Triangulating Echoes

Things must be desperate in Clinton world to accuse Obama of plagiarism.

"Top advisers and supporters of Sen. Hillary Clinton today accused Sen. Barack Obama of plagiarism for delivering a speech in Wisconsin that included a nearly-identical passage to one delivered two years earlier by then candidate for governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick."

In order to clarify the context, the "she" that Deval Patrick is referring to is Kerry Healey, who was the Republican nominee running for Governor for the state of Massachusetts, having served as Williard "Mitt" (Wink Martindale) Romney's Lieutenant Governor, accusing Deval Patrick of empty rhetoric.

It's interesting that the surrogate who speaks up is Jim McGovern-a Massachusetts Representative, who you would think would know a little bit about context:

"'It is striking to me that it is word for word," McGovern said. 'I think it says something about the origin of his rhetoric. I'm not sure if the origin of his speeches, if they're his speeches, or if they're someone else's'."

The crucial point here is that answering a question is not plagiarism if the questions are framed similarly: In other words, if I am asked if 2+2=4, my answer of 4 cannot be plagiarized. If I am charged with "empty rhetoric", pulling out uplifting quotations as support cannot be plagiarized, especially not in this context. Sure-Obama could have pulled out a Churchill quotation, or something like "'Live Long and Prosper'-just words?". The quotations in question are public domain to Americans, as surely as the Psalms in the Bible are. Thus, this doesn't pass the smell test (and I say this as an Educator).

It is the charge, and its warrants that are most troubling-and most illuminating about Hillary Clinton: Since Super Tuesday, both she and McCain have been working the same side of the semantic street, with both triangulating on the meme of "Obama as empty words", casting herself as the "proven, solid ideas" candidate:

"Clinton inferred that Obama’s campaign and was more rhetoric than reality... 'My opponent makes speeches. I offer solutions. It’s one thing to get people excited. I want to empower you'.”

Kerry Healey, in the midst of the 2006 gubernational campaign, was dismissive of Deval Patrick's platform:

"At a candidates forum last week, the moderator asked each of us to say something nice about the other candidates. Kerry Healey rather grudgingly said, 'Well, he can give a good speech'.”

Fascinating, really, how similar the contexts are, and thus, how similar the charges these two "different" candidates are about Obama and Patrick, respectively. If we turn Rep. McGovern's question around, then we can't be sure of the origin of the charges, or if they are indeed Healey's charges, or the Clinton campaign's. I mean, they are suspiciously similar, right?

If the Clinton campaign wants to continue this plagiarism meme, then, by their standards, is it reasonable to say that she is plagiarising Healey? Maybe we can drop this plagiarism talk, and call the whole thing "echoing".

But, then again, if you are a Democrat, who do you want your nominee "echoing"? The First Black Governor of Massachusetts, a Democrat? Or Romney's Lt. Governor? And what of the implications of this echo?

I guess if you are okay with your nominee echoing the GOP yet again...

Update: Big Media...

Are seemingly trying to make hay out of what is a bullshit non issue (re-coronate Hillary). It drives me crazy not because I am partisan here (because I am) but because I cannot see how this plagiarism:

1. Obama did not "copy" Patrick's phraseology (watch the video).
2. These "quotations" are famous enough to be considered, in the context of this country, to common knowledge.
3. If we cannot consider these quotations common knowledge, then is Patrick guilty of the plagiarism, for not attributing King, Roosevelt, Kennedy, etc?
4. If Obama and Patrick are plagiarists, then is King a plagiarist for directly referencing not only our founding documents, but the Bible as well, and religious songs?
5. Was there anybody in that audience, or in the media, that somehow thought that Obama came up with "We have nothing to fear" and did these same people somehow believe that these allusions were Patrick's invention?
6. I want to reiterate this: Why is no one asking, given the Clintons' standard of "plagiarism", why their critiques of Obama eerily sound and read just like Healey's critiques of Patrick in 2006? Surely, they aren't siding with a Republican, are they?
7. Finally, the Clintons are fucking snakes. They'd as soon as burn down the Democratic Party as deny that Hillary isn't fit to be President, and the people know this.