Rating: 
Summary: The Right's ...
Review: ...P>Coulter's revisionist history of the McCarthy era is quite telling. Never mind that innocent people had their lives and career destroyed by McCartthy's ultimately self promoting grandstanding and never mind that it was the REPUBLICAN party that eventually censured him -- not the Democrats that Coulter so enjoys painting with one sweeping broad brush as pinko lefties. But in Coulterland one should never let the facts get in the way of the bucks one can rake in by catering to the lowest common denominator.I'll give her this. Coulter knows her audience and knows just the kind of red meat that will get them marching into bookstores (where they no doubt are shocked to see that there are so many different kinds of books for sale) but ultimately this is not a compliment. Pity she can't, or won't, take the opportunity to enlighten them rather than just pandering and feeding their fear and ignorance over some vast, left wing conspiracy.
Rating:
Summary: Classic rhetorical pseudo-science...
Review: Ann Coulter's TREASON is one long revisionist diatribe, no different from any other extremist work of persuasive literature in the guise of an academic treatise. Think about why Jerry Springer has an audience and you've grasped the fundamental clockworks behind what Ann is up to here. Anyone can write a book and pass it off as scientific by slapping references at the back (fragile, uneducated minds simply LOVE bulging indexes and footnote sections as a way to say "see, this book backs up what it has to say!"). Nothing wrong with writing a book based on your "researched" opinions, but a word to the wise: any book that spouts generalizations like "the left is out to DESTROY the country" should give you great pause. That kind of impassioned rhetoric belongs in an op-ed, sure, but not in a scientific document. In short, if you're a conservative looking for a back-clapping highly emotional pep talk, pick this one up. If you're a scholar looking for a carefully researched emotionally neutral perspective, complete avoidance is strongly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: "You can't handle the truth"
Review: What's so very funny about all the "one-starred" reviews from whiny liberals who obviously didn't read the book, is that they have no answer to Ann's central premise. That, when Soviet files became public in the last 10 years or so, it showed that McCarthy was mostly correct!!! That Soviet spys HAD infiltrated the US government in shockingly high levels. That Roosevelt and Truman (among others) did everything they could to shelter them. And that the liberal press (NY Times, etc) practically buried the story of the Soviet files. Call Ms. Coulter every vile name in the book. Question her motives. But, you can't or won't offer up a suitable arguement that McCarthy didn't due the country a great service by trying to root out communism from the US political hierarchy.
Rating:
Summary: ms. coulter and revisionist history, redux
Review: more outright distortions of facts, more choppy quotes, and more gradeschool namecalling-classic coulter! makes a joke of political discourse, much as her left-wing counterpart michael moore. half-baked platitudes aplenty! ah, to read a book like this is to blindside all common sense and adhere to a political party as though it were the mouthpiece of god. ms. coulter lives in a bizarro fantasy world where any form of disagreement is "treasonous." oddly enough, i'm thinking this is the book she should have titled "slander."
Rating:
Summary: Required reading for real americans
Review: Treason is as informative as it is hilarious. Ann Coulter's sarcasm will have you laughing throughout the entire read, unless you're a red diaper gasbag liberal.
Rating:
Summary: Treason is RIGHT
Review: Ann is a poopy-head! Her facts are correct, her presumptions are accurate, her conjecture is sound. But she is a poopy-head! Na, na, na, pooopy-head! BTW: Why doesn't the Talking Points Memo allow feedback? Every other blog in the universe offers a "comments" section, but not that one. Why is that?
Rating: 
Summary: Good facts, but not a history lesson
Review: 'Treason' contains some very good facts, especially dealing with the McCarthy hearings, the Rosenbergs, and other Cold War events. However, do not look at this book as a being a history lesson. Very relevant facts concerning liberals AND conservatives are not included when dealing with these historical events. All in all, if you liked Coulter's previous work, or either of Bill O'Reilly's books, this one ranks right up there. However, if you are a student of history and not a student of partisan politics, look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: I smell a whiff of facism in the air...
Review: If this book shows us anything - its that the true agenda of the right wing in this country has become so extremist that the next logical step for their political agenda is facism. Let me remind everyone that this is a DEMOCRACY - or suppose to be, anyways. Democracy means being able to think critically, speak without fear of being labelled un-patriotic or treasonous, and maintain individual rights. If it were up to Ann Coulter and those who agree with her, we should lose these values of democracy tomorrow. If it were up to them, political opposition parties would be banned in America, and we would on our way towards a totalitarian state. This is NOT a debate about liberal vs. conservative, but instead, democracy vs. totalitarian rule. These are truly dangerous times in America, when you consider the kind of influence these extremists have right now in our media and government. Wake up, America, before its too late.
Rating:
Summary: Coulter Bigot, and unapologetic for it
Review: It's pretty hard to take any book that deals so sanctimoniously with McCarthy (calls him a "poet" at some point), defending him and his activities at every turn. The true Joe McCarthy, drunken paranoid hick that he was, is never revealed. It is also hard to take any book seriously that has statements that refer to the Japanese army as "savage Oriental beasts." ... And that contains lines such as: "The principal difference between fifth columnists and the cold war versus the war on terrorism is that you could sit next to a communist in a subway without asphyxiating," thereby, of course, implying that Middle Easterners stink. Or perhaps she was refering to the odor coming off of homegrown terrorists like Timmy McVeigh or Eric Rudolph. I'm not surprised that the book is ranked so high on Amazon (#2 as of posting), or that it garners 3 star rating. Coulter, like the George W. administration, continually plays to the racism still present in large segments of white America. This book will resonate well with those pathetics who already think like her, people to whom all Arabs are just camel jockeys anyways (with no distinction between Muslims, non-Muslims, Iraqi, Saudi, Iranian). The rest of us who are a bit more evolved are simply disgusted by this book, written by someone that barely deserves the title of human. It's quite sad, really. Right wing revolutions never last ... there's a reason why progressives are called Progressives. You just cannot stop things like Blacks getting educated alongside Whites, interracial marriages, equal opportunities for women and minorities, women's rights to their bodies, homosexuals' rights to equal treatment, etc. The right has short-lived triumphs, and then loses BIG ... every time. Coulter knows it ... O'Reily, Hannity, Savage, Limbaugh ... they all know it. And they hate the inevitability of it. But they will lose. :)
Rating:
Summary: Rules of Evidence: Proven Again
Review: The Rules of Court for almost every court in the US below the Appellate level, include Rules of Evidence that form civil actions. Most of these Rules are a means to guide the quest for truth.
One of the Rules of Evidence is that a showing of Habit or continued behavior and 'overiding routine of action' is sufficient to prove an accused's behavior in a given instance of civil contention. So if one claimed that another person did an act which damaged the first person and the other person can be shown to have habitually performed the act; the Rules allow the demonstration of past acts to prove the contention in favor of the complainant. Where the criminal burden of proof is 'beyond doubt' ; the civil burden is simply a 'preponderance of evidence' which can include the showing of habitual acts by a defendant. What Ann Coulter has done in Treason is to follow these rules in the presentation of facts. She has proved her thesis by showing habits of behavior by an entire group of people whom she identifies by name, date and action. Treason defines a pattern of behavior, documents the details of each aspect of that repeated syndrome, and concludes that Socials/Democrats are often today, as they have been for many years; traitors to the US. Since she has already defined exactly each phrase, each lander and each lie that will be used against her for writing Treason in her previous book Slander; one may simply listen to the various liberal socialist persons' response. By each of their name calling, accusations and rants you realize exactly how fully, to what degree, they are anti-American. No one on the Left will engage Ann Coulter in substantive discourse any more than they will Rush, Sean, or other conservatives. What is now proved without recourse or recovery is the depth of depravity to which these people have actually descended. Treason is the beginning of the final years of the socialist/marxist movement since it articulates acts against the nation that must have been kept out of common knowledge in order for those who performed them to be allowed public tolerance. Now that the facts are again within common conversation, liberals have no recourse and will be met with indulgent laughter at every turn. Ann Coulter penned the singularly best line in the '00 Florida S.C. Fiasco when she remarked about the reasons for those various justice's hearing deterioration, and in Treason she continues her reign.
| 
