"If it wasn't so stupid, it would be amusing," he said of the GOP's allegations. "(How can it be) plagiarism if it's donated from one person to another?"
Plagiarism is copying without attribution and has nothing to do with whether the text is "donated" (ie, used with permission) or not. What Kane's wife did is plagiarism, and Kane's statement is basically an admission thereof. Kane is klue-less, consistent with him having served as a consultant for disgraced ex-Illinois guv, Rod Blagojevich.
The AP story quoted one Erik Ugland, who seemed to understand what Kane did not:
Vinehout clearly plagiarized her husband's work, said Erik Ugland, an associate professor of communications at Marquette University.
"It would certainly strain credulity to suggest this was coincidental," Ugland said. "On the face of it, it seems undeniable it's plagiarism. The only remaining question was whether it was deliberate or inadvertent. It's hard not to suspect the former."
Ugland cautioned plagiarism is an ethical violation, not a legal one.
However, Ugland, in turn, doesn't understand that plagiarism doesn't turn on intent. It's copying without attribution, period.
People in that neck of the woods may have been confused by the "inadvertent" plagiarism saga down at SIU with Glenn Poshard.
**Kane's advice to Blago on taxes wasn't well-received either. See
Illinois Economic Consultant Continues Misguided Campaign for Gross Receipts Tax
Blogger profile: Douglas is an economist and President of Program Analysis Inc., a consulting firm that specializes in economic and public policy issues. He is a former Illinois state representative who represented Springfield from 1974-1982. One of his current clients is the Office of Management and Budget of the State of Illinois that sought his help with the economic effects of the gross receipts tax.