PDA

View Full Version : Besides being a nasty b***h, is Anne Coulter a plagarist?


banyon
06-12-2006, 02:50 PM
Here's Coulter from Chapter 1 of Godless: The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River in Maine, was halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant previously believed to be extinct.

Here's the Portland Press Herald, from the year 2000, in its list of the "Maine Stories of the Century": The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River, is halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant believed to be extinct.

Strangely similar, no? By the way, that's a story from 1976. Coulter doesn't tell you that little tidbit, making you think it happened last week. The next one's from 1977:

Here's Coulter writing about an attack on the Alaska pipeline: A few years after oil drilling began in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, a saboteur set off an explosion blowing a hole in the pipeline and releasing an estimated 550,000 gallons of oil.

Here's something from the History Channel: The only major oil spill on land occurred when an unknown saboteur blew a hole in the pipe near Fairbanks, and 550,000 gallons of oil spilled onto the ground.

Why, in this age of the "terrorist," would Coulter use "saboteur," a quaint term, to be sure? Could it be a cut and paste job with a couple of words changed, like a good college freshman?

So you judge. Sure, it's just two incidents in a single chapter. But does it speak to other potential strange similarities throughout the book? Is it plagiarism? The Rude Pundit's not saying it is plagiarism, but he's not saying it's not. How harshly would Coulter judge a liberal writer for doing the same? Or would she have to be silent?

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2006/06/because-some-things-are-more-profane.html

BucEyedPea
06-12-2006, 02:53 PM
I read some excerpts of that book and I liked it enough to want to buy it.
I do enjoy some of her wit and satire about liberals. I just think recently she has gone too far and feel she's getting too proud.

Pitt Gorilla
06-12-2006, 04:01 PM
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2006/06/because-some-things-are-more-profane.htmlThe first one is pretty clearly plagiarism. The second one, not so much. Still, she should at least provide a citation to the original publication.

John_Locke
06-12-2006, 04:19 PM
Funny then that Lisa Beamer is not on the list that the Bit..is complaining about. After all she wrote the first book and tried to claim the phrase "lets roll" for herself...

oh I get it, she voted bush so she is not a harpy

memyselfI
06-12-2006, 04:40 PM
Funny then that Lisa Beamer is not on the list that the Bit..is complaining about. After all she wrote the first book and tried to claim the phrase "lets roll" for herself...

oh I get it, she voted bush so she is not a harpy

Yep. Lisa Beamer was the first 9/11 wife to make a buck off her husband's death...

yet I've not heard Coulter or any interviewer mention this fact.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-12-2006, 10:56 PM
As a college composition instructor, any two words that are someone elses that you use without attribution is legally plagiarism. 50+ Is a nail in the coffin. I guess she just parses together the 'filler' from various organizations sans citations to build around her hateful vitriol, as her writing is clearly nothing but it.

Jesus
06-12-2006, 11:58 PM
As a college composition instructor, any two words that are someone elses that you use without attribution is legally plagiarism. 50+ Is a nail in the coffin. I guess she just parses together the 'filler' from various organizations sans citations to build around her hateful vitriol, as her writing is clearly nothing but it.

Fifty words, if truly borrowed, does clearly constitute plagiarism. But two words? If you are truthful and honest, you must be busting nearly every one of your students for plagarism then. If you are true to your principles, then that's the only course of action you could pursue.

T-post Tom
06-13-2006, 03:01 AM
...

Bootlegged
06-13-2006, 06:08 AM
Why do you get so worked up over this woman? Don't get me wrong, its funny to watch, but does she really get to you this much?

chagrin
06-13-2006, 06:19 AM
"...If you are truthful and honest...If you are true to your principles, then that's the only course of action you could pursue."

Not going to happen

BucEyedPea
06-13-2006, 07:03 AM
Why are the Democrats tryin' to pass book banning laws on Ann Coulter?

Link (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50626)

Two Democrats – Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender – are pushing to ban "Godless" from all bookstores in their state because of Coulter's biting criticism of four 9-11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls," who demanded investigations into President Bush's role in allowing the terrorist attacks.

Radar Chief
06-13-2006, 07:15 AM
Why are the Democrats tryin' to pass book banning laws on Ann Coulter?

Link (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50626)

Two Democrats – Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender – are pushing to ban "Godless" from all bookstores in their state because of Coulter's biting criticism of four 9-11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls," who demanded investigations into President Bush's role in allowing the terrorist attacks.

Typical Neo-Cons! Attack’n the messenger cause they can’t counter the message. :cuss:



ROFL

banyon
06-13-2006, 07:59 AM
Why are the Democrats tryin' to pass book banning laws on Ann Coulter?

Link (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50626)

Two Democrats – Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender – are pushing to ban "Godless" from all bookstores in their state because of Coulter's biting criticism of four 9-11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls," who demanded investigations into President Bush's role in allowing the terrorist attacks.

That newspaper is wrong. I saw these two on Larry King Live yesterday. They are organizing a boycott, not a ban. As William F. Buckley has said, "A boycott is as American as apple pie."

BucEyedPea
06-13-2006, 08:05 AM
That newspaper is wrong. I saw these two on Larry King Live yesterday. They are organizing a boycott, not a ban. As William F. Buckley has said, "A boycott is as American as apple pie."

Good catch banyon, but now that I've reread it the article doesn't say they're trying to pass legislation afterall. So that newspaper is right as well. By mentioning two lawmakers trying to do this without more detail it implies they're legislating.

Boozer
06-13-2006, 08:45 AM
Good catch banyon, but now that I've reread it the article doesn't say they're trying to pass legislation afterall. So that newspaper is right as well. By mentioning two lawmakers trying to do this without more detail it implies they're legislating.

Worldnetdaily is only slighly more connected to reality than the Weekly World News.

Cochise
06-13-2006, 09:30 AM
Typical Neo-Cons! Attack’n the messenger cause they can’t counter the message. :cuss:

ROFL

Damn neocons and their censorship! Er, wait a minute... those are Commifornius liberalie specimens...

banyon
06-13-2006, 09:33 AM
Typical Neo-Cons! Attack’n the messenger cause they can’t counter the message. :cuss:

You might have a point if there actually was a "message" to speak of. But titling your book "Godless:The Church of Liberalism" is really just a giant attack itself. So it's more like "attacking the attacker".

Radar Chief
06-13-2006, 09:56 AM
You might have a point if there actually was a "message" to speak of. But titling your book "Godless:The Church of Liberalism" is really just a giant attack itself. So it's more like "attacking the attacker".

Oh, there’s a message there. It may only consist of, “everyone not me SUCKS! :cuss: ”, but it’s still a message.
Besides, that was meant for BEP, who seems to be a “Neo-con Cabal” conspiracy theorist. ;)

BucEyedPea
06-13-2006, 09:57 AM
You might have a point if there actually was a "message" to speak of. But titling your book "Godless:The Church of Liberalism" is really just a giant attack itself. So it's more like "attacking the attacker".

It is not a giant attack in itself. It's her opinion.
Have you read it. I,for one, have always felt liberals use govt as a church for social good by correcting what they consider wrong behavior including involuntary charity.

Cochise
06-13-2006, 10:03 AM
It is not a giant attack in itself. It's her opinion.
Have you read it. I,for one, have always felt liberals use govt as a church for social good by correcting what they consider wrong behavior including involuntary charity.

Interesting. I guess it's pretty much a religion without the disadvantages of a label that is perjorative in leftist circles.

Some people worship a supreme being. Liberals worship the state.

banyon
06-13-2006, 10:06 AM
It is not a giant attack in itself. It's her opinion.
Have you read it. I,for one, have always felt liberals use govt as a church for social good by correcting what they consider wrong behavior including involuntary charity.

If you put it that way, then the people "attacking the messenger" are just issuing their "opinion" as well.

Radar Chief
06-13-2006, 10:23 AM
Have you read it.

Nope, don’t plan to either.

HC_Chief
06-13-2006, 10:26 AM
If you put it that way, then the people "attacking the messenger" are just issuing their "opinion" as well.

Yep.

Gotta love the 1st amendment! :)

Clint in Wichita
06-13-2006, 10:56 AM
Why do you get so worked up over this woman? Don't get me wrong, its funny to watch, but does she really get to you this much?


Probably because so many complete morons take the whore seriously.

Pitt Gorilla
06-13-2006, 11:08 AM
Why do you get so worked up over this woman? Don't get me wrong, its funny to watch, but does she really get to you this much?I would argue that plagiarism is despicable act, regardless of who does it.

Bootlegged
06-13-2006, 11:24 AM
I would argue that plagiarism is despicable act, regardless of who does it.


I haven't even read this....but the left went nuts as soon as the book hit the shelves, regardless of this charge

HC_Chief
06-13-2006, 12:04 PM
I haven't even read this....but the left went nuts as soon as the book hit the shelves, regardless of this charge

heh, no kidding. On top of that, it appears some went to the trouble of cross-referencing the entire book searching for plagarism.

If she's so nasty, stupid, and irrelevant, why would the left get their panties in such a bind?

Sully
06-13-2006, 12:13 PM
If she's so nasty, stupid, and irrelevant, why would the left get their panties in such a bind?

Sadly, I don't think she's irrelevant, as she's at the top of Amazon's best seller list. That means someone needs to fight her stupidity as many are buying it.

HC_Chief
06-13-2006, 12:18 PM
Sadly, I don't think she's irrelevant, as she's at the top of Amazon's best seller list. That means someone needs to fight her stupidity as many are buying it.

By fighting it, they're promoting it. Bad press, good press, doesn't matter to people like her - as long as there's press, period!

I just don't get people getting all pissy about her work. I don't remember people flailing like this about Al Frankin's books. :shrug:

Sully
06-13-2006, 12:24 PM
By fighting it, they're promoting it. Bad press, good press, doesn't matter to people like her - as long as there's press, period!

I just don't get people getting all pissy about her work. I don't remember people flailing like this about Al Frankin's books. :shrug:


I agree.
I wish she would become irrelevant.
But, beyond the press, when you put out a book with the title she put one out with, it's gonna have buyers. People love to have their fears and hates reinforced. That forces those who disagree to put forth the reasoning for the disagreement and to engage in discussion about it.

Franken, though a name-caller, isn't nearly this inflammatory. he calls people liars, and then backs it up with proof. He backs every word of what he says with proof, not just lobbing hyperbole bombs. That's why it's so hard to attack what he says. It's all documented stuff.

HC_Chief
06-13-2006, 12:31 PM
Ihe calls people liars, and then backs it up with proof. He backs every word of what he says with proof, not just lobbing hyperbole bombs. That's why it's so hard to attack what he says. It's all documented stuff.

oh? http://www.frankenlies.com/

patteeu
06-13-2006, 12:34 PM
Ann Coulter says "DANCE!" and the liberals dance. Look at them go. ROFL

Sully
06-13-2006, 12:39 PM
oh? http://www.frankenlies.com/

Some of that is disappointing.
Some of it is a reach.
And at least one I found is completely taken out of context (purposefully, I assume) to make it look bad.
...I will concede that it looks like, at first glance, his documentation of "facts" is not as strong as I believed it was.

Sully
06-13-2006, 12:40 PM
Ann Coulter says "DANCE!" and the liberals dance. Look at them go. ROFL

So it's liberals making her book a best seller by buying it?
Interesting theory.

patteeu
06-13-2006, 12:44 PM
So it's liberals making her book a best seller by buying it?
Interesting theory.

Some are no doubt buying it (how else can they analyze it for plagarism for example), but where they're really helping her out is with all the publicity.

banyon
06-13-2006, 12:45 PM
She is about the most hyperbolic exaggerator I have ever seen in a public setting. Yesterday when Hannity and Colmes were giving her all the airtime she wanted (I think Hannity's probably hitting that :Lin: ), Coulter kept berating the NJ Congressman who was sitting next to her for trying to "burn her books". He kept saying "No, I'm here to disagree with the content," but she just basically kept yelling "Book Burner, Book Burner, NAANY NANNY BOO BOO!!"

When Colmes pointed out to her that Bush had used 9-11 Victims to make political points, her reponse was to say "But he's the President, presidents get to run on War! You'd better believe that FDR ran on WWII!"

Of course she is either too retarded or too dishonest to know that FDR was elected three times before the U.S. was involved in WWII whatsoever. The last time was really just "stay the course" and he didn't have to put much effort into it.

patteeu
06-13-2006, 12:52 PM
She is about the most hyperbolic exaggerator I have ever seen in a public setting. Yesterday when Hannity and Colmes were giving her all the airtime she wanted (I think Hannity's probably hitting that :Lin: ), Coulter kept berating the NJ Congressman who was sitting next to her for trying to "burn her books". He kept saying "No, I'm here to disagree with the content," but she just basically kept yelling "Book Burner, Book Burner, NAANY NANNY BOO BOO!!"

When Colmes pointed out to her that Bush had used 9-11 Victims to make political points, her reponse was to say "But he's the President, presidents get to run on War! You'd better believe that FDR ran on WWII!"

Of course she is either too retarded or too dishonest to know that FDR was elected three times before the U.S. was involved in WWII whatsoever. The last time was really just "stay the course" and he didn't have to put much effort into it.

You must have missed Dick Durbin on the Senate floor comparing our Gitmo operations to those of the Nazi's, the Soviets, and Pol Pot if that's a characteristic example of the most hyperbolic exaggerator you've ever seen in a public setting..

banyon
06-13-2006, 01:11 PM
You must have missed Dick Durbin on the Senate floor comparing our Gitmo operations to those of the Nazi's, the Soviets, and Pol Pot if that's a characteristic example of the most hyperbolic exaggerator you've ever seen in a public setting..

link? (I vaguely remember that he was misquoted)

patteeu
06-13-2006, 01:15 PM
link? (I vaguely remember that he was misquoted)

"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners." - Dick Durbin 14 June 2005

Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050616-121815-1827r.htm)

Coincidentally, tomorrow is the anniversary of his statement.

Cochise
06-13-2006, 01:33 PM
ROFL.

I think she's nutty. But like Michael Savage, I find her to make valid points sometimes and usually be entertaining.

The best part is how libs hop up and down and yell that she's irrelevant and stuff, but no one gives her more publicity than they do.

banyon
06-13-2006, 01:53 PM
"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners." - Dick Durbin 14 June 2005

Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050616-121815-1827r.htm)

Coincidentally, tomorrow is the anniversary of his statement.

Yep, out of context.

Here's the e-mail that gives the context:

When you read some of the graphic descriptions of what has occurred here -- I almost hesitate to put them in the record, and yet they have to be added to this debate. Let me read to you what one FBI agent saw. And I quote from his report:

On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold....On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.

Not only was he not exaggerating about the nature of the e-mail, he (unlike Coulter) apologized to anyone who was offended by his remarks.

Pitt Gorilla
06-13-2006, 02:30 PM
Ann Coulter says "DANCE!" and the liberals dance. Look at them go. ROFLCalling her on plagiarism is "dancing?" Am I dancing when I call my students on it as well?

Adept Havelock
06-13-2006, 05:09 PM
Why do you get so worked up over this woman? Don't get me wrong, its funny to watch, but does she really get to you this much?

Same reason I laugh so hard at those on the right who splutter and rant about Michael Moore, I suspect.

Two sides of the same coin.

JBucc
06-13-2006, 05:47 PM
She has more than one wife? That's disgusting.

patteeu
06-13-2006, 07:35 PM
Yep, out of context.

Here's the e-mail that gives the context:



Not only was he not exaggerating about the nature of the e-mail, he (unlike Coulter) apologized to anyone who was offended by his remarks.

You and I must have different ideas of how the Soviets, the Nazis, and Pol Pot treated their detainees, not to mention the scale of their abuses and the frequent lack of culpability of their targets.

Mass starvation and malnutrition, lack of medical treatment, human experimentation, extreme labor and mass murder. These are some of the things I think of when I think of Soviet Gulags, Nazi concentration camps, and Pol Pot's killing fields. None of these things are present in that e-mail.

patteeu
06-13-2006, 07:35 PM
Calling her on plagiarism is "dancing?" Am I dancing when I call my students on it as well?

Is there a lot of plagarism in math class?

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-13-2006, 07:48 PM
Fifty words, if truly borrowed, does clearly constitute plagiarism. But two words? If you are truthful and honest, you must be busting nearly every one of your students for plagarism then. If you are true to your principles, then that's the only course of action you could pursue.

Since you were the product of a rape, and clearly of inferior genetics ;), I'll spell it out for you more clearly. The two words can be pursued if need be, but generally is only done so in cases where it's a clear infringement of a rather infamous and unique saying by a various author. For case in point, let's extend it to three words: Imagine that I'm a newspaper columnist, and I keep referring to my space as a "No....Spin...Zone" and that I aim "Fair & Balanced". It's fairly obvious that I did not coin those words on my own, and it would be pretty easy to bust my balls for it. The two words thing would apply also to things like 'discoveries' made by the author that would not be common knowledge. One that I use a lot here is Social Darwinism. I assume that most of the people here are educated and savvy enough to know what this refers to, or can find it with a simple wiki search. However, were I telling this info to my class via a handout, I'd want to provide documentation that shows where I got that term, since it is clearly older than my 23 year-old ass.

Is there anything else I can help you out with, Mr. Iron Nails Ran In?

Dave Lane
06-13-2006, 08:09 PM
Why are the Democrats tryin' to pass book banning laws on Ann Coulter?

Link (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50626)

Two Democrats – Assemblywomen Joan Quigley and Linda Stender – are pushing to ban "Godless" from all bookstores in their state because of Coulter's biting criticism of four 9-11 widows known as "the Jersey Girls," who demanded investigations into President Bush's role in allowing the terrorist attacks.

Completely stupid to stoop to repugnent tactics on book banning. Who cares shes an idiot next topic.

Dave

Pitt Gorilla
06-13-2006, 08:13 PM
Is there a lot of plagarism in math class?Obviously, you haven't read much math ed/educational research. I'd suggest starting with some Brownell or Bruner. Piaget, Vygotsky, and Cobb are all staples as well.

patteeu
06-13-2006, 10:08 PM
Obviously, you haven't read much math ed/educational research. I'd suggest starting with some Brownell or Bruner. Piaget, Vygotsky, and Cobb are all staples as well.

Oh boy, I feel so inferior, LOL. So how many math students have you had to call on plagarism, Pitt?

Pitt Gorilla
06-13-2006, 10:35 PM
Oh boy, I feel so inferior, LOL. So how many math students have you had to call on plagarism, Pitt?2.

HC_Chief
06-14-2006, 08:11 AM
Oh boy, I feel so inferior, LOL. So how many math students have you had to call on plagarism, Pitt?

Obviously you're a knuckle-dragging peasant, patteeu. Muffy, call security!

/Thurston Howell III voice
/John flip-flop Kerry mentality

banyon
06-14-2006, 10:31 AM
You and I must have different ideas of how the Soviets, the Nazis, and Pol Pot treated their detainees, not to mention the scale of their abuses and the frequent lack of culpability of their targets.

Mass starvation and malnutrition, lack of medical treatment, human experimentation, extreme labor and mass murder. These are some of the things I think of when I think of Soviet Gulags, Nazi concentration camps, and Pol Pot's killing fields. None of these things are present in that e-mail.


Durbin didn't say our practices were were worse or equivalent to the Nazis, only that those particular practices described in the e-mail would be a subset of the practices of the Nazis. What other historical practice would you compare them to?

banyon
07-03-2006, 03:34 PM
COPYCATTY COULTER PILFERS PROSE: PRO


By PHILIP RECCHIA

July 2, 2006 -- Conservative scribe Ann Coulter cribbed liberally in her latest book, "Godless," according to a plagiarism expert.
John Barrie, the creator of a leading plagiarism-recognition system, claimed he found at least three instances of what he calls "textbook plagiarism" in the leggy blond pundit's "Godless: the Church of Liberalism" after he ran the book's text through the company's digital iThenticate program.

He also says he discovered verbatim lifts in Coulter's weekly column, which is syndicated to more than 100 newspapers, including the Fort Lauderdale (Fla.) Sun-Sentinel and Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle.

Barrie, CEO of iParadigms, told The Post that one 25-word passage from the "Godless" chapter titled "The Holiest Sacrament: Abortion" appears to have been lifted nearly word for word from Planned Parenthood literature published at least 18 months before Coulter's 281-page book was released.

A separate, 24-word string from the chapter "The Creation Myth" appeared about a year earlier in the San Francisco Chronicle with just one word change - "stacked" was changed to "piled."

Another 33-word passage that appears five pages into "Godless" allegedly comes from a 1999 article in the Portland (Maine) Press Herald.

Meanwhile, many of the 344 citations Coulter includes in "Godless" "are very misleading," said Barrie, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, where he specialized in pattern recognition.

"They're used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility - as if it's an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits," he told The Post.

Barrie says he also ran Coulter's Universal Press columns from the past 12 months through iThenticate and found similar patterns of cribbing.

Her Aug. 3, 2005, column, "Read My Lips: No New Liberals," about U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter, includes six passages, ranging from 10 to 48 words each, that appeared 15 years earlier in the same order in an L.A. Times article, headlined "Liberals Leery as New Clues Surface on Souter's Views."

But nowhere in that column does she mention the L.A. Times or the story's writer, David G. Savage.

Her June 29, 2005, column, "Thou Shalt Not Commit Religion," incorporates 10 facts on National Endowment for the Arts-funded work that originally appeared in the same order in a 1991 Heritage Foundation report, "The National Endowment for the Arts: Misusing Taxpayers' Money." But again, the Heritage Foundation isn't credited.

"Just as Coulter plays free and loose with her citations in 'Godless,' she obviously does the same in her columns," Barrie said.

Coulter did not respond to requests for comment.


http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/copycatty_coulter_pilfers_prose__pro_nationalnews_philip_recchia.htm

Baby Lee
07-03-2006, 04:01 PM
In related news, Jeffrey Dahmer was a notoriously stingy tipper.

patteeu
07-03-2006, 04:16 PM
Durbin didn't say our practices were were worse or equivalent to the Nazis, only that those particular practices described in the e-mail would be a subset of the practices of the Nazis. What other historical practice would you compare them to?

If the choice were between comparing them like Durbin did or to not comparing them at all, I would choose no comparison.

banyon
07-03-2006, 04:21 PM
If the choice were between comparing them like Durbin did or to not comparing them at all, I would choose no comparison.

wow. that sounds even worse.

"In all of recorded history...there is no comparison available for x"

patteeu
07-03-2006, 04:26 PM
wow. that sounds even worse.

"In all of recorded history...there is no comparison available for x"

ROFL

banyon
07-03-2006, 04:27 PM
In related news, Jeffrey Dahmer was a notoriously stingy tipper.

Well, I felt it bore mentioning that it appears to be worse than when I first posted this and also that Murdoch's paper was leading the charge.

I guess I could've started a new thread about it like Denise .

listopencil
07-05-2006, 04:36 PM
Bump.