Obama '08?

georgeob1 wrote:

Nonsense. The universal standard requires the explicit acknowledgement of the source. The failure to do so is taken as a tacit claim of originality.

Take a look at the definition Roxanne offered - it fits the circumstances perfectly. Obama himself acknowledged 'borrowing' it after the fact.

I don't think it is a big deal - precisely as I explained in my post.

Big deal or not, Obama's act did not meet the burden required for plagiarism.

1) He had presumed authorization.

2) He did not claim that the words as his own original works.

Quote:

However I remain bemused at the energetic reactions of the Obama claques here. You are doing a great job in demonstrating my point.

Oh come now. This is a political forum, for Chrisssakes. Are we to let your misrepresentations of the facts go unanaswered for fear that we appear energetic? Furthermore, enthusiasm for a candidate is now a bad thing in the view of the georgobs of the world? Weird.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Nonsense. The universal standard requires the explicit acknowledgement of the source. The failure to do so is taken as a tacit claim of originality.

Take a look at the definition Roxanne offered - it fits the circumstances perfectly. Obama himself acknowledged 'borrowing' it after the fact.

I don't think it is a big deal - precisely as I explained in my post.

However I remain bemused at the energetic reactions of the Obama claques here. You are doing a great job in demonstrating my point.

And I commend your hypocrisy, bemoaning Obama's rhetoric while putting on a generic rhetorical clinic of your own.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I don't buy the 'Obama bubble' meme at all. It's bullshit.

Well, the only bubble I was talking about was the bubble of favourable media coverage Obama has been able to ride. I didnt imply that it was the only reason he ever was successful or something, but yeah, he has enjoyed considerably more favourable media coverage than Hillary, and it's that which I'm afraid is going to turn about soon.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I don't buy the 'Obama bubble' meme at all. It's bullshit.

Well, the only bubble I was talking about was the bubble of favourable media coverage Obama has been able to ride. I didnt imply that it was the only reason he ever was successful or something, but yeah, he has enjoyed considerably more favourable media coverage than Hillary, and it's that which I'm afraid is going to turn about soon.

Well, here's the thing: why? Why would the media coverage turn about soon? B/c they are tired of him?

I don't know what they would attack that he isn't already getting attacked for. The Clinton camp has pushed the 'no experience' meme, which is already repeated ad nauseum by the press.

I think that the coverage of Obama only looks good b/c the antipathy towards Clinton runs deep - and while some of that antipathy is BS some is well deserved. She should work more on media relations if she wants the media to like her!!!

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

(replying to georgeob10

It's getting to be so that people like you who post criticisms of Obama will follow up with an indignant howl of, "see, those Obamaites just cant take any criticism!" as soon as someone dares to offer a rebuttal. It's facile, and getting tired quick.

Yup, it got old pages ago, yet he continues with this nonsense.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Well, here's the thing: why? Why would the media coverage turn about soon? B/c they are tired of him?

For example. Hey, these journos have been reporting on the same goddamm race for a year now, they get tired of reporting the same story every day. Soon as things become too settled or predictable, their natural inclination will be to focus on some new unexpected turn. First McCain is the frontrunner, then he's a goner, then he's the comeback kid, then he's the frontrunner again. All developments which were based on some factual basis (first the fundraising crisis, then rising polling numbers in NH), but were grotesquely overplayed by a 24/7 news machine that's always hungrily seeking new prey, new narratives, new sensational developments.

There's financial interest in that too. Like you said a bit earlier, it sells papers. Suppose they just looked at the Potomac results, hopefully tonight's results too, and the polls and said, oh well, Obama is looking pretty safe right now - how many papers would that sell? The prospect of a last-minute Clinton comeback is more exciting, so it sells more papers. I mean, I dont think any TV station's exec manager is going to send round an email saying, "now attack Barack!," but I'm just assuming that viscerally, the instinct will be to keep this race alive and ever turning around.

Just speculating, of course - who knows what they'll do? But thats why I'm feeling antsy. I've just been sensing/seeing a change in attitude towards Obama, but it might turn out a dud.

0 Replies

A little upper for everyone...

Quote:

Rasmussen: Al Franken Takes Small Lead Against Norm Coleman
By Eric Kleefeld - February 19, 2008, 9:00AM
Taking a break from our usual focus on the presidential race, a new Rasmussen poll of the Minnesota Senate race puts Al Franken up three points over freshman Republican Norm Coleman. Here are the numbers, compared to Rasmussen's last poll from November:

Franken 49% (+7)
Coleman 46%(-3)

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/rasmussen_al_franken_takes_sma.php

0 Replies

Yep, I'm also antsy, for the same reasons. I'm more nervous about tonight than I have been since NH I think. (I've been nervous every time, but...) I've seen far too many assumptions that Obama will win both HI and WI, while the numbers are either nonexistent (HI) or pretty darn close (WI). And I think things are primed for a Hillary "upset" really changing the narrative -- not in Obama's favor.

0 Replies

Me too, soz.

0 Replies

nimh-

Can't you do it clean and neat like I do?

It's a movie.

A very good one too as I've explained.

And don't forget the woodwork.

0 Replies

Nimh and Soz, I think you're right to be antsy. There has to be some kind of backlash eventually.

0 Replies

I was curious about what Plouffe is saying about WI, found this:

Quote:

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said Clinton has come on strong in recent days; he tried to keep a lid on expectations. "They're contesting it ferociously," Plouffe said of the Clinton campaign.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-02-18-Politics_N.htm

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

George, let me ask you. Is there any point to your posting here other then to constantly and continually attack those who support Obama?

I understand that ya don't like the guy, but your constant use of demeaning terminology when describing those of us who do is insulting. And it gets old.

Cycloptichorn

Your sensitivity on this point is itself remarkable. Do you consider that pointing out the unusual sensitivity of Obama supporters to constitute "attacks"???

The truth is, as I have already indicated, I find Obama an intelligent and attractive candidate. I have reservations about many of the policys he has advocated, and I have doubts about the gap between his rhetoric and the enthusiasms it generates and his (or anyone's) ability to deliver on it all. Finally I have suggested the overdone defensiveness on the part of his supporters isn't likely to be in their own best interests.

If I have used any "demeaning terminology", I am unaware of it. The consistency of my posting here and the messages I have offered is dwarfed by that of the Obama claques who populate the thread.

Where's the beef???

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

George, let me ask you. Is there any point to your posting here other then to constantly and continually attack those who support Obama?

I understand that ya don't like the guy, but your constant use of demeaning terminology when describing those of us who do is insulting. And it gets old.

Cycloptichorn

Your sensitivity on this point is itself remarkable. Do you consider that pointing out the unusual sensitivity of Obama supporters to constitute "attacks"???

The truth is, as I have already indicated, I find Obama an intelligent and attractive candidate. I have reservations about many of the policys he has advocated, and I have doubts about the gap between his rhetoric and the enthusiasms it generates and his (or anyone's) ability to deliver on it all. Finally I have suggested the overdone defensiveness on the part of his supporters isn't likely to be in their own best interests.

If I have used any "demeaning terminology", I am unaware of it. The consistency of my posting here and the messages I have offered is dwarfed by that of the Obama claques who populate the thread.

Where's the beef???

Yes, there are legions of Obama supporters here, but it's the OBAMA thread, so why is that unexpected or wrong?

It's the terms 'cult-like' and such which are demeaning. Let me do a quick search of your posts for the last two weeks and see what I can come up with...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

Nimh and Soz, I think you're right to be antsy. There has to be some kind of backlash eventually.

This is a further, quite predictable, media creation. It will grow (something more to talk about) and the right will push it. But I seriously doubt it will have electoral effect at all.

0 Replies

Still nothing about polls (except confirmation that there don't seem to be any), but more HI info here.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-obama-hawaii_feb19,1,4406250.story

(Inouye has endorsed Clinton [that's big]. Chelsea Clinton is campaigning there; Obama's sister Maya is campaigning on his behalf. Obama is airing ads, Clinton is not. Etc.)

0 Replies

georgeob attacks my opinions too, but I welcome them to hear his POV. From what I've been observing, many of his opinions are challenged by most posters on a2k, and I find that amusing/entertaining.

Heck, I have disagreements with all my siblings; doesn't mean I don't respect or like them.

0 Replies

sozobe, Can't refute the fact that Inouye's endorsement of Clinton has a huge impact in Hawaii, but Obama is a native son which also has huge support.

0 Replies

Yep.

I wonder if you picked up any impressions when you were in Hawaii...?

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Yep.

I wonder if you picked up any impressions when you were in Hawaii...?

So, apparently, Hawaii is extremely anti-Monsanto and GM foods; a big Hillary supporter. According to reports from some people there, she's really getting beat over the head with it in local conversation and news.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know