Obama BLATANTLY plagiarizes Edwards!

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/09/obama_draws_throng_in_jersey_c.html

"One of the useful things...about yesterday was it reminds us that change isn't easy," Obama told the crowd. "Change is hard. Change is always met by resistance from the status quo."

The exact phrase Edwards used in the NH debates! He couldn't even condescend to acknowledge where it came from: say like "as was said in the last debate." No, the thieving, overblown egotistic bag of hot air, simply stole it!

Okay, it's official, I am now still uncommitted, but have ruled out Obama period. He was skating on thin ice because of is inexperience and more particularly his too strong attachment to things religious. No, you cna put me solidly in the anti-Obama corner here on out. I will never support a common thief.

and they all stole it from Kucinich. :evilgrin:

Please give the facts, if so I'm down to one candidate then aren't I? heheh

Straight out of the transcript of Edwards speaking at the Sat night debate. You know, the conversation that was met with "lets take a reality break"?

Then tell me who sounds like whom.

Ya can't keep the voice silent. . . It's what you DO with it that counts.

It seems Edwards invented the progressive agenda though...before him, there was total darkness.

At the Edwards rally I attended tonight, his people were saying "fired up and ready to go". I'm an Obama supporter and found nothing wrong with it. They seem to be merging their message.

of the 1988 rece. Now he later proved that it was not, that in fact(and there were copies apparently of the speech) had given credit for the quote at the end of the paper: which was proper in research and most formal scribblings. But the tradition for public speeches, releases and such(I presume the AP writers Guide) said they must appear with the quote. Biden quit immediately, and it was much later he went ahead and cleared it up. He has said he simply wasn't going to fight a campaign and constantly have to answer only that one issue over, and over. I am paraphasing and going on memory, it is all of record though and I presume easy enough to research.

Now to the issue you bring up. Adopting or using rally cries etc by supporters, even the speakers use of phrases in an impromptu situation does not rise to plagiarism, at least not blatant plagiarism: it must be in a formal speeh and must be exactly or almost exactly the phrase someone else coined. And that is also the test, 'coined' Edwards owns that phrase, it was never used publicly before(some research wonk or another checked it out apparently). So what we have is a Obama using an original coined phrase in a formal speech without giving the slightest credit to the author, nor any inkling it was not his words. That is plagiarism that would hold up in a court of law.

that they are merging their message to make sure Hillary doesn't win. how would we know. it's possible they've already made a deal saying the other would pick the other as their VP and throw their support their way... obviously at this time it benefits Obama since John is trailing him by 10 points nationally but you never know what could happen in 2 weeks.

Edwards is the idea guy. The others grab his ideas.

Kucinich also has a lot of good ideas, but his philosophy is different in some fundamental respects from Edwards'.

I noticed this too. It is an interesting dynamic -- and one with foreshadowing.

Edwards is in through the convention. I wonder if there are already plans in place.

~ Bill Shakespeare


Sonnet 76
Why is my verse so barren of new pride,
So far from variation or quick change?
Why with the time do I not glance aside
To new-found methods, and to compounds strange?
Why write I still all one, ever the same,
And keep invention in a noted weed,
That every word doth almost tell my name,
Showing their birth, and where they did proceed?
O! know sweet love I always write of you,
And you and love are still my argument;
So all my best is dressing old words new,
Spending again what is already spent:
For as the sun is daily new and old,
So is my love still telling what is told.

Message to the "we" message of Obama, after the contrast was shown on TV by David Shuster.
The "change" message was certainly not hers originally.

but Edwards gets no credit for those words..they just steal what he says verbatim! ..with no media holding them accountable for plagiarism.

it disgusts me.

fly

how after Edwards finished 2nd with his passionate power back to the people type speeches and policies, that the other candidates out there, even in the GOP, seem to be talking about change, personal, status quo, etc...

sorry no plagiarism there. Gratuitous useage probably, but not plagiarism. Edwards DID coin the phrase using the status quo though.

Edwards also used the "status quo" wording that Obama copied in that same N.H. debate. Well, I'm glad that Edwards is keeping Obama and Hillary on message. Someone has to tell them what to say. It is quite a complement to Edwards that they copy Edwards' language.

which she stole word *sniff* for word *sniff*

the problem is - Clinton and Obama get gobs of media exposure where as Ewards remains in a virtual media blackout... so of course the key phrases resonate... they just watch Edwards and mimic what works. Edwards is a grassroots populist where as Obama is M$M product - all marketing & packaging with no depth or content. and Clinton is a Dino sellout to corporate corruption - a terrible risk in the worst of possible times. Edwards needs to shift his focus to the war in Iraq, the failure of Afghanistan, the looming distant drums of war with Iran and the powder keg of Pakistan... and oh, by the way... an idiot was sElected for President - twice - my faith in the American public to get it right this time would definitely buck a down ward trend. It doesn't look good... nope, not good at all. Edwards, forget about the traditional channels of communication - those channels are closed. Take a cue from Ron Paul... use that internet. It's a series of tubes, ya know...

But the media didn't cover it.

Big promises. And then some bigger promises. And then some really big ones. But he just lost. Didn’t he?

But can we do it? Yes we can? Or, moreover, can he do it ? Yes he can. Can I do it? Yes I can etc. etc. etc. Remind me one more time…


It’s a perfect job
Can you fix it
Right
Left a bit, right a little, O.K. straight down
We can tackle any situation
Look out, here we come
Can we dig it Yes
Can we build it Yes
Can we fix it Yes

Bob the Builder
Can we fix it
Bob the Builder
Yes, we can

http://www.anorak.co.uk/politicians/179228.html

candidate that has NEVER taken money from a lobbyist or PAC.Excuse me? Hello? Obam himself admitted he took PAC money in his only statewide , (rather laughable) race against Alan Keyes. And who does that sound like? There have been several other "quotes" used as well.

Jeez, the histrionics are thick tonight.

...because Edwards is the catalyst that is driving this race - frontrunner or not. He is setting the tone and the priorities. That is one reason I think he MUST go on. HE IS THE ONLY ONE addressing the core issue(s) facing this nation: rampant corporatism.

His being in the race with that mantra FORCES the other candidates to have to acknowledge that and to at least include it in their agendas, if not to build their agendas around similar themes.

Though NEITHER Hillary or Obama have what it takes to DO anything about the problem - Edwards at least forces them to talk about it.

So, uh... :shrug:

in his stump speech and that he used in crucial moments of the N.H. debate. They are stolen. It is flattering to Edwards. Goes to show he is the brains in the race.

If we decided against a candidate based solely on that criteria, we'd all be voting Republican.... :scared:

Call it hedging our bets.

but I hear messages that Obama began being echoed elsewhere as well. I also recall how I felt when I started hearing Howard Dean's message coming from John Kerry before he was the winner. It was a bad feeling, like he was assuming that we hadn't been paying attention and would be fooled. Of course after Dean lost, I worked as hard as I could for Kerry; though I had a very bad feeling about him earlier, I let it go.

For what it's worth, I have heard this message from Obama before too, while campaigning in Iowa. (Obama, not me.) This wasn't the first time he's made that point using many of those words.

Don't we WANT all our candidates to be moving in that direction?

he is not a common thief, he and edwards are just campaigning against hrc. its something that they share in common.

:eyes:

HC and BO know that John has the best message out there.

answering her attempt to smear him for "using people" like the Sarkasians. He answered by saying its not about him or Hillary, but about the people. About the Sarkasians (who called him as I understand it) and about all of America. So right after her image softening exercise (we're talking about a seasoned politician here, who has not shown so much emotion in her many YEARS of talking to crowds and media) Hillary says, "It's personal.... and "It's not about me, it's about all of you."

Blatant plagiarists, both of them! But who's gonna call them on it? The M$M? The Obama/Hillary camps? Not holding my breath.

:rofl:

It's a friggin cliche for god's sake. And can you point me to where Edwards said such a thing? Thanks.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Ohhhhhh waittttttt, you're not implying that simply the words 'Change' and 'Status Quo' were used, yet that is enough for you to make the completely absurd and ignorant charge of plagiarism, right? Cause, like, if that were the case, this thread would be all sorts or rigoddamndiculous. :hi:

Silly wabbit.

You are asserting such merely because of the use of the cliche terms 'change' and 'status quo'. You've provided no quote nor supporting evidence to your absurd assertion. Calling what Obama said 'plagiarism' is asinine.

So silly how defensive you get and how quickly you resort to grade school retorts though. Course, your argument might be a bit more valid if you like, actually, ya know, used evidence and stuff. :think:

It's really quite humorous to read your responses, as if you're convinced you're waging any sort of real substantial return argument.

How bout providing a quote of Edward's that you feel was plagiarized, and then we can compare and see if your assertion carries any credibility whatsoever. Cause at this time, saying someone blatantly plagiarized another solely on the premise that they simply used the words 'change' and 'status quo' in a same cliche context, is beyond laughable. :hi:

verboten....so I will strike my next question to you.

Boo hoo hoo.

:nopity:

Hmm?

"Any time you speak out powerfully for change, the forces of status quo attack. That's exactly what happens."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/06/america/05textdd...

I mean you have to appreciate the irony there :evilgrin:

Nothing he says is original.

"Any time you speak out powerfully for change, the forces of status quo attack. That's exactly what happens."

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/06/america/05textddebate.php?page=8

:mad: :argh: :grr:

a lot of people used to argue that Edwards ripped off Kucinich.

I'm not saying that's *my* argument, I'm just reminding everyone.

Ok, so is it a rip-off of Edwards? Yes, of course it is. And that bothers me *a little*. But there's another part of me that thinks it might be a GOOD thing *if* Obama/Clinton are pushed further down the progressive end of the spectrum. If Edwards isn't going to make it, the next best thing is a candidate heavily influenced by his awesome rhetoric.

Will this ultimately translate into action and much needed change (funny how tired that word is at this point)? Well, that's another question. But before you can walk the walk you have to talk it, so it's a good first step if nothing else.