Melania ...
Comments
-
Trump is playing the media like The Truman Show.
Their outrage will play well with women, miniroties and illegal immigrants voting for dead people.
-
I get that but these are almost identical and it isn't just a phrase here or there. Also, the order is the same for both speechesTequilla said:
When you're talking about very generic things about how you grew up, your values, etc. there's a lot of these comments that would be very similar from person to person.Peterman said:
"Very generic" my asshole, one part was 22 out of 26 words exactly the same in exactly the same place. Obvious plagiarismTequilla said:
What's strange is that the parts that are being cited for plagiarizing are words that I would say you could hear in similar discussions on this type of topic.TierbsHsotBoobs said:My apologies. It appears Melania is excellent at plagiarism shit:
http://gawker.com/melania-trump-apparently-plagiarized-a-section-of-miche-1783889522
Another thing that I've learned over the years is that depending on where you are in the world, the topic of plagiarism, stretching the truth, etc. is completely different than our standards.
I also think a lot of times people view plagiarism as full blown source stealing whereas this would clearly be at best a couple of lines that are very, very generic.
I'm sure that there are things any of us have said in the past that could be cited for plagiarism. I know personally, I've said things that people have claimed I've taken straight from somebody else and I've never even seen what those people have said. -
-
Give me a break, if Michelle O did this you'd be throwing a fit. Simple factSoutherndawg said:Seriously? She gave an innocuous speech that had some elements that appear to have been edited extractions from the Grinch's speech eight years ago. So what? At least she didn't say it was the first time in her life that she was proud of her country.
I think you need to continue watching your CNN and MSNBC feeds for more talking points. -
Explains the outrage by Sven and his other handlesPurpleThrobber said:Trump is playing the media like The Truman Show.
Their outrage will play well with women, miniroties and illegal immigrants voting for dead people. -
You were already Nebraska classy in your concession. You don't need to suck my dick too.Southerndawg said:
Explains the outrage by Sven and his other handlesPurpleThrobber said:Trump is playing the media like The Truman Show.
Their outrage will play well with women, miniroties and illegal immigrants voting for dead people. -
1) Anybody that votes for either Hillary or Trump because of Melania's speech tonight probably shouldn't be votingTierbsHsotBoobs said:
So you think it's good that Melania wants to be Michelle?Tequilla said:
Completely missing the markTierbsHsotBoobs said:
When your campaign is centered on attacking the credibility of a former First Lady, it helps if your prospective First Lady doesn't shit the bed.dflea said:Has anyone really ever given a shit what the First Lady, or presumptive First Lady says?
I stopped listening 20 seconds in - and just checked out her tits, mouth, and ass for the remainder of the time.
2) Plagiarism is definitely nebulous to me ... it's clear that Michelle's speech was used in the research for this speech ... that's not really debatable.
3) I think it's very reasonable to consider that English is definitely not Melania's first language ... it's also not uncommon when people are trying to find ways to express their thoughts when they aren't sure of how to word to find other examples that are similar ... which is probably how Michelle's speech topic here came into play ...
My best guess of what happened:
Melania had these thoughts but didn't quite know how to say them ... as I said before, there's nothing too earth shattering or unique with the themes that make them unique to Michelle and Michelle only.
Someone (a speech writer) probably pulled Michelle's speech and gave to Melania as an example of a speech at a convention coming from the potential first lady.
Melania (and/or her speech writer) probably saw the part of Michelle's speech that echoed her thoughts and used it as a framework for her comments changing it as it worked into her speech.
If someone asked me for what I learned from my parents, my comments would circle around:
1) value of hard work
2) you are only as good as your word
3) you treat people how you want to be treated
4) you do as you say
-
-
That just confirms what I already know.TierbsHsotBoobs said:For @Tequilla Fucking Stupid
Melania. So hot I need to brb, jo.
Michelle. Boner kill. -
AgreePurpleThrobber said:
That just confirms what I already know.TierbsHsotBoobs said:For @Tequilla Fucking Stupid
Melania. So hot I need to brb, jo.
Michelle. Boner kill. -
I've read them fucktard ... far better than listening to them.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Watch the side by side speeches Doog.Tequilla said:
When you're talking about very generic things about how you grew up, your values, etc. there's a lot of these comments that would be very similar from person to person.Peterman said:
"Very generic" my asshole, one part was 22 out of 26 words exactly the same in exactly the same place. Obvious plagiarismTequilla said:
What's strange is that the parts that are being cited for plagiarizing are words that I would say you could hear in similar discussions on this type of topic.TierbsHsotBoobs said:My apologies. It appears Melania is excellent at plagiarism shit:
http://gawker.com/melania-trump-apparently-plagiarized-a-section-of-miche-1783889522
Another thing that I've learned over the years is that depending on where you are in the world, the topic of plagiarism, stretching the truth, etc. is completely different than our standards.
I also think a lot of times people view plagiarism as full blown source stealing whereas this would clearly be at best a couple of lines that are very, very generic.
I'm sure that there are things any of us have said in the past that could be cited for plagiarism. I know personally, I've said things that people have claimed I've taken straight from somebody else and I've never even seen what those people have said.
1st paragraph that is being cited is similar but definitely not word for word ... the values contained within are very common amongst many people and definitely not unique.
2nd paragraph that is cited is definitely the more direct example of plagiarism. Again, I'd argue that what was said in there definitely wasn't anything overly unique or special which does start clouding the plagiarism argument a bit.
If I was a betting man, I'd bet that these paragraphs were dropped in a prior edition as an example subject to revision/update. The 1st paragraph was slightly updated ... the 2nd paragraph probably just proofread and somehow the need to revise somehow slipped through the cracks.
Does this deserve an explanation from Melania and the Trump campaign ... absolutely.
Does this deserve the rhetoric that is coming from the left right now ... absolutely not. -
NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
-
FOX is silent on this.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
If the Democrats had done this, would they still be silent? -
As I said elsewhere, if I was a betting man, I'd bet that the inclusion of those 2 paragraphs were subject to editing and it fell through the cracks. It deserves an apology to Michelle and the like but it is what it is. These aren't unique ideas that are getting jumped on right now ... it's pretty amusing actually.Peterman said:
I get that but these are almost identical and it isn't just a phrase here or there. Also, the order is the same for both speechesTequilla said:
When you're talking about very generic things about how you grew up, your values, etc. there's a lot of these comments that would be very similar from person to person.Peterman said:
"Very generic" my asshole, one part was 22 out of 26 words exactly the same in exactly the same place. Obvious plagiarismTequilla said:
What's strange is that the parts that are being cited for plagiarizing are words that I would say you could hear in similar discussions on this type of topic.TierbsHsotBoobs said:My apologies. It appears Melania is excellent at plagiarism shit:
http://gawker.com/melania-trump-apparently-plagiarized-a-section-of-miche-1783889522
Another thing that I've learned over the years is that depending on where you are in the world, the topic of plagiarism, stretching the truth, etc. is completely different than our standards.
I also think a lot of times people view plagiarism as full blown source stealing whereas this would clearly be at best a couple of lines that are very, very generic.
I'm sure that there are things any of us have said in the past that could be cited for plagiarism. I know personally, I've said things that people have claimed I've taken straight from somebody else and I've never even seen what those people have said. -
-
You're surprised? Of course they are, and they'll be looking for the same sort of red meat when your "girl's" coronation takes center stage.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
FOX is silent on this.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
If the Democrats had done this, would they still be silent? -
My girl's coronation happened weeks ago:Southerndawg said:
You're surprised? Of course they are, and they'll be looking for the same sort of red meat when your "girl's" coronation takes center stage.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
FOX is silent on this.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
If the Democrats had done this, would they still be silent?
-
She needs to go on a diet and get complete reconstructive plastic surgery -
I'd say that a large percentage of America has no idea about the history of this country. Go back 200 years and when it came to politics newspapers were more or less propaganda machines for different causes, people, parties, etc.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
At no point in my life have I felt that the media is more slanted (on both sides) than it is now. Very few people tell it like it is and play it down the middle. There is always spin. Generally speaking, I feel like CNN at least tries to get balance on their panels by having people from both sides but the problem is that so many of them can't get out of their own way of sounding so biased that it really just comes across as why there is so much gridlock.
Great example of how the media is biased is as follows:
I was listening to the radio today and this example came up from the last week or so: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Oregon-gov-pushes-for-stronger-gun-laws-8380755.php
Only problem is that when the Oregon governor talks about needing to stop partisan politics, Oregon has a Democratic governor, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic Congress. But that wasn't anywhere in the article because it didn't advance the agenda of the writer.
The bottom line is more people need to think for themselves and not for whether it is good for the D or the R. -
DisagreeTequilla said:
I'd say that a large percentage of America has no idea about the history of this country. Go back 200 years and when it came to politics newspapers were more or less propaganda machines for different causes, people, parties, etc.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
At no point in my life have I felt that the media is more slanted (on both sides) than it is now. Very few people tell it like it is and play it down the middle. There is always spin. Generally speaking, I feel like CNN at least tries to get balance on their panels by having people from both sides but the problem is that so many of them can't get out of their own way of sounding so biased that it really just comes across as why there is so much gridlock.
Great example of how the media is biased is as follows:
I was listening to the radio today and this example came up from the last week or so: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Oregon-gov-pushes-for-stronger-gun-laws-8380755.php
Only problem is that when the Oregon governor talks about needing to stop partisan politics, Oregon has a Democratic governor, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic Congress. But that wasn't anywhere in the article because it didn't advance the agenda of the writer.
The bottom line is more people need to think for themselves and not for whether it is good for the D or the R. -
EnlighteningTierbsHsotBoobs said:
DisagreeTequilla said:
I'd say that a large percentage of America has no idea about the history of this country. Go back 200 years and when it came to politics newspapers were more or less propaganda machines for different causes, people, parties, etc.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
At no point in my life have I felt that the media is more slanted (on both sides) than it is now. Very few people tell it like it is and play it down the middle. There is always spin. Generally speaking, I feel like CNN at least tries to get balance on their panels by having people from both sides but the problem is that so many of them can't get out of their own way of sounding so biased that it really just comes across as why there is so much gridlock.
Great example of how the media is biased is as follows:
I was listening to the radio today and this example came up from the last week or so: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Oregon-gov-pushes-for-stronger-gun-laws-8380755.php
Only problem is that when the Oregon governor talks about needing to stop partisan politics, Oregon has a Democratic governor, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic Congress. But that wasn't anywhere in the article because it didn't advance the agenda of the writer.
The bottom line is more people need to think for themselves and not for whether it is good for the D or the R. -
Are they even live right now? Or are they replaying from earlier in the night?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
FOX is silent on this.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
If the Democrats had done this, would they still be silent? -
Disagree on CNN. They're very partisan and doing exactly what I would expect them to. Your last sentence is spot on. -
They were live.Tequilla said:
Are they even live right now? Or are they replaying from earlier in the night?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
FOX is silent on this.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
If the Democrats had done this, would they still be silent? -
No way was I going to read all that bullshit.Tequilla said:
EnlighteningTierbsHsotBoobs said:
DisagreeTequilla said:
I'd say that a large percentage of America has no idea about the history of this country. Go back 200 years and when it came to politics newspapers were more or less propaganda machines for different causes, people, parties, etc.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
At no point in my life have I felt that the media is more slanted (on both sides) than it is now. Very few people tell it like it is and play it down the middle. There is always spin. Generally speaking, I feel like CNN at least tries to get balance on their panels by having people from both sides but the problem is that so many of them can't get out of their own way of sounding so biased that it really just comes across as why there is so much gridlock.
Great example of how the media is biased is as follows:
I was listening to the radio today and this example came up from the last week or so: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Oregon-gov-pushes-for-stronger-gun-laws-8380755.php
Only problem is that when the Oregon governor talks about needing to stop partisan politics, Oregon has a Democratic governor, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic Congress. But that wasn't anywhere in the article because it didn't advance the agenda of the writer.
The bottom line is more people need to think for themselves and not for whether it is good for the D or the R. -
My sources have obtained the copy of Donald Trump Junior's speech. Enjoy:
https://youtu.be/e40TpLX3g90 -
They definitely lean left ... there's no question on that.Southerndawg said:
Disagree on CNN. They're very partisan and doing exactly what I would expect them to. Your last sentence is spot on.
Trump's campaign talks about fragments in Melania's speech yet everybody now is saying that they aren't saying anything ... people see what they want to see. The reality is that we don't know the story yet ... everything else is speculation at this point. -
Takes about 45 seconds unless you read at a 2nd grade levelTierbsHsotBoobs said:
No way was I going to read all that bullshit.Tequilla said:
EnlighteningTierbsHsotBoobs said:
DisagreeTequilla said:
I'd say that a large percentage of America has no idea about the history of this country. Go back 200 years and when it came to politics newspapers were more or less propaganda machines for different causes, people, parties, etc.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
At no point in my life have I felt that the media is more slanted (on both sides) than it is now. Very few people tell it like it is and play it down the middle. There is always spin. Generally speaking, I feel like CNN at least tries to get balance on their panels by having people from both sides but the problem is that so many of them can't get out of their own way of sounding so biased that it really just comes across as why there is so much gridlock.
Great example of how the media is biased is as follows:
I was listening to the radio today and this example came up from the last week or so: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/crime/article/Oregon-gov-pushes-for-stronger-gun-laws-8380755.php
Only problem is that when the Oregon governor talks about needing to stop partisan politics, Oregon has a Democratic governor, a Democratic Senate, and a Democratic Congress. But that wasn't anywhere in the article because it didn't advance the agenda of the writer.
The bottom line is more people need to think for themselves and not for whether it is good for the D or the R. -
Equally as irresponsible then as the harping on from the left leaning.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
They were live.Tequilla said:
Are they even live right now? Or are they replaying from earlier in the night?TierbsHsotBoobs said:
FOX is silent on this.Southerndawg said:NOC Tequila. CNN and MSNBC have one goal. Make damn sure the narrative stays in Hillary Clinton's camp. Melania's speech is a distraction, plain and simple. It's the red meat they were looking for to move the conversation from domestic and foreign security to a tabloid issue.
If the Democrats had done this, would they still be silent?
It's actually a really interesting narrative right now:
Left leaning media talking solely about the plagiarism and not talking about any other part of the night (which let's be honest, isn't a good topic right now for Obama/Hillary given that we're getting close to playing Clue! each day with killings around the world ... today's I'm taking an Afghan, with an axe, in Germany) ...
Right leaning media talking about the highlights of tonight's speeches and whatnot while putting their head in the sand regarding Melania's speech. -
I'd be shocked that a news network was spending 2 straight hours on this regardless of who said itPeterman said:
Give me a break, if Michelle O did this you'd be throwing a fit. Simple factSoutherndawg said:Seriously? She gave an innocuous speech that had some elements that appear to have been edited extractions from the Grinch's speech eight years ago. So what? At least she didn't say it was the first time in her life that she was proud of her country.
I think you need to continue watching your CNN and MSNBC feeds for more talking points.
