Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Obama's Surge!

Hawaii, Obama's birth state, held their primaries yesterday and stunned the country with voter turnout of over 37,000! That doesn't sound like much, but 2004 brought out 4,000 people. Over 75% of votes went to Obama. Coupled with his win in Wisconsin, he's taken 10 straight state victories!

One thing I wanted to poke at was the whole "plagiarism controversy." Perhaps you saw that Clinton tried to pin Obama for using someone else's words? Perhaps not? Let me refresh...

Obama made some speeches which included lines similar to those of Deval Patrick. The Clinton campaign releases videos on YouTube highlighting those similarities. Here's an example.

OMG! How could he DO such a thing! That's so WRONG!

Until you hear the backstory. See Obama and Patrick are friends, and consult one another often. In fact, Patrick encouraged Obama to use his words. So Obama comes out and makes sure everyone understands where the words came from, and even says he should have credited Patrick more.

Okay, so it can't be plagiarism if the original writer gives permission. Controversy over.

However, instead of owning up to the lame attack, Clinton tries to blame the media for spurring the non-controversy. But guess what? That media got a little pissed and having that tail pinned on them, and the Associate Press issues this article making damn sure everyone knows it was the Clinton campaign that pushed the issue on the media first.

Oops again, Clinton!

Let's review... Clinton campaign makes up a controversy. It doesn't fly. She tries to shift blame. It doesn't fly. Which candidate came out of this better?

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm on the fence right now with regard to voting for Obama or Clinton. I watched Obama's speech in Wisconsin--live on TV, and it drew me to him over Clinton.I thought the speech and delivery were great. He said things I totally agree with. Now, seeing that the words were not really his, I feel... well. Let down. That's all I'm sayin'. It's not a "lame attack." I believe it was fair to point out that those were not his words. Permission or not.

MJ

February 20, 2008 3:43 PM  
Blogger MG said...

MJ - Does Clinton give credit to her speechwriters for what each of them give her every time she makes a speech? And I was just in the car with my kid when I heard the DJs playing her speech after her losses yesterday - heard her trying to get the crowd to chant "YES WE WILL!" which sounds a helluva lot like Obama's "YES WE CAN!" slogan.

So if she changes one word she can use it? Sounds like someone's glomming onto Obama's message to me and I doubt he gave her permission.

Did Obama repeat Patrick's speech word for word or did he say similar things?

Just pointing it out.

February 20, 2008 5:27 PM  
Blogger Captain Cool said...

I certainly do admire Obama's ability to generate such excitement among followers.
And watching Hillary's campaign blow up in her face is fun.

February 20, 2008 6:59 PM  
Anonymous Gaia sighs... said...

Hmm. In the future are we supposed to ~hope~ that the words coming out of Obama's mouth are his own... and in hoping, give him a bye and turn blind eye to his lack of honesty?

I'm sorry, but this contretemps suggests to me that Barack is an arrogant, expedient corner-cutter with little originality and even less integrity.

February 21, 2008 5:51 AM  
Blogger MG said...

Gaia - you know I love ya honey, but how do you feel about Clinton after she tried to attack Obama on this issue, then turns around and uses very similar phrases already made in John Edwards speeches? (see about two posts more recently)

February 22, 2008 11:08 AM  
Anonymous Gaia sighs... said...

Moxie, as I've pointed out on another blog, there ~is~ a difference between reiterating what someone else has said, and trying to pass entire passages - practically verbatim - from another's work off as your own either overtly or covertly. Hillary was simply reiterating what Edwards expressed - soomething qutie different from Obama's offence - actual plagarism. Of course, my definition of plagarism may be different than yours.

What's your?

February 25, 2008 7:56 AM  
Blogger MG said...

Gaia -

The definition I go by is as follows:

1. the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.
2. something used and represented in this manner.

Got it by searching PLAGIARISM at dictionary.com.

By definition, he did not plagiarize. Plagiarism requires UNAUTHORIZED use of words AND trying to pass them off as his own. He did neither. First, he was given permission (nay, encouraged) by the original speechwriter to use those words. Second, he never claimed those words were written by himself, and in fact clearly expressed that they were his friend's words as soon as anyone asked him about it.

Do politicians stand there and say "the following was written by my speechwriter, Joe Smith" before spouting what Joe wrote? Now I have been to few political rallies, so perhaps it IS common practice for politicians to label each sentence that wasn't originally and completely written by that same politician, but my gut says that's not happening.

February 25, 2008 8:51 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home




Technorati Profile
Who Links Here