apparently McCain can use the internet

[Enrico Palazzo]

or at least his speech writers can, so they can use wikipedia to write his speeches.

CQ Politics | Political Insider - Did McCain Plagiarize His Speech on the Georgia Crisis?

A Wikipedia editor emailed Political Wire to point out some similarities between Sen. John McCain's speech today on the crisis in Georgia and the Wikipedia article on the country Georgia. Given the closeness of the words and sentence structure, most would consider parts of McCain's speech to be derived directly from Wikipedia.

First instance:

one of the first countries in the world to adopt Christianity as an official religion (Wikipedia)

vs.

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

Second instance:

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. (Wikipedia)

vs.

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)

[Ash-Liz]

This doesn't surprise me at all.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

He's taking that "Straight Talk Express" thing a bit too literally


And sadly, if it were Obama, this would be on the 24 hour news loop for the next three weeks

[Enrico Palazzo]

Originally Posted by TheDoctorIsIn

He's taking that "Straight Talk Express" thing a bit too literally


And sadly, if it were Obama, this would be on the 24 hour news loop for the next three weeks

damn that liberal media.

I also can't wait for Rush and Hannity and fair and balanced Fox News to skewer McCain for plagerizing his speeches from Wikipedia.

[MSU316L]

who's with me on messing with Wikipedia so we can get those clowns to say some stupid things?

[Nommad]

I guess McSame knows how to use "the google."

[Natron the Spartan]

I'm shocked mainstream media hasn't picked up on this.

[Natron the Spartan]

And that damned liberal media continues to ignore this story.

More Reactions to the McCain-Wikipedia Story

By Taegan Goddard | August 13, 2008 9:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)


Here's a round up of some of the more interesting reactions from our post on the McCain campaign's apparent use of Wikipedia:

Joe Conason: "The discovery that John McCain's remarks on Georgia were derived from Wikipedia, to put it politely, is disturbing and even depressing -- but not surprising. Under the tutelage of the neoconservatives, who revealed their superficial understanding of Iraq both before and after the invasion, he favors bellicose grandstanding over strategic thinking. So why delve deeper than a quick Google search?"

Newsweek's Andrew Romano: "I don't doubt that whomever wrote the historical passage consulted Wikipedia for a refresher course (something that the campaign wouldn't deny 'outright'). I mean, there are simply too many repeated phrases, conveniently rearranged to evade detection, to suggest anything but a schoolboy copy job."

Mark Kleiman: "Now you can't even pretend to believe it's a coincidence. If the original sentences in question came from different sources, you might give the student the benefit of the doubt, but two unattributed near-quotes from the same source? Plagiarism, beyond reasonable doubt."

Comedy Central: "That's kind of damning. But I think what really tips it off as being stolen from Wikipedia is that it's totally wrong. Everybody knows that Georgia is a state in the Southeastern United States and was one of the original Thirteen Colonies that revolted against British rule in the American Revolution."

Washington Independent: "Given that Wikipedia's founder discourages college students from citing Wikipedia as a source for their inconsequential term papers, we should probably expect someone who wants to become the leader of the free world to at least adhere to the same standard in formulating his foreign policy."

Hot Air: "Three background sentences, that is, one of which closely tracks Wikipedia's entry on Georgia, two more of which contain some phrases in common, plus a third passage that's being offered as evidence of plagiarism and ... just isn't."

Matt Yglesias: "Given that McCain, by his own admission, can't use the internet it's a bit of an ironic situation though perhaps it counts as progress of some sort."

Digital Journal: "Is consulting Wikipedia, or Britannica or any other informative sites to obtain facts that writers use for articles, speeches, blog posts or any other type of communication, considered plagiarism if the information is used but reworded to match the writer's style? "