Are you listening, Axelrod? Maybe the wrong guys are running for office . . .
Posted by idiosynchronic at February 19, 2008 04:50 PMExactly. The problem is that he's not the great authentic hope that the campaign claims he is. After all, how new and original can you be if you can take someone else's sentences almost verbatim for your own speeches?
Posted by Orange at February 19, 2008 05:05 PMIt is plagiarism...and the same type that sunk Joe Biden--but the important question is authenticity...once Obama is shown to be merely a product following a formula...it's all over. The Republicans get it. Democrats might not until it's too late.
Posted by lily15 at February 19, 2008 05:13 PMYour correct he's just as he says "a hope monger". What we need here is the same old Clinton tactics we had for 8 years.+8 y ears of GWB. Divisive, infighting, a split north, south red, blue.
Framing, a campaign is well, politics! Who needs the likes of Patrick, and Obama when we can have Hillary and Bill AGAIN.
Um, Turk, it's plagiarism.
This is the end of the line for Obama.
"Who needs the likes of Patrick, and Obama when we can have Hillary and Bill AGAIN."
Yeah, 8 years of peace and prosperity, who needs it? Jackass.
Posted by Shane at February 19, 2008 05:20 PMAt least David Axelrod is not Mark Penn.
Posted by Seven of Six at February 19, 2008 05:24 PM7o6,
he's not much better. watching them both after the great l.a. debate, i couldn't help rueing that one of these fine candidates would have one of those sleazeballs working in the white house
Posted by Turkana at February 19, 2008 05:29 PM"There's plenty of buzz about charges that Barack Obama plagiarized Deval Patrick."
In today's world: much to do about nothing. (Unless, of course you would ask for Joe Biden's opinion.)
Posted by Bagley at February 19, 2008 05:36 PMhe's not much better.
At least he's a Democrat!
Posted by Seven of Six at February 19, 2008 05:46 PMTo Shane, on the Bill Clinton years: I didn't have any problems with the peace. I couldn't stand the prosperity, though.
Posted by Orange at February 19, 2008 05:49 PMAppears obvious that Obama is just another packaged product like soap or chips. Maybe that's why his speeches remind me of a commercial of a feminine hygiene product.
It's new, it's fresh, it's ...
Republicans will not let this get by them, even if the Democrats are stupid enough to let it go.
Recycling's good.
Posted by Sharon at February 19, 2008 06:19 PMDesperation sets in at TLC. Obama wins big in Wisconsin. Hillary is hanging by her fingernails. This biased post, OF COURSE, fails to enumerate any of the many "borrowings" of Hillary from Barack himself and her husband Bill's past campaigns... Hillary ain;t exactly an "original."
Pathetic excuse for political analysis here, but we've come to be used to it, haven't we...
Posted by at February 19, 2008 06:22 PMor if you want to vote for a party of one candidate vote for Hillary because she doesn't care about dems in red states.
Posted by a4L at February 19, 2008 06:25 PMI agree...it seems like once you dig a little deeper he's just another Washington politician after all...and for all of those thinking he's really an agent of hope and change...well they're in for all sorts of disappointment and hurt once the pretty packaging and superficial stump speechifying is done and the the job needs to get done....I've no trouble supporting him in the general election, but I'm not being fooled by this....he's still far to centrist and conciliatory for my liking ...but he's way better than McBush and more importantly a McBush Supreme Court. I'm thinking that if he should win and become president he may end up being as big a disappointment to people who thought that things would change once Democrats took over Congress in 2006. At least I know what to expect, but I'm not so certain some people out there actually know what they are getting. What's that sayin....if its too good to be true chances are its not.
Posted by emal at February 19, 2008 06:32 PMLily, Emal with the same old mindless Hillary drivel. Where's Peter and iamcoyote when you need 'em?
Posted by at February 19, 2008 06:41 PMBut that can't be true! I heard from an Obama delegate-wanna-be that the cosmic forces have aligned to give us this man.
Posted by Susan S at February 19, 2008 06:41 PMno name person...if it's the same no name one because for some reason your too ashamed to reveal yourself even in a semianonymous name...well whatever same ole attack the messenger with a diffeent opinion than yours drivel because that's all you've got.. ..you really don't deserve a response but in case you didn't notice if you read my post you'll find I never mentioned She who shall not be named...but that doesn't matter because both candidates left are my 3rd and 4th choices anyway...I'm not fooled by what I'm voting for from either of them...like you apparently...and I hope I'm wrong and you and your Axelrod created candidate prove me to be wrong..it'd be one time I'd be thrilled to be proven wrong.
Posted by emal at February 19, 2008 06:57 PMTurkana,
I want to make it clear why Obama's attractive rhetoric means something to a lot of Democrats.
We look at two candidates who are, as you say, a radical departure from Bush.
One of those two candidate seems to be doing a damn good job of inspiring new voters to show up and support him. One candidate seems to have the media eating out of his hand. One candidate has the type of charisma that can help sell our ideas to the rest of the public who doesn't already think like us.
These qualities are just tools Obama has in his tool chest which might just help him WIN.
That is why Obama's auritorical skills matter.
PS. I wont dignify the plagiarism "controversy" with a response. Honestly.
Posted by midwestdem at February 19, 2008 06:57 PMMidwestdem,
Obama plagiarized. His campaign is finished.
The only question is whether it finishes as a candidate now, or as the nominee later.
Look, there's just no question that Obama is just fantastic at moving people with rhetoric. Doesn't matter who wrote it. That's an extremely useful tool for a president. Even terrible presidents with lousy policies can get their bills through congress if they can sell them to the people (think Ronald Reagan). With a democratic senate and house behind him in 08, he has every chance of doing great things, whether or not the rethugs go along.
Posted by Gary Queen of Scots at February 19, 2008 07:18 PMGary Queen of Scots,
Those are my thoughts exactly. Get a Dem in the White House and you can pass a lot of stuff if all he/she does differently from Bush is sign it!
Obama doesn't have to be the idea guy. He can pass all the good legislation coming from Hillary, Joe Biden, and the rest of the Dem controlled congress.
Posted by midwestdem at February 19, 2008 07:27 PMMarkL, I read both your posts and I trust you are being sarcastic. Otherwise, do you work for McCain?
Posted by midwestdem at February 19, 2008 07:30 PMHis campaign is finished.
After tonight, 10 wins in a row... get fucking real!
I"m not being sarcastic in the least.
Obama may become the nominee, sure, but he has no chance against McCain after being shown to be a plagiarist and phony.
Obama moves no one .. Patrick and Axelrod's rhetoric moves them.
Posted by MarkL at February 19, 2008 07:38 PMMarkL
...
Posted by midwestdem at February 19, 2008 08:03 PMMcCain after being shown to be a plagiarist and phony.
I kinda wish McCain would stop stealing that "hope" thing. Billary too. Did you see his wife (McCain's, not Hill's bee-atch) saying she was proud of America? Me too.
Posted by phidipides at February 19, 2008 08:07 PMOnce again I love Mrs. Clinton and her husband was a hero of mine minus the oval office BS. I still have been sending money to Obama in his senate campaign and pres. run because of what I think are good reasons and I think most of his supporters think the same way. One more time with feeling....
1. Clinton will have a much harder time beating Mccain because...
a. The right wing hates her and she will fire up the base to show up this november. She is their Newt and is read meat for the Christian zelots and a lot of the haters on that side. Thats in a year that many likely will not show up because Mccain is not their boy and they are so demoralized that their current man turned out to be such a moron. ( who knew?)
b. One of the central themes of this election is the Iraq war and Clinton cannot effectively counter Mccain on this. He gets a walk on the biggest mistake of his career.
c. A large part of the democratic party also doesn't like her. Most will still vote for her but I suspect that 5 to 10 % will not.
d. Obama moves a lot of people. He gets 98% of the black vote and a much bigger % of the young vote than Clinton will get. He will get a much bigger % of the white male vote and he is gaining in most of the other demographics. And though you think it is some vast right wing conspiricy, I am talking to some pretty red bush supports that are very impressed with Obama.
2. This is one time that the "change meme" actually may have some traction. Obama owns this and Mccain will just make the change issue all too obvious and Clinton will too.
3.Finally, with the horrible years that we have had under Bush we need a resounding win to get a fillabuster proof majority in the senate and Clinton just won't have the coattails to pull enough of our Senate nominies over the finish line with her and
I think Obama will.
4.I think most of obama supporters are not ignorant cultists that many here portray us as. I for one am an agnostic and If I won't join an organized religeon I sure won't fall for the so named Obama Cult.
I hope your anger at Obama is just misplaced frustration at your losses for your candidate and we can all kiss and make up. How about we rent a bar and knock back a few and unite to begin to bury this sad excuse for leadership so deep they will never crawl out of the mud and slime they helped spread. And when we elect a democrat and a senate that has some balls we can even put dick cheny in jail.
Eric in Austin
Posted by ericl at February 19, 2008 08:14 PM"Yeah, 8 years of peace and prosperity..."
PEACE?! PROSPERITY?! Are you KIDDING?! Try telling the Iraqis how much Clinton was about peace and prosperity. They will love to hear that you define peace as being bombed and starved to submission, and bombed again, and starved some more and bombed more and more and starved more and more and more for eight years, all in the name of regime change.
Or maybe you'd like to tell the people of (the former) Yugoslavia that intentionally bombing civilian targets, including trains, electrical plants, communication facilities, 344 schools, 33 hospitals, and 144 industrial plants, is peace and prosperity. Or tell the Haitians. Or the Afghans. Or the Sudanese. Or the Turkish Kurds for his all-out support of Turkey and its horrific ongoing human rights abuses against them, which were worse than Saddam's abuses against Iraqi Kurds. Or the Timorese, for his full-on support of Indonesia, including supplying the weapons with which it slaughtered about one third of the population. Or the Cubans. Tell them all about Clinton and his eight years of peace and prosperity. They will find it fascinating, I am sure.
Peace and prosperity indeed!
Posted by Shirin at February 19, 2008 08:20 PMMarkL shows yet more of his simply excellent judgement regarding politics. And if he flaps his arms very fast, he believes he can fly, too!
We await the inevitable crash, although it's a bit curious why it didn't happen immediately if it's such a catastrophe, no?
Who's the plagiarist, the speechwriter or the candidate? Can a speechwriter plagiarize himself? Does Hillary write her own speeches, too? Who knew? Ready to lead!
Posted by euzoius at February 19, 2008 08:25 PMI , am the HOPE you can believe in!
Believe in and we can be the ones that you and can believe in!
It's brighter, whiter, and recommended by 4 out of five dentists!
The stuff of con artists and Madison avenue.
That's what the Obama/Patrick campaign is coming down to....
Posted by T at February 19, 2008 09:53 PMOne thing that I'm grateful to the Obama campaign for is the new conventional wisdom amongst liberals that the Clinton years represented plague, famine, and all that.
That was sarcasm, by the way.
Posted by Voodoo Chile at February 19, 2008 11:56 PMHey folks, it's the Republicans we want to beat, right? Time to tamp down your anti-Obama rhetoric a wee bit, now that it appears he will be out candidate...and to start turning your venom towards our true opponent, Crusty McWarMonger. Beating him won't be easy, and we are ALL going to have to pull together to do it.
Posted by balthus at February 20, 2008 06:52 AMExactly. I wrote something similar at my own blog, although more grounded in Aristotelian rhetorical theory.
Posted by Fabio at February 20, 2008 07:45 AM"One thing that I'm grateful to the Obama campaign for is the new conventional wisdom amongst liberals that the Clinton years represented plague, famine, and all that."
For tens of millions of Iraqis it did not merely represent that, it produced all that and more. For millions of Cubans, Turkish Kurds, and Timorese, it produced anything but peace, and enormous death and misery. For millions of Haitians, Afghans, and Sudanese, it was hardly a gift.
"That was sarcasm, by the way."
Then apparently you are incapable of seeing or caring what happens outside your own little world.
Posted by Shirin at February 20, 2008 09:23 AM>also obviously a bit sloppy about keeping their lines different enough so that people couldn't catch on
Oh, please.
Here is one example of the limited political vocabulary national candidates have:
And here is another:
A few more minutes of googling could easily find Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain each saying "yes we can" or "fired up ready to go".
Posted by bartkid at February 20, 2008 01:18 PM>also obviously a bit sloppy about keeping their lines different enough so that people couldn't catch on
Oh, please.
Here is one example of the limited political vocabulary national candidates have.
And here is another.
A few more minutes of googling could easily find Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain each saying "yes we can" or "fired up ready to go".