Letters to the Editor
-
be honest
-a certain amount of Democratic Party activism
-a failed attempt to pass health care reform as First Lady
-a not particularly distinguished record in the senate
_____________________________
If she were a true feminist? That's the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard. Stop trying to tell women who they are supposed to be. And Hillary's record is better than Obama's, even just her Senate record. If you don't want to vote for Hillary, fine, you don't have to. But don't pretend that it's because Obama's record is more distunguished than hers, because he has no record at all.
-
"because he has no record at all"
be honest yourself
-
The Moment
Well, her campaign seems to believe it was a magic bullet, as Bill Clinton was sending out a mass email today with a video link to hillarys closing comments, attached with a plea for cash… all from 10 to 2300 Dollar
-
"Stop trying to tell women who they are supposed to be"
Hillary is painting a picture...but it's no sale for me.
Feminism is more than being pro-choice, and having the correct genitalia. She's counting her time as First Lady relevant experience for the presidency...not the actions of an independent woman.
There would be no Hillary candidacy without a Bill presidency.
Hey, my dad was in the Navy...does that mean I was in the Navy? No, it doesn't.
-
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Thank you Walter Shapiro for finally saying something it is possible to love about Hillary. She will take Texas and Ohio, not because of her response in the Debate, but because she is the best candidate and she isn't married to Michelle Obama.
-
Sorry Villemar
You don't have to pull the trigger to be a murderer...Just ask Ted Kennedy...Gob bless the soul of Mary-Jo...
-
Sentimental Traps
Why are Americans and the Media so taken in by Hallmark moments? We cuddle up to the warm, engaging statements made by candidates whose record has been one of conceit and deceit. Are we so devoid of common sense that we allow sentiments to govern our thinking? Are we watching a movie where emotions dispel all reality and we just lay down and let manipulation roll over us? Are we that foolish? Are we that co-dependent? I'm sure we would all want to believe the best in everyone, but that is just what politicians are hoping. Let's get a grip. When you hear such sweet talk, be on-guard. "Come into my parlor said the spider to the fly."
-
@ Okay libertyson, Socs and Twigs, Hutman and others, I am going to break it down for you on why it is difficult to label Clinton with plagiarism.
Clinton's words:
You know, whatever happens, we're going to be fine. You know, we have strong support from our families and our friends. I just hope that we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people. And that's what this election should be about.
Edwards' words:
What's not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be just fine no matter what happens in this election. But what's at stake is whether America is going to be fine.
___________________________________________________________
Edwards: no matter what happens
Clinton: whatever happens
These are two common phases which mean essentially the same thing, thus no plagiarism. People say these all the time. They do not come at the same place in the examples.
Edwards: What's not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be fine no matter what happens in this election.
Clinton: You know, whatever happens we are going to be fine.
In this comparison, we have words and sentiments so general as to be virtually unplagiarizable unless someone copied Edwards word for word. We don't see Clinton doing this here.
Edwards: But what's at stake is whether America is going to be fine.
Clinton: I just hope that we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people.
The word choices are far to different to be a plagiarism of words. The sentiment is borrowed perhaps.
So taking the statements as a whole one could argue that Clinton borrowed but this argument doesn't get very far because there is no original idea here. John Edwards is mouthing the usual political platitudes. Clinton is mouthing the usual political platitudes.
If Clinton were to come to me with this in a paper after I had already read the same by Edwards a couple of months earlier, I would look at the whole of both to see if there were other similarities. If there were none, I would simply ask Clinton to revise this statement: "I just hope that we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people." I would tell her that it sounds to general and that she needs to be more specific.
As to the sentiment itself, the problem lies in the fact that it is so ordinary. It is actually difficult to plagiarize the commonplace and ordinary without copying word for word.
Thesis type statements that seem borrowed are vulnerable to being plagiarisms. They are concise and, ideally, depending upon the level of the student, should be as original as possible.
Take this paragraph from Shelby Steele's book A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited about Obama and Why He Can't Win:
The illusion is that such people are less encumbered by the black identity than others. And this may be true for those mixed-race blacks who choose to distance themselves from the black identity. But for those who don't, this identity is more encumbering than for other blacks because if forces the personality to accommocate more blatant contradictions -- acceptance of racial categories in identity politics, for example, when one is in fact two races. For the mixed-race black, today's highly politicized black identity is reachable only through a degree of self-betrayal.
Now suppose I wanted to write about this subject. Remember you cannot plagiarize subjects; you cannot plagiarize sentiments; you can can plagiarize words and ideas. I write a paragraph like this without citing Steele:
It is an illusion that Obama is the black candidate. It is an illusion that Obama is the biracial candidate. In the United States, he certainly cannot be the white candidate. We would not let him. Can he win the votes of whites experiencing liberal guilt by casting himself as a true black candidate in the mold of Jackson or Sharpton? He certainly cannot, for these are men who remind white liberals of an uncomfortable entitlement. To win the votes of whites, he must allow them to identify with a hopeful, forward-looking persona who can throw off the shackles of racism. However, can he win the votes of blacks by denying the historical injustices which they have suffered? No. If he does this he risks insulting history. He risks being labeled as an Uncle Tom. And so he walks a delicate line, speaking in a slight Memphis accent and the cadences of Martin Luther King in black churches -- this man who grew up in Hawaii -- and speaking the less accented tones of hope to mixed audiences, and sometimes becoming tongue-tied in debate. He is damned if he presents himself as black and he is damned if he does not.
____________________________________________________________
As you see, I have not used Shelby Steel's words at all in my paragraph, but it is stolen just the same, because I have taken his thesis (you would have to read the book to see this clearly) and used it as much as possible in the paragraph. Steele's thesis is not only a unique rephrasing of the biracial dilemma, but he states his case so clearly and so originally using Obama as his example that there is no way that I could currently write the above paragraph and not credit Shelby Steele. Thank you, Mr. Steele.
If I were to hand this in to a teacher and that teacher had read either Steele or one of the numerous reviews of his recent book, I could be in big trouble.