Clinton Fingerprints on Plagiarism Flap

CLEVELAND — Hillary Rodham Clinton says reporters, not her campaign, uncovered evidence of Democratic rival Barack Obama sharing speech lines with Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.

She made the claim Tuesday despite the fact her campaign posted video clips on YouTube illustrating similarities in the speeches and has suggested in several instances that the shared lines amount to plagiarism.

THE SPIN: "It's not us making this charge, it's the media," Clinton told Honolulu television station KITV Tuesday. "The media is finally examining my opponent which I think is important. We're trying to pick a president, someone for the toughest job in the world."

She added: "I think the media is going to be putting forth whatever facts and information it has for voters to assess on their own."

In an interview with another Honolulu station, KGMB, Clinton noted that Obama and Patrick share a strategist, David Axelrod, "who is apparently putting words in both of their mouths."

She added: "I think that's a serious concern."

FACT CHECK: Any suggestion that the story had a life of its own, apart from the Clinton campaign, is disingenuous.

The Associated Press, the Boston Globe and other news organizations have reported on instances in which Obama used some of Patrick's speech lines _ often without attribution.

Story continues below

In the latest example, from a Democratic Party dinner Saturday night in Milwaukee, Obama repeated almost word for word part of a speech Patrick gave in 2006 extolling the importance of powerful oratory in politics. This was to rebut Clinton's charge that rhetoric is less important than results.

The New York Times reported the speech similarities Monday, having looked into them the day before. The story said the similarities "were highlighted by a rival campaign that did not want to be identified." The common lines were not characterized as plagiarism in the story.

Patrick, a friend and supporter of Obama, said he encouraged the candidate last week to respond to Clinton's criticisms about his rhetoric, as he has done before. He said he shared lines from his 2006 campaign for governor with Obama's speechwriters and wanted no credit, because the two men often swap ideas.

The Clinton campaign jumped on the matter. Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson held an hourlong conference call about it Monday and repeated many of the charges during another call Tuesday.

"Senator Obama is running on the strength of his rhetoric and the strength of his promises and, as we have seen in the last couple of days, he's breaking his promises and his rhetoric isn't his own," Wolfson told reporters Monday.

Wolfson added: "It raises questions about the premise of his candidacy."

And Clinton told reporters Monday night: "If your whole candidacy is about words, those words should be your own. That's what I think."

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said: "Senator Clinton knows full well that her campaign held a conference call with reporters to fan these flames and the fact that she suggested her campaign had nothing to do with it is exactly the kind of evasive tactic voters are rejecting."

Obama said Monday he wished he'd credited Patrick. He noted Clinton occasionally has used lines similar to his in her speeches.

___

By Beth Fouhy

Comments

[Buddhabman]

Hillary stand up and take credit for your dirty tricks!

[jules135]

Senator Clinton: please stop the negativism. I am dreading the debate on Thursday night. I am so afraid that I will end up hating you and President Clinton. Hating the fact that you will have trashed my memories of those 8 years in office.
Stop now before you trash your own political career, let alone your reputation as a good person. If you truly care about the Democratic party, stop it now. Before it's too late.

[HeironymousJosch]

The most genuine, heartfelt post I've read in weeks. I wish she could hear you jules.

[2008andbeyond]

I'm with you jules. We'll know early what the games plans are for each candidate. I just hope that Hillary does not ruin what's left of her name and attempt to take the Dems down with her.

[uberlefty]

I wonder if thats really what this is all about? The ultimate payback for 2 decades of infidelity on Bills part. Whos 5 million do you think that was she loaned the campaign. Spend his money, make him humiliate himself in the public arena, and destroy his legacy. After she's out do you think she will file for divorce? We have all born witness to the slow motion train wreck that is the Clinton marriage. We have been privy to details no one should know about anyones relationship. Now we get to watch this last sorry spectacle. Do you think thats why there is so much Hillary hate? We love dad so much it must be moms fault if things are bad. I only hope that we can part friends when this is all over. I guess thats up to them.

[Dap]

The real facts be told when deciphering Senator Obama's rhetoric, especially when reciting other political giants words (Only words), IS the belief the orator has in the concept, the clear ideology behind the words being repeated.

Is it any ones claim, that Senator Obama does not believe in these ideals?

I THINK NOT!

To the contrary, Senator Obama is eloquently expressing his heart felt relationship to our basic American ideals.

I personally share his feelings, as do many other Americans, We, the People... Hold this *truth* to be self-evident.

[bccity]

None of us can get inside Barack's head so we really do not know if he believes what he says. He appears very sincere but just for the sake of what if, lets assume that he is a very good actor. I mean we know that he is a good speaker so would it be a stretch that he is a good actor? We know that his speeches are put together by his speech writer and now, that he collaborates with a friend whom is also a politician to form his speech and the message. How do we know just what he really thinks.

The media in their love fest with Obama does not seem very interested in really scrutinizing his record. You should, as does any employer, judge a new applicant on their record and verify whether it is valid, not just take their word for how competent they are. I have a nephew that looks me straight in the eyes and swears to God that he is telling the truth when I know he is lying because I checked his story.

Now do not misunderstand me, I am not calling Barack a liar, I am only pointing out that his record has not been checked out with the scrutiny the job he is applying for deserves.
part 1

[bccity]

part 2
I have read through his bio on Wikipedia, not throughly but enough to know that much of his experience is not pertinent to being President. If he gets the nomination I will support him but remember we just went through eight years of a tyrant running our government and it has been really ugly. When I hear someone say "I vote for the person", I often think , do thet really know anything about that persons real personality or character? Look at our divorce rate and the endless list of mistakes that people are capable of making and then ask yourself, how many of these people are capable of making this serious of a decision? Do they have managerial experience where the companies survival depends on their ability to judge a persons competence? Probably not many and here they are picking the leader of the free world. Kind of humorous when you think about it, and we now know the Republicans should no longer be allowed to vote based on their record.

Do we want his or her finger on the button.

[patriotscholar]

She's not in control of her own people? I don't believe that. Having said that, however, here's a rebuttal:

http://thepage.time.com/obama-release-on-clintons-languge/

[awb]

maybe Sen Clinton really does not know what is going on in her own campaign and maybe that is the core of the problem--

Sen Clinton does not seem to have the needed executive experience to run her campaign, her surrogates etc -- so why would one believe she can run the country

--
The News is saying Clinton campaign thinks the negative campaigning in Wisconsin worked! What about losing a Hillary friendly state by 17 points tells them that worked?

[bccity]

First off, they were not very friendly to her, and we all know that going negative has worked very well for the Republicans. I really do not think most people remember what going negative means. Hillary going negative is a love fest compared to the Republican slime machine. Remember Willy Horton, John McCains illegitimate Black child, that McCain was mentally disturbed because he was a POW, John Kerry was a traitor, and Bill Clinton was a drug dealer and murderer. I mean come on, the only thing that has been really negative about this campaign has been the media coverage. I mean you may have a problem with Hillary but she is not really Charles Manson. Does she have any support in the media, and lets tell the truth here or you get your mouth washed out with soap. Are the media circling her in the air just waiting for her to fall so they can pick her bones clean? Everyone says she thought she had it wrapped up but who told us that. You only get one guess and if you said the media, you get a gold star. They are like blood sucking leeches with absolutely no character or conscience. They are the ones that really gave us George Bush and the war in Iraq. Their pay depends on whether they have any news to report so they just make it up on a slow day. And a war causes media people to have an orgasm. They would evict their mother into the street if it would get them a story. There are a few exceptions like Paul Krugman of the NY Times that display ethical journalism but he is an exception.

[internationaldropout]

This is the press, because they always get information from unattributed individuals--maybe it was a volunteer, or maybe it was a staffer that would get fired if found out, or maybe it was official--but if it was Official, the reporter would always say so. Reporters deal in gossip and they get what they deserve--trash information.

The problem is a public who credits the trash gossip, either side. Who cares? If they want to hold a press event about something stupid, let them .
Focus, people, focus.

[globality]

Now that Obama has taken the lead in Hillary Clinton's core voter group of blue collar white men and women Hillary will have to rely on her last remaining core constituency

Liona Hemsley (oops she is no more)

[truthyguy]

Hillary is so fucking sleazy it makes you want to puke.

Want to see plagiarism try looking not only at Hillary's speeches but at Bill's. Compare his to Bobby Kennedy and John Kennedy.

This is her big vote getter of an issue. Shoot me a fucking break Bitch.

[AxelDC]

Obama used two lines that were similar to his friend's. Clinton tries to manipulate this into a major press story, and then gets caught lying.

Which is worse: failing to cite a minor quote, or lying about playing "gotcha" politics over trivia.

Yet another false step by the Clinton campaign, and helps explain why she has now lost 9 contests in a row.

[lungfish]

If these are the best reasons that she can come up with for convincing us to vote for her she is in serious trouble. If you look at the actual list of legislation that she authored as a senator almost all of it is about naming libraries and such... She got some press for talking up a national health care bill while she was in Bill's WH but I haven't seen anything that alludes to all that "experience" she keeps talking about.
And if that is all she can come up with, then Obama can simply play a better game with higher standards that emphasize desperate ploys like "plagiarism" for what they are... desparation.
He is an excellent strategist and seems to be doing very well at sticking to the high ground.

[ayc]

"If it's bad to use someone else's words without crediting them, what about taking credit for someone else's policies without crediting them?

That goes on a lot in politics, and goes both ways -- just last week, the Clinton campaign claimed that Obama stole pieces of his new plan to revive the economy from Clinton. But one of the most glaring examples of the practice involves Clinton's claim -- dating all the way back to her 2000 NY campaign for the Senate -- that she "championed" the Children's Health Insurance Program (known as "S-Chip") and deserves credit for getting health insurance for 6 miilion kids.

The claim has been repeated again and again in ads. But the claim has always been problematic, because Clinton was not in the Senate when the program was established. She was First Lady. In response, her campaign has always said she championed it inside the White House by getting her husband to sign it. And who's going to contradict her?

Well, no one -- until Ted Kennedy decided to endorse Obama. Kennedy is the actual champion of the program, in the sense of having sponsored it and having gotten it passed in the Senate. And this weekend, at a news briefing at which he asserted that Hillary was distorting Obama's health plan, Kennedy also brought up the Children's Health Insurance Program."

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2008/02/what_about_policy_plagiarism.html

[kellygrrrl]

no need to kick a girl when she's down.

[angelbravo]

I don't know she might just be in need of a kick.

[Plowboy]

She tried to fool us with lies;

But Wisconsin is wise.

[KPinSEA]

We have nothing to fear except political consultants themselves .....

Should I attribute where I got that? Does *anybody* when they use it?

[ginnypoo]

Still nothing compared to the Obama camp playing the racist card to win SC...for which he was caught red-handed on TV at the following debate. Remember that?????????? that would have been a fitting inclusion in your article....except that wasn't your agenda, was it?

[LoloZ]

It was the Clintons who played the race card, you moron. Their behavior there was disgusting. It was Bill who gaffed off Hillary's 28 point loss by saying, "Jesse Jackson won here too."

[internationaldropout]

You sound like a Republican, why don't you go join them?

[Eire]

No I don't & I live in SC. Enlighten me.

[lostonechampion]

Ginny... come on...

Let me explain something. Tim Russert brought up a memo that existed within the Obama camp. The memo was a complaint about the race-baiting and it cited examples. It (the memo) was not race-baiting there is a difference.

Let me color this for you in a different fashion. If a rape-victim goes to the police to discuss the rape, she's not guilty of rape. Are you going to blame the victime now for complaining about being victimized?

Come on...

[ibsteve2u]

At the very least - given Mrs. Clinton's insistance that candidates use their own words - America should be able to assume that Mrs. Clinton's campaign is absolutely devoid of speech writers - right?