dChan
Anonymous ID: fd6572 May 19, 2019, 8:09 a.m. No.6535678   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>5706

Juan Toilet Bowl Williams Anthology.

 

Juan Williams is a tool of racist Republicans: "Juan Williams is an object of abuse, a means to prove a point.

 

Juan Williams is a paid pinata for white conservatives."

 

Or Williams is a toilet: "Juan Williams is/was a repository for the fecal matter of white conservative bigotry, and a need to maintain superiority over negroes who dare not to step off of the sidewalk when white folks pass." Or Williams is actually "coprophagic," he eats feces:

 

 

That in another life Juan Williams would be a critic of "negro agitators" during the Civil Rights movement is coincidental to his designated role on Fox News: he is exemplary of Joel Kovel's theories about white supremacy, and how it manifests as a White society which is collectively (and individually) stuck in the fecal phase of human psychological development – it is all over his face. Juan Williams smiles while cashing his checks at the prospect of his political coprophagia at the ass end of conservative politics. He revels in playing the role of the human centipede.

Anonymous ID: fd6572 May 19, 2019, 8:38 a.m. No.6535865   🗄️.is đź”—kun   >>5898

Butt sniffer uncle Joe Biden is a fraud.

 

In 1987 Joe Biden, then a Senator, was running for President. He was vying with other Democrats to become their nominee to take on Vice President George H. W. Bush in the final election.

 

Biden was struggling in the election, far behind Michael Dukakis. However, things went from bad to worse for Sen. Biden following a stump speech in Iowa. There, he used a series of phrases that bore an extremely close resemblance to words first said by British politician Neal Kinnock.

 

Dukakis responded to this by creating an attack ad that featured Biden’s and Kinnock’s words side by side. Many consider this to be one of the first examples of “YouTube politics” even though YouTube itself wouldn’t be launched for another 18 years.

 

This was paired new allegations from Newsweek that Biden had also been accused of plagiarism while attending Syracuse Law School. There, according to the school, he had copied 5 pages out of a 15 paper from a law review journal and was forced to retake the course. Additional allegations of speech plagiarism also came to the surface, though Biden claimed those were due to his staff.

 

Biden, at the time, called the stories a “tempest in a teapot.” He noted that he regularly gave the same speech and properly cited Kinnock each time. Still, the scandal combined with his lagging support forced him out of the race.

 

While it was the end of that race it wasn’t the end of his political career. He remained in the Senate and would become Vice President to President Obama in 2008. Though the story briefly reemerged then, that being the first time I covered it, it didn’t alter the course of the election.

 

Now, thirty years after the original story broke, it’s back in the headlines again as Biden is once again running for President. But with all of that, it’s worth asking ourselves a simple question: What has changed in the past thirty years when it comes to politics and plagiarism?

 

The answer, it turns out, is quite a lot and, though the facts of what Biden did haven’t changed, our views on thoughts on the politics of plagiarism certainly have.