Video: The audacity of derivativeness
posted at 9:04 am on February 18, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Via Wolking’s World. “Shouldn’t that be the audacity of plagiarism, big A?” Well, it’s old news that Obama and Patrick lift lines from each other and if Patrick’s upset about the lack of attribution, he’s being a good soldier and keeping it to himself. From the Times:
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.
You can’t plagiarize someone with their consent; that’s not theft, it’s Christmas. But console yourself with (1) the comically grotesque manufactured outrage that surely would have bubbled over on nutroots sites if it had been McCain caught lifting lines from, say, Lindsey Graham; (2) this useful reminder that the Messiah is in fact a calculating politician and not, ahem, “the triumph of word over flesh,” although maybe Deval Patrick is; and (3) the warning from no less a figure than Douglas Wilder of a total, vintage 1968 convention meltdown this summer. Yes we can!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
The “words” they speak of were either proceeded or followed by action. Obama is as hollow as a chocolate Easter bunny.
regal on February 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Wow! How’s this Patrick dude? His oration in that clip made the oprabamanator look like a lightweight.
Sadly, that might be more damning to BHO in today’s political environment than the charge of plagiarism.
y2church on February 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Regardless of who Obama is copying his speeches from — with permission or not — the troubling thing is that he equates his empty rhetoric with the eloquent, history making speeches of FDR, JFK and MLK and his trained dolphin sycophants cheer like crazy when they should be doubled over in laughter.
miles on February 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Regardless of whether or not he has Patrick’s consent, Obama should still be hit over the head with this. Seriously, he’s not even peddling his own nothingness.
Besides, the thought that MLK, JFK, et al were merely saying “just words” is ridiculous on its face (and somewhat offensive).
amkun on February 18, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Perhaps Patrick will be White House spokesman in the Obama Administration.
Ordinary1 on February 18, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Yes, they are both correct, just words. Judge a man by his deeds not his words.
Wade on February 18, 2008 at 9:36 AM
He’s an idiot. Same empty suit, different last name.
His current plan, inbetween making taxpayers pay for his new Cadillac is to kick Catholics in the teeth while building up 3 resort casinos.
Also, from the Headlines thread:
X2.
BKennedy on February 18, 2008 at 9:39 AM
The problem with this is Obama and Patrick were being criticized for THEIR words, and now they try to turn this around with others words. Neither of these men have ownership of those words. It is offensive to MLK, JFK, et al that Patrick and Obama would drag these words out and try to take ownership to cover their empty rhetoric.
Wade on February 18, 2008 at 9:43 AM
Does this mean the Messiah is the tool of the Deval?
Dang, I kill me sometimes….
MrScribbler on February 18, 2008 at 9:45 AM
That was blatant theft. If my opinion of Democrats weren’t already so low as to be warmed by magma at the earth’s center, this would lower it even more. Even their nice guys aren’t so nice.
Doug on February 18, 2008 at 9:45 AM
I had the same thought. Obama shouldn’t steal other people’s lines if he can’t at least deliver them better than the original. I thought that was the only argument for BHO was his great speaking skills. What a phony.
pecan pie on February 18, 2008 at 9:46 AM
The Audacity of Hoping that you don’t get caught plagiarizing a speech that relied heavily on quotes lifted from other speeches.
Buddahpundit on February 18, 2008 at 9:55 AM
I hope the Republicans are getting ready the Patrick/Obamma comparisons. Maybe Hilary will beat them to the punch.
davod on February 18, 2008 at 9:56 AM
The dream lives on. But I’m guessing that the Denver Police ain’t the Chicago PD circa ‘68. It’s too bad … Still, it is the Season of Hope.
Vote Sauron 08 on February 18, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Oh, I’m DYIN’ here!! That’s great!
tree hugging sister on February 18, 2008 at 10:04 AM
Good Friends, Better Enemies
Will Gov. Patrick inadvertently sabotage Barack Obama in the Massachusetts Democrat primary?….
Certainly, Clinton’s win in New Hampshire gave observers reason to question the value of Patrick’s endorsement — and of the hundreds of Obama volunteers who streamed up from Massachusetts.
In fact, some, including WBZ’s Jon Keller, have suggested that Obama’s similarity to Patrick may have done him more harm than good among New Hampshirites, who are well aware of the lack of quick progress that the Massachusetts governor has made.
This could be even more of a problem in Massachusetts. Frankly, a lot of Massachusetts Democrats now wonder whether they were snookered into believing that an unknown and inexperienced candidate, however inspirational his rhetoric, could really change the entrenched Beacon Hill bureaucracy, let alone Capitol Hill’s.
TheBigOldDog on February 18, 2008 at 10:08 AM
This story has shorter legs then Gary Coleman. The donks wouldn’t care if 60 minutes published photos of a pull string coming out of his back.
Limerick on February 18, 2008 at 10:09 AM
I love this site.
http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/
ninjapirate on February 18, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Deval delivered it much better.
Dash on February 18, 2008 at 10:18 AM
The Clinton’s are looking for any club to beat him over the head with. They went back to primary school. You don’t think they’ll be doing mashups and painting him to be Deval Redux, a Governor who basically was forced into hiding?
TheBigOldDog on February 18, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Looks like Obama has been taking phony lessons from Romeney.
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 18, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Well, BOD, I really don’t think Hill can make use of these kind of stories against him. All these hit pieces are doing for Hill is painting her as the mean-ol-lady. We care. This kind of story might dent him in the general, but the donks really don’t care about the facts. They seem to only care about the feeling.
Limerick on February 18, 2008 at 10:31 AM
Wow, now if he could only take idiot lessons from you, he’d have it all down pat.
EyeSurgeon on February 18, 2008 at 10:32 AM
Obama’s appeal is basically emotional, rather than rational. So he doesn’t need to present rational positions on policy issues. In fact, they tend to inject dissonance into his emotional attraction and stand in his way.
Criticisms of him for lack of ’substance’ run off his supporters like water off a duck’s back. The reason: Emotional commitments are rarely defeated with rational arguments. Usually the way to defeat one emotional commitment is by asserting a competing emotional commitment.
The radical left has mastered the emotional game. Until conservatives (and McCain supporters) learn to play successfully on this field, no amount of intellectual debate will likely save us, and we can expect a lot of losses at the polls.
petefrt on February 18, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Good to see you comment in between fingerpainting and recess.
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 18, 2008 at 10:42 AM
And then there’s:
“I am not a crook.”
“Read my lips, no new taxes.”
“The era of big government is over.”
“I did not have sex with that woman.”
Just words.
Bigfoot on February 18, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Exactly. Messiah isn’t far from the mark with this gentleman. With a dem congress….well just too scary to think about.
Limerick on February 18, 2008 at 10:47 AM
Funny. The image that will start to emerge is that all black politicians have to spew the same vapid lines. Pull string, indeed. But who pulls the string?
Jaibones on February 18, 2008 at 10:50 AM
I know, especially if they raise taxes and attack business as they say they will. I’m starting to worry about salvaging my retirement savings.
petefrt on February 18, 2008 at 10:53 AM
Oh My
GODBarack, that site is awesomeright2bright on February 18, 2008 at 10:55 AM
ROFL, those of us in NH with some active grey cells know that Deval and Hussein are both a couple a of gibbering empty suits.
dogsoldier on February 18, 2008 at 10:57 AM
Obama’s next speech:
“We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw…”
He’ll claim made that up himself, too.
Alas!
Hope and Change alternate like the winking of a hypnotist’s coin.
The crowds seem to buy it.
You are getting sleepy… sleepy…. pull the lever for Barack… sleepy….
profitsbeard on February 18, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Not to be nit picky but didn’t amkun plagiarize my take about eight minutes after I posted it?
Regardless of who Obama is copying his speeches from — with permission or not — the troubling thing is that he equates his empty rhetoric with the eloquent, history making speeches of FDR, JFK and MLK
miles on February 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM
Regardless of whether or not he has Patrick’s consent, Obama should still be hit over the head with this. Seriously, he’s not even peddling his own nothingness. Besides, the thought that MLK, JFK, et al were merely saying “just words” is ridiculous on its face (and somewhat offensive).
amkun on February 18, 2008 at 9:31 AM
miles on February 18, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Good stuff. The wheels may be getting a little shaky and loose. If hillary is the smartest woman in the world they will turn this into a campaign ad fast.
By the way, from what I understand, deval wasn’t just about words. I hear his actions are already screwing up massechusetts.
peacenprosperity on February 18, 2008 at 11:11 AM
But it isn’t very Messiah like to ‘borrow’ your “words” is it? In fact, isn’t he proving Hillary(D)’s point?
“Senator Barack Obama rejects the ‘politics of the past’ while borrowing from its phoniest chapters. His promised caravan toward a new Camelot, with Teddy Kennedy bringing up the rear, may generate feelings in Chris Matthews’ leg and cause women to swoon, but over time it is likely to pall and bore. Obama’s speeches are like cotton candy, sweet but substanceless and dangerous to one’s health if turned into a steady diet. Is he saying nothing? Unfortunately not. Glimpsed through the haze of his sophistical rhetoric is something, and it is tiresomely false, namely, the dogmatic assertion that ‘hope’ and liberalism are synonymous. His reliance on sentiment and rhetoric rather than reasoning to advance that assertion will not inspire a new politics of bipartisan unity but revive old and bitter resentments. Liberalism, after all, has no monopoly on hope, and the chapters of history to which Obama makes implicit reference—the New Frontier and Great Society—concluded in despair. While the Democrats won’t stop squealing over him for some time, the larger culture has already begun to mock Obama as a platitudinous lightweight.” — George Neumayr
“Up to now, the force of Sen. Obama’s physical presentation has so dazzled audiences that it has been hard to focus on precisely what he is saying. ‘Yes, we can! Yes, we can!’ Can what? Listen closely to that… speech. Unhinge yourself from the mesmerizing voice. What one hears is a message that is largely negative, illustrated with anecdotes of unremitting bleakness. Heavy with class warfare, it is a speech that could have been delivered by a Democrat in 1968, or even 1928… It is a depressing message to ride all the way to the White House… In late December, Gallup released a poll in which 84% of respondents said they were satisfied with their own lives. At some point in the next 10 months, people will have to square Sen. Obama’s Grapes of Wrath message with the reality of their lives. Unease about the economy is real, but Sen. Obama is selling more than that. He is selling deep grievance over the structure of American society. That’s the same message as John Edwards, or Dennis Kucinich for that matter.” — Daniel Henninger
“Speech delivery counts for little on the world stage unless you have convictions and, yes, the vision to see beyond the front row seats. The Democrats may remember their lines, but how quickly they forget the lessons of the past. I have witnessed five major wars in my lifetime, and I know how swiftly storm clouds can gather on a peaceful horizon. The next time a Saddam Hussein takes over a Kuwait, or North Korea brandishes a nuclear weapon, will we be ready to respond? In the end, it all comes down to leadership. That is what this country is looking for now. It was leadership here at home that gave us strong American influence abroad and the collapse of imperial Communism. Great nations have responsibilities to lead, and we should always be cautious of those who would lower our profile because they might just wind up lowering our flag.” — Ronald Reagan
DANEgerus on February 18, 2008 at 11:17 AM
Obama-nation!
sleepy-beans on February 18, 2008 at 11:28 AM
It’s not theft. It’s looting.
Damn looters.
Obama’s looting goes hand-in-hand with Obama-Messiah’s desire to loot American tax payers to create Govt programs for every facet of our life.
Montana on February 18, 2008 at 11:33 AM
“I personally believe that us U.S. Americans are unable to hope because, uh, some…people out there in our Obamanation don’t have hope, and, uh, I believe that our education like such as South Africa and, uh the Iraq everywhere like, such as and…I believe that they should, our education over here in the US should help the US, er, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future, for our chidren.”
Just words :)
sleepy-beans on February 18, 2008 at 11:38 AM
He has fooled a lot of people, a lot of the time.
Kini on February 18, 2008 at 11:39 AM
Dude, I guess I’m the Barack Obama to your Deval Patrick.
amkun on February 18, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Obama may as well steal lines from people who (once upon a time) said something eloquent. Because when he “speaks for himself” he ends up doing one of two things; Either
A. Using the same tired “class war” rhetoric we’ve heard before (as several posters, including you, have already pointed out); and/or
B. Managing to say something that sounds good, but when you think about it, you quickly realize is absolutely ridiculous.
Case in point;
Last night, at a campaign rally here in OH, Obama delivered the following statement;
Sounds good, very egalitarian. But……
1.How many corporations really have an 8,760:1 ratio between the wages of the CEO and one of their typical hourly workers? (This is not a rhetorical question- I honestly don’t know, and I strongly suspect The Prophet Obama doesn’t either.)
2. And if one or more do, so what? Who has more influence on the corporations overall performance? Who makes the decisions? And who, if he or she makes a mistake, is going to have a bigger impact on the corporation (and incidentally, everybody who works for it)? And is going to take a much bigger, harder, and longer fall if they do get it wrong?
Put it in this context; Compare a Machinist’s Mate 2C (does the Navy still use that description?) aboard the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan (CVN-76), to the commander of the Reagan’s Carrier Battle Group (CVBG), who is almost guaranteed to be at least a Rear Admiral, Lower Half. Who is the higher pay grade? And as counterpoint, if something goes badly wrong with that CVBG, who’s going to get called on the carpet in front of a Board of Inquiry to explain exactly what came unstuck, and why whatever it was wasn’t rectified immediately?
My money’s on the gentleman on the bridge with the stars on his shirt collar, not the gentleman in dungarees down in the engineering spaces just above and for’ard of No. 2 shaft alley.
If Obama cannot understand the concept of a “chain of command” and the differences in responsibility and compensation at its different levels in a civilian organization, I doubt he even comprehends the need for same in a military formation. Or else, he does understand one, or the other, or both, but prefers demagoguery to simply using facts and ordinary common sense to solicit the support of the people.
Which means that he is either too stupid to be President, or too dishonest and cynical.
Hey, wait a minute. I thought Obama was supposed to be an alternative to the Clintons!
From here, it looks rather like (as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once observed), “A difference, which makes no difference, is no difference.”
cheers
eon
eon on February 18, 2008 at 11:49 AM
No surprises here. Deval got elected with nothing but empty rhetoric and a little charm. He beat a candidate who had more substance in her fingertips than that dolt has in his whole being.
Barry is trying to do the same thing — snow the masses with his soaring rhetoric about essentially nothing, flash that Pepsodent smile and make the weanies scream with delight.
This is what lazy Americans apparently are looking for in a leader. Pathetic.
D2Boston on February 18, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Check out the DrudgeReport. Its on!
cjs1943 on February 18, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Oh ye of little faith in the Big Old Dog:
WAR OVER WORDS: CLINTON TEAM ACCUSES OBAMA OF ‘PLAGIARISM’
TheBigOldDog on February 18, 2008 at 12:28 PM
See, the thought that occurs to me, completely originally, is that, regardless of who Obama is copying his speeches from — with permission or not — the troubling thing is that he equates his empty rhetoric with the eloquent, history making speeches of FDR, JFK and MLK and his trained dolphin sycophants cheer like crazy when they should be doubled over in laughter.
CK MacLeod on February 18, 2008 at 12:51 PM
I just watched a WFMJ NBC 21 LIVE Barack Obama news conference at a local plant he is touring today in North East Ohio and was asked directly about this supposed controversy. He mentioned that he and Governor Patrick are great friends and consult each other closely on campaign issues and how to respond to attacks.
More importantly Barack pointed out the numerous campaign stump speech lines that Hillary Clinton has lifted from his campaign so far in the past two months, “Fired up ready to go!” being one, just like McCain did last Tuesday night in his victory speech. There haven’t been Hot Air BREAKING! headlines over those, and not at Drudge, but now that it’s Obama saying something similar to his friend Governor Patrick the Clinton water carriering conservatives are coming out of the woodwork screaming WE GOT YOU!!!
This last minute “controversy” is much to do about nothing. Much like Drudge has turned into the HillaryClintonSympathyReport lately it’s starting to happen here too…. this site is becoming ‘Hillary Clinton’s Hot Air, we can’t get our fill’
olympian2008 on February 18, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Copying another person’s speech, campaign slogan and delivery method are nothing to be concerned about especially when that’s all you’re running on. Don’t worry, it won’t hurt his candidacy. I learned from Deval’s campaign that Liberals want to be deceived. They go into it willingly. The reality the day after is something then need to work on however since they basically drove Deval into hiding when his actions did not live up to his rhetoric (and we’re talking about right out of the gate, his very first days in office).
Don’t mind us. We like carrying water for the Clintons.
TheBigOldDog on February 18, 2008 at 1:09 PM
No, olympian. What you don’t get is that the “plagiarism” charge was a straw man from the start. The problem is that Obama’s response to criticism that he deploys empty rhetoric, and that he is short on substance, consists of even more blatantly empty rhetoric – a canned and phony, typically pretentious and arrogant, typically evasive and manipulative pre-fabricated passage that may have been written on the spot for Deval Patrick when he faced similar criticisms a couple of years ago, or that may even have been concocted even earlier by the man behind the curtain, David Axelrod. The whole thing goes to the hubris that the under-qualified Senator from Illinois already revealed when he first announced his candidacy.
This is hardly the first time that Americans in large numbers have gathered spellbound around a charlatan. His election would represent the first time the country as a whole truly fell for one.
And his defenders are already trying to claim that the attack on his inexperience, unpreparedness, emptiness, and dissembling is somehow racist.
PS – sorry, miles, I couldn’t resist the earlier post. Your original formulation was very nicely stated – though I think that the trained dolphin is probably the one on stage. The crowd just oohs and aahs like any crowd gathered around a well-executed show.
CK MacLeod on February 18, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Meanwhile on CNN the backlash has started
William Amos on February 18, 2008 at 1:16 PM
Hollow Easter bunnies make me sad. :(
Boo! on the hollow chocolate bunnies!
Chakra Hammer on February 18, 2008 at 1:20 PM
BTW this is how ABC News played some of it
Video player political plays of the week
William Amos on February 18, 2008 at 1:20 PM
The Audacity of a Plagiarist.
Chakra Hammer on February 18, 2008 at 1:21 PM
Ok so is there no ratio that would you make pause? If the CEO of a corporation is making a million times more money than his lowest paid employee, would that worry you? Is the rule simply ‘what the market will bear’, with no consequences?
I think the issue Obama raises is a very important one. I think it’s good to have incentives such as higher salary, but that incentive should not be unlimited. The question then becomes, what is an appropriate ratio. Is it 8700? is it 1000? is it 10000? I am not sure on the exact number, but there is something wrong where there is that much discrepancy.
Finally, this argument on who makes the more complex and risky decisions should be paid more is not clear to me. Is that a valid criteria?
If I compare the salaries of soldiers, personal injury lawyers, engineers, mecanics, maintenance personel, CEOs, baseball players, etc, and put them all on a scale, do I then get to conclude the higher you are, is that how I determine if the person will ‘take a much bigger, harder, and longer fall if they do get it wrong’?
mycowardice on February 18, 2008 at 1:54 PM
AP, from the other thread, on same topic.
“Adult and substantive“? – No, we have become a country with the majority in it being idiots. Sad, very sad for the country, as many of them are the ignorant youth.
Entelechy on February 18, 2008 at 2:34 PM
A War Hero vs. A plagairist: I’m liking our chances the closer and closer we get to election time.
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 18, 2008 at 3:08 PM
But plagiarism is only a crime because it’s stealing the intellectual property of another. By leftist definition, it isn’t fair for MLK and his heirs to receive so much coin of respect; even Patrick shouldn’t get to “earn” more credit for having put those words together in that particular order first.
It’s just redistribution of wealth. Nothing new here, folks. It takes a village to raise Social Consciousness.
Nuance.
The Monster on February 18, 2008 at 3:14 PM
And spelling lessons.
kcd on February 18, 2008 at 3:27 PM
kcd on February 18, 2008 at 3:27 PM
Still a little bitter since Mav disposed of your Aumish candidates with ease?
THE CHOSEN ONE on February 18, 2008 at 3:32 PM
Actually, when Obama started his speech I thought exactly of the quotes he would use because they are the inspirational quotes about civil rights or America that I have heard many people quote. I also thought that Obama was going for a “words mean something” as a diss of Clintonian “the meaning of is is” type thing. Words do matter so I’m with Obama on this one…just this one! Now Obama lets hear your take on the meaning of fetus; human or disposable garbage. Inspire me on that, oh, great one.
deedledee on February 18, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Jesse? Jesse Jackson, Jr., is that you?
Jaibones on February 18, 2008 at 3:40 PM
My final word on this subject is that it’s hardly the first time Americans in large numbers have gathered spellbound around a charlatan. His election would represent the first time the country as a whole truly fell for one.
And his defenders are already trying to claim that the attack on his inexperience, unpreparedness, emptiness, and dissembling is somehow racist.
miles on February 18, 2008 at 6:59 PM
Mind if I quote you on that, miles?
CK MacLeod on February 18, 2008 at 8:09 PM
how much did he lift from the creepy reverend of his for his book, the audacity of hope? Wasn’t that his sermon?
CrimsonFisted on February 18, 2008 at 8:23 PM
Comment pages: