This plagiarism charge from the Clinton campaign is absolutely bogus.  For one, it applies just as well to Senator Clinton, who has been steadily appropriating themes and slogans from the Obama campaign.  More importantly though, borrowing good lines from other speeches isn’t plagiarism.  Or at least not in the academic sense.

In academia, plagiarism is relatively straight-forward, it is the “the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work.”  In oratory, it’s simply not as clear cut.  To quote from blogger Rutherford:

But more to the point, if Obama is guilty of anything, he is guilty of using Patrick’s rhetorical construct to make his point. But loads of orators borrow constructs from other orators. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke in the rhythmic patterns of many preachers before him. Did that make him a plagiarist? A good motivational speech employs rhythm, imagery, repetition of certain phrases and a certain vocal tone. Every great speaker from FDR, to the Kennedys, to King, to Obama employs these methods.

Should Obama have been more careful?  Certainly.  But using another’s turn of phrase or “rhetorical construct” without documenting it (even though he had Patrick’s permission) isn’t plagiarism, and to pretend otherwise is simply dishonest.