Letters to the Editor
FredrickBernanke
Published Letters: 186 Editor's Choice: 9
-
Running Out of Ammo: Hillary's Plagiarism Charge
[Read the article: John F. Kennedy, plagiarist?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The preposterous allegation of plagiarism against Obama is just another indication of the lack of ammunition the Clinton campaign has to go "negative" against this guy.
Here's plagiarism: Obama delivers, word for word, the Gettysburg Address without attribution to Lincoln. He basks in the glory of those words, his silence implying they were his own.
The case(s) cited by Clinton, Inc. refer to a speech given by an ally of Barack's in which the only notable phrases quoted were those of others. The original speech by the MA Governor was being used as a defense and brilliant refutation of the latest Clinton advertising agency "speeches vs. solutions" ploy.
Language is as essential to human being as water is to fish being.
Barack should stand up before his next audience as say: "I have been accused of making speeches that are too inspiring, of using words in a manner that make people feel good about the future. The following words are not mine; they were written on train ride from Washington DC to Gettysburg PA by a man trying to save his country. [Then read the Gettysburg Address.]
Then, "Those words did not offer specific, detailed solutions; they were not written by an advertising copywriter...but they are words that inspired a nation in 1864(?) and still inspire nations today. I am not ashamed to speak of hope; to see brightness ahead for our country, And I also humbly acknowledge my inferior use of words to the man who wrote that short speech: Abraham Lincoln."
Nixon tried a variation of the "speeches versus solutions" tactic against JFK in 1960. It failed then, and Clinton's use of this inexplicable tactic today speaks more to her efficacy in using the "bully pulpit" than it does to Obama's vacuity of substance. If Super-Wonk Nixon couldn't derail Kennedy, Hillary's chances of success with this tactic are nearly zero.
By its very nature as an obvious advertising slogan, "speeches versus solutions," highlights the contrived, bordering on pathetic, nature of both Hillary and her campaign.
-
@AKA Smith
[Read the article: John F. Kennedy, plagiarist?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The following paragraph is from my article.
Here's plagiarism: Obama delivers, word for word, the Gettysburg Address without attribution to Lincoln. He basks in the glory of those words, his silence implying they were his own.
So to say I "have no idea" what plagiarism is might be a tad harsh?
The original speech of Devlen's was in and of itself nothing more than a compendium of attributed, inspiration quotes from others, with few words of his own to muddy the words of those he quoted. The point of the speech was that words do matter.
Obama obviously adopted the theme of Devlen's speech and much of its form, some of its quotations (and added a few of his own,): certainly not a definition of "originality."
But the context of the situation is a political campaign, not an academic dissertation. Devlen's speech contained little in the way of his own original thoughts or words; the words and thoughts that will live in posterity are the quotes he recited.
Was Obama original? No.
Would he have served his cause better by giving attribution to the idea behind the speech to Devlen? Yes.
Was it at minimum a misjudgment and at worst a deception by Barack? Yes.
Should a voter switch her vote from Obama to Clinton because of this miscue?
From whatever perspective one judges the episode--academic, legal, ethical--the whole thing is chicken-shit in the scheme of things.
-
Running Out of Ammo: Hillary's Plagiarism Charge
[Read the article: Obama's borrowed words]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The preposterous allegation of plagiarism against Obama is just another indication of the lack of ammunition the Clinton campaign has to go "negative" against this guy.
Here's plagiarism: Obama delivers, word for word, the Gettysburg Address without attribution to Lincoln. He basks in the glory of those words, his silence implying they were his own.
The case(s) cited by Clinton, Inc. refer to a speech given by an ally of Barack's in which the only notable phrases quoted were those of others. The original speech by the MA Governor was being used as a defense and brilliant refutation of the latest Clinton advertising agency "speeches vs. solutions" ploy.
Language is as essential to human being as water is to fish being.
Barack should stand up before his next audience as say: "I have been accused of making speeches that are too inspiring, of using words in a manner that make people feel good about the future. The following words are not mine; they were written on train ride from Washington DC to Gettysburg PA by a man trying to save his country. [Then read the Gettysburg Address.]
Then, "Those words did not offer specific, detailed solutions; they were not written by an advertising copywriter...but they are words that inspired a nation in 1864(?) and still inspire nations today. I am not ashamed to speak of hope; to see brightness ahead for our country, And I also humbly acknowledge my inferior use of words to the man who wrote that short speech: Abraham Lincoln."
Nixon tried a variation of the "speeches versus solutions" tactic against JFK in 1960. It failed then, and Clinton's use of this inexplicable tactic today speaks more to her efficacy in using the "bully pulpit" than it does to Obama's vacuity of substance. If Super-Wonk Nixon couldn't derail Kennedy, Hillary's chances of success with this ploy are nearly zero.
By its very nature as an advertising slogan "speeches versus solutions" highlights the contrived, bordering on pathetic, nature of both Hillary, Bill and their campaign.