Hillary Booed After Plagiarism Attack on Obama, "Change You Can Xerox" [VIDEO]

Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report at 5:27 AM on February 22, 2008.

For weeks, Hillary Clinton and her campaign have done just about everything they can think of to stress the significance of another head-to-head debate with Barack Obama. When Obama balked at an event in Wisconsin, Clinton ran ads taunting him over it.

All of this had the effect of hammering home a simple point: Clinton couldn't wait to get back onto the stage with her Democratic rival. One assumed, given the emphasis, that she would use the next debate to practically tear Obama apart. Indeed, she probably wouldn't have a choice -- it's been a rough few weeks, her quiver is running noticeably low on arrows, and time for game-changing events is running out.

So, what happened last night in Austin? Well, I should note that I slept through the whole thing, but have read much of the transcript and lots of reports on what transpired. And if there's a consensus, it seemed to be that nothing happened last night that changed the dynamics of the race in any significant way. Josh Marshall's response seemed typical of most:

The level of specificity and detail in discussions of policy questions spoke well of both of them. Hillary had a strong closing. Obama has clearly improved as a debater and seemed to embody the frontrunner mantle. All of this points basically to a tie. And in the context of where this campaign is, a tie is a win for Obama because he's winning. And Clinton needs to change the dynamic of the campaign.

Notwithstanding the inflamed partisans on both sides, I think the great majority of Democrats like both these candidates, genuinely like and admire both of them. You could feel that in the responses from the audience tonight. But that pleasant equilibrium is losing the race for her right now.

This is not to say that Clinton didn't take any swings at all; she did use an obviously-prepared line to go after Obama on the silly "plagiarism" flap.

"[L]ifting whole passages from someone else's speeches is not change you can believe in; it's change you can Xerox." If the audience's reaction was any indication, Obama fared better in the exchange.

There was also quite a bit of attention focused on Clinton's compelling closing statement.

"I think everybody here knows I've lived through some crises and some challenging moments in my life," she began. "And I am grateful for the support and the prayers of countless Americans. But people often ask me ... 'How do you keep going?' And I just have to shake my head in wonderment, because with all of the challenges that I've had, they are nothing compared to what I see happening in the lives of Americans every single day."

Then, with the careful geographical precision that is one of her political strengths, Clinton ended this riff by describing a wrenching visit to wounded soldiers at the Brooke Medical Center in San Antonio. It would be melodramatic to believe that a single debate response could rescue a drowning candidate. But Clinton's Austin answer seemed destined to, at minimum, be remembered as a high point of her campaign.

And then maybe out of carelessness or amnesia, Clinton went a beat too far. Turning to Obama, she said, "Whatever happens, we're going to be fine ... I just hope that we'll be able to say the same thing about the American people, and that's what this election should be about." It was a lovely sentiment, one that would make any presidential debater proud. The only problem was -- as the Obama campaign gleefully pointed out in a press release shortly thereafter -- that John Edwards had used almost the identical words in a mid-December debate.

Tagged as: texas, clinton, obama, democratic debate

Steve Benen is a freelance writer/researcher and creator of The Carpetbagger Report. In addition, he is the lead editor of Salon.com's Blog Report, and has been a contributor to Talking Points Memo, Washington Monthly, Crooks & Liars, The American Prospect, and the Guardian.