Coulterism and Reep Messaging

Chapman, "A Case for Impeachment," page 13: "Four Democratic fundraisers have stated that former DNC Finance Chairman Marvin Rosen explicitly advocated selling access to the President. . ."

Coulter, page 219: "At least four Democratic fund-raising officials have revealed that former DNC Finance Chairman Marvin Rosen explicitly advocated selling access to the president . . ."
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Coulter's a plagiarist, blah, blah, blah . . .

What catches my eye about this item from 2001 (dug up by TPMMuckraker) is the nature of the slight modifications Coulter made to the passage as she ripped it off.

"Four Democratic fundraisers" become "At least four" -- because, hey, four's at least four, but Coulter's version has the added bonus of suggesting that there might have been more.

"Fundraisers" become "fund-raising officials" -- enhancing their status, because Dem officials just sounds more, um, official? Of course, not every fundraiser is actually a fund-raising official (take Jack Abramoff), but since Coulter isn't sourcing the claim, she doesn't need to worry about being called on that sort of detail.

"Stated" becomes "revealed" -- because "revealed" conveys the idea of shining light on some dark secret, while statements are simply claims.

And, finally:

"President" becomes "president", because Reeps used to acknowledge that being elected PotUS didn't necessarily entitle an individual to the abject reverence partisans always seem to demand.

No comments: