Researcher blamed for plagiarism says McInnis 'responsible for it'

Researcher blamed for plagiarism says McInnis 'responsible for it' - The Denver Post

(this should mark the beginning of the end of his campaign, not at all friendly to MMJ+patients)

Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott McInnis spent much of the day blaming plagiarized passages in water essays for which he was paid $300,000 by the Hasan Family Foundation on a researcher, but that man has denied the charge.

Rolly Fischer, a former engineer who McInnis said was responsible for lifting paragraphs and at least four full pages from work written by now-Colorado Supreme Court Justice Gregory J. Hobbs, told the Glenwood Post Independent today: "Scott's responsible for it."

Earlier today, McInnis said reports that large portions of water articles published under his name mirrored work published by a Colorado water expert 20-plus years ago are a "non-issue"

I was thinking of posting this as well. I think McInnis is toast, but Maes is even worse on the issue.

Both candidates had pushed conservative platforms in their speeches to delegates at the state GOP assembly â?? from securing the borders to cutting the state budget. McInnis called for immigration reform and touted his endorsement by the champion of that cause, former 6th District Congressman Tom Tancredo.

The minor difference in campaign platforms was that Maes pledged that, if elected, to abolish an amendment, passed by voters in 2000, that legitimized the distribution of medical marijuana. That assertion even surprised some of his supporters who are Republicans and â??Constitutionalists.â?� They noted that Colorado voters had approved that amendment and no governor can usurp the rights of the voters.

-Pueblo Chieftain, April 19

I do think, however, that Maes is less likely than McInnis to win the general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

Earlier today, McInnis said reports that large portions of water articles published under his name mirrored work published by a Colorado water expert 20-plus years ago are a "non-issue"

---

Lets see how much a non issue he thinks it when he looses in the Primary.

I hope he falls flat on his face, we sure don't need the likes of him.

I thought his slogan was the Jobs Governor, well I guess killing jobs when it comes to MMJ is ok in his opinion.

I have never voted for a democrat, but I am nowhere near a token republican. It sucks that holding a powerful political position almost goes against the middle ground/Big L/small L libertarians, but jesus christ it is so maddening when both sides try to highlight these stupid, stupid things.

My point: you'll hear the lefties here in colorado complain on this issue, while ignoring the same things done by their own, see below.
---http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-plagiarism-in-school-but-says-it-was-not-malevolent.html

anyway, it's frustrating being a young person seeing how ridiculous our 2 party system is, and how hard it would be to change or get a viable candidate from an independent party elected.

Did anyone expect a Republican to have an original thought?

Quote:

---

My point: you'll hear the lefties here in colorado complain on this issue, while ignoring the same things done by their own, see below.
---http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-plagiarism-in-school-but-says-it-was-not-malevolent.html

---

Uhhhh... I'm pretty sure the Post published just as scathing an editorial on Biden's plagiarism. You cannot credibly argue that Biden's plagiarism was ignored, because it was one of the largest news stories of the year, and ended Biden's Presidential campaign. Scooter McInnis is now circling the same toilet bowl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

Uhhhh... I'm pretty sure the Post published just as scathing an editorial on Biden's plagiarism. You cannot credibly argue that Biden's plagiarism was ignored, because it was one of the largest news stories of the year, and ended Biden's Presidential campaign. Scooter McInnis is now circling the same toilet bowl.

---

Maybe I wasn't clear.

It's frustrating because both sides seem to ignore their own parties' problems while trying to highlight the opposition's problems, when those problems are fucking identical.

well, this guy, McInnis, is not our friend.

see:
Guv hopeful McInnis wants to put brakes on medical marijuana | mcinnis, obama, hopeful - Public Affairs - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO

from OnTheIssues.org ( Scott McInnis on the Issues )
Voted YES on prohibiting needle exchange & medical marijuana in DC. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998)
Rated D by VOTE-HEMP, indicating an anti-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)

AND, it appears he has other allegation of plagiarism popping up now that people are checking up on him:
Did McInnis Also Plagiarize Speech, Column? - Politics News Story - KMGH Denver

Show me a real, pro-patient, pro-MMJ candidate and I will vote for them no matter what their party. If they are anti-MMJ, I believe them to be closed minded and anti-freedom. It's the perfect litmus test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

Maybe I wasn't clear.

It's frustrating because both sides seem to ignore their own parties' problems while trying to highlight the opposition's problems, when those problems are fucking identical.

---

Not even close to being identical, nice try though......

The Los Angeles Times reported that when Sen. Joe Biden ran for president in 1987, he "was accused of plagiarism when he did not credit Neil Kinnock, then leader of the British Labor Party, for much of his stump speech." The New York Times and the Associated Press made similar reports. But they did not note that Biden reportedly had credited Kinnock, as The Washington Post reported at the time: "John Quinlan, a reporter for the Sioux City Journal, said his notes showed Biden said he was quoting Kinnock when he used the same passage in a speech Aug. 14. Stories in The [New York] Times, The Boston Globe and other newspapers also said Biden had used the rhetoric and credited Kinnock for it."

Media outlets reported allegations Biden plagiarized Kinnock, but not that he had previously credited him | Media Matters for America


Whereas you have McInnis getting paid $300,000 for using someone elses work and it appears it was not an isolated incident;


A new example of possible plagiarism by Scott McInnis surfaced Tuesday as the Republican gubernatorial candidate faced calls to repay $300,000 he received for plagiarized essays on water that he submitted as "original works."

A Denver Post review of McInnis' floor speeches and columns published during his congressional career found striking similarities between a 1995 speech and 1994 column by McInnis and a previously published Op-Ed in The Washington Post.

"There is a growing popular belief in South Korea that the North has outmaneuvered Washington and marginalized the South's role," wrote Richard V. Allen and Daryl M. Plunk in a Washington Post Op-Ed published Nov. 9, 1994.

Six weeks later, McInnis wrote in the Rocky Mountain News: "There is growing South Korean sentiment that North Korea has outmaneuvered Washington and marginalized the South's input into this issue."

A month after that, he made the same statement on the House floor with only minor alteration.

Storm over possible plagiarism in McInnis writings escalates - The Denver Post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

Jesus Christ.

---

My last response to you was an attempt to clarify what I posted before. Both attempts have apparently not registered with you, and I'm not sure why.

I don't think you realize that we probably vote for the same people.

I am simply trying to highlight BOTH parties' ignorance of their own problems, while attempting to highlight the problems of the opposition. Do you understand this point I am trying to make? I am not saying this as a republican, as a democrat, or any other party. I am simply making an observation.

I am not taking a position that the McInnis and Biden issues are identical. What I meant was identical, is the fact that both parties' have their own problems with corruption etc. It's fucking retarded for repubs to highlight biden's issue just as it's fucking retarded for dems to use this as general ammo against repubs.

I think Biden shouldn't be in office for that offense, and I think McInnis should return the money and issue a written apology. (edit: I wouldn't be opposed to McInnis leaving office either.)

Is that clear?

Well, there's always Hick, who will be getting my vote. I've seldom had such a clearly-defined choice. He's a centrist, has experience in the private sector, brews beer and he has a good but not unblemished record in Denver. He has a mixed record on marijuana, originally opposing the decriminalization ordinance in Denver. He favors regulating MMCs. As far as I can tell, he has not made any statements about MMJ in a while.

Hick could be trainable. He's far from ideal, but not as far as McInnis. If the Republicans were smart, after McInnis drops out, they would put up a pro mmj candidate...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

My last response to you was an attempt to clarify what I posted before. Both attempts have apparently not registered with you, and I'm not sure why.

I don't think you realize that we probably vote for the same people.

I am simply trying to highlight BOTH parties' ignorance of their own problems, while attempting to highlight the problems of the opposition. Do you understand this point I am trying to make? I am not saying this as a republican, as a democrat, or any other party. I am simply making an observation.

I am not taking a position that the McInnis and Biden issues are identical. What I meant was identical, is the fact that both parties' have their own problems with corruption etc. It's fucking retarded for repubs to highlight biden's issue just as it's fucking retarded for dems to use this as general ammo against repubs.

I think Biden shouldn't be in office for that offense, and I think McInnis should return the money and issue a written apology. (edit: I wouldn't be opposed to McInnis leaving office either.)

Is that clear?

---

1. There is a question as to whether Biden even committed plagiarism.

2. McInnis cannot leave office because he does not hold any office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

It's frustrating because both sides seem to ignore their own parties' problems while trying to highlight the opposition's problems, when those problems are fucking identical.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

My point: you'll hear the lefties here in colorado complain on this issue, while ignoring the same things done by their own, see below.
---http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-plagiarism-in-school-but-says-it-was-not-malevolent.html

---

Pot, meet kettle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

Hick could be trainable. He's far from ideal, but not as far as McInnis. If the Republicans were smart, after McInnis drops out, they would put up a pro mmj candidate...

---

Dan Maes will be the Republican candidate if McInnis drops out. See my first post. He's the Tea Party candidate. He is unequivocally against medical marijuana, wants to repeal A20, and plans to ask President Obama to start enforcing federal marijuana law again - i.e. he wants the DEA to raid our MMCs. He poses as a libertarian, but he stacks up far right on all social issues. I believe he is unelectable in this state, though I'm prepared to eat my words (and my backup stash!) if he wins.

EDIT: I can't source what I said about asking Obama to resume reinforcement, but I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere. McInnis definitely supports this approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by copobo

well, this guy, McInnis, is not our friend.

see:
Guv hopeful McInnis wants to put brakes on medical marijuana | mcinnis, obama, hopeful - Public Affairs - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO

from OnTheIssues.org ( Scott McInnis on the Issues )
Voted YES on prohibiting needle exchange & medical marijuana in DC. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. (Sep 1998)
Rated D by VOTE-HEMP, indicating an anti-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)

AND, it appears he has other allegation of plagiarism popping up now that people are checking up on him:
Did McInnis Also Plagiarize Speech, Column? - Politics News Story - KMGH Denver

Show me a real, pro-patient, pro-MMJ candidate and I will vote for them no matter what their party. If they are anti-MMJ, I believe them to be closed minded and anti-freedom. It's the perfect litmus test.

---

I couldn't agree more.

Quote:

---

EDIT: I can't source what I said about asking Obama to resume reinforcement, but I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere. McInnis definitely supports this approach.

---

I think it was McInnis that said that.
http://www.gazette.com/articles/mcin...a-hopeful.html

in an interview Maes said:

* Should state or federal laws (depending on which office you seek) pertaining to marijuana be altered, and, if so, how?

Yes. Med. mar. is a disaster and must be regulated like a pharmaceutical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zedleppelin

1. There is a question as to whether Biden even committed plagiarism.

2. McInnis cannot leave office because he does not hold any office.





Pot, meet kettle.

---

I am not addressing the veracity of the plagiarism nor do I care about what position mcinnis holds. I still don't understand why you even continue to address it, because it doesn't have anything to do with my posts. I assume you are replying to 'me', because you quoted my post. Are you replying to someone else? If not, would you please drop the plagiarism stuff?

Again, my point is that the blatant hypocrisy abounds on both sides of the political spectrum.

I feel like we're arguing and making the same damn point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

Again, my point is that the blatant hypocrisy abounds on both sides of the political spectrum.

---

I speak only for myself, but I think you chose a particularly poor example. What Biden did was not that big a deal. What Scott did was. I'm not an expert, but I've taught enough college and high school courses to be able to chart the gray area between insufficient citation or errors in citation and outright plagiarism. I'll readily grant you there is hypocrisy on both sides, but the issue you raise about Biden does not illustrate that hypocrisy in a meaningful way.

We're way off topic, but maybe that mod won't notice. I like these conversations, particularly when they remain civil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

I speak only for myself, but I think you chose a particularly poor example. What Biden did was not that big a deal. What Scott did was. I'm not an expert, but I've taught enough college and high school courses to be able to chart the gray area between insufficient citation or errors in citation and outright plagiarism. I'll readily grant you there is hypocrisy on both sides, but the issue you raise about Biden does not illustrate that hypocrisy in a meaningful way.

We're way off topic, but maybe that mod won't notice. I like these conversations, particularly when they remain civil.

---

I guess your education background might explain why you insist on staying with the example I posted.

I'll happily agree that it isn't the best example, and I'm sure there tons of better examples out there regarding hypocrisy, but the biden/mcinnis comparison was an easy grab, since I didn't do any research.

I'll agree also, that this issue with biden isn't a big deal, while the issue with mcinnis seems to be more.

I guess I would say that this would better compare to an issue like ward churchill, but he was a paid, tenured (i think) so he was held to a higher standard.

As I understand it, mcinnis isn't a water expert and had no business acting as an authority, but it's not like he presented himself as such. I think it was that foundation supporting a candidate they liked, so they paid him to write a paper. I don't think either party cared much about the content. I could be wrong though.

Asshole.

McInnis campaign: 'No change; we're moving forward'

DENVER - Former U.S. Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) told 9NEWS Thursday morning he has heard Republican candidate Scott McInnis will end his candidacy, but it's a claim McInnis' campaign refutes.

Tancredo says the latest development Wednesday night "probably sinks the ship." The gubernatorial candidate held a conference call Thursday morning with the senior members of his campaign staff.
Sean Duffy, a spokesman for McInnis' campaign, dismissed Tancredo statements Thursday.

"We're not going to respond to any of that. You're going to get a lot of e-mails and speculation today, but Scott's in the race," Duffy said. "He has the same schedule we planned for him last week. There's no change. We're moving forward. He's not going to talk much more about this. At some point you've got to draw a line, and we've answered everyone's questions already."

The former presidential candidate Tancredo also personally called for McInnis to resign his candidacy. He is the first Colorado Republican to call for McInnis to resign from the race.

etc.

from 9news

I'll repeat. This guy is a walking corpse. Sooner or later he will drop out. I bet sooner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighPopalorum

I'll repeat. This guy is a walking corpse. Sooner or later he will drop out. I bet sooner.

---

I agree that he probably won't survive this. With the mcinnis camp sending the prepared letter to the researcher calling bullshit, the whole thing just reeks.

I was listening to the radio yesterday afternoon and the local talk show had the auther of the plagerism on and he said he gave the info to the campain to use...he said it was not plagerism...from the horses mouth.
still do not want to see him run but this reason is a no reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by denverbear

I was listening to the radio yesterday afternoon and the local talk show had the auther of the plagerism on and he said he gave the info to the campain to use...he said it was not plagerism...from the horses mouth.
still do not want to see him run but this reason is a no reason.

---

Read the article in the denver post or westword and come back. You really should get your info from somewhere other than koa or the radio.

In part:
Cut to this morning's McInnis salvo, "McInnis Lying, Says Engineer." The article leads with an amazing interview between researcher Fischer, who's in his early eighties, and Channel 7's John Ferrugia. In it, Fischer says he thought he was doing research McInnis might draw from in a 2008 Senate run. According to him, he never knew the material would be published. Moreover, he says the McInnis camp tried to get him to sign a letter taking responsibility for accidentally committing plagiarism. The letter reads:

Dear Scott:

I am writing to express my sincere apology for failing to provide appropriate attribution for the research I provided for the water articles we collaborated on. While my mistake was not intentional, it is nonetheless clear that this material needed footnotes.

This mistake was solely my own and I recognize that my work fell short of the expectations you had when you included me in this project.

Again, please accept my deep apology.

Sincerely,

Rolly Fischer

It's shocking stuff that makes McInnis look even worse than he already did -- as does the visual image of Fischer tottering around on a cane as he tries to figure out how he wound up under a bus. But after this info, the Post article delved into a debate over the Plunk matter with this clunky, out-of-the-blue transitional paragraph:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

Read the article in the denver post or westword and come back. You really should get your info from somewhere other than koa or the radio.

In part:
Cut to this morning's McInnis salvo, "McInnis Lying, Says Engineer." The article leads with an amazing interview between researcher Fischer, who's in his early eighties, and Channel 7's John Ferrugia. In it, Fischer says he thought he was doing research McInnis might draw from in a 2008 Senate run. According to him, he never knew the material would be published. Moreover, he says the McInnis camp tried to get him to sign a letter taking responsibility for accidentally committing plagiarism. The letter reads:

Dear Scott:

I am writing to express my sincere apology for failing to provide appropriate attribution for the research I provided for the water articles we collaborated on. While my mistake was not intentional, it is nonetheless clear that this material needed footnotes.

This mistake was solely my own and I recognize that my work fell short of the expectations you had when you included me in this project.

Again, please accept my deep apology.

Sincerely,

Rolly Fischer

It's shocking stuff that makes McInnis look even worse than he already did -- as does the visual image of Fischer tottering around on a cane as he tries to figure out how he wound up under a bus. But after this info, the Post article delved into a debate over the Plunk matter with this clunky, out-of-the-blue transitional paragraph:

---

I know what you are saying buttttt if the author of the artical from years ago gave it to the campain like he stated on the Caplis and Silverstien show and the auther had no problem then where does all this mumbo jumbo come from...just keeping an open mind here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by denverbear

I know what you are saying buttttt if the author of the artical from years ago gave it to the campain like he stated on the Caplis and Silverstien show and the auther had no problem then where does all this mumbo jumbo come from...just keeping an open mind here.

---

I'll even link the article I'm trying to discuss.

Scott McInnis, Rolly Fischer and the more dubious part of the Denver Post scoop - Denver News - The Latest Word

Read that, and tell me if your opinion changes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cologrower420

I'll even link the article I'm trying to discuss.

Scott McInnis, Rolly Fischer and the more dubious part of the Denver Post scoop - Denver News - The Latest Word

Read that, and tell me if your opinion changes.

---

I do see where you are comming from and if Scott had acknowldged he was not the true author of some of those writtings then he would not be in the spot he is in now...on the flip side how can you take 300.000 dollars and not give some of it to the man who wrote the piece...typical congressman BS...

the Republicans are talking about running Tom Tancredo instead of McInnis or Maes!

Post poll: McInnis losing support, Republicans like Tancredo - The Denver Post

and Tancredo beats Hick in the legalization dept:

Tom Tancredo wants to turn marijuana into the toke of the town - Page 1 - News - Denver - Westword

Opposing Views: Conservative Republican Tom Tancredo Questions War on Drugs

Former Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, a conservative Republican who made cracking down on illegal immigration the main theme of his campaign for his party's 2008 presidential nomination, says it's time to think about calling off the war on drugs:

"I am convinced that what we are doing is not working," he said.

Tancredo told [the Lincoln Club of Colorado, a Republican group,] that the country has spent billions of dollars capturing, prosecuting and jailing drug dealers and users, but has little to show for it.

"It is now easier for a kid to get drugs at most schools in America that it is booze," he said.

He said the violent drug battles in Mexico are moving north.

Last year Tancredo and Ron Paul were the only Republican candidates to receive an A+ grade from Granite Staters for Medical Marijuana. During an August 2007 visit to Londonderry, New Hampshire, Tancredo said the federal government should stop interfering with state policies regarding the medical use of marijuana:

It's not about marijuana, it's about states' rights. The federal government has no right to interfere when a state makes that kind of decision...The federal government should stay the hell out of it.

That much ought to be a perfectly respectable federalist position even among conservatives who support drug prohibition. When the New Hampshire Coalition for Common Sense Marijuana Policy examined the presidential candidates's broader drug policy views, Paul retained his A+, but Tancredo's grade sank to a C. "Although he does not advocate changing drug laws and says he voted against medical marijuana in the Colorado legislature," the group reported, "he insists that the federal government's role in drug enforcement is strictly limited by the Constitution." Taking that idea seriously, of course, would mean rejecting national drug prohibition, for which (unlike alcohol prohibition in 1920) there is no constitutional authority. Maybe that helps explain how Tancredo arrived at his current position, although his comments suggest that his second thoughts about the war on drugs stem mainly from its ineffectiveness and unpleasant side effects.

Addendum: On the same day that Tancredo, a conservative Republican who says he has never used an illegal intoxicant, questioned prohibition, the drug czar appointed by Barack Obama, a liberal Democrat whose autobiography describes his own extensive illegal drug use, declared "legalization isn't in the president's vocabulary."

I'd rather have McInnis than Tancredo. Or Maes. Tancredo would be a disaster for this state.

...but when you get down to it, the Reps just need a standard bearer in this race to help all their other candidates on down the ticket. McInnis was unlikely to beat Hick, with whom is the Force, this election cycle.