Please submit this article as a separate submission to HN. I think it's a better article than the one kindly submitted to open this thread.

The Slate article slagging on Lehrer is of no inherent interest to hackers. His speech, self-serving and dishonest as it may have been, addresses some interesting and little-discussed aspects of psychology, work, and knowledge. That is something I appreciate on HN. Of course the GP provides valuable context for the speech, and I'm glad it was shared, but it doesn't stand by itself as a top-level post.

How could you possibly evaluate whether this article was correct without having read Lehrer's original article?

For what it's worth, I think this whole thing is dumb. The main problem with Lehrer isn't that he plagiarized a few articles, but that his writing is mostly b-level propaganda to begin with.

I agree that you should submit this. It's a very good commentary on the article, scathing though it might be.

Thanks for the link, I did not know who he was previously.