Look Who's Talking
The Billary campaign accused Barack Obama of plagiarism because he repeated a clever, rhetorical repartee that Massachussets governor--and his friend-- Deval Patrick used.
That's rich. They're projecting. Bill Clinton has been flagrantly aping JFK since he was 16.
[Barack, though, is guilty of doing same recently, particularly in intonation, and the volunteered contributions of JFK's 79 year old speechwriter Ted Sorenson vicariously puts JFK's scripted lexicon into his mouth: "I've given (the Obama campaign) a phrase or suggestion or two," Sorensen admitted.]
Hillary recently tried to visually plagiarize Maggie Thatcher by wearing her distinctive blue on a primary night.
The Clintons are the quintessential copycats.
While campaignng in Iowa in November, Hillary decided to tell a little story about how she was going to clean up the mess in Washington. She struck her cloying "by-golly-gee" cookie-cutting pose and rested her head in her hand like a beleagured housewife and sighed: "Oh my goodness. I feel like we are going to get into the White House again and we are going to walk around and say where do we start to clean up this mess? Bring your vacum cleaners, bring your brushes, bring your brooms. bring your mops."
That was vindictive plagiarism. When president-elect W was asked what he planned to do on Day One in the Wite House, he quipped: "Give it a good scrubbing."
And W wasn't the one who ejaculated all over the West Wing.
And while Hillary, by the way, went negative with (plagiarized) petty jabs like that, she simultaneously assurred the Iowans: "I'm going to keep running a positive campaign because I think what we need to be talking about is what we are going to do on day one in the White House not what we are going do on a debate stage somewhere."
A few months later, she's now challenging Obama to meet on a debate stage somewhere. (see previous post.)
In another earlier speech, Hillary asserted something like: "If they don't do (this or that), then I...(dramatic pause)...WILL." (applause)
She was trying to play the determined tough gal there but it was a direct plagiarizing of Bill's own cue cards from 1992 when he asserted: "If they (i.e. Bush 41 et al.) won't lead, then I...(dramatic pause)...WILL." (applause)
She has most recently returned to the determined tough gal, "Iron Lady" manifestation, but that's just another mask in response to the discernment of her ruthless, win-at-any-cost ambition, spinning that negative perception into a positive "I'm tough! I'm a fighter!" tenacious one.
That shtick, however, followed her serene, almost Stoic Mona-Lisa-smile pose, which itself followed the soft-spoken, teary-eyed damsel-in-distress spiel, which in turn followed the clumsy attempt to communicate good-hearted cheer but only managing to express a hysterical--and disturbing--cackling.
Returning to her own flagrant, "I...(dramatic pause)...WILL" plagiarism of Bill's speech 15 years ago, perhaps you could dismiss that because it's a husband and wife team, so it's "okay," but Obama and Deval Patrick are buddies, and the former found himself having to answer the same charges of eloquence sans substance that Patrick did, and so felt free to repeat the excellent repartee, obviously with Patrick's knowledge of their origin and assuredly with his blessing, so the Billary campaign is not only projecting it's own plagiaristic character onto an uncredited borrowing from a friend and accusing that as being Bidenesque (if not actually Clintonian) plagiarism, but is getting desperate, which means only one thing: Obama better protect his knee-caps and cover his testicles.
That's rich. They're projecting. Bill Clinton has been flagrantly aping JFK since he was 16.
[Barack, though, is guilty of doing same recently, particularly in intonation, and the volunteered contributions of JFK's 79 year old speechwriter Ted Sorenson vicariously puts JFK's scripted lexicon into his mouth: "I've given (the Obama campaign) a phrase or suggestion or two," Sorensen admitted.]
Hillary recently tried to visually plagiarize Maggie Thatcher by wearing her distinctive blue on a primary night.
The Clintons are the quintessential copycats.
While campaignng in Iowa in November, Hillary decided to tell a little story about how she was going to clean up the mess in Washington. She struck her cloying "by-golly-gee" cookie-cutting pose and rested her head in her hand like a beleagured housewife and sighed: "Oh my goodness. I feel like we are going to get into the White House again and we are going to walk around and say where do we start to clean up this mess? Bring your vacum cleaners, bring your brushes, bring your brooms. bring your mops."
That was vindictive plagiarism. When president-elect W was asked what he planned to do on Day One in the Wite House, he quipped: "Give it a good scrubbing."
And W wasn't the one who ejaculated all over the West Wing.
And while Hillary, by the way, went negative with (plagiarized) petty jabs like that, she simultaneously assurred the Iowans: "I'm going to keep running a positive campaign because I think what we need to be talking about is what we are going to do on day one in the White House not what we are going do on a debate stage somewhere."
A few months later, she's now challenging Obama to meet on a debate stage somewhere. (see previous post.)
In another earlier speech, Hillary asserted something like: "If they don't do (this or that), then I...(dramatic pause)...WILL." (applause)
She was trying to play the determined tough gal there but it was a direct plagiarizing of Bill's own cue cards from 1992 when he asserted: "If they (i.e. Bush 41 et al.) won't lead, then I...(dramatic pause)...WILL." (applause)
She has most recently returned to the determined tough gal, "Iron Lady" manifestation, but that's just another mask in response to the discernment of her ruthless, win-at-any-cost ambition, spinning that negative perception into a positive "I'm tough! I'm a fighter!" tenacious one.
That shtick, however, followed her serene, almost Stoic Mona-Lisa-smile pose, which itself followed the soft-spoken, teary-eyed damsel-in-distress spiel, which in turn followed the clumsy attempt to communicate good-hearted cheer but only managing to express a hysterical--and disturbing--cackling.
Returning to her own flagrant, "I...(dramatic pause)...WILL" plagiarism of Bill's speech 15 years ago, perhaps you could dismiss that because it's a husband and wife team, so it's "okay," but Obama and Deval Patrick are buddies, and the former found himself having to answer the same charges of eloquence sans substance that Patrick did, and so felt free to repeat the excellent repartee, obviously with Patrick's knowledge of their origin and assuredly with his blessing, so the Billary campaign is not only projecting it's own plagiaristic character onto an uncredited borrowing from a friend and accusing that as being Bidenesque (if not actually Clintonian) plagiarism, but is getting desperate, which means only one thing: Obama better protect his knee-caps and cover his testicles.
posted by John | 11:01 AM
8 Comments:
I liked what you mentioned in the previous post about how Billy is trying to get back into the White House. I remember back when Bush 2 was running for POTUS and the press was all over the dangers of having a "dynasty" for the presidency. You could not turn a news rag over without seeing some article or another analyzing the Adams Presidencies and Royal houses in Europe and the like.
Now that it is something much closer than a "dynasty" that is being set up by the Democratic Party far left, all of a sudden the things that you mention in this article suddenly do not mean so much. The Clintonians are focusing on what they do best, which is to dismantle their opposition in a personal manner, and it does not matter what lies they tell so long as it suits their needs at the time.
My point is that I would vote for the right woman for president without a second thought as to her being a female. BUT LOOK AT THIS PARTICULAR FEMALE and I start to have real issues. Look who is talking indeed. She is a criminal in my opinion, and a ruthless power monger as well. God help this nation if she gets another shot at the White House.
What astonishes me is that all of this is on display, and yet their power is enabled by popular support.
Have we really come to a place in this country where this kind of thing is just brushed aside?
I have a friend or two who lean to the left. This one, in particular, absolutely loves the Clintons. [Kelly shakes her head in disbelief.] This is someone who thinks very much like a Conservative and who would likely vote for a Republican if she really understood the platforms of each party. YET, LOVES Bill Clinton and tells me she's a democrat...so much so that she has now said she won't even come to my blog any more because someone commented that they didn't like democrats.
The thing about the Clintons is that they are the media darlings. All of their problems are attributed to the vast right wing conspiracy. They can spin things so fast no one really believes all that dirt on them.
..sigh!
Well, John, you know that de Toqueville warned us all against the tyranny of the masses. I do not believe that the people on the left are necessarily *evil* in the sense that they get up in the morning and say to themselves "how can I destroy the US today?" The press produces what makes them profits and that happens on both the left and the right. The point of this is that what really scares me is that the people that support the Obamas and the Clintons of this country do so because they actually believe in what is presented to them from the left. I do not believe, for example, that there is a conspiracy in the press of any kind, as it does not need one. They are like others of their ilk and they simply support the candidates that they like the most.
But, tonight for me is special.....
Obama is in Ft. Worth and Billary is in Dallas. I am surrounded.
"Obama is in Ft. Worth and Billary is in Dallas. I am surrounded."
So, so, sorry!
"Well, John, you know that de Toqueville warned us all against the tyranny of the masses."
Indeed. Burke's "swinish multitude." And that's why Madison et al. opted for a Constitutional Republic (with a moderating, electoral college) than a pure democracy plebiscite.
" I do not believe that the people on the left are necessarily *evil...*"
"Necessarily," no.
"...in the sense that they get up in the morning and say to themselves 'how can I destroy the US today?'"
When I was younger, I thought the Right exaggerated when they said "Liberal's hate America," but I learned that plenty actually do.
Remember hardcore liberal professor Ward Churchill describing the victims of 9/11 who worked at the WTC as "Little Eichmans." His thinking is not isolated, but typical for the Moveon and antiwar crowd (a sizable demographic).
More middle-of-the-road "liberals" are laughably quite conservative to an uptight, bourgeois degree. They have their SUVs and lattes and put their own kids in private schools but are fanatical on a few social issues (e.g. "Pro-Choice" and "Gay rights").
I think you may be referring to that crowd.
"The press produces what makes them profits and that happens on both the left and the right."
Naturally.
"The point of this is that what really scares me is that the people that support the Obamas and the Clintons of this country do so because they actually believe in what is presented to them from the left."
I feel disgust more than fear, but there is certainly something alarming about it.
"I do not believe, for example, that there is a conspiracy in the press of any kind, as it does not need one."
I disagree. There are certainly press outfits that have their own political agenda, and select, interpret, and shape the news in accordance with that outlook, and they need to because more often than not reality spites their agenda.
"They are like others of their ilk and they simply support the candidates that they like the most."
Exactly, and present the news from an editorial bent than from a reporting on.
"But, tonight for me is special.....
Obama is in Ft. Worth and Billary is in Dallas. I am surrounded."
No worries. It's already passed. I'm pretty sure Texas won't be voting Democrat anytime soon.
Kelly:
I cannot understand women--particularly self-described feminists--who support the Clintons. Either they are ignorant, like them because they know conservatives despise them and they hate conservatives, or are careless about character and are fixated on special social issues like pro-Choice and know the Clinton's will protect and/or advance it.
In any case, they are supporting a team comprised of one who was very credibly accused of rape and who is a documented adulterer and exploiter of women.
His female supporters are either in denial of that, rationalize it away, or are titilated by something.
Either way, they damage their own credibility and integrity by their support of such self-serving frauds.
These women believe the lie that it is all part of that vast right wing conspiracy. After all, Hillary complained about it so it must be true.
"When I was younger, I thought the Right exaggerated when they said "Liberal's hate America," but I learned that plenty actually do. "
I think this friend of mine would be surprised to learn that a good many of her fellow dems see it that way. "The US is the instigator for all that is wrong in the world...hence it must be brought to its knees."
Post a Comment
<< Home