Biden did 20 years in the wilderness for stealing a speech; Obama gets a free pass?

That seems a bit out of line, especially since Biden got a bit of a bum rap.

Far too many people--seemingly even Obama himself--don't think this is much of a deal. They should turn off their indignation for a minute and listen to what's going on around them. It's not just pissy partisans who are bent out of shape about this, and it's not some kind of bizarre conspiracy by a few hypocritical loudmouths distorting a minor misstep into a big stumble. It's broad-based. It's a big deal. It should be seen as such.

For someone who's made so much hay about inclusiveness, this really cuts to the bone of his public persona. Too much "politics" here and basically no "hope".

Joe Biden's a good guy; you young-uns might wonder what he's been doing all these years. Well, back when he was running for president in '88, he used a speech by UK politician Neal Kinnock. Even though he credited Kinnock when giving this stump speech, the one time he didn't got caught on tape and he was hounded out of the race as a plagiarist. He paid mightily for that, and I think he's paid his debt to society. That's an ethical lapse, but it's not a lapse of pluralism or empathy, two pillars of a decent democracy. That's what this is.

This is callous disregard for the feelings of a downtrodden group, done for political gain, offhandedly covered with the fig leaf of "inclusion" and minimized as inconsequential. The mind reels. The big question is this: if THIS doesn't matter, what does?

To not take Senator Obama to task for this in a big way is to endorse such convenience of conscience. Certain means are not justified by the ends because their very employment denies the ends by definition. Where should we draw the line? Well, I'd say way short of this kind of crap.

There's a reason why stuff like this gets so much airplay: character matters. Judgment matters. Inclusion matters.

What would be a fair course of action for him to take at this point?

I'm not getting the jist of your post....when did Obama plagarize a speech? I think he's getting a fair shellacking (as he should) for the McClurkin debacle, but how does equate with Biden in '88?

The comparison is pretty obvious: consequences for a misstep. Although Biden credited Kinnock when giving this slightly altered speech, the one time he didn't was caught on tape and this forced him out of the race. Plagiarism is pretty disgusting, and it's a legitimate strike against one's character. The fact that this may have been a clumsy omission is open to debate, and even if credited, it was certainly a bit on the shady side to say the least. Still, the reaction to it was a bit extreme when all the facts were laid out, and Dukakis fired the person responsible for it as a result.

I contend that what Obama's done here is much worse. I'm sure I could have worded it more obviously, but I thought it was pretty clear. I'm not intimating that Obama plagiarized anything: his transgressions have been perfectly original, if not particular creative.

For what Biden did, he had to slink back into the shadows, fight to restore his reputation and eat humble pie for many, many years until rehabilitated in our eyes. (Okay, he was still a Senator, that's not too bad a gig.) This all seems completely disproportionate.

Some seem to think that Obama's quasi-repudiation of McClurkin while he still reaps the harvest of the guy's bigoted rabble-rousing is just fine. I don't. Many don't. The observation was that one man paid two decades worth of penance for something far less unethical, while many think the other shouldn't get much but the passing backlash of this board. Quite a few seem to think that even that's an undue inconvenience.

It's still early. We shall see.

I don't recall anyone today saying what Obama did was not as bad as what Biden did. I think they're two totally different gaffes.

I josh.

I don't believe that he's homophobic, or that he's anti-atheist, but the things he does may lead people in that direction.

It's par for the course that a politician's walk and talk aren't always in line, but Obama's walk and talk are so far apart, that it's really truly extraordinary.

Show me another Senator who has done the same thing in their STATE.

I can just refer to McClurkin and be right.

and gives him a microphone and an audience to spew his homophobic filth.

class.

Dukakis got so much mileage out of the Kinnock speech partly because the plagiarism of the Kinnock speech was so egregious (the parts he took were biographical -- "I was the first person in my family to go to college...my wife was the first person to go to college in her family...my grandparents were coalminers...they worked in mines and then played football for 12 hours on Saturday." Even if those biographical details were true for both of them, it's weird that you'd copy someone's speech where that person is relating their life story.

Dukakis also got mileage out of that story because Biden had plagiarize before in law school, and that's why it resonated so much. Once is an accident. Twice is a pattern and a character flaw in the minds of voters.

I had sort of reconsidered this recently when doing some research because I'd been so harsh on him at the time and over the years. Apparently I was more accurate that I thought. At the time, I was a real hectorer on the subject and I take a really dim view of plagiarism for reasons we won't get into here. If you search the archives here, you can find a few snide shots I've made at him about this.

Yes, the speech is a real "my life story" bit, and it was a total disaster for him. I call it "a bit of a bum rap" but perhaps I'm minimizing it more than I should. It's definitely a serious character issue, but it's "only" that. Obama's is as big or bigger a character issue AND a willingness to personally profit from the misfortune of others when he specifically states that this is against his core values. In the end, Biden's deception didn't hurt other people (except for stealing the eloquence of Kinnock, which IS a personal damage) whereas Obama's was and is widely hurtful to many.

I was not aware of the College issue; I thought I'd been a bit too harsh on him since I hadn't heard until lately that he credited Kinnock on the other occasions.

for what really went on during the 1987 campaign.

Here is some of what I found from the NY Times:

Articles from the New York Times

By CLIFFORD D. MAY
Published: September 21, 1987

-snip-

"Christopher Buckley, a Washington-based novelist who formerly wrote speeches for Vice President Bush, put it, if a speech writer was responsible for supplying Mr. Biden with material composed by others, ''he should have fallen on his sword by now - that would have been both the honorable and the expedient thing to do.''

-snip-

"A result of the Biden affair, he added, may be that professional speech writers will exercise more control than ever over the politicians they serve.

''And I think that's unfortunate,'' Mr. Buckley said. ''It would be nice to think that the great words uttered by a politician actually came from the man's heart and soul.''


By RICHARD J. MEISLIN, SPECIAL TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: September 18, 1987

"The instructor who alerted the faculty about possible plagiarism in Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s law paper said tonight that ''the incident doesn't look half as bad now as I thought it did then'' and that he did not think it ''reflects on what Joseph Biden is today.''

-snip-

"Although he called Mr. Biden's offense ''an unwise, stupid thing to do,'' he said the incident now seems relatively minor.

Another professor said it was not unusual for students to misunderstand what must be attributed when they are learning to write legal briefs.

-snip-

''He was one of the great successes after law school, but not in law school,'' Mr. Anderson said. ''It happens all the time.''


Of course I picked out the quotes that are most favorable. Some writers for the NYT back then were and are hard core repubs (Safire) so I don't like their ugly quotes, ha

What is apparent from reading articles on this issue, and in particular in reference to Biden, is that most the words coming out of a politicians mouth is scripted by someone else while throwing in other famous people and politician only with slight changes.

Biden was at the lower end of his graduating class. He was also raising a family while in law school.

"About six weeks into the first term I botched a paper in a technical writing course so badly that one of my classmates accused me of lifting passages from a Fordham Law Review article; I had cited the article but not properly. The truth was, I hadn't been to class enough to know how to do citations in a legal brief. The faculty put my case on the agenda of one of their regular meetings, and I had to go in and explain myself. The deans and the professors were satisfied that I had not intentionally cheated, but they told me I'd have to retake the course the next year. They meant to put the fear of God in me; the basic message was that I had better show some discipline or I'd never get through the first year. But the dean of the law school wrote a note to the dean who oversaw my work as a resident advisor: 'In spite of what happened, I am of the opinion that this is a perfectly sound young man.'"

Joe Biden, Promises to Keep

... seems Biden cited the source once, but the rest of the parts from the piece he merely put in quotes, designating the passages were quoted from a source, but not being clear which source it was.

Anyone? Did I get that right?

My "I used to know this department" is getting harder and harder to access these days. I think my brain needs an external hard drive!

I think you're pretty close though. It was his first year at law school and he was goofing off a bit. As a result he missed the class that taught the proper way to cite a source in a technical document. He was a bright young student who wasn't always as smart as he thought he was. He described himself at that time as a "dangerous combination of arrogant and sloppy".

From what I understood in his biography "Promises to Keep" he had a paper that was due for his Legal Methods class and in that paper at the bottom of every page you're supposed to write your references or whatever. Biden only did it at the END of the paper. It was not a big deal. It was never a big deal. He made a classic rookie freshman mistake. Syracuse University of Law has said that it was never an issue and to this day doesn't understand what the big deal was. He DIDN'T CHEAT.

campaign started playing dirty politics. I can't believe that decades later, this is still being discussed. Pathetic and petty.

I already don't give him any free passes, aside from any charges of plagiarism. What is he supposed to have done?

Later he (can't remember the guy's name) apologized to Biden.

representative of the man I truly believe him to be. There are some votes I don't agree with, but I feel he's "seen the light" since and his more recent voting record supports that belief.

So many political candidates' actions are so blown out of proportion it's really obscuring the benefits a candidate can offer our country.

Let the Perfect Person, without any mistakes in his/her life, please step forward and be counted.

I'm glad I don't live in the public eye!

:wow:

:evilgrin:

I usually vote for the "best hair"!

Soon, my pretties, very soon

"Clean" is an old expression for like clean cut or fresh.

You don't really think he was referring to the opposite of dirty and in particular referring to a racial issue???

a candidate is free of corruption and scandal. It certainly has never been used to indicate personal hygiene or race.

Are you Insulted? by dragging out the grasp at bigotry, you are proving yourself as the bigot.

What would be a fair course of action for him to take at this point?

attack Obama with a vague implication?

I've avoided the many rants on here about the religious/anti gay concert as there was more hate and anger than I am ready for. George and his adventures is all the hate and anger I want to deal with.

Where is the discussion in the media about the Obama religious concert and the "meanings" behind having such an event. It is very unsettling. He bundled religion and the gay issue in one big political bundle.

Oh, wait. I read that wrong.

I remember that and I've always like and respect biden. It is not Obama's fault that the press had treated Biden unfairly. You need to get an organized effort with the Biden supporters here to demand better coverage.
I feel the press has done all the candidates wrong and set things up for the feelings of frustration by supporters.
But, Obama has suffered alot of arrows from the blogs over his Gospel thing.