• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should a plagiarizer become first lady? [W:92]

Should a plagiarizer become first lady?

  • No, the first lady needs to respect other's intellectual property

    Votes: 7 38.9%

  • Yes, plagiarism isn't too big a deal

    Votes: 11 61.1%
  • Total voters
    18
Paperview said:
You really don't get this, do you?
Click to expand...
Oh I REALLY do. You are a pure partisan and find an excuse for every bit and level of hypocrisy. You **** yourself over Melania Trump and regurgitate **** brownies for your guy and swallow them down again. You are the guy that spent 8 years ****ting yourself over Bush's use of drones and then went silent or worse, excused Obamas 8 year campaign of drone attacks. You are the guy that **** himself over Bush's abuse of our civil liberties and then went silent or excused Obamas expansion of those abuses.

Believe me...I get you loud and clear.
 
VanceMack said:
Oh I REALLY do. You are a pure partisan and find an excuse for every bit and level of hypocrisy. You **** yourself over Melania Trump and regurgitate **** brownies for your guy and swallow them down again. You are the guy that spent 8 years ****ting yourself over Bush's use of drones and then went silent or worse, excused Obamas 8 year campaign of drone attacks. You are the guy that **** himself over Bush's abuse of our civil liberties and then went silent or excused Obamas expansion of those abuses.

Believe me...I get you loud and clear.
Click to expand...

You don't know diddly squat.

Eat a peek frean and calm the **** down.
 
Paperview said:
You don't know diddly squat.

Eat a peek frean and calm the **** down.
Click to expand...
Totally calm...and totally see you for what you are. Its comical, but really...its rather sad because its just so predictable.
 
Gaius46 said:
First it wasn't "word for word." - and yes I've read the comparison.

Second she didn't write it

Third we don't vote for President based on who will be the first lady.
Click to expand...

I have to walk my #2 back. According to today's NY Times the original speech was written by two veteran speechwriters. However, after Mrs. Trump got a hold of the speech she decided to pretty much completely rewrite it. The original speechwriters didn't find out about the changes she made - apparently only a couple of sentences of the original remained - until they heard the speech Monday night.

So it turns out she actually did write the bulk of the speech. She also apparently researched speeches from other candidate wives in doing so. The Times went on to note in interviewing political speechwriters that the cliches she used have been used hundreds of times before and are a staple of political speeches with the exception "my word is my bond." It seems Mrs. Obama is the only candidates wife who's ever used that phrase. Giving it the most benign read, and there's really no reason to not, she read the phrase, it stuck, and given that she read lots of speeches she used it and didn't even realize it came from Mrs. Obama.

It's embarassing to the campaign, especially given that it was avoidable, but at worst is simply another example, as it there aren't dozens already, of the lack of discipline in the Trump campaign.
 
Gaius46 said:
I have to walk my #2 back. According to today's NY Times the original speech was written by two veteran speechwriters. However, after Mrs. Trump got a hold of the speech she decided to pretty much completely rewrite it. The original speechwriters didn't find out about the changes she made - apparently only a couple of sentences of the original remained - until they heard the speech Monday night.

So it turns out she actually did write the bulk of the speech. She also apparently researched speeches from other candidate wives in doing so. The Times went on to note in interviewing political speechwriters that the cliches she used have been used hundreds of times before and are a staple of political speeches with the exception "my word is my bond." It seems Mrs. Obama is the only candidates wife who's ever used that phrase. Giving it the most benign read, and there's really no reason to not, she read the phrase, it stuck, and given that she read lots of speeches she used it and didn't even realize it came from Mrs. Obama.

It's embarassing to the campaign, especially given that it was avoidable, but at worst is simply another example, as it there aren't dozens already, of the lack of discipline in the Trump campaign.
Click to expand...

She absolutely knew it came from Mrs. Obama speech.

It was lifted directly, word for word -- and the odds of it happening at random are near one in a trillion.
 
Paperview said:
She absolutely knew it came from Mrs. Obama speech.

It was lifted directly, word for word -- and the odds of it happening at random are near one in a trillion.
Click to expand...

I'm suggesting that she lifted it word for word but, given she apparently read a lot of speeches from candidate wives, didn't necessarily know if came from Mrs Obama. Or maybe it did. I personally don't know that it matters.
 
Gaius46 said:
I'm suggesting that she lifted it word for word but, given she apparently read a lot of speeches from candidate wives, didn't necessarily know if came from Mrs Obama. Or maybe it did. I personally don't know that it matters.
Click to expand...

Yeah, she just skipped all over the title and the words "Barack" speckled all through it.
 
Paperview said:
Yeah, she just skipped all over the title and the words "Barack" speckled all through it.
Click to expand...

If I read 10 speeches and a number of quotes stuck out to me I might not necessary remember who said which. Is that really so hard to imagine? Not saying that's what happened. Am saying I find it plausible.
 
Gaius46 said:
If I read 10 speeches and a number of quotes stuck out to me I might not necessary remember who said which. Is that really so hard to imagine? Not saying that's what happened. Am saying I find it plausible.
Click to expand...

She had to physically cut and paste it. She didn't write it and rephrase it.

Yeah, she knew exactly where it came from and she probably even watched the video of Mrs. Obama giving it.
 
Paperview said:
She had to physically cut and paste it. She didn't write it and rephrase it.

Yeah, she knew exactly where it came from and she probably even watched the video of Mrs. Obama giving it.
Click to expand...

As far as I can see the only thing that was lifted word for word and that is apparently unique to Michelle Obama's speech is the phrase "your word is your bond". That doesn't need to be cut and paste.
 
Mithros said:
Technically true. As little help as possible doesn't rule out someone else doing all of it.
Click to expand...

... I'm absolutely speechless at the pirouette it took to write this sentence. You're not serious, are you?

For example....I moved that 10 ton rock with as little help as possible, that just so happens to mean an excavator moved it while I sat back and watched.
Click to expand...

If somebody else in an excavator moved a rock, you didn't get 'as little help as possible'. You didn't do anything. If somebody taught you to use an excavator and then advised you as you moved it, you'd be closer to what she says happened here. Lol, this is quite possibly the worst analogy you could have used for this situation.

The Trump campaign is transitioning from being a dumpster fire to more like Centralia PA.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Hatuey said:
... I'm absolutely speechless at the pirouette it took to write this sentence. You're not serious, are you?



If somebody else in an excavator moved a rock, you didn't get 'as little help as possible'. You didn't do anything. If somebody taught you to use an excavator and then advised you as you moved it, you'd be closer to what she says happened here. Lol, this is quite possibly the worst analogy you could have used for this situation.



Agreed.
Click to expand...
Satire doesn't always transfer...

I mean.. I'm serious in that I believe that the statement "I wrote it with as little help as possible" could literally be true, much the same way that the analogy could literally be true... but I doubt she had much of a hand in writing it.
 
Gaius46 said:
As far as I can see the only thing that was lifted word for word and that is apparently unique to Michelle Obama's speech is the phrase "your word is your bond". That doesn't need to be cut and paste.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of Vanilla Ice trying to deny that he ripped off Queen's "Under Pressure"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-1_9-z9rbY
 
Mithros said:
Satire doesn't always transfer...

I mean.. I'm serious in that I believe that the statement "I wrote it with as little help as possible" could literally be true, much the same way that the analogy could literally be true... but I doubt she had much of a hand in writing it.
Click to expand...


Apparently she did. At least according to today's NY Times.
 
Mithros said:
This reminds me of Vanilla Ice trying to deny that he ripped off Queen's "Under Pressure"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-1_9-z9rbY
Click to expand...

There's a long and somewhat honored tradition of musicians ripping off from each other - though I shouldn't probably use musician anywhere around Vanilla Ice.


In truth we rip off from each other all the time. There is precious little that's actually original.
 
I will take a first lady all day long who used a few phrases from someone else's speech over a president who is careless with our national security.

I will take a first lady all day long who used a few phrases from someone else's speech over a president who thinks rewarding people who break our laws is a great immigration policy.

I will take a first lady all day long who used a few phrases from someone else's speech over a president who thinks flooding this country with 10's of millions of cheap foreign labor is the solution to the poor and middle class getting better wages.

I will take a first lady all day long who used a few phrases from someone else's speech over a president who thinks making laws that restrict the rights and freedom of the decent law abiding people is the solution to the crime in this country.

I will take a first lady all day long who used a few phrases from someone else's speech over a president who thinks securing our borders and the American people knowing who is entering this country is a crazy idea.

Shall we continue. I am sure we could fill pages with Hillary's crazy ideas and failed policies.

And the left thinks investigating Hillary's careless and reckless handling of national security is a waste of time yet focus on a few phrases used by the wife of a candidate running for president. People have been using and reusing good points and phrases from other peoples speeches for as long as there have been speeches. Does it get any more petty and ridiculous than this. Lets hope not.
 
Paperview said:
It's not the same.
Click to expand...

Well, it is and it isn't, depending on how people are saying it's the same.

Is it the "same" in that they were both plagiarism? Yes. Yes they are the same. Both are absolutely indications of plagiarism. Waving it off as unimportant or mistaken plagiarism doesn't make it not plagiarism. Then candidate Obama absolutely took someone else's words (far more than just "Two") and passed them off as his own.

Is it the "same" in regards to the circumstances around the plagiarism? No, as you already highlighted.

As it relates to the question, as crazy of a notion as it may be in the OP, it's simply asking about plagiarizing without any concern or interest given towards the circumstances surround the plagiarism, the severity of the plagiarism, the intent of the plagiarism, or anything else. It simply asks if one plagiarizes, should they become the first lady. As such, it's absolutely reasonable to suggest that the answer to that question could be "yes" based on the fact that those in a far higher stature as it relates to the Presidency have indulged in plagiarism of some kind themselves.
 
Gaius46 said:
As far as I can see the only thing that was lifted word for word and that is apparently unique to Michelle Obama's speech is the phrase "your word is your bond". That doesn't need to be cut and paste.
Click to expand...

What the hell?


melania_zpsu8cewlxw.jpg
 
Hilary Clinton blaming a video instead of terrorists? No biggy...
Hilary Clinton being investigated for National Security violations? Nothing but a Right Wing bitch hunt...

Melania copying a few lines during a conention speech when she is nothing more than a candidates wife?
HOLY****ING**** THIS IS THE WORST THING EVER AND REPUBLICANS ARE THE****INGDEVIL AAAAAAAAAAYYYEEE!!!!!! BURNNIN HELL TRUMP. VOTE HILARY OR YOU ARE A FASCIST!!!! AAYYEEEE!!! HILARY OR YOU HATE AMERICA AND FOXSUXS!!!!!

what a bunch of ****ing idiots. Anybody whining like a little faggot about this has major ****ing problems.
 
Zyphlin said:
Well, it is and it isn't, depending on how people are saying it's the same.

Is it the "same" in that they were both plagiarism? Yes. Yes they are the same. Both are absolutely indications of plagiarism. Waving it off as unimportant or mistaken plagiarism doesn't make it not plagiarism. Then candidate Obama absolutely took someone else's words (far more than just "Two") and passed them off as his own.

Is it the "same" in regards to the circumstances around the plagiarism? No, as you already highlighted.

As it relates to the question, as crazy of a notion as it may be in the OP, it's simply asking about plagiarizing without any concern or interest given towards the circumstances surround the plagiarism, the severity of the plagiarism, the intent of the plagiarism, or anything else. It simply asks if one plagiarizes, should they become the first lady. As such, it's absolutely reasonable to suggest that the answer to that question could be "yes" based on the fact that those in a far higher stature as it relates to the Presidency have indulged in plagiarism of some kind themselves.
Click to expand...

I'd appreciate it if you would note you have clipped off what I said by at least adding ellipses.

To repeat:

It's not the same.

Deval was co-chair for Obama's freaking campaign.

He had permission, and Patrick even suggested he use his words.

That he didn't credit Patrick for the "two words" as Deval put it, yeah, Obama said he should have, right away.

They're on the same team, using the same speechwriters as well.

Comparing the two is a fools errand.

The "two words" Patrick used after quoting two famous lines were "Just words?"
 
chuckiechan said:
Michell Obama lifted phrases from her and her husband's "Bible" - "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinsky.

Michelle Obama Copied Alinsky in Speech Melania Trump Plagiarized
Click to expand...

That's not plagiarism. Like, at all....

If Michelle got up and stated "We need to make our decisions based on the world as it is, not based on a fantasy of the world as it should be"...THAT would be plagiarism.

Simply having the same words, in and of itself, does not make it plagiarism.

If I say:

"One of my favorite moments from college was my Political Philosophy class. The moment it really clicked for me was when I was listening to my Professor and he talked about how 'feared or loved? you should wish to be both' and if both is not possible than better to be 'feared than loved'"

That is not plagiarism, despite the fact that the words "...feared or loved? you should wish to be both" and "...feared than loved" are direct words coming forth from Machiavelli's "The Prince". Why? Because I'm not, in any way, suggesting that those words/ideas are my own, but rather I am indicating quite clearly that they're not.

At worst I would be, as Michelle is doing here, potentially sloppily misattributing the origin of the words to the individual I heard them from as opposed to their originator. But it wouldn't be accurate to call it plagiarism.

By your own seeming indication, you believe that this "rules for radicals" is their "bible". Well, would it not make sense then that Michelle absolutely DID hear Barack talking about those specific words in the fashion she just said?

If someone stated that, while listening to a friend talk, I was struck by what he talked about; how "god so loved the world" and "eternal life"...that person would not be "plagiarizing the bible. They would be reciting something they heard someone else said, and the person they were listening to was likely quoting and/or paraphrasing the bible when they were listening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom