Obama Echoes Deval Patrick...Again

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.