Coulter's Liberal Footnotes

Guest Post by Doctor Snedley, Personal Assistant to Doctor Biobrain

These baseless accusations of plagiarism against Ann Coulter are entirely baseless. Sure, she stole whole passages from other sources and didn’t accredit news sources for rewriting their stories in her book. But what choice did she have? As has been mentioned repeatedly, Coulter just has a different footnote style than what the stupid liberals at the MLA would have her use. And so she shouldn’t be punished, simply because she’s cutting through the MLA’s communistic redtape and hurdles over the barriers of ineptitude they continue to place in front of her.

For Ann, rather than using footnotes to merely attribute borrowings to her sources, she uses them as proof of what she’s saying. As a form of factual back-up to show that she’s not just making shit up, and that there really is some kind of basis in reality to what she’s saying. And if her source doesn’t actually back-up what she’s saying, but in fact, says the exact opposite; then that just shows how biased the media is, because they won’t provide Ms. Coulter with the proper evidence that she needs to make her case. It’s that simple.

And so it would have been inconsistent with her writing style, were she to use footnotes for actual citations of her sources. That would have confused her loyal readers who have depended on her footnotes as the double-edged proof that they need of how right she is about everything. And after all, if she could merely cite some other source of information for the points she’s making, then what would be the point of her even writing? And thus, we would be denied such masterpieces, like Treason, Slander, and Godless. But I guess that’s exactly what the liberals want.

This isn’t about “plagiarism” or “footnotes”. This is about destroying the liberal slimebags while making a quick buck. Coulter isn’t trying to document history. She’s conveying a bigger message, about Truth, Justice, and the American Way. And you can quote me on that.