It doesn't have to be cut and paste for me to think it's legitimate. I don't know if you'll get much argument based on whether it's cut and paste or not. But if you think there's something more legitimate about it NOT being cut and paste then by all means, have at.
Personally I'd prefer a simple dose of intellectual honesty instead of raw facts. But if you can combine the two it would even be better. In fact raw fact or just your opinion about the proclaimed facts would be better than more glib invectives. Can you muster something up for us?