Posted by D. Cupples (photo from Senate.gov ) | A few days ago, Sen. Barack Obama gave an inspirational speech that turned out to be heavily borrowed from another politician's speech. "Plagiarism" seems an extreme term in this case, and Obama did admit that he should have credited Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, the man from whom Obama had borrowed. (See videos). 
Most politicians borrow phrases from others -- including Hillary Clinton. So, why is Obama's verbal borrowing worthy of the spotlight's glare? Context makes it so, and it's largely the media's fault.
Some time around the Iowa Caucus, much of the media began elevating Obama to near-messiah status based on his rhetoric and charisma, which many found inspirational and which have been lavishly praised since the 2004 Democratic convention.
Admittedly, Obama's campaign did little to discourage near-messiah-hood when choosing to package Obama as "The Change Candidate" who would singlehandedly renovate our nation's policies and political style.
Pedestals are dangerous places, because they come with huge expectations and tiny allowances for human error.
Weeks after the media hoisted Obama onto the pedestal, media people and bloggers began questioning the substance behind his words. Yesterday, for example, CQ's Craig Crawford commented:
"The Democratic presidential contender’s [Obama's] famously inspirational speeches offer little sustenance for wonks.
"In a rare and much-heralded policy address last week, Obama attempted to get specific on economics but the details turned out to be so reminiscent of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s proposals that an aide to Republican nominee-to-be John McCain stepped in to cry foul. 'He basically took Clinton's words and Clinton's policies and called them his own,' McCain economic advisor Kevin Hassett said.
"Obama’s supporters and advisers refer pesky policy inquiries to the campaign web site, but it is difficult to connect the dots between this internet data dump and a candidate whose public comments reveal little evidence that he has read it himself. As Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, an Obama fan, concluded after examining the web site, 'I'm still puzzled about where to locate Obama on this policy map.'"
As Taylor Marsh pointed out, John Edwards directly accused Obama of stealing ideas:
"'If you need any more proof that John Edwards is shaping the race for the Democratic nomination, you don’t need to look any further than Senator Obama, who has followed Edwards’s lead on healthcare, poverty and, today, eliminating nuclear weapons,'” [Edwards Campaign spokesperson Colleen] Murray said in an e-mail to The Hill. 'Next thing you know, he’ll be rooting for the Tar Heels.'”
Even on the so-called "right," the image-versus-substance questions have been flying like bats out of the cartoon cave in Scooby Doo (see e.g., Charles Krauthammer).
Questions about substance are hard enough for a near-messiah to face. Now, since Obama's lack of originality came to light, the very thing that propelled Obama to exalted status is being questioned: his rhetoric -- which even his critics had widely perceived as stellar and as genuinely attributable to Obama himself.
No one would have questioned Obama's originality had he simply mentioned during the stirring speech that he was borrowing from Gov. Patrick. Something like "As a good friend once said" would have worked yet gone unnoticed by inspired listeners.
But Obama didn't say such a thing, which made him appear comfortable with the concept of basking in undeserved credit. This leaves Obama vulnerable to still other lines of questioning.
UPDATE: Some Hillary supporters are, naturally, focusing on these negatives. Some Obama supporters instead are focusing on other things while defending Obama, for example, accusations that Hillary is just desperate -- period, nuff said.
I have no clue whether Obama's campaign will suffer from what one blog has (perhaps facetiously) labeled Plagiarism-Gate.
What I do think is that the media could have prevented embarrassment for Obama's campaign by not turning him into a near-messiah in the first place.
Memeorandum has other people's commentary: The New Republic, The Huffington Post, Power Line, The Sundries Shack, The Reaction, The Radio Equalizer, Liberal Values, Donklephant, Is That Legal?, Political Machine, TigerHawk, The Ruckus, Unfogged, PrezVid. Associated Press, Spin Cycle, American Street and Talking Points Memo
Other BN-Politics Posts
* Media-Created Intrigue: Obama's "Secret" Meeting Followed Hillary's
* Bill Paxman: What Real Journalism Looks Like
* Is the Media Biased Toward Barack or Against Hillary?
* Polls Show Clinton Leading in TX & OH: Will Pundits Spotlight it?
* Media Fashions Bill Clinton's Words into Corkscrew
Comments