Political Punch

"Is that really what you want your president to do? Garnish your wages for a health care plan you don't even want? I should have the right to decline health care coverage. Of course I have to accept that I will "pay the price" in the event of something catastrophic, but that's my choice."

Had to respond to this one. If someone is so hard up that they choose not to carry health insurance so they don't have to pay for it, then chances are, the majority won't have the financial means to "pay the price", as you so nonchalantly state. So what happens? Well if the visit occurs at a hospital, and the bill isn't paid, WE have to incur the cost of that over-priced visit (speaking in terms of ER visit vs. doctor's office). Where do you think the funds come from to pay that? US. So yes, absolutely I think everyone should be required to carry health insurance on themselves and their children, because if they don't, taxpayers will incur the cost of their visits when they can't or won't pay for them.

As for the plagiarism, I think it's very valid to bring it up. Hillary "exaggerated" her story about Bosnia and people won't shut up about it, but Obama passes someone else's thoughts off as his own (because obviously, he isn't original enough to come up with his own, considering the number of times he has done so - we're not talking about one incident here, people) and that's okay. If words aren't "just words", then why can't he come up with his own?

Oh, and what do I think? I think if Obama happens to steal the nomination, I will be among the estimated 36% of Hillary supporters who will vote for McCain if he gets the nomination (as opposed to 19% of Obama supporters who will vote for McCain if Hillary gets the nomination). Face it, even if he wins the nomination, he's very likely to lose the Presidential election, and I will whole-heartedly contribute to that prediction.

I hope voters will not be fooled by the borrowed words Mr.Obama uses to inspire people any more. It is so sad majority of them cannot tell they are all borrowed from somebody and not his own.

I see a lot of people missing the point. Plagiarism isn't merely using someone else's ideas, it's taking someone else's work *and passing it off as your own*.

So regardless of whether or not Gov. Patrick and Sen. Obama are firends, regardless of whether or not the Governor gave his implicit permission to use his speech, Obama is guilty of pretending someone else's work was his own. That's what the main offense is.

Just as it's wrong to have someone else write your college entrance exam essay for you, it's wrong to pass off your campaign speeches as being yours (or your speechwriters') when in fact they were someone else's. It's about giving credit where credit is due and not taking it when it's not yours to take.

It matters because if the heart of BO's campaign is about words and how they can "change the world," then words matter. His plagiarism shows that BO is utterly unoriginal, at best, and a fraud, at worst. If you can't trust his words, then you can't trust the man.

It matters because BO's campaign been run on the power of words and how his words can "change the world." It's not that he has just plagiarized words, but plagiarized ideas! Thus, he is exposed as an utterly unoriginal thinker at best, and a fraud at worst. If you can't trust that his words, you can't trust the man.

I'm sorry I'm confused. Are we upset with Obama and Wolfson because the did not give credit to Martin Luther King, "I have a Dream" Franklin D Roosevelt " We have nothing to Fear..." and John Kennedy "Ask not what your country..."

And if it's not that...then didn't Obama just do the same thing to Wolfson speech...just took a few "words" from it.

It's not like he recited the declaration of independence, or the constitution of the United States....by the way wouldn't I want a leader of my country to use and follow those words?

Isn't it a fact that the way to communicate ideas is to use words...that we all understand? Or am I now committing plagiarism because I'm not speaking some new form of Leek Speech? Should I quote each and every dictionary I have pulled these words from?

Why are the masses so distracted by shinny objects? You know children....John Locke...not the writers of the declaration of independence first published Life, liberty and the pursuit of property.

Thank God there was no media to jack that all up. I guess we would have never been able to leave the King had someone pointed out….they stole John Locke ideas.

Learn to think, it only hurts at first.

I have come to a final conclusion that those against Senator Hillary Clinton don't want a former First Lady to become the next President of America.

The Kennedys against Senator Hillary Clinton are jealous of the political success story of the Clintons.

What happened to Jackie Kennedy after JFK was assassinated?
She abandoned the JFK Legacy and became Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis.

Look at how Coretta Scott King preserved the legacy of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., until she died.

The Clintons have done more for America than most of the Presidents of America.

People are wasting a lot of energy talking about plagiarism when we really are looking at just a couple of vague, almost archetypal ideas being iterated by two similar people trying to make the same point. None of this seems to me to be anything anybody in their right mind would ever claim origination rights to. Can you have plagiarism if you don't have someone who feels plagiarized?

The irony kicks in when you realize -- what is all this bickering about? "Just words".

If you repeat an idea you heard and agreed with, are you plagiarizing? In my opinion, you are simply propagating a meme, and you can only be accused of plagiarism if you pretend you started the meme but you know you did not (because that's just arrogant) -- did that happen here?

Ever heard the phrase, "there's nothing new under the sun"? No, I did not come up with it. So don't accuse me of plagiarism.

This might have already been said in another comment but I'm lazy and don't want to read all 700 of them.

How did we let our country get to a point where how well a person speaks is how we vote for them? What does being a good speaker have to do with running a country?

I think it would be awesome if we had a candidate that was never at the debates. He was always out doing something instead of talking about what he might or might not do.

I'm weary of a presidential candidate who's riding on change, but is only a plagiarist. Plagiarism is theft, any student knows that. Even the romance industry, ask Cassie Edwards, a plagiarist, has set ethics and standards against plagiarism, yet we have a presidencial candidate brushing it aside. If he compromises his ethics, what else is he willing to compromise?

I have not been able to go through all the comments but I see the main issue as: Is this man USING his ability to be a Tony Robbins pitchman to get elected by using a brilliant strategy or is he a AUTHENTIC person? In light of his using the same political strategy and the fact he has the same POLITICAL STRATEGIST who ran the EXACT SAME CAMPAIGN for Gov. Patrick I would be quite leery. I personally have little trust or likink for this campaign as I have an aversion to cult like leaders and fully comprehend the limitations of people who always want to be led by the nose to the PROMISED LAND. This is not an endorsement of his opponents, it is just a warning which the mainstream media has ignored. We elected a phony likeable politicial who used a political strategy of being a likable and friendly beer buddy. Now we make the same mistake again. This strategy of hope and change has been used befroe and when it's proponents get elected, THEY HAVE FAILED MISERABLY.

Oh please, there's barely a wisp of difference in Clinton's and Obama's policy proposals, but this guy's got a large segment of the population running around starry-eyed like they've found the answer to all the divine questions. Sometimes, if it seems to good to be true, it's because it is. His "uniting" has left the party bitterly divided and people who two years ago would have defending the Clintons against the kinds of scurrilous Limbaugh and Colter would assert, now making those same attacks themselves. He's a snake charmer, a con man. He's never deserved all this adoration. The American people needed a fix of "hope" and inspiration after the last 7 yrs. of darkness, destruction, and war. They needed it, so he became it. Well, don't look at the man behind the curtain.

Grown ups face reality and problems head on, instead of fabricating a fictional superhero.

It seems Obama not only copied off Clinton's and Edwards' papers to come up with is policy platforms, but he also copied off of Patrick's paper for his message of hope, and his inspirational shtick. It's disappointing, but I always did have this icky feeling about him, like he was trying to sell me something, similar to a late night TV commercial, that would make me happier, smarter, and shine my shoes. Those products rarely, if ever, live up to their sales pitch. Sadly, the only one in the race who, IMO, was genuine, who didn't take any of their dirty money and wasn't beholden to anyone, who told the truth was Edwards, but he wasn't exciting and shiny enough for this American Idol competition of an election.

The level of hate and ignorance posted here by many Barrack antagonists is mind boggling. It is obvious that many of you accusing Obama of plagiarism would not have voted for him anyway.

For all who are still undecided or do not already dislike Obama for superficial reasons and are honest with themselves about this, see this for what it is, a desperate attempt to belittle one of the most intelligent, strong, charismatic and viable presidential candidates in US history who could actually put the United States back on track as a role model for justice, equality and progress. I urge you all to research the facts with an open mind without preconceived suspicions or fears. It should be obvious that Barrack is much less polarizing than Hillary, he also has a better chance at beating McCain and bringing more bi-partisan solutions to the nations problems.

Also, I saw a negative comment by an educator regarding Obamas plans for education. His plan calls for rewarding teachers who mentor new teachers, work in rural or inner city schools, or consistently excel in the classroom. Now I ask all educators, are you getting appropriately rewarded now for any of this? Obama has a comprehensive plan that puts Educators and students in a much better position than they currently are (there is a large pdf document on his website about this).

After reading a host of these reader comments, I now realize that there are a lot of people out there who are dumber than they may appear. How can one come down so hard on someone who borrowed a line from another speech while in the race for president after having had this bozo Bush for eight years??? If Bush's only shortcoming was that he used someone else's words from time to time it wouldn't be so bad, but everyone knows that Bush is certainly told what to say by someone else!!! And that person who made the comment that a "cloned goat" would be better than Obama, should go live in another country or go back to school. And where did that person get the story about Obama having a drug addiction and being a Muslim??? I think these people need to hold up a mirror before they make such potentially damaging statements. For when a finger is pointed at someone else, there are almost always three fingers aimed back at the pointer.
We need new blood in the white house, and with the administration we've had for the past eight years it is better to say that a cloned goat would have been better than Bush! Obama is the future of this country and if elected will have a positive effect on this country both here and abroad. So cynics, review your history before opening your mouths and revealing your ignorance.

I think that people are finding that Obama is more than just filled with words but a man of his word -- no matter how it's spun -- you cannot take away from the people unity, participation and hope to help "bridge" a change to the future.

This is all we need: a lecture on the importance of language and meaning from the people who brought you, "Well that depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."

Hilarious.

"LET JUSTICE ROLL DOWN LIKE WATER AND RIGHTEOUSNESS LIKE A MIGHTY STREAM..." IS ON THE MARTIN LUTHER KING MEMORIAL IN ATLANTA, GA, BECUASE HE USED THOS WORDS IN HIS "I HAVE A DREAM SPEECH IN 1963. THIS ICONIC PHASE HOWEVER IS ACTUALLY FROM THE PROFIT AMOS IN THE BIBLE (AMOS 5:21-24). ALTHOUGH MARTIN LUTHER KING GIVE NOT CREDITS TO THE PROFIT AMOS IN HIS SPEECH, THOSE LINES, SPOKEN AT THE HEIGHT OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT DRAMATIZED THE URGENCY OF THE MOMENT..

EQUALLY SO, MR. OBAMA'S USING THE ICONIC PHRASES OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, JOHN F. KENNEDY AND FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT EVEN WITHOUT MENTIONING THEIR NAMES DROVE HOME THE POINT THAT JUST AS THE WORDS UTTERED BY THEM LED TO CHANGES IN THE PAST, SO SHALL "YES WE CAN"...AND WHAT WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR IS US.." MOTIVATE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO REALIZE THE URGENCY OF NOW AND EMBRACE CHANGE.

Marianne Pepitone: you are the classic ignorant racist that believes anything that comes down the email pike without any sense to investigate without first blathering it to your small circle of low IQ cronies. Do you REALLY believe that Obama is a Muslim just because one of Hillary's minions (since fired) sent you an email stating he was? Do you REALLY believe he is a Muslim in a Christian's clothing and that somehow millions of people across the US have fallen for this deception. You are the dupe, and people like you are the ones that are dangerous...spreading your hate and disdain for any race that isn't yours. Go back to your Y2K shelter and heat up some pork and beans...it's going to be a long four years for you and your ilk.

Obama admits, as he should, that he should have cited his friend, and didn't. He knows he shouldn't have done it...so what does that mean about those of you who are acting like this isn't a problem?

That's the difference between Hillary and Obama. One uses words to help motivate and inspire, while the other treats words like mud and barbs.

GOP will pound him on this one if he wins. Remember GOP-Conservatives. You think he'll get away with everything thrown at him now, wait until McCain unleash himself. (McCain) Long time Senator, votes through his principles, decorated military men and stand up to his principles.

all of you who are opposing him are haters, in this word, everyone has one or twice said something that somebodyelse has said before, why Hillary was saying " i think its time that we should say yes we can. And soon after she started shouting yes we will, what the was that? Yes we can is Obama line why people dont say that she copied Obama as well, that woman needs to whatch her mouth, and she realizing she is loosing thats why she wants to put Obama's momentum down!!!!!
whoever that falls for it is a plain dumb!!

Obama Scares Me. Me sounds good -- ands as a Democrat he seems OK but not ready to run the USA. Hillary has made some mistake, because powerful, effective people like her -- with years of experience and willingness to take a stand sometimes do. She understands how to make changes in Washington, She is the Ultimate Expert on on revamping our broken health care system, and she knows how to turn around an economic deficit. What does he really offer? Words? The words he echos are from great men, powerful men who cam e before him and their words went down in history because they were new and different. Obama clims to offer a new perspective, change and be different, but he is not letting us know who he is... He seems to be more of a follower of great Orators than a talented leader.

A Jr. Senator, who is scared to be himself, may not have the talent to do anything new or bring change... but who knows... that's what scares me.

I suggest that the journalists need to get up from their cozy offices and do what they are supposed to do - that is, research stories before printing or mouthing them on TV. It looks like what happens these days is one of them give a talking point and they all repeat it in their various medium. It's actually sad to see the level of the product they put out there for the rest of us.

Now, I challenge all journalist to go back and review all of Obama's so called "inspiring" speeches and see which parts of the speeches are actually his. I bet you all, most of the material in his speeches and books are plagiarized.

I beg you to prove me wrong.

Am I hearing this correctly? That if you plagiarize your friend, it does not count? Why are college students being kicked out of school when they use their friends' papers as their own?

Is this not what we were taught from day one in kindergarten?

If this was Hillary that did this sort of thing, the Media will replay the speech 24 hours a day and say how horrible this was.

Wake up America! Wake up!

In order to be able to borrow quotes -and good ones- Obama shows that at least HE reads. In politics, there are very few "original" quotes. How one says something is not a substantive issue, but rather what one says. Words don't matter as much as the substantive value of the words being spoken. Better yet are words not broken.

Every great politician has borrowed phrases from others to convey his or her ideas at some point. That is because a great catch-phrase that embodies a popular ideal is often hard to improve upon, and if it is part of the popular conscience, it can be used to get the point across. If Sen. Clinton writes her own speeches each and every time, and never, ever quotes anyone else, then I suppose she can claim to have superior substance. Since politics is a collaborative effort, I doubt that she has thought of every good idea in her campaign all by her lonesome. But if she is as smart as people claim, may be she has and she doesn't need anyone else.

With Hillary "grasping for straws" (I'd better check that phrase out for it's rightful owner), does this mean we can accuse Hillary of plagiarism by using the words of Gov Deval Patrick's opponent, who said Patrick's campaign was one of "just words"?

How far back do we have to go on everything we say in a sentence without having to give rightful ownership to the phrase or for that matter, a word?

How many times have you heard Clinton using Barack Obama's or John Edward's words or phrases?

Get back to the real issues of the day and not the "grasping for straws" items!

Barack Obama has used a line in two debates that I know of ( and I am paraprasing " we will need to get out of Iraq as carefully as we we were careless getting in" I've heard Senator Webb say that quite a while ago - perhaps when he was running for President. I think Barack probably lifts a lot of lines and ideas. I don't know if I would call it plagiarism, but I would chalk it up to not being able to discuss substantive ideas on the stump without borrowing themes he heard elsewhere. I have no idea why people think he has the background and/or experience to handle the presidency. It just isn't logical.

I've read through a bunch of the comments and I have to say, I'm really surprised there are actually people who are on Hillary's side in this situation.

It is PLAINLY OBVIOUS that Hillary is struggling and looking for ways to steer the argument into the gutter in order to try and bring Obama down. I'm not saying he's the greatest thing since sliced bread, but he's obviously a step above her. Is this really what the race is supposed to come down to: whether or not Obama forgot to credit a friend of his for a few lines of a speech? Lest we forget, said friend GAVE OBAMA PERMISSION to use those lines.

Geezus people, wake up and grow a brain. It's the same with Hillary trying to make it a big issue that they didn't have a debate in Wisconsin. They've had how many debates already? Aren't we about to slip into a recession? Aren't we technically at war? Isn't our health care system in the crapper? But we're really going to pay attention to someone who is whining about a debate or proper citation of a speech?

She must REALLY be in trouble if this is what we're supposed to decide our vote on. Don't forget, she changed campaign managers DURING THE RACE. You don't do that. Ever. It's a sign that you don't believe in your own campaign and that you are in enough trouble that you have to go a completely new direction.

She's been twisting stuff all along. She keeps saying that Obama's health care plan doesn't cover 15 million people. What she isn't telling you is that 15 million is simply the estimate of how many people will choose not to purchase the insurance. That's NOT the same as not being covered. It's the same number of people that choose not to buy insurance in the current system. The problem right now is that there's another 30 million that can't afford insurance at all. Obama is going to cover them with subsidies. Hillary is going to make EVERYONE pay though, even if she has to garnish wages to do it.

Is that really what you want your president to do? Garnish your wages for a health care plan you don't even want? I should have the right to decline health care coverage. Of course I have to accept that I will "pay the price" in the event of something catastrophic, but that's my choice.

What I don't choose is to have a president that thinks like a lawyer first and a public servant second...

This question of plagerism was not brought up by Senator Clinton or her campaign. As I recall, it was reported in a Boston Globe article back in January. Those of us in Mass. have long know of this "sharing" between Mr. Obama and Gov. Patrick. The problem is that people from other parts of the country that are not familiar with Gov. Patrick and his campaign may believe that Mr. Obama is being original and sincere. The reality is that he is borrowing a winning stratgy HOPING that no one will look too closely

Obama gave another dashing speech 'We are the ones we are looking for ...' while ago. ..sounds great!! but when I searched if he or his speechwriter wrote it, but found out one of Pulitzer prize winner Alice Walker's book is entitled "we are the ones we are looking for".
If not plagiarism, I will say most Obama's influencing Words Are Not His Own.

This is about as disgusting as politics gets. You bring a guy down because he looks a little funny in a hat, because he mispronounces a word, because he's exuberant before a crowd of cheering supporters. You look for the INCONSEQUENTIAL element that will galvanize the public mind (a public that's been carefully groomed NOT to think!) and you get what the corporatocracy wants in power. And you think you've actually voted and taken part in a democratic process.
You want to know what is REALLY "just words"?? This ridiculous attack and attempt to get some traction for a criticism that is all smoke and mirrors, no substance.
Get real.

A lot of feathers but not much chicken

Change we can believe in?

If we are foolish enough to believe that he really had change in mind

This is a silly issue. Does everyone actually think a politician making a speech is going to stop after every line inspired by someone else and credit it? Their speeches go on long enough. If they did that they would be nattering on forever. How many different ways are there to say the same darned thing in any case?

They ALL have speechwriters anyway. Do they credit them all the time?

I'm surprised that none of the professional journalists have talked about the STYLE of speech, that is RHETORICAL or ORATORY. Completely different rules apply. Those of you who took Latin or Public Speaking will remember these forms from the Roman speeches (also found in Shaklespeare's Julius Caesar). This form is meant to recall entire contexts and associated historical meanings by allusions and familiar phrases. If the speaker is in fact resonant with the listeners in terms of meaning and emotion, the listeners respond accordingly. Any journalist, any lawyer, and any politician who does NOT know this--just sit back and learn!

What an non- issue! This doesn't affect the American people at all. It's the knd of politics that gums up the system. While everyone is busy talking about this nonsense, the issues remain the same. Politicians love it; they love that the people eat it up and are too busy getting fired up about a line in a speech to get fired up about holding elected officials accountable for anything SUBSTANCTIVE! Wake up people, stop drinking the kool aid.

It is a strawdog argument. Clinton frames Obama as being nothing but rhetoric and then attacks the rhetoric as not being authentic. Meanwhile, she excuses her own plagiarism because, she says, hers is a debate over policies, not rhetoric. In other words, her plagiarisms aren't as serious because she never claimed to be authentic. Time to move on Jake.

Do you think Obama practiced plagerism in college? Plagerism is lying for your own advancement and in this instance reflects on the integrity of the individual. But this is not the only thing Obama has stolen. He has taken ideas on the issues from Edwards and Clinton. So when you hear his speeches, you should wonder what little white lies is he telling now?

Erwin: I don't have to give up anything but you need to wake up. You just are afraid of the truth and the truth hurts. Obama doesn't like the truth because a liar and a fake like him that's caught copying others speeches tried to wrangle out of it. And for your information he is not a christian but a Muslim. He goes to an all black church that does not like whites and it has already been proven. They have ties to Farrakkan and you know who that is. WAKE UP!! This is not a race issue this is an issue of honesty. And he doesn't have that. Are you in the same league as Obama that you are defending lies?

vimed: What do you mean Obama's followers? And show them the light. Are you comparing him to Jesus? You better get a life. Obama has been a fake and a liar from the start and Patrick probably showed him how to do it. Obama cannot write his own speeches because it takes integrity which he is lacking and he should stop trying to be RFK when he's campaigning. It was shown on TV already comparing the two when RFK was campaigning. This generation like you don't know any better and your in the same league as Obama. If you think Bush is bad you better think again because if Obama was elected America would be in the worst disaster in history.

What Hillary Clinton is doing is exactly what everyone hates about politics. So they win this news cycle battle, but ultimately they’ll lose the war because nothing gets us more “fired up”* then this sort of tired, old-school, win-at-all-costs mentality.

It’s so much more fun for the Clintons than talking about the issues… can anyone say, NAFTA**?

* “Fired-up” attributed to Sen. Barack Obama
** NAFTA attributed to the Clintons (Happy now, Hil?)

Wilder: Obama knows how to use other peoples words and you say he knows the meaning of them. Who is kidding who. If he was so smart as he claims to be he would create his own speeches. And Patrick is the one that probably copied from someone else. Obama doesn't have the integrity to create a speech and you and the rest of this generation are in the same boat. Many of the college students of today can't finish college because the can't pass their tests. And Obama is no brighte than them. He is a fake, liar, no experience and should not have been running for president. He is not an American black he is a Kenya black and should be running for president in his own country. He is desperate to make history and don't kid yourself he does not like white people he only uses them for his own self. He goes to a church that hates whites. Get a life and face reality about him.

Philip: Why don't you admit that Obama is the biggest fake of all the candidates that were running for the presidency. Hillary doesn't say yes we can, she says yes we will and Obama copied that from another president because he is so dumb he doesn't know how to create a speech of his own Isn't he supposed to be an attorney. If he happens to be elected president he better get copies of the speeches of JFK and RFK so that he won't have a problem in knowing what to say. He is a good talker but a liar and a fake. Wake up to reality. That's the problem with this generation they are as dumb as he is or dumber. Obama thought that no one would catch his lies but Hillary did and good for her.

It's important to note that Deval Patrick is widely viewed as a disappointing failure as Massachusetts Governor.

All talk and no substance like Obama.

Lets not make our judgements on the origin of words used by HILL Or Obama,but what we believe they can deliver to the Americans.Words are just but arrangements of alphabets.Who is capable of implementing his/her words?,Vote for hinm or Her,Vote for Democrat

VPNathan3, thanks for posting that article. It proves once and for all that Obama didn't get any special deal on his house, and that Rezko had no influence whatsoever on the sale. Good to see such a positive story on the day before the Wisconsin primary.

Heres something funny, Hillary says just speeches, you need solutions,
Obamas reply , just words , just words,
when asked about plagiarism hes states , it doesnt matter, hes an old friend,lol,, ahaha you silly people, he questions Hillary just words just words and he quotes Patricks and then says as if he was telling Hillary words do matter, but they dont when you borrow the speech from a friend, so he lacks conviction in his speeches, when you believe in what you do, you need no speeches they come from with in lol,,,, too funny Go Obama , show your followers the light lol,, contradicts himself so i suppose his speeches are meaningless,,,,

What a stupid NON-issue. Obama's friend, who said these words first, has given oral permission over the air on TV. Why does the press keep hassling the Democrat candidates with trivia and then lets the Republicans off with their maasive faults and lies and the swiftboat machine they're already starting? Why the double standard, eh, Jake Tapper? Why don't you go tap over to Larry Craig and cover his toe tapping instead of picking on Obama? Eh?

actually Obama has had the same message since his senate run. He had a similar speech about hope and bipartisanship and change in the Democratic National Convention in 2004!!! Obama also started writing a book called "The Audacity of Hope", which is about everything Patrick talks about in his speeches, before Patrick ran in massachusetts (2006). So if anyone is stealing speeches its patrick from Obama. Although I will admit that the Just words lines were patricks, and Obama has admitted the mistake and has publicly acknowledged Patrick for it.

Clinton's are really trying to spin this whole story...it's quite pathetic.

So, Obama has a golden tongue, using words he is advised to use. Never mind substance; hook 'em first; we'll fill in the blanks, later.; Hillary has a golden touch, using her savvy and experience to mint clear ideas, pragmatic plans, and actual successes--all of which should be the coin of the realm. Give Obama another 8 years to watch the genuine article, get over himself, grow, gain experience, and to actually become the substance of things hoped for, and to clarify things currently heard, but which remain unseen.

Interesting to see how even Democrats are divided and arguing among themselves on differences in big opinions, even more surprising to see it divide over insignificant issues. How do Americans end up standing together to positively change the *United* States of America? Should this nation be renamed to the Bickering States of America? Is terrorism the only method to bring the nation together?

This is how one foreigner sees it.

Hey! Whattayaknow - Sen. Clinton and republican Massachusetts govenor candidate Kerry Healey are the same person...blaming their opponents for only having words...(it's important to note that Healey lost...)

All over the evening news and news programs, shown Hillary plagiarizing lines. People laughing at her, saying she's desperate.
What was she thinking? They won't show her doing the same thing?

Really dumb move Hillary.

Blah, Blah, Blah - He used a similar defense when confronted in a similar manner, so what - there really appears to be no mal-intent here.
I want both Candidates to synapse the views on the big issues(Economy,Environment,War,Border,Trade and Health to start) and then debate as to the differences and be willing to adjust their plans - not some sideshow about improper citation.

Don’t tell me words don’t matter.

I had a dream this afternoon that the brotherhood of mankind would become a reality.

Just words….

Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country.

Just words….

We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal.

Just not my words….

Just not my speech…

At last people know the fact: The inspiring words is not Mr. Obama's originals, but comes from his speech writers. While people still arguing about if it's plagiarism or not, I want to say: Wake up, America! It doesn't matter it belongs to Obama or not, since anyway he himself will not take it serious. Words, inspiring word collections has only been used by him as a tool, as strategy of his campiagn. And believe me this is not a guess: --- Michelle explained it use her own words!

Personally I respect Mrs. Obama's honesty. Michelle once openly discussed this in the Morning show, that they want to make people firstly "emotionally involved", THEN think about to do hard work. So don't blame Mr. Obama not having plan yet, he just doesn't get much time except busily reciting the inspiring word collections.

If you tell me it is nothing wrong to use some famous sayings, I will agree, in fact. Then please don't disturb people's feeling by accusing others play "old politics" in general, and at same time pretened to be so "new". Michelle made it very clear in another TV interview: "Politics is game!" That is what really in their mind, and what they are doing.

Very clear that word is only a tool for them to play, inspiration is nothing but his campiagn strategy. So why you guys are still so serious about these words belongs to him or not?

Wake up, America! Get clear mind to see his nothing new politics.

You got to be a simple minded that Hillary was not a part of this distraction. Are we talking about the same Hillary? The one who doesn't allow reporters to interview her daughter while Chelsea sell candies for her? This is what I don't like about the Clintons. We see the pattern of her surrogates doing the "HIT JOB" and hide or run. She is a control freak and if you think she is not a part of it, then you're deluded beyond any help.

There is no way we can hold politicians to their campaign promises. We all know
that! Never in history, has there been so many major issues facing an incoming president. The war,health care, illegal
immigration, social security reform, the economy, our education system, just to name a few. I think we should all just pray to God that the best person for the job gets elected, whether it be Democrat or Republican, and pray that God continues to bless this great country of ours.

Can I ask when did Hillary, say that Obama was plaiarising, I dont ever recall her saying that, it was beyond belief, American voters, who enjoy inspirations books, do you really think she would call him out on it, and those who say crasping at straws, in a business if you were caught plagiarisn your credibility, would be questioned along your with your ethics, so is he any better than those working class voters or business people who would be terminated,for such a cause. You know when one such as Hilliary uses a line, its a line,,, it is not a continuous speech in reference to every quote you can master up with inspiration, when he gives a speech not all people know that he is taking it from text, of another he is not even crediting the source, even in college papers you must use your source of reference, the point is people connect him to the words as if they are his own, not all is schooled in such great quotes, time and time again he uses with out giving a plan to excite people to give him the trust on carrying the nation to a better level, but when you continuously borrow, from others it's a speech that is repeated , over and over until it is just words, no true plan to accomplish, it , its Patrick speech , why give a speech that he
has already given , another mans words is not words of his own, to thrive for the intensity of the passion of belief that people believe in him, to accomplish what is needed , not just quotes,,to believe in oneself is the inspiration of a man,,, you do not need famous quotes, to drive in those plans,,, ,,,, well its an F , if graded by any fair professor, and to give credit after the fact , that some people recognized it,, Please one step closer to dishonesty , is the first step taken of a greedy man,, take take take and pass it off as your own,,,,,,

Hillary, you stole lines from Obama, "Fired up, ready to go!" and "Yes, we can!" So don't even think about distracting the voters from the real issues. 1) Release your First Lady Documents so that we can see what roles you played in your touted "35 years of experience." 2) Release your tax return so that we can see ourselves what's in it. If you run for the highest office in America, you are obligated to disclose any information relevant to the voters' decision making!

I don't care if this govenor is his father, it still is inappropriate. Students aren't given a "NO BIG DEAL" if they take their friends work rather than a nonfriend. IT IS THE WHOLE IDEA that he MISLED these vulnerable voters.

I like Obama, in fact - I like him A LOT. But I have to admit that this bothers me. Our high school students know enough to cite a source when using another's words, whether in a speech or an essay. Give credit where it's due, don't claim another's work as your own - in school we call it cheating.

to DocDee:

I do see the distinction, and apparently to Vicki it's a distinction with a difference. To me, the fact that someone's beliefs, ideas, even the expression of those ideas is influenced by or even "borrowed" from people that that person admires is of minimal import. Obama has acknowledged in the case of the recent "just words" speech that it would have been wiser of him to attribute the theme to his friend - there's not always a bright line. Jack Kennedy did not attribute when he said "Ask not what your country can do for you..." Nonetheless, I find myself often sounding like and using the words of friends and family members who I admire, quite often in the context of persuasive speech, sometimes with attribution, sometimes without. I appreciate that others may have a different perspective on this, but I believe that perspective is a case of tail wagging dog (Dustin Hoffman, Wag the Dog, circa 1998), i.e. I think those bothered by this were already bothered by Obama for one reason or another.

By the way, on a tangential point, some of those reasons, you will surely have observed for yourself from the tone of the posts on various blogs, are based on legitimate reservations; others are based on patently or latently racist motives, in my opinion. I know this is a two-way street, of course, since I have also heard both unapologetic and insidiously sexist reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton. In either case, it tends to take the shine off the progress everyone is celebrating in overcoming racial and gender bias and discrimination, especially when those calls are coming from inside the house. (When a Stranger Calls, circa 1978). Peace.

Come on ... day before election when Hillary's supposed to pull some tears out out and all the country can talk about is some pilfered lines of general hope speak? And the rest of the time they talk about Bill yelling at hecklers? Obama laid a trap and they stepped right in it. I believe appropriately (and they don't have to try hard) their campaign strategy is to "keep Hillary b*tching". Drawing personal conclusions from this about Obama is atarded.

I get it! So none of us has any shot at ever being authentic again, because there's absolutely nothing new under the Sun left to be said...

If Hillary Clinton wins the nomination by taking Obama down this way, she will take herself and the Democratic Party down with her...MARK MY WORDS!

The only thing this entire incident proves to me is that the best thing that the Democratic Party can do for itself is to completely separate from the Clintons. They have managed to turn this thing into the type of sleeze that we're accustomed to seeing from the Republicans. I feel like I need to take a long shower now...

Some of you people amaze me! So now...because Obama utters his friends words...he's dishonest and lacks integrity??? So when ALL of the other politicians (including Hillary) do it it's OK, but when Obama does it, he lacks honesty and integrity??? I was wondering how long it was going to take. The more things change...the more they stay the same...

Do any of you know that Hillary and McCain have done the same thing. It has been al over the national news tonight. You make it sound like Obama is the only one. If some of you would know how to read, it was also explained how most of Presidential candidates do it. I bet none of you have ever use someone elses words. Oh no, not you, your purer than snow.If you aren't voting for Obama now, you never intended to in the first place.