Posted on 01/26/2011 3:34:28 PM PST by No One Special
If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, what can be said of plagiarism? President Obama’s second State of the Union address contained enough recycled ideas and lines lifted from speeches of others to make historians wince. I suppose this is what one does when one not only has nothing new to say, but is required by custom and Constitution to come forth with a report of some kind by a certain time and day.
Had Obama or his writers been considerate enough to have informed listeners of where some of the president’s best lines and offered-up ideas originated, the speech might be remembered for its cutting and pasting of great and not-so-great moments of the past performance of others. After quoting Robert Kennedy early on, Obama tried to have his listeners believe that everything else he said that we might remember were his or his writers’ creations. Had the president submitted the text of his second State of the Union Address in the form of a college term paper, he would have been sent forthwith to the nearest academic dean. Once again, our public affairs are such that we have one standard for presidents and another for undergraduates. Now is as good a time as any to let Obama’s listeners in on what the late Paul Harvey would have termed “the rest of the story.”
Early in his address, Obama said that he wanted the nation he leads to be a "light to the world." The last president who set such a mission for the nation he led, and in those exact words, was Woodrow Wilson.
Obama’s concept of the “American family” may well have had its origins in the first State of the State address New York Governor Mario Cuomo delivered in 1983.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
i doubt Sowell would....just a hunch
Biden wrote it.
Does anyone know exactly what the SOTU is supposed to contain, according to the Constitution? Our forefathers must have laid down some guide lines. And, if so, did the President full fill his duties?
I see Obama is taking guidance from Biden.
It’s not a crime to echo the words of others. If anything, college students should do it more often. It would help demonstrate they’re not illiterates (which they almost certain;ly are.). Great communicators like Reagan and Churchill did it.
In any advanced culture, the words of the learned will be filled with allusions to well-known works. Even to this day, when no one reads, our common speech is full of language from the Bible and Shakesspeare, for instance.
This from the left wing U.S. News & World Report?
Wow!
I commented in the LIVE thread that his speech seemed to be a rehash of what every president for the past 30 years had promised.
It could be an email.
Does anyone know exactly what the SOTU is supposed to contain, according to the Constitution? Our forefathers must have laid down some guide lines.
Almost literally, all the Constitution says about the SOTU is that the president shall drop by COngress and rap with them from time to time. It became a big to-do through informal tradition. Sorta like the filibuster and judicial review, it’s something the founders never laid out for us.
Frankly, I think we're fortunate he didn't order Sarah Palin to be crucified upside down in the background as he telepromptered us into his dark future.
Of course, his rule is still young.
Shakesspeare = Shakespeare
I should add, if Obama echoed too much, it’s a sign of bad writing. But not plagiarism. Th
ping
Obama’s State of the Union Was Tantamount to Plagiarism
Biden wrote it.
I was wondering where Ward Churchill went.
He read his teleprompter. The Republicans are to blame.
Joe Biden wrote the speech. The Democrats do not care.
More to the point, Obama's speech was basically Bill Clinton's. It was a "Bridge to the Future" moment.
Democrats don't win votes with their social agenda or their wishlist of new government programs.
They can talk about those when they've just won an election, but that's more for the audience in the room than for the rest of the country.
After things have died down and they lose a midterm election, they talk about "economic growth" and "innovation" and "the future."
This speech was a "back to the future" moment that was intended to recapture Clinton and the spirit of the 1990s.
It didn't work. First, because the economy is so much worse now, and second because Obama wasn't convincing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.