NEWS: When Does The Anger Start To Turn Into Cancer?

POLITICS: When Does The Anger Start To Turn Into Cancer?

America’s favorite twig of fury is back in the news. Vicious python Ann Coulter has been accused of plagiarism in her new book called, “Liberals, blah, blah, blah, blah”

The allegations began when the New York Post hired former University of California, Berkeley professor John Barrie to look for plagiarism in her new book. Barrie is the creator of a plagiarism-detecting software system called iThenticate. Barrie reported this week that he did find examples of plagiarism in the book, as well as one column written by the bulimic beast. In the book, the pencil thin ogre apparently lifted words directly from the L.A. Times, the Heritage Foundation and Planned Parenthood without giving a footnote.

The string monster, who can kill babies by just walking near them, responded to the allegations by not denying them, but by attacking the investigator:

Touché. The undernourished branch has used quite a bit of her column space over the past couple of years to attack the New York Time over the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal. One would think she would be very mad at herself.

And now the company that syndicates the unsociable troll’s column is going to take a look at her previous work. Universal Press Syndicate issued a statement today saying they are probing allegations of plagiarism. . They will use iThenticate as well as their own computer technology to search for the alleged literary crime.

you know...if your gonna use someone elses crafty writing in your stuff, you really shouldn't be a twig and not cite it.....cite it, cite it, cite it. If someone else wrote it, USE IT....but give em credit for it.....

She just needs to be killed by a school of mutated, ill-tempered sea bass.

-TM

You're just jealous because Ann Coulter has a bigger penis than you.

I'm not a fan but would like to see examples of the plagiarism before stating anything. The criticism on her use of stem cell examples is weak at best. I mean how many ways can you say "Repairing heart attack damage", of course it's going to be similar. So far unless referring to the same item or event, of course using similar words, is plagiarism, it doesn't seem like there is a good case here. However big her dick is it just seems like a personal attack.

I agree that it is always best to see the examples plagiarism. Accusing people of plagiarism is a really fashionable way to attack people right now, and isn't always necessarily valid.

However, I have a read some of Coulter's stuff and it was some of the most nonsensical crap I've ever read. I'm thinking that whether or not some parts of the new book were plagiarized, it's probably incoherent garbage as a whole.

I don't disagree. I think she's as loony as anyone she complains about and worse than many. Still...................

I usually refrain from posting on just about anything on this site. I am a proud Conservative and know I am out numbered to the nth degree. As much as I love the site I just can't even bring myself to respond to some of the stuff I see on here.
As they say "Dont argue with an idiot, becuase after a few moments people are not going to be able to tell the difference."

Thanks to Bones708 for at least waiting for the evidence to come in. Becuase like most things that the libs get all fired up about comes out to be nothing in the end anyway, while the stuff they blow off has reprecussions in the future. Becuase results don't matter only intentions.

I am a huge fan of Ann's just for the pure fact that she does not care what anyone thinks. Which is amazing considering you would think people on this site would be all for that.

Most people that give her shit have never actually read anything she has written to completion. I love that people call her shrill etc etc. Which is amazing becuase everyone I hear on the left sounds exactly this way to me. (e.g. Hillary) So I guess you know how we feel know expect you have more shrill speakers that we do. I guess we go for quality over quantity.

This reminds of the guy from Emory (Michaell Baisden, I think) who tried to, "through supposed academic research" that settlers really did not own guns and that the "gun culture" was an invention. Amazingly he was completely discredited by his own peers (who were not real big 2nd Amendment advocates) and was relieved from his postion. The book was hearlded as the second coming by the gun control freaks, becuase they thought they had the answer to John R Lott acutally researched works. When he was descredited and fired amazingly the media and all the lefties just lost interest and much like Dan Rather, while the story may have been made up I still believe the core of it to be true. Amazing..

But the most important question would be Why would an intelligent LAWYER do something as stupid as plagiarism? I think that you guys finally thing you have her on something so in true propagana fashion are just going to scream loud enough and long enough until people believe you regardless of what acutally happened. And when the truth does come out and if it does not fit the mold you wanted will you cowboy the fuck up and admit it or will you just go screaming to the next thing? History is not on your side.....

i'm of the opinion that ann coulter isn't actually a real person. getting mad at her is about as productive as getting mad at a sock puppet.

She's an evil robot communist sent from the horse head nebula here to piss everybody off.

Well, the NY Post is turning into a tabloid rag.
But that is neither here nor there.

As soon as I hear a neocon say the nine magic words: "There were no WMDs*. It was all a fraud."

Pot...meet kettle.



* - Yes, I am counting that as a word.

......I have no comeback for that.

-TM

Dude, you're asking people to actually read her stuff...

Most of the people here wouldn't take away her right to say anything. But just because she says it doesn't mean we have to like it. She spews nothing but garbage.

I have, out of morbid curiosity, and I regret every second of it.

You lost me there.

I sorta' like Ann Coulter - for the same reason I like Nixon & Amina and a lot of the other SG's... these are some ballsy chicks. I also agree with a fair amount of Ann's politics. I don't always like her brazen tactics but they don't get me too riled up - it's just showmanship, meant to sell tickets to the circus. But as for her new book...

*Yawn*

In his book, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind," Dr. Julian Jaynes pointed out all the similarities between religious and non-religious philosophies, and how the human brain organizes these beliefs and drives our resulting behaviors. He was far more reasoned and eloquent than Ms. Coulter could ever hope to be.

So Liberalism is godless? Big whoop. But it's like a "religion?" Wow, thanks for the news flash, Ann.

Read Jaynes for some real insight into these issues.

From the NY Post article:

Found this on Yahoo! There are quite a few passages, not only in her latest book, but in her column as well.

I, for one, am going to watch her go down with relish. The hate-mongering bitch-queen has certainly done her part to dumb down political discourse to whoever can string together the most hateful collection of acidic, factually-absent invective. The only thing I fear is that when she gets the axe, someone even prettier, dumber, meaner and more bitter will step up to fill her shoes.

No I just want to see the plagiarism that they are talking about because so far the examples just don't rise to the level anyone should call plagiarism.

I have alway given Coulter full marks as an entertainer. What I find humorous is that people treat her as something other than an entertainer. Coulter has but one purpose and it is no different from Dennis Miller or Bill Mahr, she wants to make money. And in that she is wildly successful.

However, what she says has neither face nor content validity.

I have read two of her books cover to cover. I have not read the last. But then there are thousands of other books out there that I haven't read either, so I would not make too much of that.

I do not find her shrill. I find her transparently provacative.

As to her being a lawyer and a plagarist - let's just say that even the brightest of people can be incredibly stupid.

Particularly when they become successful and arrogant and think they are smarter than everyone else.

But, as you say, we will just have to wait and see if this plagarism claim is real or not. Rest asssured that, even if it is, Coulter will go to her grave denying it.

but not shown so we just have to take his word on it

Again not shown

Why not just show it?

15 years earlier? She what saved it for her book? Could it be the old monkeys typing factor? Not that we would be able to guess because they don't show it

So its not posible her recitation of the facts would closly mirror the report mentioned? Why not. Again show me what was writen not what someone else decided upon reading the book.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200607060003

Here are a few examples.

Proud of what, exactly?