Out of professional curiosity, I read the original NYT allegations. I guess I've seen dumber instances of plagiarism where students copied word-for-word from wikipedia and even forgot to take out the hyperlinks. But this was a particularly dumb move if the then-colonel had political aspirations at the time. It's one thing to think your work won't receive this kind of scrutiny at the time, but surely he had to know that every word he had every put to paper would be analyzed to this degree as a U.S. senator. A dangerous combination of stupidity and arrogance for a man who had risen to the authority of a colonel. My guess is that the DNC will pressure him into bowing out of the election at this point. In California, maybe the base wouldn't care if someone cheated at some place called "War College." In Montana, though, my guess is the people will not like it one bit. It's very prestigious to be selected from a state National Guard for resident War College, even more so for a small state like Montana. And he returned that honor by embarrassing them, or so it would seem. By the way, no one seems to be grasping this yet, but the content of his paper is just about 100% aligned with neo-conservative thought. (And by that I mean the actual ideology of neo-conservatives, not in the manner that some on this board use it, as a synonym for all that is evil and soulless in the world without really understanding what it means.) This shouldn't be surprising to anyone given that the papers he plagiarized were authored in the post-9/11 but pre-OIF timeframe when many on both sides of the political fence were of the opinion that our long-term security was tied in to forcing political and economic liberty on our enemies so that they wouldn't hate us anymore. It is surprising, though, that as a Democrat (I assume he was a Democrat then) he was espousing this kind of neo-conservative thought in 2007.