Kos And Joshua Micah Ezekiah Boutros-Boutros Marshall Are 100% Right

...that the Coulter plagiarism charges are absurd.

Sorry to beat a dead donkey, but this really shows the left for how sad, desperate, and impotent they are. Read the list of alleged "plagiarized" passages and decide for yourself.

In many cases, similar word choices can be explained, rather easily, as a case of simply describing the same brief fact pattern. When I read the passage about Annie Sprinkle, the ex-low-level-porn-"star" who did gynecological caberet for a while, I could see the next word coming... and not because I had read Coulter or the source she allegedly "plagiarized" from. I had read this all in some other magazine -- maybe the Village Voice, or some other left-leaning rag that thought Annie Sprinkle was "empowering" or something -- and there are simply no other words to describe her form of "performance art." Unless one postulates that one must resort to tasteless word-substitution to avoid "plagiarism" -- look, if the woman lets you look into her naughty bits with a flashlight, there is really only one way to say that. The proper word for her naughty bits is "vagina" and the simple word for flashlight is, well, "flashlight."

To avoid "plagiarism," Coulter would have needed to write "Annie Sprinkle invites audience members to look insider her Quavering Cavern of Carnality with an electric torch (as the British call it)." I mean, honestly.

But that's not the worst. The worst, the saddest and most desperate examples, are alleged cases of "plagiarism" where Coulter doesn't actually even use similar words. I mean, there are instances of alleged plagiarism where she uses entirely different words altogether to describe the same basic facts.

Like this. And I apologize for the scatalogical example.

Example 6: "Christ submerged in a jar of urine. — NEA-funded exhibit"

Alleged Source: "'Piss Christ' featured Christ on a cross in a vat of the artist's own urine." (“How the NEA Pollutes American Culture,� The Boston Globe, Jan. 24, 1995)
(Identified by Raw Story & The Rude Pundit)

Need I suggest that there are only a limited number of ways to convey the idea of a crucifix submerged in urine? And need I further point out that, among these limited number of other ways to describe it, Coulter did in fact choose one of these other ways?

Here's one that's not dirty:

Example 6: "In a private speech — not a brief on behalf of a client — Souter attacked affirmative action, calling it 'affirmative discrimination.'"

Alleged Source: "In a May, 1976, speech reported in a newspaper account, Souter said he opposed affirmative action, calling it 'affirmative discrimination.'" (Ibid)
(Identified by John Barrie/New York Post)

What? The only words "copied" there, apart from articles and prepositions, are "speech," "affirmative action," and "affirmative discrimination." The last is Souter's key quote, quoted in the original; obviously, you want that quote. The whole point of quoting someone is, well, using his own words, with quote-marks around them to indicate they are someone else's words.

I guess these idiots think that Coulter should have substituted the term "oral declaration" for "speech" and come up with an entirely new coinage to describe affirmative action.

That's plagiarism? The left seems to define plagiarism as not copying words, organization, ideas, etc., but simply as re-reporting the same fact pattern with different words, organizations, and ideas. If Coulter mentioned that Washington had crossed the Delaware on Christmas Eve, the left would cite this as "plagiarism," because, you know, other writers had also noted this obscure fact.

Honestly, it's sad, and I will not even speculate about the hateful, impotent, beaten-down, psyches of the morons who catalogue this silly shit in hopes of finally bringing The Despised One down. I will say they seem to have a lot of free time on their hands.

I'll also say their pathetic writings resemble the claw-marks on the padded cell-walls of a lunatic.

Whoops. There's that "crazy" charge again.

Anyway, see for yourself. It's so petty and childish and unhinged it makes me feel dirty even sharing blogspace with them.

Thanks to CraigC for prompting me to finally post on this.

More... A Krazy Kos Kid dismisses these inconvenient "facts" and suggests, well, just frigging lying:

...Let it sink into the national subconscience [sic] that Ann Coulter is a plagiarist... even if it's not true.

Bear in mind, these are the same cats who mention Hitler's "Big Lie" proposition approximately every fourth sentence. (As if they disapprove of it.)

Strong. Tough. Goebbellian.

Layers.

Thanks to the Purple Avenger for that.

Purple Avenger also notes the Freudian slip of writing "subconscious" as "subconscience."

He thinks it's a Freudian slip; I think it's just the left being smugly semiliterate as usual.

Still. Kinda funny.

posted by Ace at 02:40 PM

| Access Comments