It looks like Sen. Rand Paul does indeed have a plagiarism problem:
An entire section of Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s 2013 book Government Bullies was copied wholesale from a 2003 case study by the Heritage Foundation, BuzzFeed has learned. The copied section, 1,318 words, is by far the most significant instance reported so far of Paul borrowing language from other published material. […]In this case, Paul included a link to the Heritage case study in the book’s footnotes, though he made no effort to indicate that not just the source, but the words themselves, had been taken from Heritage.
And if anyone dares to accuse him, he'd challenge them to a duel! Follow the link.
Rachel Maddow exposed Rand Paul's plagiarism of-- tadaa!-- Wikipedia of all things. This is Part 2 of what is now a multi-part story.
How hard could it have been for Paul to simply say, "According to Wikipedia..."? That's all it would have taken. So simple that even a tea partier could do it.
This man-- the same man who is not a fan of the Civil Rights Act-- wants to be president of the United States.
He's reading off a teleprompter! This is a prepared speech!
When you are running for president, a plagiarism scandal is not something that you want on your resume, especially not one as embarrassing as plagiarizing from Wikipedia, repeatedly.
But that is what Rand Paul has on his hands now, and in the face of this mounting evidence now that this wasn't an isolated incident, this is a repeat thing, Senator Paul is not talking...
He may not want to answer for it, but he's going to have to. This is getting worse by the day.
UPDATE: As Rachel just tweeted, "Rand Paul plagiarism story gets weirder":
The rest of it is making a mountain out of a molehill from people who basically are political enemies and have an axe to grind.
It's a disagreement on how you footnote things.
I didn't claim I created the movie Gattaca.
This is really about information and attacks coming from haters. [Rachel Maddow] has been spreading hate on me for about 3 years now... I don't see her as an objective news source.