Blind Leading the…
I was reading through Barrack Obama’s website to see his policy positions. He’s been touting lately that he has detailed policy positions posted on his website. He doesn’t really. He says things like he’ll create a “living wage” but fails to say what that would be. Anyway, there’s plenty to pick on, but this one made me laugh out loud.
Expand Flexible Work Arrangements: Barack Obama will address this concern by creating a program to inform businesses about the benefits of flexible work schedules for productivity and establishing positive workplaces; helping businesses create flexible work opportunities; and increasing federal incentives for telecommuting.
Really? I see companies every day trying to figure out how to offer flexible work schedules, enable home workers, and the like. It allows companies to access a wider labor pool. Most private companies get this issue and are doing everything they can do, within the confines of the needs of the business, to attract and retain good employees even if they can’t work a traditional work schedule. Meanwhile, Obama wants to spend our money to have the federal government teach private businesses how to do this? Maybe the federal government should learn something from private businesses instead of the other way around.
Exactly!
And there are some businesses which need people there during specific hours—managers are regularly trying to figure out ways to make things more flexible, and like you said, they don’t need the government giving them suggestions, especially when they are suggestions that have already been explored.
Posted by hsgbdmama on February 17, 2008 at 1804 hrs
Kinda reminds me of the practice - in Vietnam - of sending junior and inexperienced officers to advise Vietnamese officers who had been spending their entire lives fighting ...
Posted by Brian on February 17, 2008 at 2017 hrs
That’s funny you did that today Owen because I did the same thing. I kept hearing Obama supporters tell me.. “All of the policy details don’t make good speeches, that’s why he doesn’t offer details. You have to go to his website to see them.”
So today, I did. And just like Owen said… they aren’t there. Lots of promises with no way to pay for any of them.
Now, they are going to have to come up with another line.
Posted by Deibert on February 17, 2008 at 2109 hrs
Looks like a great idea….if your goal was to add some more unionized Federal bureaucrats. Another “nothing but fluff” idea from the big O.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 17, 2008 at 2308 hrs
I resent your use of the nickname “Big O.”
Posted by Owen on February 17, 2008 at 2309 hrs
Yeah, the Big O will always be Oscar Robertson. Say rather, ‘Big 0’. See the difference?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 0825 hrs
Actually, the Feds are terribly behind in flexible work schedules and work from home opportunities. Much of that is due to the horrible IT structure and rigid workrules, both caused by regulations.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 1035 hrs
So nerdbert, are you saying that they should first teach themselves, then lift regulations, then teach private businesses? Sounds like our Government.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 1130 hrs
I stand chastised and corrected. My apologies to Oscar Robertson…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 1458 hrs
Is Fraley stealing your stuff, or are you guys both getting this from the same third party? He just put up the exact same post today, word for word.
Posted by Seth Zlotocha on February 18, 2008 at 1543 hrs
Identical posts is a little weird.
Posted by elliot on February 18, 2008 at 1715 hrs
“[Brian Fraley] and I are longtime friends and allies. We often share ideas about politics, policy and language. The argument in question, on the value of words in the public square, is one about which he and I have spoken frequently before.”
Posted by Owen on February 18, 2008 at 1722 hrs
So did one of you come up with it, or is it from a third party?
Posted by Seth Zlotocha on February 18, 2008 at 1728 hrs
lol
I get it. Obama used another guy’s speech like Brian used yours.
Now that’s what I call an obscure allusion.
Posted by elliot on February 18, 2008 at 1737 hrs
I wrote the post. The rest was just Brian having some fun.
Posted by Owen on February 18, 2008 at 1738 hrs
Oh, I get it. A riff on the Deval Patrick thing.
Yeah, there’s no difference between copying this:
‘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.
And copying this:
I was reading through Barrack Obama’s website to see his policy positions. He’s been touting lately that he has detailed policy positions posted on his website. He doesn’t really. He says things like he’ll create a “living wage” but fails to say what that would be. Anyway, there’s plenty to pick on, but this one made me laugh out loud.
Expand Flexible Work Arrangements: Barack Obama will address this concern by creating a program to inform businesses about the benefits of flexible work schedules for productivity and establishing positive workplaces; helping businesses create flexible work opportunities; and increasing federal incentives for telecommuting.
Really? I see companies every day trying to figure out how to offer flexible work schedules, enable home workers, and the like. It allows companies to access a wider labor pool. Most private companies get this issue and are doing everything they can do, within the confines of the needs of the business, to attract and retain good employees even if they can’t work a traditional work schedule. Meanwhile, Obama wants to spend our money to have the federal government teach private businesses how to do this? Maybe the federal government should learn something from private businesses instead of the other way around.
Fraley’s right. It is a joke.
Posted by Seth Zlotocha on February 18, 2008 at 1738 hrs
Seth, laugh. It’s good for you.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on February 18, 2008 at 1745 hrs
Screw-up at hive-mind central.
Kinda embarrassing.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 1756 hrs
I know, Sean, I should be able to just laugh at it. But it does come within a context that makes it difficult. I tried to engage Fraley in the comments of his initial Obama gotcha, but without any luck. It’d just be easier to laugh if it was an aside rather than the primary means of discourse (at least coming from Fraley).
Posted by Seth Zlotocha on February 18, 2008 at 1758 hrs
Robinson and I do trade ideas all the time, and, you know, he’s occasionally used lines of mine. I was writing a blog in Wisconsin used some words of his. I would add that I know Seth and liberal bloggers on occasion have used words of mine as well. I really don’t think this is too big of a deal.
I wrote the post. The rest was just Brian having some fun.
How much fun is RICO?
Ya ya, I know great beards think alike.
Come on Owen at least own up to it.
Lost credibility usually precedes marginalization.
I guess this is the exception to the rule, huh?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 2150 hrs
What am I supposed to own up to, pjr? I wrote a post. Fraley decided to have some fun with Obama supporters with it. That’s the end of the story. Are you thinking there’s more to it?
Posted by Owen on February 18, 2008 at 2202 hrs
And what’s with the RICO reference. Even if Fraley and I did coordinate on this, does that constitute a criminal enterprise?
Lighten up, pjr. You’re getting a bit battier than usual.
Posted by Owen on February 18, 2008 at 2203 hrs
Irony is lost when it doesn’t involve Jon Stewart.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on February 18, 2008 at 2207 hrs
Why is this so hard to follow people? I guess when you’re so hell bent on proving the vast right wing conspiracy the humor is lost.
So, here we go….
Owen wrote it first. These were his words/thoughts.
I rewrote the same words. Actually, I just cut and pasted the entire post. Probably less than a half dozen keystrokes.
Is it plagiarism?
Oh and both Owen and I had similar responses, because we worked together on the response.
Now, and I’ll type real slowly so pjr can follow here.
O b a m a l i f t e d t h e l i n e s f r o m a friend’s speech. Did not give him credit. When accused of plagiarism, both Obama and Deval Patrick issued similar responses because they most likely coordinated the response. Campaigns call this damage control.
Yes, I blatantly ripped off Owen. I did not credit the author of the those words, that thought.
Obama and his supporters say that because the plagiarism was among friends it doesn’t matter.
Do you buy that?
I don’t.
Get it?
Posted by Fraley on February 18, 2008 at 2209 hrs
Fraley, I got it and don’t think Obama plagiarized. In fact, I think it was a disparate Clinton tactic unless they can show a pattern of word-swiping.
To add some flavor I bet Sen. McCain will grab this and try to hammer Obama like it beat on Romney with the false time tables accusation.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on February 18, 2008 at 2220 hrs
because the plagiarism was among friends it doesn’t matter.
Do you buy that?
I don’t.
Get it?
Is that slow enough for you Brian?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 2222 hrs
Sean,
Oh, it’s rhetorical theft, without a doubt. I do think the Clinton campaign is pushing this hard. Perhaps too hard.
The problem with Obama is when your rhetorical skills are the biggest asset you have, any knock on them is newsworthy.
Posted by Fraley on February 18, 2008 at 2225 hrs
The problem…..is when your rhetorical skills are the biggest asset you have, any knock on them is newsworthy.
And humorous.
Will this be one of Chuckie’s topics in the coming days?
Lighten up, pjr. You’re getting a bit battier than usual.
Gee I’m not used to so much attention
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 2235 hrs
He knowingly and willingly copied another man’s speech without giving due credit. When confronted with that fact, he first said it was no big deal, ............it offers a tiny window into the character of the men who would…
have us believe that you can make a sow’s ear out of a silk purse.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 2245 hrs
If? IF!?!? Who else could write such eloquent and insightful drivel?
http://whallah.blogspot.com/2008/02/interesting.html
I check on that when I’m in the kennel later.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 2304 hrs
Fraley, it’s as much “rhetorical theft” as Clinton employing the “change” meme following her Iowa defeat and McCain using “fired up and ready to go” in his Potomac Primary victory speech.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on February 18, 2008 at 2346 hrs
Sean,
We disagree.
It’s the difference between a few words or the turn of a phrase and an the use of an entire passage of a speech.
Posted by Fraley on February 19, 2008 at 0027 hrs
The “entire passage” is this, Fraley:
‘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.
It’d say Sean’s right that doesn’t represent much difference from copying the “fired up and ready to go” phrase, as both McCain and Clinton have done.
Posted by Seth Zlotocha on February 19, 2008 at 1141 hrs
Total Entries: 19997
Total Comments: 134028
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 06:25 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 03:06 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 108
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 03:38 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).