Saradise Lost - Book 2 - Chapter 56 - Plagiarism or Not, The Speech Challenged Common Sense and the English Language -- Updated with Shirley Comments

A commenter at my DailyKos diary on this subject got closer to the real issue at hand, than those did who are debating whether or not Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin actually plagiarized author Craig Shirley, by failing to mention his co-authorship of lines she used last Wednesday in the introduction she gave to a speech in Anchorage:

My husband got bored the other day, and wrote me this in email:

(No, she hasn’t gone away. She will never go away.) A sentence from a recent speech:

Reagan knew that real change and real change requiring shaking things up and maybe takin’ off the entrenched interest thwarting the will of the people with their ignoring of our concerns about future peril caused by selfish short-sighted advocacy for growing government and digging more debt, and taking away individual and state’s rights and hampering opportunity to responsibly develop our resources, and coddling those who would seek to harm America and her allies.

I don’t know if my C-compiler could parse a sentence of this complexity. Here’s my take on it, which is probably wrong. To simplify the analysis, I’ve treated whole groups of words (which act together as a noun, verb, or what have you) as if they were a single word.

Reagan -- Subject

Knew -- verb

that -- Misleading preposition: a red-herring to throw us off the scent. What follows is a sub sentence which is a direct object (WHAT Reagan knew) and not a prepositional phrase, despite appearances.

{real change AND real change} -- Tautological double subject for a sub-sentence which is the direct object of the full sentence required verb for direct object sub-sentence.


{ {shakin’ things up} -- First sub-direct object of the direct object.

AND

{Maybe takin’ off }-- Second sub-direct object of the direct object, which is an extended action converted into noun form.

{ {the entrenched interests} Object of the second-sub-direct-object above, which will also be the subject of the following clause. (Properly speaking this clause itself the full object of the second sub-direct object above).

{thwarting the will of the people} -- Adjectival phrase, modifying "the entrenched interests"

with

{ {their ignoring of our concerns} -- Object of preposition modifying "thwarting the will of the people"

{caused by} -- verb starting an adjectival phrase modifying "their ignoring of our concerns"

{ {selfish short-sighted advocacy} -- Object of the verb above

for

{ {growing government} -- Object of preposition, modifying the object of the verb above

AND

{digging more debt} -- More object of the preposition

AND

{taking away individual and states rights} -- More object of the preposition

AND

{hampering} -- Verb for clause for next part of object of preposition

{opportunity to responsibly develop} -- direct object of this clause


{our resources} -- adjective modifying direct object

AND

{coddling} -- Verb for fourth part of the object of the preposition.

{those who} -- Subject for next clause, (which will form the object of the above verb)

{would seek to harm} -- Verb for this sub-clause {America

AND

her allies} } } } } }.

Anyway, the C4P folks are claiming Palin's attorneys are demanding that the Anchorage Daily News take down David Hulen's politics blog post, or something along those lines, because it references the Huffington Post article that had initially claimed Palin had plagiarized Newt Gingrich and Craig Shirley. A lot of people are uspet because Palin actually did name one of the article's two authors, Gingrich. But unless Palin named both authors, she was certainly remiss, even if it didn't meet the bar of actual plagiarism.

Update - 11:00 a.m: Co-author - along with Newt Gingrich - of the article Gov. Palin so casually cited and paraphrased (I'm in a charitable mood today), Craig Shirley (who was not mentioned as co-author in the Wednesday remarks), has weighed in. Here's from Sam Stein's article at Huffington Post:

An author quoted liberally -- some say plagiarized -- by Sarah Palin during a recent speech said he has no objection to the Alaska Governor's use of his work.

But long-time GOP strategist Craig Shirley -- whose 2005 article on Ronald Reagan, co-written with Newt Gingrich, was lifted by Palin this past week -- did use the opportunity to rap the GOP in general and its 2008 presidential candidate specifically.

"It looks as if Palin's career is still being ably managed by the best elements of the McCain campaign, including Nikki Wallace and Steve Schmidt," said Shirley. He added later: "I just wish George Bush and the GOP leadership had read the article four years ago."

Stein goes on to conclude his article with this:

For Palin, however, the incident is yet another in a slew of unfavorable or potentially damaging stories that have arisen since her run as Republican vice presidential candidate. And charges of plagiarizing a GOP standard-bearer like Gingrich and a respected operative like Shirley seem likely to further widen a developing rift between the Alaska governor and the national GOP. On Monday, it was reported that Palin may end up skipping an annual fundraising dinner for the Republican Party's two campaign committees because she would not be allowed to address the crowd. Organizers, it seems, were concerned that she would upstage another keynote speaker -- Gingrich.