Today’s filings of independent expenditures at the Federal Election Commission shows US Rep. Chris Murphy with an additional $176,000-plus in his efforts to defeat Republican Linda McMahon for the U.S. Senate race. It brings his total to about $7.2 million, compared to McMahon’s $720,499. Today’s filing are led by a timeshare industry group called ARDA-Resort Owner’s Coalition, with $125,868 reported for radio ads supporting Murphy. Planned Parenthood Votes reported contributing $25,591 for “persuasion calls” for Murphy, plus an equal amount for calls against McMahon.
Archive for the ‘campaign2012’ Category
Plagiarism? Research? It’s part of the public discussion now, says scholar whose work was borrowed by McMahon.
A day after Sunday’s fireworks at the U.S. Senate debate, the conservative scholar whose February 2011 research paper appeared in part among Republican Linda McMahon’s campaign proposals said he’s flattered, overall, that the work has become part of Connecticut’s political discussion. But he also wishes she had put his language in quotes.
“We’re never going to solve anything without public discourse,” said Jason J. Fichtner, senior research fellow at George Mason University’s conservative Mercatus Center, during a Monday interview. “I am actually very glad to hear my ideas are being debated in a policy context,” he said. “That’s part of why I do what I do.”
McMahon took at least three sentences verbatim from Fichtner’s work on reducing federal spending, plus other direct quotes from the National Association of Manufacturers and Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy, the Democratic Senate candidate, accused her of plagiarism.
Fichtner, whose paper was entitled “The 1 Percent Solution,” said that direct copying of his work should have been put in quotes and credit inserted nearby.
“When you are using somebody else’s words, word for word, proper attribution protects the context in which they were written,” he said, noting that the issue of plagiarism seems now to have become a “distraction” in the Senate campaign.
Should McMahon have given Fichtner some compensation for using his paper?
“The fact that Linda McMahon and Chris Murphy are using the ideas is payment enough,” Ficntner said. “We should be demanding that more candidates use research.”
The McMahon campaign says her proposals, released in March, contained credits in the PDF version that is online.
But the online version — including her 6-point plan that visitors to her website are invited to read — did not receive individual footnote citations until sometime between Friday night and Saturday, according to Murphy’s campaign, brandishing screen shots to make their case. That was around the time the McMahon campaign began responding to Murphy’s claims of plagiarism.
McMahon’s campaign disputes that, saying there have always been citations on the website and that the screenshots are “irrelevant.”
A transcript of the post-debate spin at WFSB for Murphy, McMahon
The WFSB studio in Rocky Hill quickly made the transition Sunday afternoon from U.S. Senate debate wrestling ring to spin alley, as reporters descended first on Republican Linda McMahon and then U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy. At one point in the debate, she referred to the American law on gay marriage when she apparently meant Connecticut law.
McMahon called his charges of plagiarism in her campaign positions as “left-handed” that were shopped around to reporters on Saturday. “Papers wouldn’t take it, not even the liberal, you know Huffington…ah paper. So I just wanted to hit him hard on that.”
Reporter A: “Do you want to comment on your stumble on the gay-marriage issue and the American law?”
McMahon: “I can tell you I absolutely would support what I say this time…I would not look to overturn that at all and I’m a supporter of gay marriage.”
Reporter A: “When you used the word ‘America’ that was just a slip of the tongue at that point?”
McMahon: “Yeah I was really talking about..we weren’t going to overturn…I wouldn’t vote to overturn anything in the state of Connecticut, that’s for sure.”
Reporter B: “Would you overturn the Defense of Marriage Act?”
McMahon: “I would vote to repeal DOMA. You know, to me it doesn’t seem fair the folks in Connecticut have the right to be married and yet then they don’t have the same rights as a heterosexual couple, you know, for federal benefits. I just think that’s not fair. So I would…I would vote to repeal DOMA.”
Reporter C: “Have you always had that opinion position because it looks like there’s mixed opinion on where you stand on DOMA?”
McMahon: “I have changed my position on DOMA because with, now, you know gay marriage approved in the state of Connecticut I just, I don’t think it’s fair, and ah, so I would vote to repeal DOMA.”
Reporter C: “You’ve changed it since 2010? I just want to get that clear.”
McMahon: “I do favor….”
Reporter C: “But when did you make the change?”
McMahon: “Um..I’m not sure. But my opinion has just been evolving and I clearly want there to be fairness and there just isn’t fairness, you know, with DOMA. So I’d vote to repeal it.”
Reporter D: “Would you leave it to the states to decide? The individual states to decide?”
McMahon: “I think, you know, the states do continue to have their own marriage laws, their own divorce laws and they should continue to do that….”
She spoke about various positions she’s taken, charging that Murphy hasn’t been honest with state residents.
McMahon on Murphy’s claim of plagiarism: “I went out and sought the best minds, the best ideas and did research on those, compiled my own plan, put them together, cited those experts and it’s very clear that this is a plan that I’ve put together. Where is Congressman Murphy’s plan? He hasn’t offered one, so there’s nothing to look at to see what his positions would be.”
The reporters’ scrum then moved to Murphy.
Murphy: “Linda McMahon wrestled with the issues this morning and the issues won. Linda McMahon couldn’t answer basic questions on her positions on Social Security and Medicare and women’s health. And I think voters saw a really clear difference. I’m ready to come to these debates and talk about, very specifically, how I’m going to fight for the people of this state, for the middle class who need a voice. And Linda McMahon showed that she’s ready to come to these debates and use talking points that she’s borrowed from Republican website, but she can’t be specific about how she’s really going to stand up for us as a senator… I think Linda McMahon made it very clear that she doesn’t have any real idea on how she’s going to fix this economy, or preserve Social Security or fight for civil rights. I’ve been fighting my entire life for the people of this state and I’m going to be ready to do this job on day one.”
Reporter A: “Chris do you want to talk about the defense of marriage stumble she had, when she used the word ‘America,’ instead of Connecticut?”
Murphy: “Listen, I think the fact that she gave a 10-second answer to a question about civil rights for Connecticut residents displays how weak her commitment is to stand up to the Republican right wing. I am going to fight with every bone in my body against the social right in Washington that’s trying to strip away women’s health care rights and rights for people based on their sexual orientation. Linda McMahon clearly didn’t understand the law today on gay marriage, but she also revealed that she’s not really willing to go to Washington to fight her party. And it would be a disaster for the people of this state if they sent a Republican to Washington who is going to gladly empower the agenda to destroy civil rights for minority in this country.”
Reporter A: “Did you have some advice for President Obama somewhere along the line?”
Murphy: “Yeah, you know President Obama let Mitt Romney get away with this lie about the (federal ACA) health care bill cutting Medicare by $700-billion. The health care bill reduced the rate of growth of Medicare by $700 billion and it did so by taking money out of the pockets of insurance companies and drug companies and putting money in the pockets of beneficiaries. So, you know, the president made a mistake by not pushing back on Romney’s lie and I wasn’t going to let Linda McMahon get away with trying to claim that the health care bill cut Medicare by $700 billion….”
Reporter A: “When you talk about plagiarism in politics, it’s a pretty low bar, isn’t it? Everybody’s taking talking points from various places and repackaging them for their own purposes.”
Murphy: “Well listen, very few of our, you know, ideas in politics are brand new. It is something different to put a plan on your website that lifts word-for-word entire paragraphs and sentences from Republican websites in Washington…Linda McMahon isn’t being straight with the people when she says that she’s got a plan for the people and the economy of the state of Connecticut…It’s a right-wing Republican plan.”
Reporter B: “Would you dispute the accuracy of the McMahon campaign claim regarding hearing attendance? We’ve tried to ask you and ask your campaign several times and don’t seem to get a direct answer.”
Murphy: “Yeah, I haven’t seen her exact numbers. The point is, that I tried to make today, is that I have a 97 percent voting attendance record in Congress and Linda McMahon has a 20-percent voting attendance record when it comes to the basic civic responsibility to choose your elected leaders. Linda McMahon hasn’t even bothered to show up to vote in Greenwich over the last 28 years and ultimately, as I’ve said over and over again today, I think this race needs to be about the issues that people care about. And I think we largely focused on those issues today…”
Reporter A: “Don’t you think you’re giving her a pass, though, on the committee attendance stuff?”
Murphy: “Um, no, I think that Linda McMahon is wrong on this. I’ll stand up for my work ethic on any day of the week. The reason why we’re building a new Army Reserve center in Danbury, we’re building a new industrial park in Waterbury, why we’re building a new commuter rail line through Meriden is because I’ve played above my weight when it comes to fighting for projects for my state. And Linda McMahon’s going to continue to attack, you know, my character, my personal finances and my hearing records because she can’t win a race that’s focused on the issues that this debate was really about.”
.n
Chris Murphy unveils new TV ad in campaign for U.S. Senate, charging that Linda McMahon is threat to middle class
Heading into Sunday’s big debate, US Rep. Chris Murphy launches a new ad today. Here’s the transcript: “I’m the son of a public school teacher. I was taught to work hard and play by the rules. But there’s a problem in Connecticut today. People like Linda McMahon – they create their own rules. Enriching themselves at the expense of the middle class. McMahon hired lobbyists to gut health protections for her workers. And as Senator, her tax plan would give herself a $7 million tax cut, but she raises middle class taxes. I’m Chris Murphy and I approve this ad because our next Senator should be on the side of the middle class.”
Here’s the url:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_M69gmydec&feature=youtu.be
Why didn’t Obama mention the “47 percent”? (VIDEO)
Denver – One of many headscratchers after President Obama’s listless, unfocused debate performance Wednesday was why he didn’t hit GOPer Mitt Romney with Mitt’s infamous “47 percent” remark. It’s only a centerpiece of Obama’s campaign and one of Romney’s biggest gaffes of the year.
Obama’s campaign manager Jim Messina’s answer: It didn’t come up.
Huh?
Isn’t the point of a debate to MAKE SURE that such things come up? Another questionable tactical move — or non-move by Obama on a bad night. Right behind not pressing Romney harder on some of his dubious fact assertions.
Messina dismissed such questions as concerns about “style points” — a phrase used by other Obama officials in the post-debate scrum Wednesday. But in this culture, where people have the attention spans of gnats, style points count.
Let’s go to San Francisco Chronicle/SFGate.com’s Shaky Hand Productions for Messina’s answer:
