So funny, MBB! If you're going to try to pull a sexism counter-attack, best not resort to the 'poor woman' trope. A 'poor woman' is a helpless victim who needs the protection of a strong male. That's not really the way someone who is serious about sexism would talk. As Bear points out, she certainly isn't poor by any normal metric - she's privilege personified.
The next error is to suggest that she was attacked "for doing what they all do" while also pointing out that the same allegation was made against Obama. The latter point highlights that political speeches are routinely scrutinised by opponents to see if they contain any plagiarism. Once spotted, such plagiarism is always the subject of comment whether the one who makes the speech is male or female. And politicians do their best to avoid falling into this trap, with speeches being carefully vetted to avoid unintentional plagiarism. So, not everybody does it and when caught out all those who do it are roasted.
So what was the attack, and who really was the target? You don't think the attack is really directed at Trump? Wasn't it attacking Trump's relentless dishonesty? He or his campaign had Melania say that she wrote the whole speech "with as little help as possible". That is clearly a lie as is apparent from the media autopsy. The speechwriters were all over it, though the latest suggestion is that the plagiarised text was added after it was finally vetted. I don't think anyone would have cared if she said that she left it to speechwriters given she isn't a native English speaker. And if she had, the allegations of plagiarism would have been levelled at the speechwriters rather than Melania. But the lie put her right in it. Even if she hadn't claimed authorship, Trump's campaign staff probably wouldn't have wanted to accept the blame as it would feed a perception of incompetence, disorganisation and deceptiveness.
But I reckon it has Trump's fingerprints all over it. If the media reports that the offending text was added after final vetting are true, surely he's the most likely suspect. It's safe to say Melania didn't add it herself. We know Trump liked Michelle Obama's speech - he tweeted his approval when she gave it. We know he likes rebadging the work of white supremacists such as the picture of Hillary superimposed on a pile of cash and with a comment in a Star of David.
And we also know that Trump just has to say that everything in his world is just the greatest in all respects. He just couldn't let Melania admit she isn't the world's greatest wordsmith. He wants to show that Melania is every bit as eloquent as Michelle Obama, so much so that they say pretty much the same things!
The next error is to suggest that she was attacked "for doing what they all do" while also pointing out that the same allegation was made against Obama. The latter point highlights that political speeches are routinely scrutinised by opponents to see if they contain any plagiarism. Once spotted, such plagiarism is always the subject of comment whether the one who makes the speech is male or female. And politicians do their best to avoid falling into this trap, with speeches being carefully vetted to avoid unintentional plagiarism. So, not everybody does it and when caught out all those who do it are roasted.
So what was the attack, and who really was the target? You don't think the attack is really directed at Trump? Wasn't it attacking Trump's relentless dishonesty? He or his campaign had Melania say that she wrote the whole speech "with as little help as possible". That is clearly a lie as is apparent from the media autopsy. The speechwriters were all over it, though the latest suggestion is that the plagiarised text was added after it was finally vetted. I don't think anyone would have cared if she said that she left it to speechwriters given she isn't a native English speaker. And if she had, the allegations of plagiarism would have been levelled at the speechwriters rather than Melania. But the lie put her right in it. Even if she hadn't claimed authorship, Trump's campaign staff probably wouldn't have wanted to accept the blame as it would feed a perception of incompetence, disorganisation and deceptiveness.
But I reckon it has Trump's fingerprints all over it. If the media reports that the offending text was added after final vetting are true, surely he's the most likely suspect. It's safe to say Melania didn't add it herself. We know Trump liked Michelle Obama's speech - he tweeted his approval when she gave it. We know he likes rebadging the work of white supremacists such as the picture of Hillary superimposed on a pile of cash and with a comment in a Star of David.
And we also know that Trump just has to say that everything in his world is just the greatest in all respects. He just couldn't let Melania admit she isn't the world's greatest wordsmith. He wants to show that Melania is every bit as eloquent as Michelle Obama, so much so that they say pretty much the same things!