On Words ...

Our view: Obama speech flap isn't 'plagiarism'

The flap over Barack Obama's borrowing a few well-turned phrases from Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is, to quote Shakespeare, much ado about nothing.

That the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton would seek to turn the incident into a charge of plagiarism is a sign of the second-place Democrat's increasing desperation as Obama racks up win after win in the primaries.

Plagiarism is the use of words written by another without proper attribution. It is a serious charge in journalism, where we make our livings and reputations with our words and ideas. In the world of politics, however, the stirring words we hear our leaders speak rarely are written, these days anyway, by the politicians themselves. They are the product of speechwriters and analysts, of marketing gurus and focus groups that aim to capture what plays well in Peoria. To accuse politicians of plagiarism ... well, one might as well accuse them of breathing.

The Clinton campaign has tried to paint Obama as a man of words, not action. Clinton, in contrast, is about "solutions, not speeches."

"Don't tell me words don't matter," Obama told a Wisconsin audience in response. "'I have a dream' — just words? 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal' — just words? 'We have nothing to fear but fear itself' — just words? Just speeches?"

The words are nearly identical to those spoken by Patrick during his 2006 campaign for governor. Patrick then, like Obama today, faced the charge that his rhetoric was not supported by experience.

"'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal' — just words? Just words?" Patrick said. "'We have nothing to fear but fear itself' — just words? 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.' Just words? 'I have a dream' — just words?"

Patrick explained that he and Obama are friends and had discussed political strategy, specifically, how to counter the "empty rhetoric" accusation. Obama said he probably should have credited Patrick with the turn of phrase.

Yes, he should have done so. But there is really nothing more to the matter than that.

Clearly, Obama is an inspiring speaker. Just as clearly, Hillary Clinton is not. The Clinton campaign wants to chip away at that advantage by calling Obama's words into question, by raising doubt as to whether there's any substance behind the rhetoric.

In truth, the art of politics is using soaring rhetoric to inspire people to follow one's policy prescriptions, the details of which would probably bore most folks to tears.

To paraphrase Dr. Martin Luther King, if you can't get the people to follow you to the mountaintop, they're never going to see the promised land.