UPDATE: 3-18-08
Greetings Mr. Borchers and readers reader of “CoulterKampf”! In case you missed it, below is my original article about Dan Borchers’ stalker behavior. Enjoy!
Debunking the Coulter Plagiarism Charges
by Lisa De Pasquale
July 10, 2006
Liberals are positively orgasmic over the accusations recycled from nut websites in the New York Post that bestselling author Ann Coulter plagiarized others’ writings. Oddly, the Post didn’t think these accusations were important enough to ask her about when interviewing her in early June. Perhaps this is because the accusations of plagiarism aren’t news. Calling Coulter “mean” and other four-letter words wasn’t gelling with Americans who actually know how to read, so liberals had to move on to plan B — she’s a plagiarist!
In his second article citing “plagiarism expert” and CEO of iParadigms John Barrie, New York Post recycler Philip Recchia gave no examples of passages that were plagiarized by Ann Coulter so the reader could compare them. Barrie, a graduate from the People’s Republic of Berkeley, is the creator of the iThenticate computer program that claims to root out plagiarism. But according to Universal Press Syndicate, the company that distributes Coulter’s widely-read column, a representative for iParadigms suspiciously said that he wasn’t sure the company “ could provide the same information about Coulter as was given to the Post.”
Recchia simply offered vague references to old claims, including “10 facts” that were also in a Heritage Foundation paper. These facts were descriptions of projects funded by the National Endowment for the Arts. How many ways can a columnist describe a picture of “Christ submerged in a jar of urine” to its gentle readers? Columnists for at least three publications — the Manila Times, San Diego’s Daily Transcript and the Southern Illinoisan — described the work of “art” in those exact same words after Coulter did so in her June 29, 2005, column. Given that it’s more likely that they read Coulter’s column than a 1991 Heritage paper that isn’t available online, does that mean they knowingly plagiarized Coulter? Of course not. There are only so many words one can use to describe the filth funded by the NEA.
Likewise, there are only so many arguments liberals can use against Coulter. Her detractors are as predictable as Pavlov’s dogs. Devoid of critical thinking, they have a conditioned reaction to successful conservatives. By the way, you may find that I am not the first person to describe the Pavlovian theory with the words “critical thinking” and “conditioned reaction.”
Another example that is being recycled by bloggers is a 2002 article that accused Coulter of plagiarizing in her first New York Times bestseller, High Crimes and Misdemeanors. The author of this ridiculous article is longtime Coulter critic Daniel Borchers, a so-called “principled conservative” and owner of the now defunct AnorexicAnnie.com website. Borchers has put himself in the spotlight by claiming to be an expert on Ann Coulter. It is now time for me to speak out about Daniel Borchers.
From 1997 to 1998, Borchers sent 10-page fan letters once a week to Coulter. The letters went unanswered by Coulter and since then he has repeatedly harassed her, her family and her former co-workers. I experienced his erratic behavior firsthand as program director of an organization that sponsored her campus speeches.
However, Borchers may have a few copyright issues himself. At the 2002 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) I witnessed Borchers distributing folders filled with his rants against Coulter and pornographic photos that were meticulously cut-and-pasted so that her face replaced the female faces in the photos. Former CPAC staffers have told me that Borchers has gone to great lengths to sneak into CPAC under false pretenses, including making a phony press pass on his home computer and registering under fake names.
Amazingly, even for the National Enquirer, Borchers’ rants against Coulter were recently quoted in their ludicrous article demanding that “she should be thrown out of the country.” He has also been cited in Mother Jones and by numerous liberal blogs, such as Huffington Post. This is literally like hiring John Hinkley to write about Jodie Foster.
The fact that the left is using Borchers as the go-to expert on Ann Coulter proves how little evidence they have against her. In 2005, the liberal dogs were still salivating over the 2002 release of Coulter’s second New York Times bestseller, Slander. The Daily Howler’s Bob Somerby wrote: “Coulter wanted to say that the liberal [New York] Times had engaged in the nastiest possible conduct. So of course! Unable to make such a claim in good faith, she plagiarized. She simply made the claim up.” Which is it: a made up claim or plagiarism? Here’s a newsflash: Claims of misconduct by the New York Times do not need to be fabricated.
Most telling is the fact that none of the authors or publications that liberals claim Ann Coulter plagiarized have come forward. Liberals are always parroting themselves because they think truth is based on the number of times an accusation is repeated. The latest cry of plagiarism from the left is simply their conditioned response to her continued success. If the New York Post’s famed “pattern recognition” expert John Barrie couldn’t spot this trend, I wouldn’t put much stock in the vague accusations he makes against Coulter. Nor should anyone take obsessive rants seriously just because they are recycled in tabloids and in the liberal blogosphere.
————- BACK TO ORIGINAL “LAZY MONDAY POST ————-
Happy Colombus Day!
I’m sitting at home working on my column, watching reruns of Roseanne, BOTUS at my side. It’s a wonderful 86 degrees outside, so when I reach some appropriate milestone (say, 400 words), I’m going out on the deck for awhile.
If you’re stuck inside, here’s a link to occupy your time — MyHeritage.org. Upload a picture of yourself and see which celebrities you look like. If you’re really bored, upload pictures of celebrities and see if they get match to themselves.
