Posted on 03/23/2002 10:59:31 AM PST by ArcLight
It’s not likely that many people are taking pleasure in Goodwin’s ordeal. She is, by most accounts, a nice person who works hard on her books. A Concord resident, she is also a local celebrity, someone in whom Bostonians have justifiably taken some pride. She has essentially admitted to plagiarism in the case of The Fitzgeralds and the Kennedys. But though her Pulitzer-winning 1994 opus on Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, No Ordinary Time (Simon & Schuster), has come under question, it seems solid enough to me to withstand sustained assault. Doris Kearns Goodwin is not a fraud. She is, rather, an earnest, well-intentioned historian who made some serious mistakes.
Her "books"?
Haven't read the Phoenix in a long time. Boston's "alternative" paper. Years ago, great fun reading the
personals - when herpes was the disease to have, when having fun.
Well, Mr. Kennedy,after seeing and listening to this bias Leftist Biographer on numerous channels over the years,I have to say, you have no idea how REALLY WRONG you are!No matter what happens in Politics,she's on one of the channels, offering up her opinions,and frankly,I just think this is a case of what comes around goes around; plagiarism of any kind is not welcomed or allowed in my home,especially when you are allowed(as she has been)to be "PLACED" on a pedestal,with a smarmy 'holier than thou'smirk,and given WAY too much air time .It's a good day when the Leftists finally throw one of their own on the grill.
So this is the ultimate conclusion of the article?
This author lays out the seamless case against Goodwin in great detail and points out its obvious seriousness, but the introduction and conclusion contradict the substance of the reporting.
The meat of the article seems to emphasize that Goodwin has no wiggle room on this one -- she paints herself as an objective independent historian, then wantonly violates every requirement for membership in this academy. Her offenses were not minor -- they were major, repeated, and consitute intellectual robbery. She is disgraced, period.
But then it's framed with apologies and dismissals of the actual significance because the general public can't distingish her from Gary Condit. Bizarre.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.