Rating: 
Summary: Oops, she did it again...
Review: After reading this book I can't tell if Ann Coulter is evil or just plain stupid. I found her arguments lacking serious logical merit. Throughout the book Coulter shows no interest in making a logical point but rather seeks to destroy her opponent's and silence dissident opinions. Each page of this book was like reading one paranoid accusation after another (based on what are probably her own neurotic impulses).Ann Coulter reminds me of a modern day Ava Braun in a Prada suit. The girl who used to get drunk at college frat parties on jello shots only to go home with various members of the football team. The girl who woke up one day and decided to salute the party to the farthest extremes by spouting their rhetoric with hateful furor.
Rating:
Summary: Angers my conservative side far more than my liberal side
Review: I consider myself a political independent whose views vary from the left to the right depending on the issue, and I have good friends all along the political spectrum. Foreign policy, the subject of this book, is one of the subjects where I tend to be right of center, and it is the right side of me that cringes at this book, for it throws conservative views into absolute disrepute. Whenever I argue from the conservative viewpoint in regards to foreign policy, I find myself facing an audience unwilling to even consider my points of argument because they are starting to associate them with Coulter, who honestly sounds like she might have copied some of these passages from Hitler's speeches. This is hindering conservative's efforts to bring more people to their side, not helping. The best thing she could do for her cause would be to lighten both her tone and stance and perhaps try to reason with liberals instead of entrench them and bring more potential conservatives to the left out of horrified reaction to her. I agree with another reviewer who pointed out that Michael Moore is the liberal version of Coulter, and that we would all be better off if the two of them would just find a secluded place to scream at each other all day so that the rest of us could actually enjoy some intelligent debate. Whether you're a conservative looking for an intelligent book to provide ammunition in debates or a liberal hoping for a glimpse of the mind of the enemy or a taste of variety, there are much, much better books out there for you to spend your money on.
Rating:
Summary: unreasoned bitterness -- a disgrace to conservatism
Review: What an amazing volume of bitterness this is. While one might expect extremists on the right or left to hate even moderates on the other side, sometimes even centrists or moderates on their own side, it is rare to find such hate expressed in print. Usually it turns up only in the company of like-minded extremists. What does Ann Coulter hate? "Liberals", she says, but by her definition that includes everything from the moderate right to the far left. She starts with these words: "Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason." She starts her name-calling in the first sentence of the book -- even in the title, actually. "Whenever the nation is under attack," she claims, "liberals side with the enemy." It is her position that McCarthyism is nothing more than a liberal myth meant to hide US liberals' alleged lack of patriotism and support for enemy nations. Who does she cite first as evidence for her claims? Joe McCarthy, the namesake of one of the most shameful stories in US history since slavery. She denounces free speech as "a one-way ratchet for traitors." She even suggests that Irving Berlin, if he were alive today, might write a song titled "Good-bye Walla Walla, I'm off to Smash Allah", as a follow-up to his "God Bless America." I hope he would have better taste than that. Later in the book, Coulter denounces Democrats for getting the US into the Vietnam War, praises Republicans for pursuing it as a noble cause, then again denounces liberals in Congress for preventing the US from winning it. So which is it? A war that the foolish Democrats got the US into, or a noble cause? That's part of a blanket statement that Democrats lose wars -- never mind the fact that the Democrats were in power during World War II. Coulter provides numerous footnotes (or, more properly, endnotes) in her book, but she apparently counts on readers not to check whether the endnotes actually support the main text that refers to them. Often, the endnotes reveal how the main text takes things out of context, misrepresents the source, or has nothing at all to do with it. That is sloppy scholarship, but then this is a work of hateful name-calling, not scholarship. I was appalled with every bit of the book that I could bring myself to read. Her writing is full of bitterness. It lacks logical consistency, denouncing "liberals" for things that are admirable in conservatives. She may be a well-educated person, but that's not at all evident from the book. For conservative readers, I recommend George F Will most highly. I have not read his books, but I enjoy his columns, which are well reasoned and gently worded. Even liberal readers who rarely agree with him will appreciate his rational expression of conservative viewpoints. Bill O'Reilly is not nearly as skilled a writer as Will, but he's much better than Coulter, and he is an excellent conservative television entertainer. Don't waste your time on Coulter's ill-reasoned bile. Liberals, read it only for outraged laughs, and be sure not to buy it. My impressions are based on reading only a few chapters of the book, which I did to compare five current political books. The others were _Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right_ by Al Franken, _Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush's America_, by Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose, _Dude, Where's My Country?_ by Michael Moore, and _Who's Looking Out for You?_ by Bill O'Reilly. The best of the bunch were _Lies_ and _Bushwhacked_. Franken was funnier and more entertaining to read, but Ivins and Dubose were more focused and heavier on detailed research. Moore's was mildly amusing, but heavy on name-calling and not nearly as fun as his movies. O'Reilly's seemed like little more than a compilation of his newspaper editorial columns, and was rather boring -- like Moore, O'Reilly is much more effective on-screen than in print. This one was by far the worst; it was little more than a lot of hateful name-calling and misleading quotations, without even the sense of humor that made Moore's name-calling amusing.
Rating:
Summary: What did I ever do to Ann Coulter?
Review: Wow Wow oh wow I believe I side with Al Franken when I say that Ann Coulter is an absolute nutcase. From sentence one she violently attacks liberals for being anti-American and conscious committers of treason. Now I don't know about any other liberals, maybe I missed the annual treason meeting flyer, but I haven't ever committed treason. Not ever. And, as those of us who read "Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them" by Al Franken, Ann's "facts" are often guilty of that crime against her. I am all for intelligent and poignant political books, but if this is the best Ann Coulter has to offer, I am not impressed. My real question, however, is this: Ann coulter, What did I ever do to you?
Rating: 
Summary: a bit over the top
Review: Coulter's work is a bit over the top. She has some pretty good ideas (though not all), but then she just keeps speaking. Treason loses all credibility because Coulter won't stick to her philosophy or the facts (though I'm not sure of the accuracy of all her facts), but she has to go into name calling--let me tell you, not a page goes by that she doesn't call someone or some group some name. Like I said, there are some good ideas contained within the book, but you have to wade past so much dreck to get to them. Pass this one by.
Rating:
Summary: Poor thing doesn't know how to focus.
Review: Whatever case Coulter may have gets buried in an onslought of marginally relevant sarcasm and dissembling. This book panders to those who get an adrenaline high from name calling, which may be more fun than a reasoned analysis, like Doritos are more fun than broccoli. As intellectual nutrition, it's way negative.
Rating:
Summary: cut out the sacrcasim and you may have something
Review: Ann Coulter does provide some good information in Treason. Most of the book deals with McCarthyism and fighting communishm from the end of WWII to the end of the the Vietnam War. She provides some useful evidence such as the Venona Project which provided links between the Soviet Union and spies in the America as well as giving explanations of MyCarthy to demonstrate that he had reasons to believe what he did and that he may have been mistreated by the left and textbook writers. It also deals with how party politics influenced the Cold War such as the end of the Vietnam war. Coulter also provides some information on the conservative side of the current war on terrorism by dealing with allegations of misconduct by Attorney General Ashcroft and the Justice Department as well as issues such as racial profiling. The only problem is that Coulter tries to make wisecracks and sarcasim that seem to take away from any sort of meaningful points that she might have.
Rating: 
Summary: ALL HAIL SATAN...i mean Ann Coulter!
Review: THIS BOOK IS AMAZING! i mean WOW! i've read it cover to cover, and i just can't get enough! it really grabbed my attention on the FIRST PAGE when she used the phrase "third-world savages"! AWESOME! just like we're in the 50's!
Ann proves you dont have to be an ugly redneck with a mullet, to be a lying, peace-hating bigot!
She beats the pants off these so called "american political minds": Noam Chomsky? please, like working at MIT means anything! Howard Zinn? so what if Columbus was a horrible guy? i'm rich because he killed natives. AWESOME! Michael Parenti? How can he call USA a rogue nation. we should get rid of him. i don't care how many treaties we have to break to do it! See? Being an ignorant wretch is REALLY FUN! you should try it!
Ann Coulter did.
GO GET 'EM ANN!
Rating:
Summary: Treason
Review: Ann Coulter doesn't pull any punches! She names names and documents where she found the information. She shows that the Venona Project,declassified in 1995, proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss were guilty. (By the way, the Venona Project is online for your personal observation.)
And so I say, thank you, Ann Coulter, for saying what needed to be said about left-wing liberals liars.
Rating:
Summary: Funny Stuff
Review: I got a good laugh out of the review called "got them liberals on the run." I really hope that it was a sarcastic joke imitating right-wing readers of this book. Otherwise, I'm really scared to know that there are people like that in this country. As far as the book goes, it is poorly researched, and hard to identify the sources as they come in the form of endnotes, not footnotes. It will not change anyone's views, but it will push people further to the left or the right, wherever they were already.
| 
