Sarah vs. Michelle

[Dawkinsrocks]

Does anyone read posts that are as long as the one that begins 'perhaps you are as racist as...'?

I know I don't

 

[Libsmasher]

Does anyone read posts that are as long as the one that begins 'perhaps you are as racist as...'?

I know I don't

They are probably not intended for people like you who think in sound bites and slogans. Watch out - there are three syllable words in there.

 

[neilsimon]

Sticking back to the topic, I think Michelle got it right when she said, "Don't vote for her because she's cute." Which is a lot more relateable than being referred to as "Joe six-pack."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

So is an amoeba

Especially a moose-huntin' amoeba.

 

[Libsmasher]

Sticking back to the topic, I think Michelle got it right when she said, "Don't vote for her because she's cute." Which is a lot more relateable than being referred to as "Joe six-pack."

I'd vote for ANY Joe or Jane six pack before I voted for a slimey liberal lawyer.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Indeed you would and that is because you want to bring the US to its knees.

Well, stomach actually. The current republican government has brought it to its knees but that isn't enough for you is it Libs.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Libs is really a commie pinko bedwetter who wants to smash the state from within by getting everyone to vote for more republican government.

I reckon I might have underestimated you Libs.

Or should I say, comrade?

 

[The Scotsman]

Libs is really a commie pinko bedwetter who wants to smash the state from within by getting everyone to vote for more republican government.

I reckon I might have underestimated you Libs.

Or should I say, comrade?

...............careful pumpkin!!!!!....

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Oh yeah, I know, 'cause he PLAGERIZED most of what he ever said in speeches!

Do you deny it?

O.K., let's see your proof.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

She certainly is too-qualified to be a Republican VP-candidate!!

Perhaps, you're as racist as she is:

.....And, that makes Sarah Quayle less of a bubblehead, huh?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You can just see her anger in her facial expressions:

Gee.....how would you analyze this one?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Sticking back to the topic, I think Michelle got it right when she said, "Don't vote for her because she's cute."

Lucky, for you, you're not a Right-Wing Columnist!!

 

[bododie]

O.K., let's see your proof.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s papers were donated by his wife Coretta Scott King to Stanford University's King Papers Project. During the late 1980s, as the papers were being organized and worked on, the staff of the project made a discovery that dismayed them — King's doctoral dissertation at Boston University, titled A Comparison of the Conception of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman, included large sections from a dissertation written by another student (Jack Boozer) three years earlier at Boston University.[1]

As Clayborne Carson, director of the King Papers Project at Stanford University, has written, "instances of textual appropriation can be seen in his earliest extant writings as well as his dissertation. The pattern is also noticeable in his speeches and sermons throughout his career."[2]
Boston University, where King got his Ph.D. in systematic theology, conducted an investigation that found he plagiarized major portions of his doctoral thesis from various other authors who wrote about the topic.[3][4]

According to Ralph E. Luker, who worked on the King Papers Project directing the research on King's early life, King's paper The Chief Characteristics and Doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism[5] was taken almost entirely from secondary sources.[6] He writes:
Moreover, the farther King went in his academic career, the more deeply ingrained the patterns of borrowing language without clear attribution became. Thus, the plagiarism in his dissertation seemed to be, by then, the product of his long established practice.[6]
Boston University decided not to revoke his doctorate, saying that although King acted improperly, his dissertation still "makes an intelligent contribution to scholarship." However, a letter is now attached to King's dissertation in the university library, noting that numerous passages were included without the appropriate quotations and citations of sources.[7][1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._authorship_issues


A committee of scholars appointed by Boston University concluded today that the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized passages in his dissertation for a doctoral degree at the university 36 years ago.

"There is no question," the committee said in a report to the university's provost, "but that Dr. King plagiarized in the dissertation by appropriating material from sources not explicitly credited in notes, or mistakenly credited, or credited generally and at some distance in the text from a close paraphrase or verbatim quotation." Despite its finding, the committee said that "no thought should be given to the revocation of Dr. King's doctoral degree," an action that the panel said would serve no purpose.

http://polymathis.solideogloria.com/2008/04/martin-luther-kings-plagiarism.html

There are so many sources available on this subject it's not funny. All you had to do was look.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I'd vote for ANY Joe or Jane six pack before I voted for a slimey liberal lawyer.

Yeah.....and look what that's gotten us.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Indeed you would and that is because you want to bring the US to its knees.

In Republican-circles, it's called The Pandering Postion.