To Mr. McClure:

If she uses a sentence without attributing it to the original source that IS plagiarism.  According to the Oxford dictionary, plagiarism is defined as: “taking someone’s words or ideas as if they were your own.”

Taking an off point and out of context passage from a hundred and fifty year old case won’t change the fact that she is a plagiarist.

The copied bits are probably the only sensible bits in her books. The rest is drug- and booze-fueled hatred and venom. Who buys that stuff?

Would someone please explain why I, or ANYONE, should give a damn what Coulter writes, says or does?

Hmmmmm.

And I thought I was posting about *her* ad hominem   attacks in my Godless review:

http://westanddivided.blogspot.com/2006/06/ann-hominem-coulter-some-godless-notes.html

I wonder who’s personal attacks they really are? - mw

You’re kidding me, she uses one sentence and that’s considered plagarisim.  How much content of Jayson Blair’s columns were lifted from other sources? A sentence?  A paragraph?  Large passages?

“A reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism.” Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342 (1841)

To all Ann Coulter has to say, has said or ever will say I have only one reply.

Follow the link:

http://coulteredit.ytmnd.com/