'High Crimes' And misuse? (Ann Coulter Is Accused of Plagerism) GAG ALERT!

Boston Globe ^ | 10/18/01 | Alex Beam

[areafiftyone]

Earlier this month, conservative commentator Ann Coulter laughed off her dismissal as a contributing editor of National Review magazine by telling the Washington Post: ''I'm getting a lot of great publicity.'' But now Coulter is facing less welcome publicity - the suggestion that she is not the sole author of the 1998 bestseller ''High Crimes and Misdemeanors'' that brought her to national prominence as a telegenic Clinton-basher and poster girl for the right-wing establishment.

[areafiftyone]

brought her to national prominence as a telegenic Clinton-basher and poster girl for the right-wing establishment.

Seems to me, Wagner is just a wee bit jealous of Ann Coulter's success.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

We all used the same lines everytime we argued impeachment. Did Lanny Davis and Serpent Head ever use different words when they appeared on TV? How many ways can you write the sentance. Either, " if they joined the DNC's `Managing Trustees' program and agreed to donate $100,000 ...'' " at the front of the sentence or the back of the sentence."

[Hidy]

Hey, what's a little plagarism in the grand cause of chasing Clinton's dingus?

No one should be surprised if Ann turns out to be a little dishonest. I once heard her admit -- boast, even -- on national television that she had often lied to the FBI when they asked her about people she knew. She laughed this off, since she knows that lying to the FBI is no big deal when you're a conservative. Nothing will happen to you.

Oh, but imagine the uproar if Molly Ivins ever bragged about lying to the FBI on national televison. What a Freepfest that would be.

[samtheman]

So they both reported the same two facts. Not much of a case for plagerism there. This is a get-Coulter smear campaign.

[Egregious Philbin]

I'm guessing their will be more evidence one way or the other soon enough. What makes you so sure now it's just a smear campaign? Would it still be a "gag alert" if Coulter did, in fact, plagiarize?

[Blade]

Uhhh...look at the quotes.

Ann Coulter is a plagerist.

[Sans-Culotte]

If this were a paper written for college, I think Ann would have some problems, unless it can be proven that the quotes that are the same came exactly that way from a primary source.
Look, I like her columns as well as the next VRWC member, but I see no point in using the Clintonesque tactic of deny, deny, deny when one of ours is accused of something. In any case, this is a personal problem for her to deal with, and does not lessen the impact of her columns and TV appearences.

[stylin_geek]

Liberals are treasonous. They bend and twist the Constitution to gain what they want, along with using the courts to write law. Liberal tactics have been to use the courts to create law, because they know the majority of their policies will not pass if brought to a ballot. Liberals utimately want America to become the Peoples State of America, with one all powerful over-arching central government taking care of citizens from cradle to grave. These are known facts about liberals, and it all sounds rather subversive to me. So, "treasonous" is an incorrect label in what way?

As for Ann Coulter, if she did plagiarise, then she does need to be condemned. However, the evidence, at this point, is rather thin. Was the document which Coulter supposedly plagiarised from a primary source, or were both statements drawn from another source?

[Physicist]

Uhhh...look at the quotes.

Ann Coulter is a plagerist.

Possibly she is, but those quotes don't prove it. It takes more than a sentence here or there to constitute plagiarism. Since she read the work from which the original sentences came, it seems likely that some turns of phrase just stuck in the back of her head. Perhaps when they came back to her, she had no idea that she was remembering them and not composing them. This has happened to me, and it's embarassing enough when I'm the one who catches it.

Another possibility is that both are taking their phrasing (in these two instances) from an original source they used in common.

[HoweverComma]

The question is, "just how MUCH did she merely remember instead of compose?"

[Gil4]

"...Twenty years of treason haven’t slowed them down." It is difficult to condemn this statement strongly enough.

I've never been a big Coulter fan - I liked to read her stuffbut never really went out of the way to find it - but I don't have a big problem with the quotes. The T word works for me. Sorry if the libs don't like it.

[D-fendr]

If this is the best they got then, they're nuts, or just trying to Newt-er Ann.

I suspect the latter.

Good luck Ann, keep the great stuff coming

[dighton]

I once heard [Ann Coulter] admit -- boast, even -- on national television that she had often lied to the FBI when they asked her about people she knew. She laughed this off, since she knows that lying to the FBI is no big deal when you're a conservative. Nothing will happen to you.

Yeah, right. Got a transcript?

[Physicist]

The question is, "just how MUCH did she merely remember instead of compose?"

Of course. That's for the court to decide. My point was that these two quotes by themselves don't constitute any proof of plagiarism, just as one airline crash by itself does not prove terrorism.

If each of us could somehow discover just how much of what we think we write is actually inadvertently culled from someone else, we'd all be astonished.

[onedoug]

She has seemed a bit more subjective of late. War jitters.

[RicocheT]

The Klintoon cover-up cabal all repeated the same DNC talking points for years and still uses them. Now, Colter is a plagerist for using the same wording in two or three sentences???

[HoweverComma]

There is a difference. Conservative writings are "intellectual property," and thus have some value.

Liberal writings are worthless drivel.

Got the picture now? :o)

[samtheman]

The Klintoon cover-up cabal all repeated the same DNC talking points for years and still uses them. Now, Colter is a plagerist for using the same wording in two or three sentences???

That should really be the last word on this silly trumped-up attempt at a "story". Unfortunately, it won't be. It is for me, though. I'm "outta here" on this thread.