This is pretty funny!
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/coulter_caught_cribbing_column_720
Actually, it seems pretty weak. The parts that are “plagiarized” seem to be the descriptions of the art in question. It’s hard to say. My partisan sense went into overdrive on that site and my eyes glazed over like this. :eek:
Anyways, so she used similar words to describe the art. There are only so many ways to describe a crucifix in a jar of urine. She could have gone for Christ on the cross in a crock of pee-pee, but that sounds so juvenile.
There are no shortage of reasons to loathe Coulter, but I’m just not seeing plagiarism being one of them.
I dunno, if she had handed an essay in to a high-school teacher like that, it would have been called plagiarism. Sure, there are only so many ways to describe the art; that’s why people use quotes and reference their source.
Some of those do appear plagiarized. The phrase “available for oral sex” seems pretty unique to me. Other times, the resemblances seem coincidental and it’s true that there are only so many ways to describe certain pieces. Cliches develop about art that way.