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
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Thank you, Ms. Welsh, for your insightful article. Unfortunately, Mr. Obama, his campaign, and his followers will simply continue their artful denial of any wrongdoing and their usual all out assault on those who dare question their right to say and do exactly as they please.
This is how Obamaphiles understand the definition of authenticity.
So the Saint Obama supporters are reduced to claiming, "It depends on what your definition of plagiarism is."
Yep, REAL inspiring!
Heavens forbid he starts sounding like Bill.
Look up the word "speechwriter", consider the definition and its context, then get back to us.
I don't know he use speechwriters??? I thought he wrote from the heart. You mean all those inspiring words are not from him?
I know you're not comparing this to catle futures (Hillary, how'd you make a $99,000 profit on your first investment? Hillary "I read the Wall Street Journal!" "I got lucky?" "My husband was governor and my broker illegally fixed it."), Whitewater, Travelgate, kissing Mrs. Arafat after she accused Israel of gassing women and children, failing to admit she had a ghostwriter for "It Takes a Village"..
Stop making up false quotes... and paraphrasing the man who stood looked the country in the eye and lied.
Funny. :)
Dr. Welsh, kindly explain why it matters if Barack Obama has "plagiarized" (which he did not), but it's okay when Hillary does the same or worse?
Thank you! As if a pathological liar and hypocrite (Clinton) is a good example for children? She just lied today, claiming that her campaign did not accuse Obama of plagiarism, but that the media did. Are you kidding? Her communications strategist accussed Obama of exactly that yesterday. There are also countless examples of Hillary's "plagiaris
Dr. Welsh,
Your criticism is misplaced. Dr. Obama is well aware of the conventions of academe. He is also in touch with his African heritage. The black community has historically produced great orators. Martin L. King, Barbara Jordan are the best known, but they are present in every community. They are the griots, the truth tellers, who spread the word of a spoken language like talking drums. Call and response is the mode of communication that is heard and repeated. It is present in the sampling of rap artists, who "plagiarize" other artists' work. It does not diminish the original work; it reflects it and responds much like jazz takes original melodies and improvises them.
But, Dr. Welsh, your criticism is more damaging than your critique because it plays on the racial stereotypes that portray the black man as lazy and thieving. Your use of this criticism is cold and calculated to achieve a response in the racist hearts of white Americans for a specific political purpose that may be to your personal advantage. Raise your academic standards for criticism or remain silent.
Oh, please! The "plagiarism" amounted to about three phrases -- sure-fire rhetorical tropes that anyone would remember and possibly use. Sure, Obama should have cited his source; but to compare this trivial quoting with, say, submitting a paper or article written by someone else, or appropriating many lengthy, un-cited passages for substantiial content is foggy thinking; and to react with such high moral dudgeon is pompous and self-important.
you nailed it, jim. there's nothing really left to say about this specious nonsense.
Well now, we'll see how much more there is to this, won't we?
It may be more than a few phrases.
Come on, Dr. Sylvia Walsh. If you consider that plagiarism, you haven't been around academia very long. You should read some of the master's and phd's works that I've read. You want plagiarism, you've got it there, but it's passable and possible. I seriously doubt that children will even know anything about a political speech by Obama. I think you're just a Hillary partisan and can't stand it that Obama is doing so well. This is a tempest in a teapot--oh wait! I've plaigiarized, haven't I?
"Words do matter" - Barack Obama
Another Obama apologist, Prof?
I'm so very glad that amental health care professional has weighed in on this issue. My first thought was also the example such a cavalier attitude demonstrates. Any top tier shcool will not only flunk a student caught regurgitating someone else's words, but a suspension or dismissal is likely.
Prof, you mentioned dissertations. All I can say is: if the sources aren't properly cited and the plagiarism is allowed to pass, you must belong to one hell of a substandard university system.
What university do you teach in that allowed Plagiarism to be passable and possible? I would like to so I can check it credential.
I am so sick and tired of hearing this nonsensical debate. If the topic were a lifted phrase from a book, op-ed piece, or other scholarly work, I would understand it. The fact that this "plagiarism" charge is about a phrase in a SPEECH is beyond me! When was the last time anyone had a candidate whip out footnotes during a speech. The fact that Obama says he writes most of his speeches is impressive in itself when the vast majority of politicians, including Hillary Clinton, have an entire staff of speechwriters!!! Are we stupid to assume that a speechwriter's job is to --- gasp--- write speeches!?!?!?!?!? The horror!!! The hypocrisy actually!!!! This is a non-story of the highest order. And I for one am thankful that we didn't have to listen to speeches actually written by "W" the last 7 years!!! Or are we supposed to check our brains at the door and assume that he really DID write those speeches, even the word "nucular"!!! Gimme a break!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here's why we care that his words are his own.
He professes to have original thought as to how to solve problems, a new way of doing things - change,
When we see that his words and themes are not his own, his appeal is lost, His speeches are delivered with the fervor and cadence of a black preacher. We know he is just acting.
It makes a huge difference.
Certainly, the plagiarism issue is not as serious as the implications of the Rezko case. Nonetheless, it was a couple of instances of plagiarism that prevented Joe Biden from becoming President -- ever.
How badly does Obama need to transgress before his irrational fans are willing to admit to his imperfections?
Ridiculous comparison. Cheap kneecap fodder for HRC supporters. This is a criminal waste of readers time. Almost all of Deval's words were quotes from other people--except "just words". Obama has used the same quotes from time-to-time to make a point. Yes, he could have said "My friend..." I'm sure of it was a book/article he would have...Fur
Oooh. Great copy from Chris Matthews. Rove writes 'em, MSM says 'em, you repeat 'em. Works like a charm.
It's just another "Ooops!" moment for Obama. He's had a string of things he's had to sorta apologize for.
And this blogger is a licensed doctor? Huh!
The false moral indignation is startling. Anthrologists will have so much to take from this election about women behaving badly and the manslaughter (no pun intended) of the feminist movement. What was already an obsolete cultural campaign that most young woman distanced themselves from identifying with, these women who are whining and triangulating arguments for Hillary are doing more of a disservice to shame and scare women from empathizing with wanting to continue feminism as a campaign.
Who wants to end up older and as prejudiced with blind ignorance as this?
Not only will we have the most memorable election this year, we will also see the formal demise of the feminist movement with these women crying foul but not seeing what part they played.
You poor thing. How can you turn your back on the women (and men) who fought for centuries for women's rights? An obsolete cultural campaign? Would you say that about the civil rights movement? I hope not.
What is it about Hillary being a woman that should overrule her votes for war in Iraq and Iran? For mismanaging her campaign? For being an uninspiring speaker? For not growing the base of the party?
UppityNegress,
That is one sick post - the demise of the feminist movement? Obsolete cultural campaign?
Shall you wish for the demise of the civil rights movement too? Back to slavery?
Please we all wish for equal treatment, and people in America deserve it.
Oh Boy.
"Who wants to end up older and as prejudiced with blind ignorance as this?"
You're going to be older whether you like it or not. Let's just hope you're wiser than you are now. Dr. Welsh's creds are as good as they come.
What are yours, that you question her right to be licensed?
On the subject of speech writing, and politicians reading the speeches that have been prepared for them, there is a great line in Connor Cruise O'Brien's book "The Seige", in which Adlai Stevenson is reading a speech in the U.N. attacking Castro, and it was obvious that he hadn't written the speech because he was stumbling over it. At one point he read "and Castro has circumcised [sic] the rights of Christians" at which point Abba Eban, who as the representative of Israel, sat next to O'Brien in the delegation from Ireland, leaned across and muttered to Conner "I just knew we were gonna get blamed for this..."
Has anyone even bothered to look the word plagiarism up? No!
Plagiarism: the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.
The key word here is UNAUTHORIZED. If the originator has no problem with it, it is NOT plagiarism.
As soon as you people start picking up a dictionary, then come back and we can debate the issue of whether it is intellectually honest for someone to mimic anothers words. But every single person INCLUDING the author of this blog does it on a daily basis (knowingly or not). Have a nice day! DID you make that original thought up? Bless you! DID you have that as an original thought? This is what you get when people who haven't studied the particulars of semantics or even done crossword puzzles try to make an argument about something they don't have a clue about. There is nothing even close to a prima facie (look it up) case presented here by the blogger. As a debator in high school for the school that won the state debate final all 4 years I attended, I can tell you all that any high school debator in the country would blow this argument out of the water in 3 seconds flat. The definition of the word pretty much does it without any further discussion or debate. THAT IS a prima facie case, my friends! BEEP! TRY AGAIN!
Ah, yes. The meaning of plagiarism
So by your reasoning Obama must be in contact with a medium to get permission from "The Other Side" to use the words of MLK, JFK, FDR, et al.
If you've consulted a dictionary you should also know that there are multiple definitons of plagiarism, many of which do not include the word "unauthorized", but mentioning the passing off of another's words as one's own without attribution.
Usually, you must recieve written permission from the owner of the intellectual property brfore you can use it.
It is NEVER ok to use it without reference, to claim it as your own.
Please look up the word "speechwriter".
Ah so now you are parsing words for Saint Obama. I thought you Obamaniacs, like the Republicans, hate to parse words.
Hillary Clinton took Chris Matthews speech without giving Matthews credit-
Chris Matthews:"Taking the heat is what leadership is all about. As Harry Truman said, 'If you don’t like the heat, stay out of the kitchen.' Taking heat is all part of the process of proving yourself for the world’s most important democratic office.
Hillary Clinton: "I anticipate it's going to get even hotter, and if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. I'm very much at home in the kitchen,"
Chris Matthews:"The fact that I am the first woman has nothing to do with the heat on me in this week’s presidential debate. I was the target because, quite simply, I am running well in the national polls.
Hillary Clinton: “I don’t think they’re picking on me because I’m a woman; I think they’re picking on me because I’m winning,”
http://www
http://www
http://www
You yourself stated that the kitchen phrase belongs to Harry Truman. Why are you accusing Hillary of stealing it from Chris Matthews? Fortunately most folks know the origin of that statement and don't need to think Chris Matthews is being plagiarized.
Sometimes a statement is so well-known it is almost a cliche. Those things don't require attribution because nobody supposes that they are original to the speaker. The "if you can't stand the heat..." quote is one of those statements. Nobody who heard Hillary say it thought she made it up herself.
Maybe if he had just said "As my good friend Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts, would say....", this whole thing could have been avoided.
"Give me Liberty, or give me Death!" Everyone knows where that came from. Attribution would seem like talking down. Ditto "Day of Infamy", "Cold Dead Hand", "The lights are going out all Europe", Bible quotes, etc., etc., etc.
Right. That makes sense.
In 1988 Joe Biden's presidential bid was dashed as after giving several speeches by a specific author on one of thge times forgot to mention that they were the authors words....a
"Plagiarism" is really a misnomer. Obama, with his friend Patrick's encouragement, used a rhetorical idea to respond to Clinton's attacks on his inspiring speeches. The idea: Don't words matter was attached to various famous words already in the public domain: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" is one example.
Writers who want to score points on the basis of setting good examples for children should at least try to be technically accurate. Also, on the subject of children, it is not obvious that the Clintons have presented a great role model to the young.
One wishes that the Clinton campaign could get beyond the "hopelessly" petty and focus on issues that do matter.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
