If it turned out a month ago that John Edwards was using Patrick's words in his speeches,

[Seabiscuit]

I'd be feeling devastated, especially if my main reason for backing him was a feeling that his speeches were inspiring and that what we needed as a country was not so much experience as more inspiration.

I'd feel so devastated I'd probably go hide in a corner for a week.

I certainly wouldn't allow the world to watch my head exploding all over DU by posting in denial mode and pointing fingers at some other candidate.

Flaming me for saying this will only prove my point.

[islandmkl]

1. damn....looks like some at DU want to put some speechwriters out of work

[Seabiscuit]

3. LOL!

I thought they just went back to work.

[babylonsister]

2. Obama's "Plagiarism"

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/02/18/obama-s-quot-plagiarism-quot.aspx

Obama's "Plagiarism"

Mike and Noam have already done a great job explaining the ridiculousness of the Clinton campaign's charge that Obama plagiarized from Deval Patrick, but I thought I'd add one more point. Obama's already on record as admitting he borrows lines from Patrick (and vice versa). Stumping in New Hampshire last December, Obama said:

"But you know in the end, don’t vote your fears. I’m stealing this line from my buddy (Massachusetts Gov.) Deval Patrick who stole a whole bunch of lines from me when he ran for the governorship, but it’s the right one, don’t vote your fears, vote your aspirations. Vote what you believe."

I look forward to the Clintons' next desperate gambit.:eyes:

[dkf]

5. aha!

Case closed.

[Seabiscuit]

7. This is a good example of what I was talking about.

In one speech Obama admits, in his own words to "stealing" a line from Patrick. Yet in most of his speeches, where he quotes Patrick speeches verbatim, he offers no such attribution.

So if it's OK for Obama to "steal" another politician's line, isn't it more than just a bit hypocritical for Obama's people to respond first with a ludicrous attack about Hillary supposedly "stealing" lines Obama falsely claims are his (such as "yes we can", the english translation of Cesar Chavez' "Si se puede")?

That's what I call exploding heads.

[babylonsister]

16. Seems like yours is the only head that's exploding. nt

[Seabiscuit]

23. Good one! Hint:

try to make a teensy weensy bit of sense with your next retort, please.

[babylonsister]

28. Ooh, you told me!

Not, but nice try. I think you're beating the proverbial dead horse here, but hey, have at it.

[Recursion]

37. I don't get it... are you saying he didn't really have Patrick's permission?

Yes, I'm an Obama supporter, but I just don't get this. Everything I've seen said he and Patrick had agreed they could do this. How is it stealing from Patrick?

[Seabiscuit]

41. Not at all.

Plagiarism has to do with lack of attribution, and permission is no defense.

Consider: Student A gives Student B permission to use Student A's term paper as if it were written by Student B. Student B submits the paper to his professor who later discovers it was in fact written by Student A. Student B is definitely going to be disciplined for plagiarism, regardless of the fact that Student B had Student A's permission.

[Recursion]

48. That's certainly valid in an academic context, which this is not

That is only true in academics because the whole point is about the progress of the individual student. Although my circuitry profs don't care if we share work on our homework without attribution, personally.

From what I've read, Patrick and Obama copylefted a lot of their material to each other. It's like Linux in a speech...

[Recursion]

49. Maybe I'm coming too much from a programmer's perspective

I have license to reuse some people's code without attribution and I do it all the time. Even for profit. Does that make me a dishonest programmer?

As I mentioned in my other reply, my profs allow us to work in groups for our homework without attribution. Are they bad professors?

[Seabiscuit]

50. Apparently programming is "another ball of wax" entirely.

Oh, shit. I can't attribute the "ball of wax" reference. I have no idea who started it. Woe is me!

[ProSense]

10. Hillary's campaign

The Clinton Campaign Just Now...

February 18, 2008 11:33 AM

In a conference call just now the Clinton campaign would not guarantee that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, has never used someone else's rhetoric without crediting them.

I asked Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson and Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass, if they could assure the public that neither Clinton nor McGovern has ever done what Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, did when he used the rhetoric of Gov. Deval Patrick without footnoting him.

They would not.

In fact, Wolfson seemed to say it wouldn't be as big a deal if it were discovered that Clinton had "lifted" such language.

"Sen. Clinton is not running on the strength of her rhetoric," Wolfson said.

Hmmmm.

So it's a big deal only because Obama's "rhetoric" is powerful and appealing?

Speaking of lifting language without permission.

[shaniqua6392]

4. I can just imagine what the response would be

if Senator Clinton had spoken the same exact speech as someone else. All hell would break loose. I just wish we could have some equality regarding our two candidates.

[ProSense]

6. How do you feel about this:

Edwards lifted Kerry's 2004 platform:

John Kerry (2004) on Corporations

John Edwards (2007) on Corporations

They've all lifted policy from Kerry's campaign


Is there an echo in here?

[jackson_dem]

9. You're cleverly comparing plagiarism to having similar policies

There is such a thing as Democratic boilerplate.

[ProSense]

17. Your "boilerplate" spin

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=79567&mesg_id=79567">doesn't hold up (video).

Those were Kerry's policies.

[jackson_dem]

25. Post replies for once instead of links

Kerry was nothing but Democratic boilerplate. His campaign wasn't about issues but him having been in Vietnam. If we wanted military experience we should have went with General Clark instead of Lt. Kerry.

[Straight Shooter]

44. It's Links Syndrome, similar to Tourette's but twice as annoying.

Hear, hear on Clark instead of Kerry. I wanted the whole dish of lasagna, not the wimpy noodle.

[jackson_dem]

54. It was the logical thing if we wanted military experience against Bush!

[ProSense]

46. If the voters had wanted Edwards or Clark, they would have won the primary. n/t

[jackson_dem]

53. How'd that work out for us? Lt. Kerry got swiftboated

General Clark wouldn't have.

[ProSense]

56. You can't know that because Kerry won the primary. n/t

[babylonsister]

19. Nah, I think I hear crickets! nt

[calmblueocean]

8. So you think John Edwards had no speechwriters?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wendy-button/#blogger_bio

[MessiahRp]

11. Edwards was plagiarized though by Hillary.

She took his "This is personal to me" line and stole it a day after the debate and shed some crocodile tears in New Hampshire and hoped for a boost. It worked. Every great speech in world history has been given in some form or another. If Obama liked what Patrick said in his speech and he gave PERMISSION to use it, great, fine... It's not like people don't plagiarize MLK or Kennedy all of the time.

But at least he gets permission from the living people he used the lines from. Hillary has blatantly been stealing her opponents lines and slogans all throughout the primary.

That's the disgraceful part.

In closing, there's nothing that says you can't say someone else's words and believe in them and convey them with true passion and meaning. If I were speaking I could say and believe great lines from JFK, MLK and others and do it convincingly because while they were other people's words originally, they fit my beliefs and values and are an accurate representation of what I would want to offer to people as well. There's nothing wrong with that. If you believe it, it makes it real even if you didn't say it first.

However Hillary doesn't believe any of what she has stolen. She is a political opportunist and this is just another example of her inability to connect with voters on the issues (which she claims she is more substantial on) and rather she has to get in the gutter and pray that this works. Her stances on issues and her going into the gutter are what she has been using as strengths but they happen to be the very reason she is losing and will continue to lose.

Rp

[Seabiscuit]

14. Why can't some people get it through their thick skulls that this isn't about Hillary?

My thread is about John Edwards.

This morning's brouhaha was all about Obama.

Trying to change the subject to Hillary completely fails to address either.

[MessiahRp]

22. Seems to me your OP was supposed to shame Obama supporters

Hard to feel shame though when the accuser is the most blatant plagiarist in this campaign.

Rp

[Seabiscuit]

26. Nice juicy set of rationalizations you've got working you over there.

[Adelante]

51. It's about Edwards, okay

''For all those politicians and pollsters who say, wait a minute, why are you taking one valuable day to come back to Kansas to campaign, Kansas is a red state,'' Mr. Edwards said. ''To John Kerry and I, there is no red state, there is no blue state, there is only one United States of America.''

August 8, 2004 - Lawrenceville KS

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9506E7DD113CF93AA3575BC0A9629C8B63

And he used it other times, too. He liked it after Barack said it at the convention. Big deal :shrug:

[More Than A Feeling]

12. Way to try and summarily quash other points of view.

That shit doesn't fly among Democrats.

[Seabiscuit]

21. Huh????

:wtf:

[More Than A Feeling]

30. Tell people to go and hide rather than defend their candidate

and then say if they respond anyway, you win that way, too. Trying to set up a "heads, I win, tails you lose" scenario is bullshit.

[Seabiscuit]

32. DOUBLE HUH?

I never told anyone to "go and hide".

I just said I'd feel so devastated that if my candidate turned out to be quoting Patrick in his speeches as if the words were his own, I'd feel so devastated that I'd probably hide in a corner for a week.

I also said I wouldn't allow people to see my head exploding all over DU posting a bunch of denial.

That isn't telling anyone to do anything.

But it does imply that I have been witnessing a lot of exploding heads on DU this morning.

[More Than A Feeling]

34. Fine, play dumb. I've made my point. nt

[Seabiscuit]

36. Projecting again, are we?

[Benhurst]

13. I was depressed thinking all that feel-good pap was Obama's. I don't

know whether it's reassuring or even more depressing knowing that it was borrowed material. Where are the Lincolns and Douglases when we need them?

[bunnies]

15. If Edwards and Patrick were great friends who shared rhetoric over the years...

You'd be devastated over it? Really?

[Seabiscuit]

18. Absolutely. Re-read my OP. Turn your brain to non-reflexive mode and maybe you'll get it.

[bunnies]

29. I'm trying to get it.

I am.

But heres my opinion: its not like the speeches were verbatim. We're talking about a line or two here or there. I watched Devals inauguration speech and Obama has always reminded me of him. But knowing they went to school together, consistently exchange ideas, and share an advisor (Axelrod) a similarity doesnt bother me. I just cant bring myself to feel that Obamas saying "just words?" negates everything he's ever said.

[Seabiscuit]

33. That's some of the denial I was referring to.

It IS like Obama's speeches were "verbatim" in that he wasn't copying just " a line or two here or there". He quoted exact phrases and sentences from Patrick again and again in his speeches.

And of course, I'm not suggesting anywhere that Obama's conduct in this regard "negates everything he's ever said".

[bunnies]

45. It's not denial though Seabiscuit.

And I dont want to have a semantics debate, but how does a 'line or two' differ from a 'phrase' or 'sentence'? IMHO, they're the same.

I *do* get what you're saying. And youre definitely entitled to your feelings. All I'm saying though, is that it doesnt bother me. I've long known about the link between Obama & Patrick. And the thing is that since the constantly share ideas... we can't really know who came up with what. But either way, the sharing of phrases doesnt bother me.

The percentage of shared phrases might be, what, 1%? As I said... I understand why you feel the way you do... but even if Edwards had done it, it'd be OK by me. I guess I expect a certain amount of rhetoric to be borrowed. Like I said to WesDem, there is no such thing as "new" music either.

[Seabiscuit]

47. I do think you're trying to be reasonable,

but I think I refered to Obama using entire phrases and sentences over and over again in his speeches, that he borrowed from Patrick without attribution.

And for all we know, this morning's news may just be the tip of the rhetorical iceberg.

The way I see it, trying to diminish what actually happened in addition to trying to diminish its importance is a form of denial.

Obama has risen in popularity in direct proportion to the perception that he is inspirational in his oratory. When it turns out that a good bit of that oratory isn't even his own, I know I'd feel pretty deflated if I had felt inspired by it.

Beyond all this, I don't think any of it will make any difference in a few days' time. Voters tend to have short memories.

[Adelante]

20. That's innocence for you, I guess

David Axelrod worked for Edwards, Patrick and Obama. I imagine a thorough search of all three candidate's speeches over time might turn up similarities. There is really nothing much new in political speech. Nobody invents nothin'.

[bunnies]

31. Exactly.

Its like... tying to find a piece of music that doesnt sound like something else. Most (honest) musicians will say it doesnt exist. And they're correct.

[GarbagemanLB]

24. I guess we're going to have a plagiarist as our next president. Damn.

[Seabiscuit]

27. Quit trying so hard to be inspirational, damnit!

:rofl:

[donheld]

35. Is any speach really new

Totally new?

[zulchzulu]

38. Patrick said Obama could use his words...that's NOT plagiarism

If Edwards used Patrick's words without having talked with him LIKE Barack Obama had, then it would be plagiarism.

[MNDemNY]

59. No, using the words without attribution IS plagiarism.

Look it up Too bad your candidate is a down-low plagiarist.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Seabiscuit]

42. Ahh... we've got a live one, all right. DU has been blessed with its own psychic!

[RoadRage]

40. Obama's speech GIVING is great.. but, it's not the reason I am supporting him.

He actually writes a lot of his own stuff - something many candidates don't do. So, he's already one up there.

But, I like him for his policies on Iraq, Healthcare, and the economy.. not his ability to swoon 20,000 people at a time (although that is nice and will bode well in a General Election).

And, plagerize means to take credit for someone elses work without permission. There seems to be plenty of "permission" here, so that term (plagerism) sort of goes out the door, doesn't it?

[Rageneau]

43. Is Obama a 'spell-binding orator' or is he a hack?

Spell-binding orators write their own stuff.

Hacks try to pass someone else's words off as their own.

Which did Obama do?

[BlackVelvet04]

52. When a candidate is hailed as an

inspirational figure it would certainly behoove that candidate to use his own words to inspire.

As for the argument that Hillary stole his slogans........."all fired up" "get fired up" and "yes we can" were used in cheers back in the 70's and maybe even before. I don't think you can plagiarize a cheer.

[TheDonkey]

55. It was an applause line, not his entire speech, get a grip. This was uncovered a week ago

and i guess now some journalists have been browsing DU to get dirt.

[stillcool]

57. I guess it's a good thing...

that words don't matter.

[spooky3]

58. thanks, Seabiscuit.

I hope I would feel and act that way too.