Rating: 
Summary: Pseudo intellectual Appealing to knee jerks
Review: Ann Coulter is an example of the pseudo intellectuals on television, with their arrogant, know-it-all attitude. The American people are smart enough to reject fundamentalist politics. No doubt, Coulter would have been standing behind Joseph McCarthy cheering him on. Don't waste your money on a book that might as well have been written in Sanskrit. By the time she is dancing around and around, getting dizzy, and falling down, along with her house of false truisms, the public will have moved on to a better world.
Rating: 
Summary: Liberals Are Traitors - And History Proves It
Review: It's this simple; liberals are traitors, and history proves this out by example...over and over and over again.All Ann is doing (with her razor sharp wit) is pointing out that liberals have a history of siding with the enemy in every contest or war in which America has been involved. Historical example after historical example is used to point out liberal's support of every enemy America has ever had in the last sixty years. She also clearly points out how the left has demonized "McCarthy" who actually exposed the traitors in our midst, and then worked to make questioning the left's "patriotism" off-limits and thus allowing the left and liberals to attack this country time and again, without being called on their anti-Americanism. In fact, the liberals simply run and hide behind the "McCarthyism" mantra, and have so twisted the argument that they have tried to make their anti-Americanism seem patriotic. Ann lets them have it with both barrels in this book, and it is delicious! It is quite simple: liberals actions over the decades have consistently met the definition of "treason" - they are traitors - and they get vicious if they're called on it. Ann is calling them on it. So, of course, the book will be met with all the venom and viciousness the liberal left can vomit up.
Rating: 
Summary: Ann Coulter is outspoken anticommunist
Review: Ann Coulter is outspoken anticommunist, the right-wing extremist, claiming the extraordinary accusations of treason and subversion in her book. She became increasingly paranoid and isolated after publishing "Treason".
I read Ann Coulter's worthless, moronic book throught to the end rather quickly, trying to understand what her point was in writing such a laughable garbage. Inaccurate, out of context quoting is a motif of the book. I find them to be unprincipled, selective, illogical. Her writing is inspired by a reactionary, one-dimensional 'which-side-of-the-fence-are-you-on' dialectic. What her writing lacks (as does much similar writing) is a foundation in an understanding of the complexities and interdependence of various disciplines. Her diatribes are informed by a shallow, selective reading of history, philosophy and political science. It's too bad so many folks will read this who still have not read Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Friedrich Engels, Michael Moore, Stephen Hawking, James Carville and Paul Begala , David Brock, Leo Tolstoy, etc., etc. I would advise picking up any book by any of the aforementioned authors before reading "Treason".
The book is a propaganda campaign for Coulter's shrill, smug, elitist, lopsided, and hypocritical views, with no capacity for thinking with both sides of the brain, and possessing the intellectual density of mayonnaise. There are no thoughtful essays, here. No interesting ruminations or insightful perceptions on the nuances of life. It has no ideas. Ann Coulter is a hypocritical harpie totally incapable of seeing subtleties or nuance, totally humorless. She is a lunatic, a person with serious mental problems and deep-rooted anger. Don't read this poorly written book.
Rating:
Summary: Better than Slander!
Review: I went ahead and bought this book the first day, along with "The Dittohead Bartender's Guide", and it wasn't a let down. After reading "Slander" a year ago, I didn't think a better conservative book could be written, but I was wrong. "Treason" is ten times better! I also highly recommend "Bob Cobb's Dittohead Bartender's Guide", a recommendation of Rush Limbaugh. Both books will keep any conservative happy for hours on end!
Rating:
Summary: One of the Lying Liars
Review: Ann Coulter has one of the cover shots on Al Franken's book (due in October) Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right. I hope he gets to add some of the ludicrous material in this book. It was Reagan who worked with Saddam Hussein. Both he and Carter supported Osama in Afghanistan. Now, Coulter is accusing "liberals" of treason. That the blonde arch-conservative commentator, who loves to wear somewhat split mini-skirts, has published another screed should come, as no surprise. The right wing love to hate, and she throws them red meat, even if it is really baloney.
Rating:
Summary: Unfortunately I decided to try this one out
Review: I found this book on several listmanias, and was convinced that it was going to be a real eye opening read. Of course, once I checked out the books page I found out that it hasn't even been released yet - so I anxiously waited to find out what the liberals are doing. Coulter has lost her mind with this piece of work, where it seems that she is using the lever of the fear of terrorism to point fingers every which way except to her extreme religious values. Well, it's like they say, "if you have an average IQ then about 50% of the people are dumber than you." This book was written for the said 50%
Rating: 
Summary: Coulter Shock
Review: Ann Coulter depicts and explains historical events with vituperative power-words in "Treason." The title alone is quite direct, and it seems Coulter went for shock in her follow-up to the popular "Slander." There are many strong words that honestly border on histrionic. They are definitely provocative. Fightin' words. There will be shrill reactions by those that sit on the opposite side of the aisle. Look for these responses in the media, after June 24, '03. Taking snippets of recent history from primarily post-WWII to present, Coulter puts us back into the waste-basket yawn of the mass-marketed and narrow minded Conservative vs. Liberal debate in a bemused America. How old can this get? Can it get more boring? Taking us on the superficial historical ride again, over the most common publicly known past events and major eras such as the Cold War, fall of the USSR, and today's War on T. She even drops Alger Hiss's name to woo us. Interestingly, she had the individual fortitude (which deserves respect) to claim McCarthy and his actions were noble, just, and dignified. What this neurotic and failed Senator did was an attempt to re-enact the Salem Witch Trials. Ruining the lives of innocents, and spurring the anti-communist paranoia which led to the creation and cementing of the omnipotent power-triad: the military-industrial complex. The Pentagon + Federal government + defense contractor corporations. The triumvirate that is now running America. In large part, the result of the Red Paranoia Scare, and the Cold War. (Eisenhower publicly warned us about the above noted triad in the 1950s.) Coulter's re-hashed arguments are scrapings from the surface that we've been pummeled with for decades. Where's the research? Can she tell us anything new? A boring, needless, and shallow historical analysis of something no one cares to debate in 2003: 1. Whether Reagan brought down the Soviet Union or 2. whether it was a self-inflicted implosion. Try a combination of both. The degrees of significance which 1) and 2) comprise one's mentally limited 'zero sum pie' doesn't depend on objective research, but which portion of the political spectrum the arm-chair policy analyst sits. This question, and the world itself, is far too complex to give one single, categorical, solitary answer in the first place. Contrary to Coulter's view, the U.S. did not win the Cold War. American defense contractors, nations of Europe, and the continent of Asia did. The alarming rate of U.S. taxation, and its' mammoth military-industrial complex are the results of the 1945-1991 struggle. Where is the peace dividend promised in 1989? We're still waiting. Now the new struggle to keep the mouths of defense contractors and Pentagon officials filled is the War on T. Even City Port officials in the U.S. are begging for millions and millions of dollars now from the Feds. She reminds us of the long-standing mis-held positions of the "treasonous" lefties and the 'righteous, nation loving' righties. This book is a reiteration of the rants of shrill television yellars such as Buchanan, Carville, Novak, Press, and a guy named "Tucker." The monkeys who take the stage an feign secret knowledge of what the rest of us should be aware. "Liberals have a preternatural gift for always striking a position on the side of treason," writes Coulter. "Everyone says liberals love America, too. No, they don't." She uses media buzz words like 'treason' in a time of post 9/11 bumper-sticker bliss by a nation of people who have no clue if the dubious media is telling them truth anymore.
Add this book to the buffoonery of "hollering" T.V. talk shows that leaves the audience more polarized, dense, and uninformed than they were in the beginning. She's now achieved what she set out do to: become the self-anointed spin doctor for the "whatcha-ma-call-'ems." Some Liberals are misguided whiners, but if they are to be pummeled, proper depictions of history and not revisionism, should be the avenue of discourse. "Treason," misnomer and all, will provide more sales and profits to the glut of crass and uninformative political spin books already piled sky-high. This will shoot up to the top ten, then fall into the abyss.
Rating:
Summary: Just the facts . . . with provocative opinion
Review: Ann Coulter, an effective legal scholar and political commentator, has marshalled the facts regarding the question, "Which party is more patriotic?" Using definitive scholarship on Joseph McCarthy from primary sources (the original transcripts of Senate hearings and his speeches), the Verona papers (the translation of intercepted Soviet cables), and a plethora of newpaper quotes, she shows that:
1. There were spies in the State department, as Senator McCarthy said.
2. Presidents Roosevelt and Truman did nothing about them, other than promote them, after being notifief of their communist sympathies.
3. Even when the communists were removed from government, their lives continued smoothly, either being employed by academia or by the Soviet or Chinese government.
4. The staunchest anti-communists were Senator McCarthy, President Nixon, and President Reagan, and they were the most vilified by the Democrats. Her provocative opinion is that since liberal Democrats consistently support Communists and oppose the U.S. defending itself, they are de facto guilty of treason, by giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If you want to read a challenge to the conventional interpretation of the Cold War and Senator McCarthy, be sure to read this book.
Rating:
Summary: you liberal whackos
Review: To the liberal whacko "reviewer" trying to smear Coulter as an anti-Semite because this said "reviewer" decided to substitute "Jew" for "liberal" in some of her quotes: you are missing the whole point buddy. If it DID say "Jew" she would indeed be wrong, and a hopeless racist, anti-semite, judging fellow Americans on superficialities such as religion, skin color, etc. But that ISN'T what she said... she said "liberal", not Jew... "liberal" actually makes her statements TRUE, and not anti-semitic in the least... the modern-day intonation of the term "liberal" (in case some of you out there are not aware) refers NOT to such a superficiality as skin color or gender, but rather a VOLUNTARY ideology... the way you choose to see the world- ie, government is always the solution, cradle-to-grave, no one is responsible for the actions they take... In this sense, she is 100% correct when she states that liberals are consistently on the wrong side of history... usually the anti-US, anti-freedom side!... Nice try, go back to the drawing board you LIBERAL (not "Jew") demagogues!
Rating:
Summary: Libs.....
Review: "according to Merriam-Webster: it is "a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the political and civil liberties." Now that *is* evil, right?" No, but that definition is centuries old, and it applies to Classical liberalism. It hardly applies to modern day liberals which is exactly how Coulter is using the word. That old definition also says: "individual freedom from restraint especially by government regulation in all economic activity and usually based upon free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard" Does anyone know any liberals who believe in lack of "government regulation in all personal economic activity"? "Allow me to quote her in one instance that perfectly embodies the entire aim of the book; it's from the very first page, and it's fully accessible from Amazon: "Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence. The left's obsession with the crimes of the West and their Rousseauian respect for Third World savages all flow from this subversive goal." Is she serious? And, furthermore, does she know that if one were to substitute the word 'liberal' in her book with the word 'Jew,' she would sound like Joseph Goebbels?" And here we have the typical liberal tactic of dragging in the "nazi" comparisons. "(Here's another sampling from Treason, complete with a simple substitution written in brackets: "Whether they are rooting for the atheistic regimes of Stalin and Mao, satanic suicide bombers and terrorists ... [Jews] always take the side of savages against civilization" (pp. 285-6)). As a Jew myself I find it interesting that a simple substitution like this can reveal so much about the cruel, sadistic nature of her book." Your analogy is wrong. The Jews never constituted an actual threat to Germany. They were merely scapegoated. Liberals, on the other hand, are a clear and present danger to our Republic. These people have ripped apart the Constitutional limitations of the Republic and the social fabric of our society. You are exactly what you are bashing. Coulter has been completely logical. The assertion of liberals "taking the side of savages against civilization" is not exactly an emotional one as much as it is a logical one. You inject anti-semitism to the equation so as to bring emotion into the debate, because you cannot win on the facts (suggesting we rewrite what she said by replacing the word "liberal" with "jew". That is not winning with the facts. It cannot be denied that modern day liberals have sided against their own country, with American enemies, even at times of war). Because LOGIC leads to conservatism. Conservatism is the result of logic.
|
