Whether it was for cash, political belief, or
for sheer mendacity, the NYT has stooped
to the lowest level of "journalism", in recorded
Not only do they bring up a 20-year-old scandal,
but they try to indict an already cleared Senator
McCain. They knowingly and intentionally
do their best to use innuendo and vague statements
to induce the reader to assume that McCain is
guilty of inappropriate behavior.
This is the lowest form of yellow journalism and
the NYT should be admonished for bringing it’s
already tarnished image, completely into the
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
"If your whole candidacy is about words, those words should be your own. That's what I think."—Sen. Hillary Clinton
Oh Boy! I’d like to be Sen. Obama for just one day and I’d have Sen. Clinton regretting the day that she had the audacity to raise plagiarism as an issue.
Because I’m thinking that if your whole candidacy is about experience that experience ought to be your own. What do you think about that Sen. Clinton? I’m also thinking that Sen. Obama ought to get off of the defensive and challenge Sen. Clinton’s experience meme again like he did earlier in the campaign and then we’d see who the plagiarist is.
Plagiarism is the stealing of another’s ideas as if they were your own.
Dictionary.com says plagiarism is:
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.
something used and represented in this manner.
Let’s focus on the second entry “something used and represent in this manner” and examine Sen. Clinton’s claims of 35 years of relative experience that qualifies her to be President of the United States and I think that the she bull that has been attempting to gore Sen. Obama over a speech that he made may just have to retract her horns.
Now as far I a know Sen. Clinton has never been President or Vice President so she couldn’t be claiming any direct personal experience now could she?
And aside from the denials that the Clinton campaign planted the issue of Sen. Obama committing plagiarism (it's got Clinton stamped all over it) we would not be discussing stealing words, ideas or work experience but it’s the politics of personal destruction yet again.
It makes a person wonder why would someone whose whole candidacy, no, whose whole career is based on her husband’s accomplishments or her husbands misdeeds why would such a person attempt to draw attention to anyone using someone else’s words and claiming them as their own when Sen. Clinton has been claiming her husbands political experience as Governor of Arkansas and President as her own and as the reason that voters should chose her for President.
You must remember Chris Matthews’ comments on the matter of Senator Clinton’s experience.
"[T]he reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around."—Chris Matthews on Senator Hillary Clinton
Sen. Clinton has claimed that her experience as first lady is apart of the experiences that qualify her to be President of the United States a claim which was challenged by Senator Obama initially.
"I think the fact of the matter is that Senator Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn't work out, in which case she says she has nothing to do with it,"-- Sen. Barack Obama
Sens Obama and Edwards used this issue quite effectively early on in the campaign and though they differed on how best to exploit the significance of Sen. Clintons claims, they did bring attention to the fact Sen. Clinton experience was not what she claimed.
Senator Barack Obama's decision to challenge Hillary Clinton's claims of governing "experience" stemming from her days as first lady has split her two most aggressive challengers, with Obama suggesting she deserves meager credit for her husband's presidency and John Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, arguing she should be held accountable for its flaws. Sasha Issenberg
Slate’s Timothy Noah takes Sen. Clinton to task about her claims and issues a warning that Republicans will be able to dismantle Mrs. Clinton’s claim of plagiarized governmental experience.
Clinton's claim to superior experience isn't merely dishonest. It's also potentially dangerous should she become the nominee.
If Clinton continues to build her campaign on the dubious foundation of government experience, it shouldn't be very difficult for her GOP opponent to pull that edifice down.
That's especially true if a certain white-haired senator now serving his 25th year in Congress (four in the House and 21 in the Senate) wins the nomination.
McCain could easily make Hillary look like an absolute fraud who is no more truthful about her depth of government experience than she is about why her mother named her "Hillary." —>Timothy Noah
I don’t think that the Clinton campaign really thought this recent attack on Obama through it opens Sen. Clinton up once again to questions about what experience is really hers and what experience has been borrowed from her husband.
Sadly Senator Clinton has only had about eight years as an elected politician with very little accomplishments to speak of and no executive experience at all Sen. Obama has more than that! Yet by her count she has 35 years of experience which qualifies her to be President.
Here’s one place that I agree with an idea of Sen. Clinton’s, that is if someone is going to claim experience as the basis for their candidacy it should be their own experience not the experience that you’ve plagiarized from your spouse.