Barack Obama And Why It Matters That He Plagiarized A Speech (At Least One That We Know Of)

As a child psychologist and psychoanalyst, I have worked with children and adolescents of all ages who come to me with every imaginable kind of problem (and some that are, quite frankly, unimaginable). Usually, the teenagers I see are there because they've gotten themselves into trouble, both at home and at school. The trouble could be drugs, it could be overly aggressive behavior, it could be truancy, it could be lack of respect shown to authority figures and, not uncommonly, it could be because he or she has gotten thrown out of school for plagiarism.

Any child over the age of, say, 8, knows it is not only morally wrong to sign your name to something you did not write but that it is a punishable act. Such punishment, when the child who commits the plagiarism is in high school or college, often includes expulsion from school. With kids ever more internet savvy (i.e., having access to the myriads of articles and papers written on any given subject by some supposedly obscure author) and school administrators and teachers trying to ensure that the teen does not "slip one past them," schools are increasingly using programs designed to detect whether, in fact, a piece of written work handed in by a student was actually written by that student and does not match, in phraseology or any other patterns that such programs detect, written work by someone other than the student. We, as a society, value honesty and integrity and one of the surest mark of a lack of both is a person's willingness to claim someone else's words (or work) as their own.

And this is why it matters that Barack Obama is now furiously trying to suggest that it's "no big deal" that he plagiarized his friend's, Deval Patrick's, speech. He's even claiming that Mr. Patrick told him to use the speech. Perhaps Mr. Patrick did. Perhaps Mr. Patrick told him to use the speech and never told him to say it was written by Mr. Patrick and not by Mr. Obama. It doesn't matter, actually, what Mr. Patrick said or did not say to Mr. Obama. What matters is that Mr. Obama passed this speech off as his own, adding only his by now customary flourishes of tone and inflection. That the man who has presented himself to this country as the man of integrity and change turns out to be a fraud — and that is what we call people who pretend that someone else's words are their own — must be a profound disappointment for his supporters, if they can be honest enough with themselves to admit it.

However, what's even more disheartening and heartbreaking is this: Mr. Obama, in his historic bid for the Presidency, represented an ideal with whom children from broken homes, of mixed racial origins, of no great means, of inner turmoil who seek refuge in drugs, could all look up to and strive to be. In one fell swoop of his unwritten-with pen, he has dashed the hope that here stood a man who pulled himself together and got it together.

Here stood a man who towered above others in his quest for decency and integrity. Here stood a man who played it straight and said it as he saw it. But Mr. Obama is not that man. This man, as it turns out, is just another guy who seems to have bought into his own hype about how wonderful he is even as he tries to convince us he is not simply a liar. Worse still, he has been shown to be a liar while he has paradoxically been running his entire campaign based virtually exclusively on his stellar character, a character he has claimed that is so different from all those Washington insiders he has sought to set himself apart from.

Listening to the pundits of Slate Magazine claim that this charge of plagiarism "won't stick" with the voters because "with Obama, there's no pattern of lying," only adds insult to injury. I'm sure that even Slate Magazine remembers that Mr. Obama's so-called autobiography, Dreams From My Father, was discovered not to be entirely factual, as well. It took Mr. Obama some time, as I recall, to finally admit that, yes, some of the characters were not real but were, rather, "composite" characters. In other words, they were fiction. Which means that, in other words, he lied about it and never told anyone that his autobiography was not only not entirely written by him (check with his ghost writer), but that his so-called life was not exactly what he claimed it was.

Children know that not telling the truth, either by omission or commission, is the definition of a lie. Perhaps there is more of a pattern to Mr. Obama's distortions and omissions than even these two rather egregious examples point to. As a clinician, I have found that if one lies about one or two things here or there and then makes light of those lies, and acts as if the ones who find this offensive are the ones making mountains out of molehills, you can almost take it to the bank that a deeper pattern of not telling it like it is exists. It's only a matter of time before it becomes more fully exposed. So, it's suffer the children yet again. Yet again, a grownup who might actually have served as the inspiration he so adamantly claims he is, turns out to be another scammer who, when caught in the scam, does what every child does: he says, "it's no big deal." And then he has the audacity to cast aspersions on the ones who caught him. Even the children I see don't do that.

So, here's the lesson these kids will learn if the media, as they seem likely to do, go too easy on Mr. Obama for this crime: The trick is in getting away with it. That's the lesson they will learn, when the sad thing is they could have learned so much more from him. Mr. Obama's dismissal of this fraudulent act and his other as "no big deals" undermines what parents and teachers have been trying to teach their kids about honesty and integrity, sometimes against very strong odds. They thought maybe in Mr. Obama they had a helping hand. They were wrong.

What they have instead is a man who, while seeking the highest office in the land, shrugs off a "crime" as no big deal, seeks to blame those who uncovered it, and arrogantly thinks he should not be held to the same standard to which we hold school children. I only hope for the sake of the children watching, that he is wrong.

As Mr. Obama using Mr. Patrick's speech says, "it's only words." Yes, Mr. Obama, words do matter, especially when they're lies.

Dr. Sylvia Welsh is a Clinical Psychologist and Psychoanalyst. She is on the faculty of the NYU Psychoanalytic Institute and the faculty of the NYU School Medicine, Department of Psychiatry. Dr. Welsh treats children, adolescents and adults, families and couples.

Read more news and blog posts on accusations of plagiarism against Obama

Comments

[Diogod]

I would like to add that I find it particularly distasteful the demagog method of this article: uses of expressions such as "for the sake of the children", "his crime", etc. I also dislike very much the pretensiouness of the author, repetedly affirming her supposed credentials ("I'm a psychologist", "psychoanalyst", "a clinician") as if they made her words be an expert's opinion. Not only its pretensious, but that alone shows how poor her arguments are - since they alone do not convince, the author thinks that throwing some credentials would make them more convincing. This is incredebly mediocre.

[Diogod]

Wow a bunch of non-sense. You may be a psychologist, but you clearly are not smart enough to consult a dictionary before throwing words around (incorrectly, may I say).

Let me just say for the record that I don't care about this election. But this is not about politics - its about common sense and normal understanding.

Plagiarism, by concept, requires 2 things: unauthorized use and authorship (that is, a context where originality matters). The first requirement - unauthorized use - is not present since David Patrick let him use the words.

But, most importantly, politics is not about originality or authorship. Its not relevant that any given idea or argument be original - all it matters is that it makes sense. If he is saying that "words matter" - we should be wondering if this is true or not - not if he made this up himself. Gee - most politicians never write their own speeches.

So: 1) this case, by concept, is not plagiarism; 2) this article has nothing to do with politics; 3) Sylvia Welsh is ignorant - she can't see the difference between school homework and politics.

[Zuni]

as opposed to the ventriloquist's (Bill) dummy Hillary?

[Citizenofreality]

I resent you speaking on behalf of those of us who are of mixed racial origin. I am mixed, my children are mixed, my nieces and nephews are mixed. Do you suppose that we are all so unintelligent and incapable of thinking for ourselves that we would react to this ridiculous charge against Barack Obama and swallow hook, line and sinker the idea that he has committed a crime? You may speak for yourself but please refrain from speaking on behalf of my racially mixed family. We are not single minded simpletons hungering for a role model and we don't need your concern.

[qwr]

For the sake of the children! Won't somebody think of the children!

[sebocd]

America, America! God mend thy every flaw.

And now the moment of truth: Senator Obama is like in all things including sin. So, to whom shall we go, Sylvia? Who are you endorsing? Bonnie and Clyde? Since not all sin is fatal I think I'll stick with Senator Obama and his peccadilloes.

[eljodio]

Let's see who has the deeper inclination to lie. Here's the Clinton camp most recent spin on the plagiarism charge:"Hillary Clinton flatly denied that her campaign was attacking Barack Obama for using the words of another politician, telling reporters on Tuesday that her campaign had not made the charge. The Chicago Tribune reported her remarks from an interview with KITV in Honolulu on Tuesday:


"Look, it's not us making this charge. It's the media. You know, the media is finally examining my opponent which I think is important because we're trying to pick a president, someone for the toughest job in the world [...] So, I think the media is going to be putting forth whatever facts and information it has for voters to assess on their own."

[stoprollingover]

She's lying.

[Thurber]

Before you keep waxing poetic about teaching the kids, look up the definition of plagiarism.

It doesn't fit.

[1observer]

Ms. Welsh's premise is that Mr. Obama's behavior is indicative of a deeper inclination to lie.

1) True or false? Mr. Obama, should he be elected President, is going to withdraw US combat troops from Iraq, excepting the usual contingent necessary to protect the diplomatic corps and an embassy compound.

2) Who said, "if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda"? (Hint: see http://www.barakobama.com/issues/iraq)

Since al Qaeda not only already *has* a base in Iraq but in fact attempts to build a base in every nation on earth, Mr. Obama is in fact committed to keeping US combat troops in Iraq.

Perhaps Ms. Welsh has a valid point?

1observer

[mutatio]

Oh lord, here goes another 40 pages of comments, someone dissected Obama. lol

[jaywh1]

What really matters is that Hillary Clinton always loses, and then claims that the loss doesn't matter.

[JimR]

Congratulations. This is THE most convoluted, overblown response to this... "issue" I have seen, heard or read.

[LiarLiarIraqsOnFire]

PLAGIARISM - The unauthorizeduse or close immitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

Gov. Patrick has already indicated that he and Sen. Obama often share ideas/rhetoric. How is this plagiarism? Especially when Sen. Obama has often credited Gov. Patrick in the past.

I hate the mud-slinging & smearing that Beltway Insiders & Corporate Media engage in, to the detriment of the American public.

It's time for a change!

[Rule Of Law]

If he had used a line from the Gettysburg address would anyone scream plagiarism?

No.

So it's only plagiarism if the words come from a less well known source? How about a book someone likes and assumes many folks are familiar with but apparently are not, or a throw away line from the Simpsons? Or an uncredited source who works for them?

Anybody ever hear of speech writers? Every politician has them. When a candidate uses their words is it plagiarism if credit is not given, like--Hey, glad you all liked my speech, I didn't write it, by the way, just thought you should know.

No, this is about desperation and distraction. It's verbal swiftboating.

[MPeter]

YOU, OBAMA VOLUNTEERS, YOU ROCK!!!!. Thank you for busting the chops of old style racist feminists; thank you for rejecting the politics of smear. Thank you for making the calls and believing in the power of 'We'. You carried Obama over in WI, and left the Clintons in tears after spending so much money and energy on negativism. Thank You Obamites and Obamacans. You rock.

[Rule Of Law]

Wow, i appreciate your enthusiasm for your guy!

I'm actually a Kucinich/Dodd supporter, but I just like to call them the way I them. This whole plagiarism thing is nothing but MSM hot air in the guise of alternative media.

[tomcj]

Dr. Welsh' article would be at home in The Onion.

I suggest Dr. Welsh read T. S. Eliot's "Poetry and The Individual Talent". Good poets borrow, Eliot wrote, and great poet's steal.

Obama is a great poet. Hillary is....well, Hillary.

The Nation asked a valuable question: given all her money advantage and name recognition and Bill's political team, who can't Hillary win even the Democratic Nomination on her own merits?

Perhaps Dr. Welsh, Americans are tired of her.

P. S. I hope all the young people hurt by Obama's plagiarism never read about Monica Lewinsky and what Bill and Hillary did to her. But, that is ancient history isn't it?