Right-Wing Pundit's Work Under Scrutiny (Ann Coulter)

sfgate.com ^ | 07-07-06 | By HILLEL ITALIE, AP

[bugseye]

Right-Wing Pundit's Work Under Scrutiny By HILLEL ITALIE, AP National Writer

(07-07) 19:17 PDT New York (AP) --

The syndicator of Ann Coulter's newspaper column is looking into allegations that the right-wing pundit has lifted material from other sources.

"We are reviewing the material and expect to have a response some time next week," Kathie Kerr, a spokeswoman for Universal Press Syndicate, told The Associated Press on Friday.

The New York Post and the Web sites Raw Story and the Rude Pundit have raised numerous questions about Coulter's columns, which appear in more than 100 newspapers, and her best-selling "Godless," already notorious for the author's calling four 9/11 widows, who supported Democrat John Kerry for president in 2004, "harpies" thriving on their husbands' demise.

Kerr said that the press syndicate had not discussed the allegations with Coulter, who was not immediately available for comment Friday. The publisher of "Godless," the Crown Publishing Group, issued a statement saying it had reviewed the "the allegations of plagiarism" in her book and "found them to be as trivial and meritless as they are irresponsible."

"As an experienced author and attorney, Ms. Coulter knows when attribution is appropriate, as underscored by the 19 pages and hundreds of endnotes contained in 'Godless,'" Crown's senior vice president and publisher, Steve Ross, said in the statement. [...]

See also: Media Matters asks Random House to investigate Coulter plagiarism allegations http://mediamatters.org/items/200607070004

and, Syndicate Will Look Into Alleged Coulter Plagiarism On Its Own -- And Possibly With Electronic Tool http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002801078

[Republican Wildcat]

You didn't include that in post #4, therefore, there was nothing to read. It just appears to be a blanket attack on Ann. I believe you when you say that's what you meant, but you didn't say all of that or imply it in that post directly. That attack on Deb is unwarranted, IMHO.

[WLR]

Hardly , Just as only Nixon could have approached China and not be considered a potential traitor because we all knew he hated the Rats.

Coulter has put a final stake in the heart of Liberal's

"I can savage you, don't you dare speak ill of me"


For that alone we all must be grateful

W

[beyond the sea]

Some folks (not you) read the whole thread before they go making uninformed and ignorant assertions such as, "nice work helping the enemy". That is more than insulting.

Have a good Sunday. The Wimbledon men's final between Federer and Nadal may just be an epic, a tennis match that will be talked about for years and years.

[beyond the sea]

See post #73. We basically agree.

I see the value of the subject Annie broached. She's got a lot of guts and is a great writer.

But, I just wish she would have stopped before she caused injury to herself. The last sentence of hers was not needed. She had already made the point very well.

And, by the way, she went on Hannity and Colmes a few weeks ago and said something else that everyone seems to be ignoring. She asked cryptically to Sean and the audience, "How do we know their husbands weren't going to divorce them before 9/11." How bizarre. That was not needed either. She is not her best friend when she says things like that.

(jmo)

[reg45]

My liberal relatives are saying that the Democrats can put up Mickey Mouse as a candidate (in 08) and they will crush the GOP.

That's only because more people trust Mickey Mouse than trust Democrat politicians.

[reg45]

To a liberal, quoting someone accurately is plagiarism, that's why they always quote people inaccurately.

-- Good heavens, that sounds like something Ann Coulter would write.

[beyond the sea]

One more thing if I may.

Let me try to explain to you what nasty crap Ann may have to absorb in the future (this silly plagiarism rap is just the beginning) because of that one unneeded sentence of hers.

When she wrote that "husbands' death enjoyment" sentence, she rubbed it in more than she needed to. It was real bad form. It was not decent (the sentence by itself).

Here is an example that I hope helps you to understand my point.

I played some baseball years ago for money...... I played it a long time. There were rules. When a batter hit a homerun it used to be always customary to just throw away the bat, put your head down, and run around the bases and that was it. These days, every once in a while there will be a hitter who homers, and then stands at home plate to admire his homer before heading around the bases. He's asking for retribution. It's real bad form to "show up" the pitcher. You may say, "so what". OK, fine.

But here is what happens in real life (in politics, etc.) at times. The hitter who shows up" the pitcher like that eventually some day down the line, later in the season or even somewhere further down the line ........ may get DRILLED with a beanball or a well-placed fastball that breaks his wrist. When that happens he has hurt himself AND his team by his showing up the pitcher. If he is put out of action for a couple of months he has hurt his team.

Ann (with that one sentence) has hurt her team, imo. She most likely will be "beaned" by the evil lefties over the next years. Yes, they will never forget that sentence, and they will make her life miserable. She will be given the "Linda Tripp" treatment on the late night shows. Letterman and Leno have been skewering her for days now.

There are those of you out there who think this just brings her more great publicity. It does bring her publicity. But it will bring her pain too, and that pain will be transferred to all conservatives.

No showing up the pitcher........... bad form. It accomplishes nothing good!

****

[syriacus]

(this silly plagiarism rap is just the beginning) because of that one unneeded sentence of hers.

She would have been accused of plagiarism whether or not she made a comment about the Joisey Goils.

[syriacus]

Ann is more like a batter who breaks a distance record, rather than like a batter who stands around drawing attention to her skills.

Yes, the person who says the "forbidden" words first (before a certain percent of the public accepts the ideas expressed) will suffer. But that does not mean it was wrong for the person to speak out.

Speaking out against abortion was once considered forcing one's own religious beliefs on another and, therefore, bad form.

A prophet is not without honor, except in her own time.

[beyond the sea]

LOL............... I'm waiting for them to start to accuse her of making some American girls to want to be thin.

;-)

[syriacus]

I'm waiting for them to start to accuse her of making some American girls to want to be thin.

Girls who really want to imitate Ann would find it necessary to do the hard work of, first, thinking and, second, writing books with copious footnoting.

All teenagers know that girls with bodies like Monica Lewinsky's get to "share pizza" with Presidents in the Oval Office, without doing anything worthwhile.

[beyond the sea]

lol ............. right on.

[TASMANIANRED]

Much truth in that..

[beyond the sea]

I get your point, but comparisons are not too helpful. I should not have begun it.

;-)

[GregoryFul]

A thinking decent person just doesn't put in print (no matter if it's true or not) that women are enjoying their husbands' deaths

Nonsense, it is time that thinking decent persons put it precisely like they think. These four women are banking on the sympathy decent people may have for their plight - banking to the extent that they will swallow the stinking swill they have to deliver to the sympathetic person.

[GregoryFul]

"How do we know their husbands weren't going to divorce them before 9/11." How bizarre. That was not needed either. She is not her best friend when she says things like that.

Coulter was trying to point out to dufuses that the only reason these four women were being accorded reverence for their utterances was the assumption that they were intimately connected to the victims of 9/11. And there was no evidence offered that these women were attached to these victims! Since 50% of marriages end in divorce, it is likely that at least two of these gals were gladdened by their hubbies demise. And they certainly profited financially. A happy circumstance to them.

[GregoryFul]

How dare you inject your pastoral scene into this debate! (Thanks, I liked it)

[GregoryFul]

She will be given the "Linda Tripp" treatment on the late night shows. Letterman and Leno have been skewering her for days now.

And Letterman and Leno show themselves up for the creeps that they are - long ago I became convinced that these people were the absolute $hit of the airwaves because they "skewered" people who I would trust because of their patent honesty. The Leno and Letterman are frigging scumbags pandering to the leftist idiots of the world.

[beyond the sea]

Since 50% of marriages end in divorce, it is likely that at least two of these gals were gladdened by their hubbies demise.

IGNORANT

[beyond the sea]

The Leno and Letterman are frigging scumbags pandering to the leftist idiots of the world.

Well, you got that right.

;-)