Rating: 
Summary: Typical right wing mcarthyite fantasy
Review: Coulter's book is all about rescuing the reputaion of that nice guy McCarthy. Turns out according to Coulter that Joe was not the lying and malicious right wing goon who tried to turn the US into a police state, he was the courageous fighter against communism that he claimed to be.Missing from this book are the real facts about McCarthy's life and crusades. Like the fact that it was the Republican led senate that finally censured him. Coulter will no doubt get plenty of sales from Fox news watchers and the radical right.
Rating:
Summary: BUYing this book would be treason
Review: I'll admit right off the bat that I did not finish this book. I read the first few chapters and flipped thru the rest. However, I get the basic idea... Besides the fact that her research is shoddy, her premis thin, and her writing style mediocre, I find it troubling that people are buying and reading this book at all, much less agreeing with her. Her view of the world is very skewed, and extremely one-sided. Rather than rant about how stupid and dangerous this book is, I would recommend another book to the reader who is curious about liberty and freedom in a democratic society: "On Liberty", by John Stuart Mill. One of his ideas was that no matter how stupid or dangerous an idea, there are redeeming qualities to ANY idea since at the very least it helps illuminate the positive qualities of its opposite idea. In this light, "Treason" demonstrates why liberal ideas are so necessary to the preservation of democracy and counterbalnaces the side-effects of capitalism. Other than this, the book "Treason" could be useful as toilet paper... maybe. But than again, maybe not. Anyway, not recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: If the truth hurts, toooooo bad
Review: Ann Coulter is a compiler of facts, not reinvention of truth/history, this makes many people unconfortable this is truly a shame but truth hurts someimes. On the Joe McCarthy part, I remember watching some of the TV back in the 50ies and I was unconfortable and did not like Mr Joe McCarthy, then low and behold most of his statements matches the Soviet spy files we were aloud to check. Ann Coulter has matched the facts,spy records with McCarthy and most of the time he was right, sorry if it doesnt fit our need for myths and warm fuzzy feelings.
Rating:
Summary: Pure garbage
Review: This book is more hate-filled neocon drivel that continues to deepen the political gap between decent, moderate, tolerant people on one hand and Coulter's crowd of McCarthy-supporting, vitriolic hate-mongers who remind me of German national socialists in the 1930s. This is a dangerous, damaging book.
Rating: 
Summary: Great writing style but LOTS of name calling
Review: In Slander, Ann Coulter authored a book about a truly serious subject, had spent a lot of time documenting her argument (even though some critics made a convincing argument that some of the documentation was inaccurate), and wrote a highly lively book. If she lapsed into the same "sin" that she contended those on the left indulged in, there was still the main argument and she made her case relatively well. In Treason there is the Good News and the Bad News. The Good News is that once again she has written a highly lively book, and done lots of research. The Bad News is that this could be titled Slander since it is has lots of name calling, accusations, etc. aimed at the left -- and indulges in what Coulter seemingly decried in her LAST book (this time aimed at her political foes). To put it simply: if you're a conservative and believe your opponents have taken stances that hurt U.S. security, or are traitors and have been traitors, you'll absolutely love it. If you're a moderate or liberal and believe people may differ on policy without being traitors, you'll absolutely hate it. If you go into it with an open mind it won't convince you because of all the name calling and demonization, the same kind of thing she argued against in her last book. Treason will be great for those who agree with Ann Coulter, won't win over those who have open minds but aren't into name calling, and will be totally ignored by those who disagree with her. It IS a lively book, but you have to enjoy books written by authors who seem as if they're perpetually angry.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read for All Who Love America
Review: A masterful work! Ann did her homework and presents an overwhelming case exposing the Left and the Democratic Party for its treachory and treason over the past half century. Her witty style, reasoned logic, and well researched facts made reading this book thoroughly enjoyable and enlightening. It will make you laugh and it will make you mad as hell. This is a must read for any serious minded American who cares for his or her country.
Rating:
Summary: I'm completely amused by these reviews....
Review: especially the one by the person who claims so many Americans are "boarder-line illiterate" (um...that would be "borderline", hon). Thanks for the laugh, though. Fun way to start my day.
Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating book
Review: Treason is a fascinating read. Her chapters on McCarthy, and Alger Hiss are fascinating. I found the chapter on Hiss particularly striking - it agreed perfectly with what my parents (who lived through the time) told me about the case. "Treason" is more like "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" than "Slander" - less entertaining and more serious.
Rating: 
Summary: Rewrites history and Skips Important Events and Facts.
Review: How can she write about about McCarthy and not mention his campaign in 1949 on the behalf of the Nazi SS Officers convicted of war crimes in the massacre of 83 Americans in Malmedy during the battle of the bulge. The S.S. officers were sentenced to death but McCarthy claimed they were framed and set up by Americans. She also fails to mention the Voice or America investigation which proved to be an outragous waste of time and money. She blames liberals for his downfall, when infact it was President Eisenhower and a causus of G.O.P. senators including the current Presidents Grandfather, Prescott Bush, who voted to censure him along with democrats. She repeatedly uses quotes out of context and uses them to make a point that is not true. Anyone whoe reads this book should also look for themselves into what she states as fact. She is pushing an agenda not truth, using twisted evidence and name calling.
Rating:
Summary: a given audience
Review: I think this book is playing to a specific audience - the tried and true conservatives that run the government and other like them. But this isn't bad. I don't agree with everything because I am not this kind of person, but the book is pretty well written and it is not as badly documented as some reviewers say. I give it three stars (middle ground) because I think some of the author's conclusions are too much, but I don't agree with the people who give it 1 star because it does have merit. Anybody not understand?
| 
