

it is their right,

it is their duty,

to throw off such Government,

and to provide new Guards for their future security.

~~ Thomas Jefferson (Declaration of Independence)

I don't know how much more radical that you can get than THIS. Good heavens!!!

I LIKE THIS MAN!

It is called CHANGE, folks!

Don't lose sight that Britain and King George 3rd considered this

HIGH TREASON

When is modern America going to reach a point where they do the "duty" that the Framers speak of above?

"DUTY."