Language

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): As readers of openDemocracy know I have been taking a serious interest in what Obama is about and the forces beneath the foam. If his campaign continues to build there will be waves crashing on these shores too. To prepare for this it's worth considering a spat now taking place. Hilary attacked Obama for being mere fine words, as if this was not a vital part of politics. The aim being to devalue the currency of his oratory, as her's has, up to now, been so poor. (If you want to see the contrast in their command of language take a look at this - their response to today's news that Fidel Castro is stepping down, it's on Time Magazine's exceptionally useful Real Clear Politics blog.) Obama replied with a defense of "mere words" which was seen as crushing. But it was lifted from a speech by Deval Patrick who is one of his supporters. You can see the Clinton's YouTube demonstration of the plagiarism below. Obama could easy have acknowledged his source and should have. Strike one for the Clintons. (Who of course think it exposes his unsuitability for the highest office.) But won't the episode also rebound against Hilary, especially over the course of what may be a long campaign? After all, the video also broadcasts the compelling argument that words do indeed matter and rhetorical command is power voters should look for.