NC Senate hopeful is sorry web material was copied
gregbrannonspeaking.jpg

CARY, NC (AP) -- North Carolina US Senate candidate Greg Brannon says he's sorry his website contains material that appears copied from Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul's former campaign website. But he added he agrees with every word.

The Republican said Friday his campaign would revise and footnote text on his website to make clear its source. He says a staff member drafted the pages and Brannon reviewed and approved them.

The New York Times first reported Thursday identical wording on Brannon's website and Paul's 2010 Senate campaign site on issues like monetary policy, education and health care.

A spokeswoman for Paul declined comment Friday. Paul endorsed Brannon last month in the North Carolina race. There are four Republicans seeking to challenge Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan next November.

(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

Greg is a good patriot and I applaud him for entering the race so early and garnering a lot of libertarian support from around the state. We have approximately 2% of them who vote for their candidate in statewide elections. I hope we don't have 7% in November of 2014. There are others in the race and getting into the race in NC that people need to hear first. It is 6 months away from the primary and too early to jump on the first candidate that you like their stances.
There is a book called good to great. I know of A GREAT candidate coming out soon and you need to her what he has to say!

It's obvious the New York Times has nothing better to do. Both Sen. Paul and Dr. Brannon have the same campaign firm working for them. It's the firms that write the content, not the candidates. Since both Brannon and Paul have the same stance on the issues, and they both employ the same firms, I'm certain the firm copied it's own work. No sense in re-inventing the wheel.