MAKING UP SO MUCH LOONY SHIT MUST BE REALLY HARD

Ann Coulter's job might seem easy – wake up, dress like a cocktail waitress at a Reno truck stop, and say the most inflammatory and ridiculous things that come to mind. Liberals hate America! Gays are evil! You're gay! Boom – check falls in her lap.

Well apparently it isn't quite as easy as it seems. It's so hard to come up with fresh lunacy that Ms. Coulter has had to glean some of it from those who have gone before her. Which is a polite way of saying she plagiarizes. A lot.

According to noted liberal bastion the New York Post, new plagiarism-detection software has been used to analyze Coulter's latest book and years of her syndicated columns. The searches turned up numerous examples of direct word-for-word plagiarism (often from newspaper editorials by other authors who are not attributed) in many of her writings.

Whoops.

As an instructor at the University level, I have long since been aware of the wonders and glories of plagiarism tools such as Turn it In and the like. We don't even need to submit anything – the threat that we might do so is more than enough to dissuade 99.8% of the students from plagiarising. The idea that such tools – invented to bust stupid, lazy college freshmen – are being turned against stupid, lazy right-wing media whores and war profiteers is really quite heart-warming. God Bless America, and here's hoping that Ann's plagiarism lawsuits turn out very poorly for her.

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to “MAKING UP SO MUCH LOONY SHIT MUST BE REALLY HARD”

  1. mike Says:

    I always wonder whether Ann Coulter is either the best marketer out there or has functionally lost her mind. When you look at her credentials (law review at Michigan, father was lawyer who secured on the largest union decertification in history, dated Bob Guccione Jr., federalist society) you just assume she's a William Buckley Republican who realized she could make a shitload of money running around saying Bill Clinton has commited treason, liberals are monsters, et al.

    But after reading the National Review's comments on her leaving, I wonder if she is just a lunatic.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment100301.shtml

    Evidently she claimed she was only being paid $5 a month (!) to work for them to the Washington Post.

    The funny part is I'd give 50/50 odds that the book was ghostwritten (it may as well have been) – I hope she gets James Frey-ed over this all.