Rating: 
Summary: GENERAL MARSHALL...A TRAITOR AND COMMUNIST!!!
Review: Well not really. But McCarthy, the man that Coulter praises so much in the book, accused him and President Truman of being treacherous. This is of course bunk. Some would argue that Truman dropped the bomb and roasted 100,000 Japanese not only to bring an end to the war, but to show the Soviets not to mess with the US. Truman also fought communist aggression of N Korea and sent aid to anti-communists in Greece and Turkey. Marshall, the Secretary of State at the time formulated the Marshall Plan, which if anything restored the Western European economies and removed any sympathies Western Europeans would have for communism. I do not believe this stuff she says that Ronald Reagan singlehandedly won the Cold War. He certainly had a part in it, but so did numerous other presidents, both Democrat and Republican, over the span of the Cold War. Just because JFK didn't want to start a nuke fight with the USSR doesn't make him a pansy or weak or "lacking the balls to defend freedom" as Coulter-types would say. It pained me to read this book just because I am the kind of person that recognizes propaganda when I see it.
Rating:
Summary: A treatise of hate.
Review: A short synopsis of this book: If you don't agree with Coulter, you're commiting treason. Coulter's venemous polemic is a cruel attack on the Clinton presidency. If this is what you're looking for - buy away.
Rating: 
Summary: Embarrassing
Review: It is embarrassing that in a country where cures for the most insidious diseases have been discovered and where technology has grown by leaps and bounds . . . that this type of primitive, knuckle dragging fueled by blind, partisan hatred continues to exist. A poor commentary of our times.
Rating:
Summary: Twists and maneuvers facts
Review: . It is clear that she is writing to a select audience of narrow-minded, illiterate individuals and obviously counts on the fact that the individuals she wants to persuade are not students of history.
Rating:
Summary: Easily the worst book I've ever read!
Review: I bought and read this book for the same reason I bought one of Lynne Cheney's books-I wanted to read what the American conservatives wrote themselves rather than relying on their words and ideas after being passed through the minds of commentators. Unfortunately I found out exactly what is in the mind of Ann Coulter and it isn't pretty. Besides the normal conservative concerns that peppered the first 14 pages she lets the reader know where her mind is when she writes, "America is in an epic global battle with ruthless savages who seek our destruction..." Back in the Sixties in my rural high school the english teachers told their students to drop loaded words like savages from our writing because their implications were too loaded to be used in in sophomore writing-I guess Ann attended a better school than I where they made exceptions to correct speech because she used the same word on at least five more occasions. Besides being the embodiment of all the reasons why political correctness needs to be, Ann as a spokesperson for neoconservatism, has illuminated all the reasons why that political movement is transforming a rational country into a bastion of dangerous unthinking. She spends considerable time decrying the inept international moves by Democratic presidents since World War II ended but not offering even a hint about what to do. She picks apart liberal thinking with regard to international relations but she never offers a conservative answer to why the problem exists in the first place. She believes that world problems materialize out of thin air and assuredly America's force can correct the problem there and then without pointy eared professors dirtying the water of reason by suggesting that there might be very cogent reasons for the existence of this particular problem. Ann Coulter paints with an exceptionally wide brush but as with the nature of paint the covering is wafer thin-her world view, as well as the neocons trying to guide it, cannot offer the world any direction in substantive change or adaption to differing circumstances. Ann spent an entire chapter enumerating the reasons why we should all be enthralled by Ron Reagan's bludgeoning death of the Soviet Union so that America could win the Cold War. After this chapter and another six I kept thinking, how naive can the author be-how can she keep swallowing the propaganda lines formulated and distributed by the various instruments of the American government? Throughout her book, Ann repeats exactly the words we are programmed to absorb-she is the best example of the continued working of the propaganda machine. I guess the book's title says it all-if you disagree with Ann Coulter and the shallowness she writes about then you are a traitor. I always thought that disagreement was the backbone of democracy-just not Ann's democracy I suppose.
Rating:
Summary: a blight on the right
Review: Certainly, the 1950s was a tense time in American history, as the Cold War intensified. The fight against Communism was waged both domestically and internationally, for better or worse, and would be for another forty years, even if it was done less at home and more abroad. In the years since, the Fifties have been mythologized and vilified in almost every regard, from the supposed social stagnation and "oppression" of the family to the villainy of that "drunkard" McCarthy. Without question, McCarthy made errors in his anti-Communism, and there was in him some frightening qualities of a demagogue. But behind fifty years of academic cant and myth lies a kernel of truth: the unquestionably flawed (like any man) McCarthy was fighting the good fight and, in some cases, was right; Tailgunner Joe was neither devil nor angel. Much of the historical record, when unobscured by ideologically motivated researchers, bears this out.
Ideology, however, cuts both ways, and its obstructions are just as dangerous from the right as they are from the left. The academy and elite opinion have for years painted an ugly picture of the anti-Communist movement, which purportedly sacrificed free speech and civil liberties to eradicating Communism and which was prone to ranting and raving and flights of the imagination. Such a perspective prevents us from gaining a full understanding of McCarthy--or even from understanding him at all--all while glossing over the dangers within, and the reasons to oppose, Communism. But to approach things from the other side and paint anti-Communists as saints and opponents as traitors does not ameliorate the record. This, too, precludes a complete understanding of McCarthy or the era. It also reduces the thoughts and actions of many people of the left to mere treason, and their depth, complexity, and motivations are lost. Neither picture is interesting; neither interpretation is history. And the end result of the two sides is not a full interpretation: two wrongs do not make a right.
Ann Coulter fits right in with the people she is so quick to condemn and contributes to the degradation of politics, history, and even language. She has turned history into the plaything of politics rather than restoring it to the source of wisdom that it should be. She has debased language--if critics of the Bush administration are "traitors," then what do we call people who really are attempting to bring down the government? She has contributed to the polarization of politics and its reduction to name-calling and finger-pointing. (She is, as some have said, the Michael Moore of the right.) And she has given an ugly face to conservatism--so much so that the average person no longer associates it with the wit, logic, and urbanity of a William F. Buckley. For a domestic history of the Cold War or for insights into the conservative mind, look elsewhere.
Rating: 
Summary: An Important Courageous Book
Review: Aaaaaaaaaahhhhh! Some Truth. It feels good and gives one hope for America. Certainly such a brave work would never be published in Liberalism's Amerika and their Hatred and Hysteria does as much to prove Coulter's points as the book itself. I remember the Nazis were so furious over CONFESSIONS OF A NAZI SPY that they banned all Warner Bros films from the country yet if the film was such rot then why such a reaction? It is the same with Coulter. If the book is nonsense then why the venom? If the book is true, would those who hate the book so actually come out and admit same?
Ann Coulter remembers what being an American means and as such, because of this risky book, she must be considered a Great American and a Patriot.
Rating:
Summary: Poison for political discourse
Review: I am writing this review as an unashamed liberal (card-carrying member of the ACLU) and someone who, despite Coulter's assertions, does really love my country. As a history teacher, I have also spent a fair amount of time thinking about the political traditions of this country. The changing arguments between liberals and conservatives has been basic to this tradition and when either of these mainstreams has become too dominant or has stopped listening to their opponents, the results have been damaging. By dismissing liberals as a group (as if THEY all think the same way any more than conservatives do), portraying them as anti-American and even as, well, TRAITORS, she is poisoning the political well of this discussion by encouraging her conservative readers to question the motives of anyone who disagrees with them. I believe that if we can't have a healthy discourse within which people can disagree about difficult, complex issues like the proper response to terrorism, without resorting to tactics of the kind that this book is filled with, we are in deep trouble as a nation.
Rating:
Summary: Book not worth all the banter
Review: All the discussion to do with 'Treason' is unfounded. This book was mislabelled, it was actually supposed to be in the fiction category, not non-fiction. It's a fairytale, written for chidren (pretty mean children by the tone of some of the 5 * reviews), heroes and villains (the honorable Joe McCarthy vs. all the people who's lives he ruined by getting them blacklisted), a happy ending (the simple fact that it even has an ending). It even has a witch in it (Coulter).
Rating:
Summary: If only there were a way to give out 'negative' star ratings
Review: From an earlier review, quote: BUT NONE OF THE REVIEWS attacked Ms. Coulter's research or her specific facts. Uh, gee, I guess none of those reviews include the ones on www.spinsanity.org, or the one from the ultra-conservative www.frontpagemagazine.com that called the book "distressing", or even the line-by-line exposition of the textual errors posted at http://homepages.nyu.edu/~th15/coulter.pdf. I guess the reason none of the reviews attacked Coulter on her "facts" is because facts are awfully hard to come by in between the covers of this little screed. Sure she's got a mean streak and a sense of wit ... and she looks a lot better in a black dress than Al Franken or Michael Moore. But she's offering up a truck load of hooey with "Treason". Read it for laughs, maybe. But take it to heart at your own peril. It's rife with empirically verifiable factual errors. Jeez, do we need to review the "facts" in "The Turner Diaries" or "The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion"? Call it a name: This is ultra-right-wing wind baggery in a slinky party dress. But if you like jokes about the Holocaust, I guess you'll go in big for "Treason" too.
| 
