by Frank James and John McCormick
Updated and expanded at 1:43 pm
Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign wants everyone to see a campaign speech made in 2006 by Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick just before he won that office and a recent speech by Sen. Barack Obama.
In his speech Patrick responded to the charge by his opponent that he was a fine speaker capable of tossing off inspirational words but not a politician with results. All words, no action.
Patrick responded by uttering some of the most famous words of American history: "We hold these truths to be self-evident" and "We have a dream" and saying, repeatedly, they were "just words" too. A very effective comeback.
So effective, in fact, that last night Obama used a similar formulation in Wisconsin two nights ago as you can see from the YouTube video.
"If you use somebody else's words or somebody else's idea, I believe you should credit them," said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.,) a Clinton ally, in a teleconference being held right now "...When Sen. Obama uses them and doesn't credit their origin, those same words seem less inspiring..."
Howard Wolfson, Sen. Clinton's communication director, sought to kick the stool out from under Obama. Wolfson's argument is that the campaign of Obama, since he is a relative neophyte on the national stage, is premised more on the senator from Illinois's rhetoric than experience. (Of course, Obama has countered in the past that he has plenty of relevant experience but that's another matter.)
So, Wolfson continues, if Obama's is a rhetoric-driven campaign, the fact that Obama is using someone else's words completely undermines the basis for Obama's bid.
"..Sen. Obama has not had a lengthy career in public life. So in many respects he is asking the public to judge him on the strength of his rhetoric and the strength of his promises.
"The power of his rhetoric has been much discussed and many of you on this call I'm sure have written about it. So when we learn he has taken an important section of his speech from another elected official, it raises questions about the premise of his candidacy."
Wolfson went on to say he was sure reporters and the Obama campaign (let's not forget the Republican National Committee's opposition researchers) would be scouring everything they could to find evidence of Sen. Clinton borrowing the words of others as well.
The obvious question is, how damaging will this be for Obama? When Sen. Joe Biden lifted some words and life events from a British politician in 1988, he wound up being so badly wounded, he had to quit the race. It definitely isn't the kind of thing Obama wants people focusing on right now.
In the age of YouTube, it's probably a good idea for presidential candidates to credit the source to avoid these kinds of problems.
Jake Tapper of ABC News had a posting yesterday on this latest eruption in the Democratic race for the presidential nomination. He had this response from the Obama campaign which was actually a response from Patrick, a good friend of Obama's.
Tapper wrote:
The Obama campaign has issued a statement from Gov. Patrick: “Sen. Obama and I are long-time friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language. The argument in question, on the value of words in the public square, is one about which he and I have spoken frequently before. Given the recent attacks from Sen. Clinton, I applaud him responding in just the way he did.”
Jeff Zeleny, our friend and former Chicago Tribune reporter who's now at the New York Times, wrote this after an interview with Patrick.
In a telephone interview on Sunday, Mr. Patrick said that he and Mr. Obama first talked about the attacks from their respective rivals last summer, when Mrs. Clinton was raising questions about Mr. Obama’s experience, and that they discussed them again last week.
Both men had anticipated that Mr. Obama’s rhetorical strength would provide a point of criticism. Mr. Patrick said he told Mr. Obama that he should respond to the criticism, and he shared language from his campaign with Mr. Obama’s speechwriters.
Mr. Patrick said he did not believe Mr. Obama should give him credit.
“Who knows who I am? The point is more important than whose argument it is,” said Mr. Patrick, who telephoned The New York Times at the request of the Obama campaign. “It’s a transcendent argument.”
David Axelrod, the chief strategist for Mr. Obama who also advised Mr. Patrick, said Sunday that Mr. Obama adapted the words from Mr. Patrick. Mr. Axelrod said that he did not write the words for either candidate.
“They often riff off one another. They share a world view,” Mr. Axelrod said. “Both of them are effective speakers whose words tend to get requoted and arguments tend to be embraced widely.”
The similarities from a passage of Mr. Obama’s speech on Saturday and in remarks that Mr. Patrick delivered on Oct. 15, 2006, were highlighted by a rival campaign that did not want to be identified. Clips of both speeches are archived on the Web site YouTube.com.
Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe, talking with reporters today, downplayed the controversy.
"They often share ideas about politics and language,"
Plouffe said it was a "curious charge" from Clinton campaign considering she has "used language that Sen. Obama has used."
He called it a "side show that is not going to matter to the voters in Wisconsin."
As I said above, Wolfson had said he expected the media and opposing campaigns to find instances where Clinton herself had borrowed language. I don't believe the Clinton teleconference was even over when the Obama campaign sent out the following:
Clinton Stole The Phrase "Fired Up And Ready To Go" From Obama. "We are fired up and we are ready to go because we know America is ready for change and the process starts right here in Iowa." In Davenport, Iowa, those words escaped the barriers of a tired Hillary Clinton's teeth. Without irony. That phrase is associated with Barack Obama. Obama borrows it from a woman in South Carolina who helped remind him what was important in life. It's the signature, in fact, of Obama's close. [Marc Ambinder, 1/2/08 http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/clinton_borrows_an_obama_line.php ]
Clinton Stole Rhetoric From Obama And Said She Wanted "Bring Our Country Together" And How She's Not Running For President Of The Sates That Voted For Democrats. "One other thing about those Clinton events yesterday: The woman is not at all bashful about stealing from her rivals. Between the two events, I counted six rhetorical turns I've heard other candidates employ: She talked about goals 'I hope will bring our country together,' a la Barack Obama. In response to a question about excessive partisanship, she talked about how she's not running to be president of the states that voted for Democrats, she's running to be president of the United States. This closely resembles Obama's 'I don't want to pit red America against blue America. I want to be the President of the United States of America.'" [Noam Scheiber, TNR, 11/20/07 http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_stump/archive/2007/11/20/hillary-the-thief.aspx ]
Clinton, Stealing Obama's Line, "Yes, We Can" Said That Obama Was The "No We Can't" Candidate And Said In Contrast, "Yes We Can." Stealing a line, Clinton casts Obama as the "no we can't" candidate, and herself as saying "yes, we can." Obama is the "Yes We Can" candidate of the 2008 presidential race, an Elvis-like presence riding a wave of popular enthusiasm unseen in U.S. politics in many years. Democratic strategist Liz Chadderdon said Obama is sweeping Americans off their feet."It's this incredibly moving speech about how it's time for Americans to turn inward and fix America's problems. You listen to it and you say 'Yes.' Not that what's coming out of her mouth isn't solid, it just doesn't have the same emotional connection that we're feeling with him," she said [Politico, 2/8/08 http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Stealing_a_line.html ; Reuters, 2/15/08 > ]
10/30/07: Clinton Said "We've Got To Turn The Page On George Bush And Dick Cheney." Clinton, speaking about her electability said "In a perverse way, I think that the Republicans and their constant obsession with me demonstrate clearly that they obviously think that I am communicating effectively about what I will do as president. I am trying to do that because it matters greatly. We've got to turn the page on George Bush and Dick Cheney. In fact, we have to throw the whole book away." [Debate, 10/30/07]
Ø 5/2/07: Obama Gave "Turn the Page"-Themed Speech To The California Democratic Convention. Speaking to the California Democratic Convention, Obama said, "I'm running for President because the time for the can't-do, won't-do, won't-even-try style of politics is over. It's time to turn the page.It's what I learned as a state Senator in Illinois. That you can turn the page on old debates; that it's possible to compromise so long as you as you never compromise your principles; and that so long as we're willing to listen to each other, we can assume the best in people instead of the worst.Democrats of California, it's time to turn the page.It's time to turn the page on education.It's time to turn the page on energy.But most of all, we have to turn the page on this disaster in Iraq.We will bring our troops home. It's time to turn the page.California, if you want a new kind of politics, it's time to turn the page. If you want an end to the old divisions, and the stale debates, and the score-keeping and the name-calling, it's time to turn the page.If you want health care for every American and a world-class education for all our children; if you want energy independence and an end to this war in Iraq; if you believe America is still that last, best hope of Earth, then it's time to turn the page.It's time to turn the page for hope. It's time to turn the page for justice. It is time to turn the page and write the next chapter in the great American story. Let's begin the work. Let's do this together. Let's turn that page." [Speech http://www.barackobama.com/2007/05/02/remarks_of_senator_obama_to_th.php , 5/2/07]
Comments
These are salient examples used to counter a stupid argument. The repetition of the same examples is no evidence of plagiarism, given how obvious they are to everyone but Mrs. Clinton. Hillary, start paying attention to the needs of the people, you're distracted.
Posted by: Iris | February 18, 2008 11:27 AM
A "similar formulation" is an apt description. They are both quoting some of the most famous quotes in American history. It's hardly necessary to credit their origin since (hopefully) every American knows them. The argument itself bears repeating.
Posted by: DD | February 18, 2008 11:29 AM
Grasping. At. Straws.
Posted by: Annie | February 18, 2008 11:31 AM
The Obama campaign has issued a statement from Gov. Patrick: “Sen. Obama and I are long-time friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language. The argument in question, on the value of words in the public square, is one about which he and I have spoken frequently before. Given the recent attacks from Sen. Clinton, I applaud him responding in just the way he did.”
Posted by: Jeff V. | February 18, 2008 11:32 AM
When are the American people going to wake up to his B.S.? Just a lot of wind and no substance. Biden had to quit the '88 race because of stealing a campaign speech from a British politician. Heaven help us if Obama ever get's in the White house. Wake up before it's too late.
Posted by: Ray Gorak | February 18, 2008 11:36 AM
Okay, this is getting weird. Is it plagiarism whenever someone quotes "I have a dream" or "We hold these truths to be self evident"?
If he was found to have lifted a paragraph verbatim from a 1985 Thatcher speech on another topic it might raise some eyebrows. If he listened to Gov Patrick's speech and later incorporated the same argument into his own speech, I just have trouble collapsing in a tizzy over it. In fact, without hearing either speech, if I were going to respond to charges about the importance of words in politics, I think those are common examples I would draw on, used because everyone recognizes them, not because of sneaky plagiarism.
If the Clinton campaign is down to this as the deep dark negative stuff they swear the Republicans will unleash in the fall, there isn't much to stick on the man.
Posted by: dal | February 18, 2008 11:37 AM
Rubbish. Biden's problem was telling a biographical story and not always remembering to mention it wasn't HIS biography. (Which I'm sure can happen when you give the same stump speech over and over and over again.) BUT, this is about a concept. As I've said before...
It's all part of one movement, so calling any of it plagiarism is a bit disingenuous imo. Of course they riff off each other - that's how progress has always been made. One person has an idea, another improves it, or clarifies it, or expands it. Sometimes it's just restating it in a different way so some other group 'gets it'.
For example, Martin Luther King said:
"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice."
Obama quoted that, and then added:
"Here's the thing, young people, it doesn't bend on its own, it bends because you put your hand on that arc and you bend it in the direction of justice."
You see? MLK was saying "don't lose faith". That's important, but you can't stop there. Obama reminded people that doesn't mean wait for someone else to do the work - democracy is not a spectator sport.
Now that's being restated in the "we are the people we've been waiting for" meme. Some people are more interested in tracking it to Maria Shriver or Tom Hayden or the Hopi Indians - as if that's the point. It's actually a much, much older and a much, much more universal message. The point isn't its history, but its truth.
Same thing with the "it's just words" thing. That's a lot older than either Patrick or Obama, so why claim plagiarism when they're pointing out the obvious?
People who 'get it', and there are more every day, aren't just supporting Obama, but getting involved in politics in all sorts of ways. They're also insisting on an end to lies, spin and innuendo in both politics and government. That's the movement, and that's what Team Clinton doesn't understand. They can't see the forest for the trees, I guess.
Posted by: Tom J | February 18, 2008 11:40 AM
Gov. Patrick's Stetement on the "issue":
“Sen. Obama and I are long-time friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language. The argument in question, on the value of words in the public square, is one about which he and I have spoken frequently before. Given the recent attacks from Sen. Clinton, I applaud him responding in just the way he did.”
Posted by: Luke | February 18, 2008 11:40 AM
Why doesn't the media talk about all of the things that Hillary steals from others for her arguements and speeches. I think she's using "Yes We Will" right now on her website and don't forget that she has gone around using the change slogan even at one point calling herself the candidate of change! What a joke this article is!
Posted by: Ezzy | February 18, 2008 11:41 AM
It's not plagiarism if the original author gives you permission to use the language.
Perhaps the Clinton campaign could spend its time more wisely, like figuring out the delegate allocation rules in their firewall states, or putting forth a positive, substantive message.
Posted by: Heidi | February 18, 2008 11:41 AM
I'm glad this has been highlighted. All of the Obamaniacs need to realize that they are being hypocrites. If Hillary did this kind of thing, it would be heresy. But when Obama abuses his most important asset, his rhetorical ability, everybody attacks Hillary for somehow pointing out an obvious error.
Posted by: Brandon | February 18, 2008 11:42 AM
It all depends on the origin of the definition of the word IS is..
Posted by: Walter B. | February 18, 2008 11:44 AM
It's desperation time for the Clinton campaign. After a year of trying to dig up dirt on Obama this is the best they have??
Pathetic.
Just drop out now Hillary and save yourself from further humiliation.
DCuz
www.RightCuz.com
Posted by: DCuz | February 18, 2008 11:44 AM
The desperation of the Clinton campaign is palpable. What an ugly way to lose.
Posted by: Rob | February 18, 2008 11:44 AM
First all words, no actions now he even stole the words. Hmmm!
Posted by: Tom T. | February 18, 2008 11:44 AM
Wow. The Hillary campaign must be incredibly desperate to be stooping to this level.
The Hillary opposition research machine is humming, but it's not coming up with a whole lot right now. This is a non-story, especially since Deval Patrick has given his blessing to Obama's use of his own words - and has all but said he suggested that Obama use the same language.
Hillary & Co. are obviously hoping Obama has a Biden-style meltdown. The problem is that Obama is no Biden; Joe wasn't exactly the most articulate guy in the 1988 race, whereas you have to agree Obama has a silver tongue, regardless of whether or not you like him.
Posted by: Beeblebrox | February 18, 2008 11:44 AM
This isn't the first time something like this has happened:
http://www.jabberwonk.com/flinker.cfm?cliid=1ed2u5
Patrick and Obama are close allies, they have been for awhile.
At the same time, Patrick's and Obama's campaigns have been sensitive about mirroring each other too closely.
Obama, in his Senate race, used the well-worn phrase "Yes, we can!" as a rallying cry.
After Patrick employed the same phrase at a state Democratic Convention in 2005, a reporter alerted the campaign that it was Obama's signature line, and they went back to the drawing board, said Dan Payne, a Democratic strategist working for Patrick at the time. (Patrick would adopt "together we can" instead.)
Posted by: nisleib | February 18, 2008 11:45 AM
It's called "sour grapes"
Posted by: Steven | February 18, 2008 11:45 AM
So now we can't say, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman".
Posted by: David | February 18, 2008 11:45 AM
Just another lame ploy by a faltering Clinton campaign. McGovern's argument is empty. I guess he should have explicitly cited MLK, too.
Posted by: Nathan | February 18, 2008 11:45 AM
Gee! I always thought plagiarizm had something to do with the "written word". I think someone should view the definition before throwing out barbs. But,,then this is politics at its best. And as "Annie" so eloquently put it "Grasping. At. Straws." (I give credit to Annie because she wrote it first)
Posted by: JR | February 18, 2008 11:46 AM
If Obama is a man of hope and ideas, why did he lift the CADENCE of the use of thos quotes? Same quotes, same rhetorical statement afterwards: "Just words?"
All he would've had to do is acknowledge Patrick. Oh- and simply shuffling the order does not preclude plagiarism.
The proof of whether he was lifting or not will come in if he uses Patrick's sequence again. Which I'm guessing he won't.
Posted by: john | February 18, 2008 11:46 AM
The Clintons are getting so desperate it's funny. I guess she is a plagiarizer for using Obama's words and McCain is a plagiarizer for using "Fired up". And she wonders why so many are jumping off her ship onto Obamas.
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2008 11:46 AM
The Clinton Campaign is desperate, sorry and clutching at straws. Governor Patrick and Senator Obama are friends and have been open about Governor Patrick's support for him.
Posted by: jonathan B | February 18, 2008 11:46 AM
This is not plagiarism. Quoting someone else quoting other people is totally fine. The formulation itself is basically a list. Plus, if the author gives permission, it's not plagiarism.
Posted by: John D. | February 18, 2008 11:47 AM
has it come to this Hillary? You are above this B.S. aren't you. The Clintons have had to use thier mud and B.S. polictics and it has exsposed the for what they are !!
I understand her frustration - she was the front runner and now she is diggin the trash grashing for straws.
Please let hurry up and get these 2 clowns off the scene - it is disheartening to watch them 2 now.!!
Posted by: Roderick | February 18, 2008 11:47 AM
If this is the best the Clintons can do then we know Obama will be safe from Republican attack (fully vetted as Hillary likes to say). No one is as schooled in opposition research as the Clintons.I'd call her desperate, but someone probably has and I'd hate to be accused of quoting without attribution.
Posted by: John Carlson | February 18, 2008 11:47 AM
This argument reaks of desperation on the part of the Clinton campaign.
Posted by: Tearlock | February 18, 2008 11:47 AM
The Clinton Campaign is desperate, sorry and clutching at straws. Governor Patrick and Senator Obama are friends and have been open about Governor Patrick's support for him.
Posted by: jonathan B | February 18, 2008 11:49 AM
Another plagiarism by Obama:
The Hopi Elders Speak:
"We Are the Ones
We've Been Waiting For"!!!
Posted by: Luis | February 18, 2008 11:49 AM
Obama-maniacs, you just dont get it. You blindly follow an empty suit candidate who promises you hope and change through inspirational speeches. Now we find out that they are not inspirational but cheap copies (like many of his policices too). No substance and no inspiration at all - but you still follow blindly... ever heared of SS and Nazis? Same pattern here.
Posted by: GimmeHopeObama | February 18, 2008 11:49 AM
Has Hillary said anything positive yet? Can anyone name one thing she has ever accomplished? Why is she even in this race? Oh yeah, to get Bill back his power. Sorry, that's not a good enough reason to get my vote.
Posted by: Craigo | February 18, 2008 11:49 AM
Does Rep. Jim McGovern have anything better with his time? If not, we can surely suggest things for him to do.
Is this the best they can do against Obama? They must be really desperate. "I have a dream" that someday I will become a millionaire. And I "hold these truths to be self-evident" that being a millionaire means having a lot of money.
Posted by: Garba | February 18, 2008 11:50 AM
I have a feeling that those here defending Obama's lifting of a speech by someone else in 2006 would be crucifying the Republican who'd done the same...the double standard is astonishing and breathtaking
Posted by: Modd Kenwood | February 18, 2008 11:50 AM
Hilary is unbelievable...she doesn't even use good quotes in her speeches. Instead of attacking Obama, she should take notes.
Posted by: DonaldD | February 18, 2008 11:50 AM
The problem is that he's a phony. Obama has risen as the next greatest thing since sliced bread but his words are not even his own. What else? You need to scratch beneath the surface people. There's more there than just words.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200706140007
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/184540,122306obama.article
http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/did_obama_plagiarize_clinton_t.html
http://thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html
http://perezhilton.com/2008-02-18-obama-plagiarizes-speech
Posted by: Lisa Naujoks | February 18, 2008 11:51 AM
Yes We Can! Yes We Will !
Vote Democrat!
Posted by: cooday | February 18, 2008 11:52 AM
Some one is desperate. And it'not Obama!
Posted by: Mark | February 18, 2008 11:53 AM
Yawn.
Posted by: Steve | February 18, 2008 11:53 AM
It is plagiarism if the party supposedly plagiarized from says he doesn't care and has even talked to Obama about it beforehand? No. It's just smart use of a nearly identical phrase. Let's face it, very little in politics is truly original. I have a hard time believing that Obama's "Yes we can" has never been uttered before, and the same for Hillary's "Bill has a dream." Oops, wrong quote.
Posted by: John, Las Vegas, NV | February 18, 2008 11:53 AM
"Yes, we can" was Gov Patrick's campaign slogan as well.
Posted by: Matt | February 18, 2008 11:53 AM
STUPID FOLKS....
Patrickl Deval is part of OBAMA's election committee---THEY ARE FRIENDS!
STOP TRYING TO START &%$*!
Posted by: Traci | February 18, 2008 11:53 AM
Clintons; just go home and enjoye all your lobbis money
Posted by: Arsene | February 18, 2008 11:54 AM
The argument is NOT about the words quoted about the famous speeches of figures like Martin Luther King. The argument is over Obama quoting these speeches and then using the phrase "just words" just as Patrick had done. It is not so much the content of what he is saying, rather the importance lies in that Obama is using the exact same defense against Clinton as Patrick did in his campaign. I understand that there is no originality in politics, but come on...I'm still waiting for Obama to let me know even ONE thing that he can do for me as president! I've heard from all the other candidates, so when is Obama going to step it up? It's time for him to make some promises, not just political rhetoric.
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2008 11:54 AM
Is this supposed to make us vote for Clinton? If anything, it is just another example of Clinton's 35 years of experience in trying to smear and destroy good people.
Is wasn't long ago that Clinton also tired to discredit Obama, who in Kindergarten wrote that he wanted to be President.
Posted by: Dr Lee | February 18, 2008 11:56 AM
Hillary ---
how do you blow through $130 million dollars???
Focusing - on stupid stuff like this --- rather than your check.
Posted by: Traci W | February 18, 2008 11:57 AM
Howard Wolfson needs to go. He is doing Hillary no favors. This is incredible nit-picking. Their campaign is sinking fast and this is the best they can do against Obama? Give me a break! So much for the vaunted Clinton machine. It's a jalopy.
Posted by: Jim D, | February 18, 2008 11:57 AM
It's not about plagiarism. It's just that Obama says that he is different and better and wants to inspire. Yet he borrows speeches from others. Even with DP's permission, it's just not very inspiring to see this guy parrot another's speech and present as his own when the basis for his whole campaign is some kind of implied moral superiority to his opponents and to other politicians in general. It is just one more example of Obama's actions not matching his lofty rhetoric.
Posted by: Leslie | February 18, 2008 11:57 AM
Can't wait to see the last of those slack-jawed Arkansas hicks out of Washington.
Posted by: Josey2006 | February 18, 2008 11:57 AM
I wonder if Hillary credited Abe she said just this week something her being or the president being, by the people and for the people.
Abraham Lincoln best described democracy as "government of the people, by the people, and for the people."
Posted by: Gregg | February 18, 2008 11:57 AM
The Truth of this question, is that Words do Matter and Words are not Cheap, as Clinton tries to insinuate. Without words there would be no great books or poetry and she herself said she was inspired by the words of Martin Luther King and now she is trying to cleverly put a halt to Obama's speech making ability to inspire a Generation of People. She herself is doing everything she can in her speeches to try to emulate Barack's words and incorporate them in her speeches. Yes we Will, she says. We can do this. If you hear her speeches today, they are cleverly changed with Barack's words, so words obviously do matter. And that chant of hers, Yes we Will is a pitiful immitation of Yes we Can and it sounds just that. If they want to win, they are barking up the wrong tree. America has moved on, America is growing up, something the Clintons have not caught on too. And because Duval and Barack are such good freinds it could be that Barack gave Duval the lines two years ago for his speech. What does it matter, the truth is Words Do Matter!
Posted by: Angellight | February 18, 2008 11:58 AM
and we can no longer say
"yes we will" - Hillary's minions will put you "video on YouTube".
Posted by: Garba | February 18, 2008 11:58 AM
The problem is the "They are just words" part. Certainly anyone can quote our founding fathers and other historical personages without any big deal, but the construction of this was a direct lift of what Governor Patrick said. Mr. Obama is talk without substance.
Posted by: Stewart | February 18, 2008 12:32 PM
Well thanks for alerting me to this.
Whew, and I almost voted for him. Good thing I am not basing my vote on something important like the fact the Mrs. Clinton voted to send our kids off to fight in a illegal/unjust/immoral war based on lies.
Posted by: Will | February 18, 2008 12:36 PM
"Hear that Mr. Anderson [Hillary]? It is the sound of inevitability."
While Agent Smith was wrong with respect to Neo, it is apt here: Ms. Clinton's campaign is foundering, and is grasping at whatever pitiful life rings it can. Unfortunately the attempt is so transparently empty, it makes her campaign look even worse.
This is why the Republicans are so deathly afraid of an Obama candidacy: there is a dearth of mud to sling in any Roverian attempts to Swiftboat him in the general election.
Posted by: Buster | February 18, 2008 12:36 PM
If I say to my girlfreind as she leaves, "Parting is such sweet sorrow", and I don't tell her it is from Shakespeare, is that supposed to be plagiarism?
Get real, Hillary!!
Posted by: Plagiarism Police | February 18, 2008 12:36 PM
Wow, Busted! Imagine if this came out during the Presidential election in October? He would be fried by the Republicans. Obama is not ready for prime time yet...Rookie mistake to try to be someone else, since he doesn't really know yet what he wants to be when he grows up. Even if he got permission form Gov. Patrick, it still would just be words..just not HIS WORDS. I would even say it was worse that Gov. Patrick and Obama colluded to make it seem that the “articulate” Obama came up with these words himself. Obama is an empty suit…propped up by his puppet masters and sent out to lip-synch speeches. Didn’t we have enough of puppet presidents?
Posted by: jim London | February 18, 2008 12:38 PM
So.... why isn't Hillary being held accountable for plagarizing Gov Patrick's opponent..."All words no action" ????
Posted by: Rick | February 18, 2008 12:39 PM
Jimmy, my boy, you are causing acute acid reflux coupled with bile and phlegm from laughing. Please do something, anything, that has a wee bit of value for your constituents. Remember them?
Posted by: Alfred | February 18, 2008 12:40 PM
So, it's a big deal because Obama used Patrick's words "just words" and the rest are already famous words? The truth is they both quoted famous speakers -and neither really added anything, except to say: words do matter. Plus if Patrick is on Obama's side, I agree with the people who say this is just desperate Clinton politics.
Ask Clinton why her economic plan looks lifted from 2006's Audacity of Hope? Or better yet, tell her to stop stealing lines from Obama's speeches today! Mrs."if I give you a plan, I have a way to pay for it" -Obama has been saying that longer. Or her trying to come up with slogan #15, yelling "yes we will" Give me a break. Sore losers.
Posted by: June | February 18, 2008 12:41 PM
I'm still waiting for Obama to let me know even ONE thing that he can do for me as president!
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2008 11:54 AM
What does he have to do? Visit your house with flowers, wine, and a check for $1M dollars? OK, maybe just the check? Maybe it's not all about you. "Ask not what your country can do for you......"
Posted by: DD | February 18, 2008 12:42 PM
GimmeHopeObama,
Are you one of the low-lifers
that constitute Hillary's base, or a republican shaking in his boots at the prospect of facing Obama?
I have a dream you'll lose because we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
Let me know if I'm plagiarizing.
Posted by: joseph pierre | February 18, 2008 12:44 PM
Obama still lacks substance. He is a good speaker, but in the end his words are "just words." He has no grasp on what he criticizes. ...and NO, I AM NOT A BILLARY SUPPORTER.
Posted by: Mike | February 18, 2008 12:46 PM
i thought the rule for plagiarism was four words in succession...?
neither one is qualified, in my opinion and all four scare me. obama would be a fabulous motivational speaker... and clinton would be equally wonderful at empowering young women... but that does not mean that they could pull all of our loose ends together. we need someone with a firmer grasp on reality and action... and the concept that our country is not the only one occupied by millions.
Posted by: tabi | February 18, 2008 12:47 PM
Amazing that the Obama Nazis can't even admit that "Dear Leader" is wrong here.
A simple "I was tired and neglected to mention my close friend Deval Patricks name" would suffice.
But, no you black racists and white weaklings have to dig in your heals.
Anyone but the evil muslim in november. No Obama!
Posted by: Mark Stephens | February 18, 2008 12:48 PM
A speech given shortly before he died by President John F. Kennedy is perhaps the best refutation of the Clinton approach to politics, and captures the Obama magic ...
"When power leads man toward arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations. When power narrows the area of man's concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses."
America is tired of the arrogance, corruption and lack of that elusive thing called grace that characterized Bill Clinton's "co-presidency" with Hillary.
Or, to put it another way, as the ancient Romans said: "When Cicero had finished speaking, the people said, 'How well he spoke,' but when Demosthenes had finished speaking, the people said, 'Let us march.'"
America is on the move again.
Posted by: MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN | February 18, 2008 1:01 PM
HilLIARy people are TOTAL hypocrites
this is not plagiarism for many reasons - just for starters Obama added the churchhill quote that the other gentleman did not
IT WAS A SO OBVIOUSLY SPEECH ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF WORDS - AND IT WAS A NECESSARY SPEECH BECAUSE HILLIARY HAS BEEN ACTIVELY TRYING TO SAY THAT BEING INSPIRATIONAL WITH WORDS IS NOT A NECESSARY TRAIT IN A WORLD LEADER - IT WAS A SPEECH ABOUT MEANINGFUL WORDS FROM OUR OWN HISTORY THAT WERE MORE THAN JUST WORDS - AND THUS REFUTES HILLIARY'S ARGUMENT - HOW COULD HE NOT USE SIMILAR LANGUAGE - OBAMA HAD TO USE A SIMILAR SPEECH TO MAKE HIS POINT AND HE WAS ONLY ANSWERING HILLIARY'S PERSONAL ATTACK ON HIM
BUT IF THE QUOTES OF WORLD LEADERS ARE OUT OF BOUNDS THEN MAYBE ..........
maybe Bill Clinton should sue everyone who uses the phrase "IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE DEFINITION OF IS IS"
OR
"I SMOKED IT BUT I DIDN'T INHALE"
OR
"I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN"
OR
"OF COURSE OBAMA WON SOUTH CAROLINA SO DID JESSE JACKSON"
OR HILLIARY SHOULD SUE ANYONE WHO SAYS,
"VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY"
BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE MOST MEMORABLE "WORDS" FROM THE MOUTHS OF THE CLINTONS
THERE IS AN OLD SAYING AMONG WRITERS/COLLEGE PROFESSORS
THE PROFESSOR'S VERSION IS
"IF YOU BORROW FROM ONE SOURCE, IT'S PLAGIARISM, IF YOU BORROW FROM MANY, IT'S GOOD RESEARCH"
THE WRITER'S VERSION IS,
"IF YOU BORROW FROM ONE SOURCE, IT'S PLAGIARISM, IF YOU BORROW FROM MANY SOURCES, IT'S BRILLIANT'
OBAMA = BRILLIANT
How can anyone honestly find any fault with Obama for this and not find much greater fault with HilLIARy for planting a question in the audience - you can't
Posted by: tom | February 18, 2008 1:02 PM
This type of dirty politics is not why I dis-like the Clinton campaign, I 'hate' them. This morning I have read that Obama is sexist. Now he is a 'word stealer'.
All of this right before the primaries tomorrow. The Clintons trully have no shame what-so-ever. I plan to vote for Obama even though I have always voted Republican but if Clinton cheats her way in which she is really trying to do I will vote and donate and work for the McCain camp. Why in the world can't Clinton people see that people 'hate' thsi kind of politics and frankly that has caused many people to hate the Clintons. Can you tell I'm pissed? Well Hillary Clinton is a peice of garbage.
Posted by: E James | February 18, 2008 1:04 PM
If you use the Clinton Campaign’s argument that it’s plagiarism, then you would also have to say that “Yes we can” from Obama’s stump speech is stolen from Deval. Deval used that same phrase, “Yes we can” extensively in his speeches. Of course it’s not Plagiarism, Deval is part of Obama’s campaign. They are sharing ideas not stealing from each other
Posted by: Frank | February 18, 2008 1:04 PM
Wow, as a person who has a M.B.A from a very notable university, if I had written a paper or gave a speech and not attributed the person who I got the words from, it would NOT be an excuse to tell my professor that I got their permission.
That is a straw man and I would have received an 'F'. It is so funny to see the Obamamots lowering the bar and changing the rules. The receptors to Obama's speech should have been made aware that those words were not Obamas especially has 'rhetoric' is his trade mark.
What I find scary is the Obama canidacy seems to be a 'brand' and Axlerod seems to be the marketing manager. Same manager for Gov. Deval Patrick, same speeches, same emphasis on hope, change etc.
Scary...and how did that go in MA, Clinton won by 15pts because by and large the voters of MA have found Patrick to be an unremarkable governor.
Posted by: shark | February 18, 2008 1:06 PM
THIS IS GOD.
Stop quoting my Commandments without attribution!
Posted by: Danny M. | February 18, 2008 1:06 PM
POST OF THE DAY
(worth repeating)
Well thanks for alerting me to this.
Whew, and I almost voted for him. Good thing I am not basing my vote on something important like the fact the Mrs. Clinton voted to send our kids off to fight in a illegal/unjust/immoral war based on lies.
Posted by: Will
Posted by: Your Conscience | February 18, 2008 1:07 PM
This ain't plagiarism just more Clinton stupidism.
Posted by: tex | February 18, 2008 1:08 PM
For months and months, HRC has been appropriating words, slogans, themes and ideas from the Obama campaign. It is now ludicrous that the campaign is attempting to tarnish Obama because, with Deval Patrick's encouragement, he used some rhetorical ripostes from Patrick's treasure trove.
Also, if Obama repeats "Four score and seven...", is he plagiarizing? If he recites "we have nothing to fear..." (without crediting Roosevelt) is he plagiarizing?
This latest HRC charge is so seventh grade!
Posted by: G.B.Kerra | February 18, 2008 1:08 PM
I guess Howard Wolfson has run out of ammunition and must resort to grabbing chunks of pavement to hurl at Obama's Mo-train.
It'll be over soon. If they're doing stuff like this, they're out of both ideas and money, folks.
Posted by: spackle | February 18, 2008 1:10 PM
But, no you black racists and white weaklings have to dig in your heals.
Anyone but the evil muslim in november. No Obama!
Posted by: Mark Stephens | February 18, 2008 12:48 PM
Since Republicans like to ask Muslims to disavow violence, will any Republicans step forward to disavow this digusting statement or will you all remain silent in tacit agreement?
Posted by: paul | February 18, 2008 1:12 PM
Media Garbage. Stiring the pot to find something that will "sell papers".
If the media would serve us well they would be inspecting how Senator Obama's platform measures up in getting this country out of the awful mess it is in. As a voter, that is what I am looking for, not this
DIRT.
Posted by: Bob | February 18, 2008 1:13 PM
It's not about plagiarism. It's just that Obama says that he is different and better and wants to inspire. Yet he borrows speeches from others. Even with DP's permission, it's just not very inspiring to see this guy parrot another's speech and present as his own when the basis for his whole campaign is some kind of implied moral superiority to his opponents and to other politicians in general. It is just one more example of Obama's actions not matching his lofty rhetoric.
Posted by: Leslie | February 18, 2008 1:13 PM
Wow.
This is coming from the lady who says "Fired Up! Ready to Go!" and "Yes We Can!" - two of OBAMA'S campaign slogans- at her boring, straight-laced "rallies"?
Wow.
I've lost total respect for her.
Posted by: Tori | February 18, 2008 1:13 PM
UNBELIEVABLE!!!
The Clintons are just like Republicans, they will say or do anything just to "win".
Posted by: JimmyVenom | February 18, 2008 1:18 PM
McCain, Clinton, Obama is this the best we can do?
Posted by: Oh My | February 18, 2008 1:21 PM
I always think that Obama is lifting his speeches from MLK. Talk about injecting race into politics - how many times is this guy going to summon the spirit of MLK?
Posted by: Mby | February 18, 2008 1:24 PM
Among the many words of wisdom from my grandmother: "Quote others if you ever expect to be quoted." She never told who said such things first. How could it matter?! When individual brilliance becomes folk lore, all the world is learning ... smiling again.
Posted by: Steve in Myrtle Point | February 18, 2008 1:24 PM
Let the "politics of personal destruction" begin. This is the standard Clinton MO, and they are only getting warmed up!
Whatever it takes to win. They are starting to get desperate.
Posted by: Joe Momma | February 18, 2008 1:24 PM
It seems to me that the Clintons plagiarized Governor Patrick's critic using the same criticism against Obama!
A similar response to a similar attack would be appropriate!
Posted by: SactoDan | February 18, 2008 1:25 PM
Obama is an empty suit, a Chicasgo Machine politician who has never really done anything. He skipped every controversial vote as a state senator, won election to the US Senate after divorce case scandals knocked opponents out of the race, and now steals the words of others for his rhetoric. I'm sure his copyright law class at Harvard must have taught him something about that, no?
Posted by: Michael | February 18, 2008 1:26 PM
The only two memorable phrases from the Clinton presidency ...
It all depends what the definition of "is" is. (A Bill original.)
The era of Big Government is over. (No attribution given to Ronald Reagan.)
Posted by: MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN | February 18, 2008 1:28 PM
For those who are supporting Obama because of his inspriring words, are you still inspired or do you feel a little duped?
Posted by: Jim | February 18, 2008 1:28 PM
I'm sure Oprah agrees that it was ok for Obama not to credit the source. She thought it was okay for James Frey to make things up in a Non-fiction book. Credit belongs where credit is due.
Posted by: MB | February 18, 2008 1:28 PM
I'm sure Oprah agrees that it was ok for Obama not to credit the source. She thought it was okay for James Frey to make things up in a Non-fiction book. Credit belongs where credit is due.
Posted by: MBy | February 18, 2008 1:28 PM
I was disappointed to learn that MLK had given the "I have a dream" speech prior to the Wash DC march. He had another speech prepared but delivered that one because it seemed to match the mood of the audience that day. His "I've been to mountain top" was not a new speech but given whenever he sensed danger. So much for my thoughts that he foresaw his death the next day.
There's no doubt that Obama has used phrases previously. I'll bet he used "Yes we can" when he inspired the registration od 150,00 new voters in Chicago that helped Bill Clinton win his 1st presidential election. To be sure Michelle Obama has heard most of his phrases previously but it didn't keep her from deciding that he was authentic in his desire to serve the people. His words inspired her to leave a better paying corporate job and work in jobs that helped poor people train for better jobs.
What is wonderful is that he is smart & charismatic and is willing to put his skills and energy into improving the America we live in.
Posted by: ereece | February 18, 2008 1:30 PM
The other day my wife caught me with another girl and l had to defend myself to her, so l said " l did not have sexual relation with that woman"
Now l quess the Clinton camp will accuse me of PLAGIARISM
Posted by: Julie | February 18, 2008 1:32 PM
You Obmabots are really sacry. You can not even admit when your "chosen one" has done something wrong. You remind me of people that support Bush. They blind themselves to anything that he does. Obama stole this speech plain and simple. Whether he got permission or not, he didnt credit Patrick. He gave the speech as if it were his own. He pawned the speech off on peopel who thought it was his own. THAT IS PLAGARISM. The audience had no idea those were Patricks words and not Obamas. That is the issue, not if Obama and PAtrick had some secret deal that neother one told anyone about until AFTER Obama was caught using someone elses speech.
Posted by: Vinny | February 18, 2008 1:33 PM
If Hillary "borrowed" some other politician's lines, the media would be calling for a congressional investigation and her head, of course.
Posted by: maria | February 18, 2008 1:36 PM
I am a Republican and I am scared. Obama is so refreshing and seemingly has no negatives...McCaim will not be able to beat him. Although I will say, I would MUCH, MUCH rather have Obama as our next President than Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: HL | February 18, 2008 1:36 PM
Plagiarize! My God. The Clinton's must really feel backed into a corner for them to be crying foul over this nonsense. Was this another one of MArk Penn's brilliant ideas? Give me a break. I guess that means that their fresh new, hip Clinton "solutions" strategy isn't working out too well for them. BOO FREAKING HOO! What's more- great speeches are there to be ripped off.......they are a matter of public record and can hardly be plagiarized.
As Hemingway was fond of saying "Good writers borrow, great writers steal".
GO OBAMA! Yes you can! DuVal Patrick said so!
Posted by: Tracey malesa Wheaton | February 18, 2008 1:39 PM
PLEASE HELP!!!
Who do I need to quote for words I have used here?
I'm sure someone have used these words before I have used them here.
I don't want to get sued by the Clintons. Should I invent my own language if I want to say anything?
PLEASE HELP!!!
Posted by: David | February 18, 2008 1:41 PM
CLINTON IS A DEAD FISH out of water she represents the PISCEAN age which is dying out BARACK OBAMA represents the AQUARIAN AGE which is fast approaching the old way of thinking is dead the people have spoken the AQUARIAN children and BARACK OBAMA IS AN AQUARIAN PRESIDENT he has the AQUARIAN ENERGY ALL AROUND HIM IT SPEAKS THROUGH HIM AND RESONATES WITH THE AQUARIAN MASSES OF OUR PEOPLE WHO WANT CHANGE
Posted by: AGE OF AQUARIUS | February 18, 2008 1:41 PM
Slow news day at The Swamp?
Posted by: Yellow Dog Democrat | February 18, 2008 1:47 PM
I am an undecided at this time. But for what it is worth I find this issue taken up by the Clinton camp embarrasing! Is Hillary this desparate to take this as a campaign issue? This will backfire because it shows that she is now weakened.
Posted by: Bill | February 18, 2008 1:53 PM
There was no plagiarism here because the words Obama used were from famous people who've been quoted time and time again, quotes we all use from MLK, JFK, FDR. What did he plagiarize, Deval's use of "words?" Hillary Clinton should be the last one to scream plagiarism because she has constantly stolen Obama's words and his ideas, going back to Obama's first "Have Dinner with Barack"; she then came with (send in a donation and have) "Lunch with Hillary" then Edwards came with "(send in a donation and) Build a house with John Edwards, and then Bill Clinton came with (send in a donation and) "Have popcorn from a bowl with Bill Clinton and watch Hillary debate". Did these people get Obama's clearance first? Has Hillary gotten clearance before she and her campaign held banners after Obama's and screamed "Yes we Can!"? Did they get clearance before using "Change"? Did she get clearance before she used "Fired Up and Ready to go"? And more. Now she is even taking his cadence, and his words of hope, dream, and opportunity, trying to make them her own. Where are the headlines on these thefts? Obama and Deval have said long ago they trade barbs, ideas, words. People try to slam Obama because of who he is, to squash him. He is an inspirational person, he is a brilliant person, he is exciting many people into this political process that have never been or never wanted politics before, and people are jealous of that, jealous of him. He is what who he is and no one can do anything about that as much as they attack him. I believe they really want to follow him too. Every single one of the politicans running for president this election have taken Obama's ideas, especially Hillary Clinton. John Mc
Cain shouted at the end of his rally the other day 'fired up and ready to go'. Mitt Romney's entire campaign was turned around from the Obama idea of 'change', all Mitts banners and mantra had become 'change' written on them. So media, press, where are the headlines when all these people have stolen from Obama? You need to back off Obama with this bull unless you go and attack Clinton and McCain for their plagiarisms of Obama.
And by the way, stop trying to turn the excitement from America and around the world for Obama into what you call 'cult'. Stop trying to reduce it to that, make it ugly, as you're trying to pidgeon hole him. If people are flocking to Obama the way THEY ARE NOT flocking to Hillary or McCain, too bad. He is his own individual. They can try to politicize, reduce, deduce, CULTicize, label, attack his inspirational message all they want, but in the end it is only them who looks stupid, who looks jealous, who looks incompetent. They too need to recognize this unique person has come along for the better of America in a way that only he can do, and maybe, just maybe, both Hillary and McCain need to seriously think about too -- stepping aside. Obama '08!!
Posted by: RuthieM | February 18, 2008 1:57 PM
As Hilary does everything in her power to turn what was once a positive campaign into typical mudslinging, she will not only damage her chances of getting the nomination, but will most likely increase the chance that McCane (spelled that way purposely) will win in November.
She used New York and now she is going to destroy the Democratic party. Huzzah!
Posted by: stu | February 18, 2008 1:59 PM
Obama is busted!
Posted by: Christie | February 18, 2008 2:02 PM
I think old Clinton is trying to tell you dems that Obama`s words are BS to!Ill say one thing at least Billary has plans and not just ideas or phrases!I cant wait to see them up against the repubs in the debates!
Posted by: demsmustgo | February 18, 2008 2:03 PM
We, in Massachusetts, elected Governor Deval "Yes We Can" Patrick a year ago. He immediately got rid of Governor Romney's old Mercury and got himself a brand new Cadillac. He spent thousands on drapes for his office. He hired an 'appointments secretary' for his wife. Ever since then, he's been Governor Deval "What do I do now?" Patrick. Patrick's campaign was also one of style over substance. We barely ever hear a thing about him. His speeches were fluff and he's governing as a non-substantial figurehead. Beware of pol's who use high-flying words of inspiration that aren't grounded in solid ideas. And yes - the same goes for Hillary.
Jim Anderson
Posted by: Jim Anderson | February 18, 2008 2:04 PM
<Obama can't even come with his own lines to feed his cult?