Political Punch

I am a Democrat from Massachusetts that voted for Gov. Duval Patrick. I was a fan of his since a year before he announced that he was running for Governor of Massachusetts and appeared in an interview on our Town television station. Wow, was I ever impressed. I told a friend, he will be our first black President.He won the Governors race by a landslide!

I along with many of his followers am extremely disappointed in what he has done in 14 months in office. He hasn't done a thing. Not one thing, and now he just signed a 1.35 million dollar book deal, about his life story. This man is a nice,wonderful guy, but a as far as having the ability to govern, he is a fraud. I am positive after hearing the disappointment in his constituency that he couldn't get elected as "dog catcher" 14 mos. later.
The man is incompetent and a con artist.We've all been had. Our only saving grace will be that Duval will take him so that we can get a Governor that knows the political arena and can work with a legislature. Disgusted!

What is most ironic is this:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident...that all men are created equal..."
was indeed JUST WORDS, in the sense that, at the time, "all men" meant "the right kinds of wealthy white men."

So, words do need to be buttressed by consistent authentic ACTIONS, else they just mislead, as those words misled Obama when he 'quoted' them in Patrick's context.

About actions. The press hasn't yet done a sufficiently thorough job of informing us about the comparative track records of the candidates, and the extent to which they allow themselves to be influenced by corporate interests.

For example, what's the story on the energy bill, and how Obama, Hillary, and McCain stood on its various aspects?

Nobody is talking about what matters.

The "just words" quotes that Obama lifted were spoken by Martin Luther King, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and our forefathers and signers of the Declaration of Independence. The reason that those words have inspired generations and are quoted today is because they were spoken by men whose actions spoke far louder than any words they spoke. It wasn't those words that have transcended time but the weight that those words held due to the courage and leadership of the great men that said them.
It's important to understand how "just words" can manipulate even when they are someone else's. Actions, on the other hand, are the only communication who's source is unquestionable.

Clinton shouldn't be criticising anyone about a lack of experience. I wouldn't let her take care of my goldfish much less run the country. I don't think McCain is the greatest thing to ever come down the pike but it would be interesting to see how Obama would have reacted in the prisoner of war camp that McCain led his men through and eventually out of in Vietnam. It's rare to have a candidate who's leadership and character has been tempered as McCain's has.

Perhaps the speechwriter shouldn't have used the same words for two so similar candidates in such a short timespan. The larger question is whether "the words" really mean anything. Patrick hasn't had too much success creating coalitions within his own party in Mass. and his term so far has been disappointing at best. His recent state of the state address reflects a governor that's either out of touch with economic realities or who continues to push hope and belief over any viable plan for action.

I care! Obama has great words and nothing else!

This is the biggest non-issue thus far in the campaign. This was NOT a scientific publication, it was NOT a journalist making up sources, it was NOT an author lifting pages of another's book. It was similar words of a well travelled Democratic speech writer appearing in two different speeches he wrote.

If words can be owned--and I'm not sure these simple stock phrases can be "owned"--but if they are owned by Deval Patrick--they can only be "stolen" by Obama if Deval wants to press charges. If I come home and find you in my living room eating out of my fridge, do you automatically go to jail for trespassing or stealing? Not unless I press charges. If I am the injured party, and I don't press charges, nobody else can do that for me. What Deval Patrick gives away as a gift cannot be stolen--whether he approved it before or after it was "taken" is not the point.

I wonder if Obama's student supporters feel they can do the same on a term paper or essay.
Many students feel that it is OK and lift entire essays. You can but them online. So if they are cheaters,then it is no problem to follow someone else who does.
I wonder how my professors would react if I said I lifted some of my friend's term paper but it's ok because it's my friend and she gave me permission.
I mean it's only words,right?

Well, Obama admitted he used Patrict's "Words" and should have credited him when he used the "Words" and didn't. I believe he credited him later when this became an issue for some reason. The good people of Wisconsin and Hawaii didnot see this as an issue, neither will Texas and Ohio and the remaining states. Another non productive fishing expidition by would be "anglers", to put Senator Obama in a picture that only fits your preconcieved image. Get mad about the message "Words" not the messenger.

seriously who cares?.....they are buds, pals borrow from each other all the time..if it was such a big deal why isn't gov. patrick up in arms about it?
media sucks...find a real story to cover.

Thank you for this. People want Obama to be America's Messiah. He can do no wrong. In fact, he and his team have cast themselves as the saviors of the world. The truth is he is a human being. And apparently he's being caught in small lies that amount to small compromises in integrity now (to prop up an image of perfection). That image will have to fall at some point. I'd rather it fall now, than when small compromises have the chance to become much larger ones in the White House.

Let's see what we've actually got here. Almost no accomplishments that anyone can name. But wait, he gives a great speech. Not quite as good as Duval Patrick, in my opinion, and you certainly have many instances where you can actually compare these side by side and make your own opinion. President of the United States because he is a "different" kind of candidate? Because he is "change." ROTFLMAO. You Obama supporters are seriously not thinking this thing through. If you SERIOUSLY think that Obama is a different kind of candidate, then your just deluding yourself or you just don't care. Either way, it's creepy. I do agree with you, though, he gives a great speech! I will give him a 7 on a scale of 10 and Duval Patrick a 9. I give the speech writer they share a 10. A different kind of candidate? President of the United States?

WAKE UP PEOPLE!

Obama is CORRUPT, his slogan of change an ILLUSION.

1) A houseowner wants to sell both a house and adjoining land. Obama can afford to buy only the house. No problem, the criminal Rezko to the rescue. Rezko pays full price for the land, whereas Obama gets a discount of $300,000 on the house. Nice to have criminal friends like this!!! (reference ABC News)

2) Exelon Corporation had not disclosed radioactive leaks at one of its nuclear plants in Illinois. Obama, a senator for Illinois introduces a bill to make disclosures mandatory. Seems like Exelon doesn't like it. Each draft of the new bill by Obama goes more and more towards Exelon till disclosures end up being "voluntary". What gives? How about $250,000+ donations by Exelon to Obama's campaigns!!! Obama is not change, he is WASHINGTON BUSINESS AS USUAL. (reference New York Times)

People need to stop believing their fantasies about Obama and realize that Hillary is the one who has been fighting for them all along. All the way back to 1993 when she tried to introduce universal health care (before it became politically fashionable).

Status Quo-Barak and Deval-"say anything, do Anything" to get elected.

They are friends.
They riff back and forth.
Who cares timeline.
Change the channel.
(I would have said "turn the page" but that just keeps this hamster wheel rolling, for chrissake)

Jake Tapper: Give it up, OK? Just give it up. We know you want McCain in office and we know Obama is the one who can beat him. But seriously--you aren't going to hand the nomination to Hillary. The Democrats simply reject her. She's out of it. She's finished. It's over. Hillary is now old and in the way of the best candidate the Democrats have had in generations. And John McCain has NO CHANCE of beating him. So Jake? Just give it up. You lose. Obama wins. And through him, the Democratic Party wins. It's over. Hillary is finished.

The YES WE CAN slogan was originally coined by Cesar Chavez (Hispanic labor leader) and his movement in California.

I have been bemused at people complimenting Obama's speechWRITING talent. To the best of my knowledge--ALL presidential candidates use speechwriters. Presidential candidates are worse plagiarizers than ad-writers. If the novice listener doesn't factor that reality into their evaluations; they should learn that lesson immediately.

Good speaking abilities are judged in three categories:

1. Good delivery (voice control and quality and body language) -

2. If the speaker is speaking extemporaneously (spontanously-- or, with little time for preparation (ex: debate) :
Knowledge, clarity of thought, wit or humor, skillful use of language
and good delivery (see above)

3.-IF JUDGED AS AN ORIGINAL SPEECH WRITTEN BY THE SPEAKER: the ability to make a clear and logical argument, factual accuracy, and use of powerful, vivid imagery. All intellectual property must be credited.

If you are listening to the speaker's original thoughts, they will normally reflect how the speaker communicates spontaneously. In other words, they will still use the same style, syntax, knowledge level and clarity of thought.

If you want to evaluate how much of Obama's speech is his own work; compare his debate exchanges to his stump speeches.

Tappe - the only real reporter in the mainstream media. I'm so sad that we're about to elect this guy president, and he doesn't care about plagiarism. I'm sad for my nieces - one is six years old and she knows Obama's name. Cheating is OK, he says. John Trigger-Happy Anger-Problem McCain is better for this country than this fraud. The damage is already done - he should have at least acknowledged he should always attribute things like this. He should have done it with a much more serious tone than he did.

(And no, Obama fans, don't follow up with Hillary did it too. She did not copy entire paragraphs from another guy's speech. When she said "yes, we can" or "no, we can't" it was an obvious retort or response to her political opponent during a campaign. And a ghost writer for "It Takes A Village" does not count either, not at all. Hillary hired the ghost writer then had to re-write the thing herself, it was in horrible shape.)

The Cambridge dictionary describes plagiarism as: to use another person's idea or a part of their work and pretend that it is your own.

Why is it that there is so much denial that Obama has done this, when he's admitted to doing it, has done it multiple times, and states he should have credited the author? If he's accused of it, he admits it, and states he shouldn't have done it, then what we think really doesn't matter.

Senator Obama and Governor Patrick have been close friends for a very long time. Obama was with Patrick just days before his "just words" speech back in 2006 in Boston to endorse him.

Patrick is a brilliant speech writer and orator. I was at the rally in Oct 2006 and can tell you it was nothing short of exhilarating. It wouldn't surprise me if he is a speech writer for Obama.

All this talk of Obama using Patrick's words is just nonsense. There are many more important things to write about than two close friends helping each other get elected. Its time to discuss the issues and move on from this nitpicking.

Re: "I particularly want to know why you are pressing for $120 BILLION in aid to Africa"

My heart goes out ot Africa, but I don't want to give them 120 billion dollars. Meanwhile Obama votes for free trade deals that devastate people all over North America by putting them out of work. We need to focus on our own country and our own continent for a change.

It is getting just a tad bothersome. When many of us are ready to say, "Yeah, this guy may be mostly rhetoric with a few progressive ideas thrown in the mix, but man oh man is it GREAT rhetoric!" and then we start hearing lines he's using popping up all over the place?

I already accept that most politician's contributions to their own speeches amount to a read through with pencil in hand. But in this situation I'm like many others: I keep wanting to plug my ears when I hear people saying he's about nothing but rhetoric; but now to hear he's running short on rhetoric too?

That speech he gave after Super Tuesday was in my opinion bar none the best I've ever heard live (I mean, on TV but JFK, MLK, all those guys were before my time). I want to know that those were his words, I really do.

You may not be aware that Hillary Clinton did not write It Takes A Village. She hired a ghost and never gave the real writer any credit. Google it if you want details.

This holier than thou attitude that seems to prevail amongst the Hillary supporters is surprising considering the laundry list of sins committed by the Clintons. There is one thing for sure, Hillary is going to cause the Republicans to get back in office.

When she starts throwing mud, then she further divides the party. She will carry this same divisive attitude into the White House and she will get down to the business of paybacks to those who opposed her or fought against her. She will take that same combat attitude into the world as she meets with our enemies and tries to improve our standing in the world.

Hillary is the one who should be feared because she is the one who can hurt you the most. Doesn't anyone have any fear of a dynasty or co-monarchy setting up here.

For 30 years we have had a Bush or a Clinton in office. Bush 41 and Bill still stump together for their Foundation. There is another George Bush, son of Jeb, who is half Latino and would be ready to run in 2016. Then Chelsea would be in her 40's in 16 years would be about ready to run. This is getting dangerous and we the American people need to turn the page. We need somebody else to look after our interests other than a Bush or a Clinton. Obama may not be who you want, but we need to stop this co-monarchy before the democratic process slips away into acceptance of the next Bush or Clinton.

I quote... "Absolute power corrupts absolutely".

Do you work for the Clinton camp or the McCain camp? Clearly you aren't a journalist so I'm just curious who pays your bills.

If you really read into Obama, his campaign and his autobiography there are so many inconsistencies that to ignore them or automatically write them off as insignificant is delusional. I'm voting for the man who spent years in a POW camp as a result of defending this great nation. I won't ever consider myself republican, but if any candidate truly cares about America I think it's Mcain.

I know that politicians use speech writers, but is it too much to ask that Obama hire one capable of creating original material? See what the writers strike has done! LOL

How did he pretend those were his own words? When asked, he said they were Deval's. So no it's not plagiarism. And are people so STUPID as to think politicians don't have SPEECHWRITERS. How stupid are you to believe they don't have WRITERS really?

I hope Obama doesn't govern like Deval- he has been the target of so much criticism. I guess this is why Mass. voters voted for Hillary. Perhaps we should pay more attention to them.

Finally the press is starting to take note of what a phoney Obama is

Obama is slowly but surely being exposed as the fraud he is. He can't even use his own words . . . he has to use somebody else's. So much for "hope" and "change". Wake up, people. The guy's an imposter.

The Cambridge dictionary describes plagiarism as: to use another person's idea or a part of their work and pretend that it is your own.

Why is it that there is so much denial that Obama has done this, when he's admitted to doing it, has done it multiple times, and states he should have credited the author? If he's accused of it, he admits it, and states he shouldn't have done it, then what we think really doesn't matter.

A vote for Obama is a vote for the future. A vote for Clinton is a vote for the past. Clear and simple.

Can’t people remember the WhiteWater Scandal with both Clintons caught right in the middle? Remember Monica L. and BillyBoy lying to the American People and remember when he was impeached for Perjury? Remember Vince Foster being Auf’d. Remember how Ms. Williams (current Clinton Campaign manager) broke in and ransacked Vince Foster’s office looking for some kind of damaging evidence about Ms. Clinton and then tried to cover it up to protect the “First Lady”, after Vince Foster was killed but before the Police arrived? Any just why won't Mrs. Clinton release her tax returns? What IS she hiding? And does anyone remember the Dems pledge (including Hillary) to not put their names on the ballots in Fl, and Mich, nor to campaign in those states? Yet Hillary did indeed have her name on the ballots and did indeed campaign and now wants those votes to count (sorry Fl and Mich) even after she made a pledge to the American People and to her Party to not have these votes count? Doesn’t anyone remember that?? What about her vote to give authorization to start the illegal and immoral war in Iraq that to this day she still can’t explain nor apologize for it? Have you forgotten that? Remember what Billy Boy said – you get two for one when you elect us. (I am crediting Bill Clinton for that line). So, essentially it’s a vote to put Bill back in the White House. Why can’t people remember these things? The Clintons show a clear pattern of low blows, underhanded and sometimes downright illegal tactics and speaks volumes on just how the Clinton’s run their life and their political careers. Yes Clinton has the experience to run this country on Day One – to run it the same way it’s always been run for the last 100 years – lobbyists, corruption, we all know the rest. Obama isn't twisted by the political coes in Washington. He’s not corrupted by the money sucking corporations, he hasn’t sold out to Big Business. He is fresh – he is alive – he is progressive - he is the New Century Leader. He is offering something different – something new and something we have always JUST hoped for - all races can agree - but never actually thought it could be obtainable. A vote for Obama is a vote for the future. A vote for Clinton is a vote for the past. Clear and simple.

Didn't he say that he and the gov. have been close friends for over a decade and that they share the same campaign stategist and they advize each other on lines from time to time? I don't see what the big deal is. Haven't politicians always done this? You can probably fill a book with all of the lines Hillary has gotten from Bill. This is honestly a non-issue that got blown way out of proportion.

A candidacy based on words, even if and especially since they are inspirational, should be those of the candidate's. That's the reason there is more scrutiny here. Base a candidacy on honesty, and when there are lies, they are more glaring. Base a candidacy on fighting for vets and voting records show that's not always the case, that issue will become glaring. If the root of his popularity is his inspirational words, which seem to be the case, I would think that his own constituants would want them to be his own. How inspirational can someone be that only speaks the words he's given??

I'm surprised the Clinton campaign let Obama off the hook for stealing Deval Patrick's speech. Obama didn't just steal Patrick's speech...he's stolen Patrick's entire campaign! Which speaks to the authenticity and genuineness of Obama's campaign, rhetoric and message.
The people of Massachusetts voted for Deval Patrick's campaign/message in 2006, but when they saw Obama running the same campaign with the same message two years later, they thoroughly rejected it. They were played for suckers once and wised up.
Most people usually catch on to a snake oil salesman. Unfortunately for Democrats, they look like they aren't going to catch on fast enough. But the rest of the country will in time for the general election.
And on another note, Obama (along with Deval Patrick) promises all of this magic change, which leads to the following questions. Just what has Deval Patrick "changed" for the better in Massachusetts in his two years there? And what, if anything has Obama ever "changed" for the better in his entire life?
The only "change" I have ever seen Obama accomplish is that his campaign (Deval Patrick's really) has changed alot of Clinton supporters into insane, rabid, foaming at the mouth Clinton haters.

Yeah, bummer, Hillary is right. I guess with Barak was putting together his presidential ambition plan back in kindergarden, it was a fine point he missed.

Copying fool wrote: "No one cares about plagarism unless you're the one getting ripped off."

Interesting because Obama had permission to use the words.

What about the instances of Hillary using other peoples' words?

I'm going to copy and paste everything here and use it as my own and send it to all my liberal nutjob friends. I figure I can get away with it since a lot of people are screaming that no one cares wether or not it's ok to steal someone elses ideas and words. Here's a thought to ponder. The US Constitution is eerily similar in verbiage to Connecticut's original "fundamental orders"....hmmmm. No one cares about plagarism unless you're the one getting ripped off.

Experience matters...that's why Clinton can't be President. Her experience in the White House proves how divisive she is. Her universal health care task force failed miserably because she couldn't reach out to the other side of the aisle to gain support for it. AND, scandal after scandal in the White House is experience we don't want repeated.

Who cares where Obama gets his lines? He delivers those lines exceptionally well, and inspires people. Compare his delivery to McCain's and Clinton's use of Obama's lines and they just have no umph! Obama is an excellent orator and it's very obvious that the Clinton campaign needs to tarnish this any way they can, even if it's hypocritically so.

Word on the street is that Obama has also used a "speechwriter", whose words Obama quotes verbatim and without attribution on a regular basis.

This shocking plagiarism of the words of campaign staff and supporters must stop.

Just remember, college students can be expelled if they plagiarize. Maybe Barack should be setting some sort of example for his student "fans." And I call them fans because they are relating to him as if he were a celebrity, and not the next president who will have to guide us through some very dangerous times.

Let's also not all kid ourselves here, the original words weren't even those of Patrick, but those of his speechwriter. How many lines has every single candidate spoken as if it was his/her own when in fact they were the idea of the speechwriter? Seriously, let's not be dishonest with ourselves about this.

Good Grief! NOBODY cares (except Clintinista) who said what when. The point is the MESSAGE from Obama is getting thru. Wolfson is grasping at anything to stop this message of hope and change. Obama '08!!!!

I am LAUGHING at Clinton and her cronies for making such a BIG DEAL out of this! Just goes to show you how desperate they truly are! Thankfully, Clinton is in her last days as a candidate. It's all but over for her! Bye-bye! We sure in the hell won't miss you or Bill!

I think these young Obama supporters are in deep denial. These kids who blindly supported Mr.Obama are feeling ashamed of their gullibility and naiveness. It hurts. And here their immaturity kicks in. They become very stubborn, being in denial, not admitting
their errors. Actually these Obama supporters are the victims of current politics. They bought one of the most expensively marketed products which actually worth not very much. They feel duped but admitting it make them feel bad and hurt so denial is much easier. Attacking the opponents or anything that make them feel justified, kind of nice to nurse their hurt feelings. Yes, these people were victims of marketing. They know it and we know it. That is why we cannot make these kids/people decide the 2008 election

Even if this was important, it is clear that Hillary overplayed her hand. This should not be a central issue of her campaign.

Watching the Hillary supporters swarm in to comment on something so inane is a telling sign - they're grasping at straws at this point. On the plus side, I hear the GOP are huge fans of Clinton and hope she gets the Dem nomination - so you've got that going for you...

The Cambridge dictionary describes plagiarism as: to use another person's idea or a part of their work and pretend that it is your own.

Why is it that there is so much denial that Obama has done this, when he's admitted to doing it, has done it multiple times, and states he should have credited the author? If he's accused of it, he admits it, and states he shouldn't have done it, then what we think really doesn't matter.

These Clintonites just don't get it. They're so wedded to the nasty, say-anything politics of the last two decades that they can't see how hugely divisive this crap is. The rest of us have moved on. Too bad they can't, too.

Political allies and friends trade lines and share ideas all the time - this is nothing new nor is there anything wrong with it.

Why hasn't Hillary Clinton or John McCain released their tax reports?

Was it ethical for Hillary Clinton and John McCain to sell-out their donor list?

The same people saying this plagiarisms doesn't matter are the same people that feel experience doesn't matter.

I find it ironic that any FACTS backed up with responsible journalism, such as that by Mr Tapper, is instantly attacked as "not mattering" and being a Clinton supporter.

These typical Obama supporters are tearing our party apart. For them it's Obama or nothing and that's not in the spirit of the Democratic party. Get with it or we wont win in November.

this is all just a bunch of nit-picking. what difference does it make?

All politicians borrow phrases. Hillary has also borrowed a ton from Bill and even from Barack. It's no big deal.

Oh come on, they might have discussed the specific respone at a particular time, this doesn't mean they din't discuss elsewhile. Also, remember Obama used the 'yes we can' slogan in 04 which patrick used in 06, and during the 06 camphain Obama was actively supporting him in Mas. So the exhange of ideas would have occured over a longer period of time (rememeber, 15 years of friendship), and specific issue might have been discussed at a particular time. So come on, stop trying to make a issue where this is none!

why would Obama need to rely on somebody else's speeches? He claims to be this change-agent, but he's merely repeating old speeches given before by his friends. Talking about style over the substance...

Going GREEN does not mean recycling SPEECHES!!!

Why is this even an issue? And why would Hillary, of all people, make it an issue? She was running as the "experience" candidate until she stole Obama's "change" message. It seems to me that if there's one person in this race who has nothing to say on the issue of "plagiarism," it's Hillary.

You would think a person involved with journalism would have at least a RUDIMENTARY understanding of what plagiarism is and is not. Tapper does not, which is disgraceful.

Why Can't Obama Answer These Questions?

1. Why does Obama's health care plan leave out 15 Million People while Hillary's health car plan covers everyone?

2. Why DID he vote for BILLIONS of dollars in Bush giveaways to the oil companies?

3. And this one is of deep concern to Baby Boomers who are now becoming the age to begin receiving social security: Why would Obama, a supposed Democrat up the age of retirement and cut benefits to people who have paid into the system for the benefits they deserve?

And why won't he debate Hillary?

Is it because he can't explain the inconsistencies between his rhetoric of hope and change and what he will actually do or has already done?

Is it because he wants to be held to a different and less stringent standard than Hillary?

She has already told us her plan and what she will do and how she plans to go about doing it?

But Barrack Obama doesn't want to be pinned down or held accountable for the things he says, so he says basically nothing.

We want to hear what you are going to do and how you plan to do it, Mr. Obama.

The people can't live on rhetoric, nor make informed decisions based on high sounding words with no facts or details to them!

I particularly want to know why you are pressing for $120 BILLION in aid to Africa -- where you grandmother actually lives, in Kenya -- while upping the age to get social security and cutting the benefits to people who were born in the country to which you are supposed to give your pledge of loyalty, and who have put that money into the system?!

Thank you for taking the time to read and consider what I have asked here.

Gosh Rob, that is another thing wrong with this whole thing. Everyone is afraid to criticise Obama on anything, for fear of being called a racist, and that is what you just did to the writer of this article. It's not right. and I for one am sick of it. I don't like Hillary either, but by God it is time someone started bringing crap out on this guy. The MSM won't! They are all "followers" and drank the "koolaid"

Behold, another one of Hillary's solutions for America:

Slime, defame and besmirch the only chance we have of beating McCain in November.

I guess she is a VERY close friend to McCain after all.

And oh yeah- What about Bill's shady Khazak uranium deals with a not-so-benevolent dictator? Is that why they refuse to release their financial records? Hmmm...

Jake don't get wrapped up about these Obama-zombies. If you say anything that may paint the man in a mildly negative light you are going get all these insane posts. Half try to character-assassinate you and the other half will character-assassinate Hillary. Because those are the best argument the followers of the 'hope' and 'unity' candidate have.

Jake, It's not that I don't believe you on this. It's that I simply don't believe anything you write. You lost all credibility as a writer and political correspondent earlier in February, when you wrote: “The Holy Season of Lent is upon us, can Obama worshippers try to give up their Helter-Skelter cultish qualities for a few weeks?" It was incredibly offensive to anyone who happens to be Christian, it compared Obama supporters to followers of Charles Manson, and revealed a level of maturity somewhat below that of my 16 year old. But more disturbing than all of that is the fact that ABC news would retain a reporter with views that are so clearly partisan.

It's no wonder that half the country hates HRC.

I get chills up my spine every time these phony propaganda stories come out.

Plagiarism? Give me a break. Unless you want to admit that Hillary has been plagiarizing Mario Cuomo for about 6 months straight. Wake up, Clinton zombies.

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time." Abraham Lincoln.

Oh Grady, you just don't get it. Obama is not real, he is a fake.
He is NOT the second coming, like his cult followers would have everyone believe.
If you people would watch his speeches, he is reading off a prompter!!! Those words are just not coming out of his mouth. He does not speak in front of crowds without a prompter.
If you notice, when he is asked questions, he stammers around trying to come with words. He just can't think for himself.
And you want that for a president?

Oh man. I just read every last one of these comments. I must be really bored. However, I noticed that the people on each side of the issue(the Pro-Obamas and the pro-Hillarys, if you will) are almost literally saying the exact same arguments over and over and over again.

As a completely undecided voter thus far, and one with no party affiliation, I will say that all of you are making the Democratic party look pathetic. If I were a Republican, I would be sitting back and quietly laughing at all of you.

And as for the so-called journalist who wasted his and our time covering this: deep down, don't you realize there are more important things to cover? I saw a mere sprinkling a comments mentioning that we should be talking more about our soldiers dying for a war that has no end in sight. Only a sprinkling. So sad and yet so indicative of the duplicity we Americans show every day. We all complain about the economy being in a dive, we all claim heartily that we support our troops, and yet when it comes down to it, we'd much rather just hear about little bickerings like these, or Brittany Spears' latest antics, or who moved on to the next round of American Idol instead of confronting head-on the very thing causing our financial woes and endless grief: the war in Iraq. And yet, it's too easy to just say we Americans have become complacent. After all, is it not true that these trivial subjects are what is being force fed to us by the MSM? You can't expect the public to be informed of the issues that actually affect us when those issues are increasingly getting buried and hidden by frivolousness.

I apologize for waking anyone up. You can go back to sleep now.

Your timeline argument also doesn't make sense. He could have talked to Patrick about this possible attack by Clinton at the timeline you pointed out but that does NOT preclude him from talking to Patrick about speeches, rhetoric and ideas from before.

Indeed, Patrick used Obama's "Yes we can" refrain in 2006 before their discussions in 2007 and which proves that they talked about this stuff for a long time.

Logic and reasoned arguments are helpful for journalists - also facts.

I think it's more like a Branch Davidian cult...

Dear lord, please don't prolong this trivial diversion any further. This is simply pathetic. I know the campaign is exciting and all, but uh, there is important stuff happening in the country. If you'd spent the kind of time investigating some of the really serious issues involving the current administration that you're wasting on piffle here, we might all be better off.

Yeah, wakeup, I remember the last two campaigns when people reacted almost precisely the same way. Those were in 1980 and 1984.

It seems that particular candidate went on to become a president who changed the world and played a major role in freeing hundreds of millions from the tyranny of communism.

Isn't this just peachy. When Jake Tapper's writing attacked Hillary I didn't hear any Obama supporters complaining that Tapper was biased in favor of Hillary. Now that the tables are turned....heh, heh. I've arrived at the Nirvana of balanced reporting. I've apologized to Tapper, you should too.

ELEVEN 22
THANK YOU FOR BEING SO KIND TO MAKE MY POINT ABOUT WHAT WAS NEXT; KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK FOR THE MORAL COMPASS OF AMERICA; HILLARY CLINTON. I KNOW YOU DON'T WANT TO "GO THERE," I"LL BE KIND AND JUST REALIZE HOW COMPETITION FREAKS SOME PEOPLE OUT - HILLARY THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE OVER BY NOW. PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU CAN HAVE ALL THE POLICY PAPERS WITH ALL TYPES OF WONDERFUL "SOLUTIONS" LISTED, BUT IF YOU CAN"T EXECUTE THE PLANS WHAT DOES IT MATTER. I JUST DON'T SEE HILLARY CLINTON, THE POLARIZING FIGURE SHE IS AS A PERSON WHO CAN, WORK WELL WITH OTHERS. THE REPUBLICANS WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE HILLARY AS THEIR OPPOSTION THAN OBAMA. AGAIN, I'M FINE WITH US HAVING A VIGOROUS DEBATE, BUT THE MUD -SLINGING IS SOOOO DESPERATE. AND "SWEETS" AS YOU CALLED ME, I THINK YOU NEED TO THINK BEYOND THE CONVENTION AND HOW THIS PARTY WILL WORK TOGETHER! AS OF NOW, I DON"T SEE IT HAPPENING! KEEP CARL ROVE'S DREAMS ALIVE!!!