The Institute (協会)

I would love the 'superdelegates giving Clinton the win! After all the bitching and moaning from the Democrats after the last presidential election, it would be great for one Dem to win the popular vote and another to win the nomination.

I would be VERY hesitant in supporting Clinton if she magically *won* the nomination. She disgusts me. But, because the idea of another 4 years of Republican rule is even more disturbing, I would vote for her in November. But, I certainly wouldn't be as engaged in the process as I normally am.

Paul, haha, never thought about it that way before.

are you promoting a political riot on your blog? just sayin man. wow.

Well, Obama has said a few things that obviously come from Deval Patrick. Are we so Balkanized in our opinions that we cannot admit the truth, even if it surprisingly comes from a Clinton?

Sorry, but at some point, Obama is going to have to face serious scrutiny of his positions, which make Teddy Kennedy look like a conservative at times.

Bike Bubba:

In regards to the Deval Patrick comments: Why is this such a big deal for you? Obama and Patrick are reportedly good friends and had reportedly discussed ahead of time the very idea of using this same line of rhetoric to counter the same arguments leveled against Patrick 2 years earlier.

Positions are another story, but I don't see the connection between this cheap shot and his positions. What I see is a desperate swipe by Clinton as she staggers before the impending knock-out. It seems on par with the curious NYT attack on McCain earlier this week.

I knew my history lessons on Andrew Jackson had left an impression when one of my 6th graders walked in today and said, "Well, Hillary's started the mudslinging..."

Even a broken clock is right 2x/day.
I think Hillary is right here. If he just shared ideas with Patrick, fine. But it is word for word.
For him to represent change, shouldn't he be a bit more original? And people like MLK went beyond mere words to spell out what they wanted and how they thought it could happen. Haven't heard Obama do that. Is it like John Kerry's plan?

Plagiarism is a big deal, Ryan. If you take ideas without giving proper credit, you are a thief. Too boo someone who points this out, as the audience regrettably did, and to answer this with "don't be divisive," as Obama regrettably did, shows a basic lack of understanding of the power and importance of ideas.

Which might explain why he's campaigning on "change", but without explaining what changes he's going to make. Here's a hint; his Senate voting record places him to the left of Senator Kennedy.

So it is your opinion that every politician in all of their stump speeches would cite each of their speech writers giving them credit for the portions of the speech the speech writer and not the candidate had written. But they don't do this, because the writers provide the speech material without the requirement that it be cited to use, and because this is not the way that political speeches tend to work.

This would seem to be a similar mode or process to Obama calling up Patrick and discussing with him how he was going to respond to this attack, and Patrick suggesting that he use the same response Patrick had himself used in the past.

Plagiarism is important, it is a big deal. But this just doesn't quite seem analogous to turning in a research paper you found on the internet or publishing original ideas from another author as if they were your own.

You've made it apparent in both of your posts that your biggest concern is less the plagiarism and more the ideas of the man himself. That is a fair concern. It seems like a stretch however to say that his true character is revealed and defined by this "plagiarism" incident.

He may be a bona-fide left wing socialist monster whom we should fear running this country, but if that is the case then it would just be good news for McCain when the truth comes out in the long time left before the election.

Ryan, exactly what is socialism but a flat out rejection of the principle "Thou shalt not steal"?

And what is plagiarism but the same?

This isn't just an academic issue. It's about basic character.

Socialism in all forms or socialism in its extreme form (communism)?

If it's all forms of socialism, doesn't that mean that taxation is stealing? I've heard that argument before but it doesn't fly. Can we have a definition of terms here please?