Rating: 
Summary: Dissent NOT treason - this is still America!
Review: I don't know who is scarier....Coulter or her fans (like "mormondad2") who consider anyone refusing to parrot right-wing dogma "traitors." Hello? This is America. The last time I checked, dissent was not a synonym for treason. I also love the people who can't even spell "hypocrisy' correctly but use it to label everyone who dares to disagrees with them! (These are the same people who need to check with Rush or Hannity before they can go to the bathroom.) Interesting that Coulter's "sales" are BULK buys. What is she smoking anyway?
Rating:
Summary: Lots of invective, not much history
Review: Ann Coulter is definitely pretty funny, but what is contained in this book cannot be called "history," unless history is defined as presenting a few facts that support your ideological bent, and leaving out the vast majority that don't. It's pretty simple - if you're a conservative, you'll love this book, if you're a liberal, you'll hate it. Some of the accusations contained within are well-founded - certain liberals - just like certain people of any ideology - don't want to deal with the events of the past that don't support the ideology - the existence of Soviet spies, etc. Unfortunately, Coulter stretches the truth, or just plain ignores it, in nearly every paragraph. She lumps everyone who she considers vaguely left of center into one great mass of people (150 million of them or so), which is sort of like lumping together Hitler, Mussolini, Joe McCarthy, every Republican and Libertarian who lived in the 20th century, and saying that they all beleive and act in precisely the same way. Entertaining, but not grounded in reality at all. This is a book of pure invective, and contains no more rational argument than a ten year old's rant against an older sibling. Basically, if you actually want to learn something,check out books by historians - Kagan (conservative), Lafeber (liberal), and plenty of others.
Rating: 
Summary: Ann is right on again!
Review: Think where we would be as a country if it weren't for the treasonous behavior of evil liberals. We would rule the world!!! Ann for President! We could then put all the vile liberals in concentration camps where they belong.
Rating:
Summary: Treason.
Review: This book should be required reading for every school child starting in the 5th grade! Excellent gathering of material. Well researched. Thank you, Ann.
Rating:
Summary: Here's your proof!
Review: A reviewer from Jacksonville, FL, asked for just one example of Ms. Coulter's outright lies and misrepresentation. Okay: 1) She wrote, "The Democratic Party has shirked the honor of leading this country to war, be it hot or cold." This is a lie. Or did she forgotten that Democrats -- Presidents Roosevelt and Truman -- led Americans to victory in World War II? Or did she also forget that Truman was at the helm of the U.S. at the beginning of the Cold War? Did she forget who ordered the flights into West Berlin and that saved those people from starvation? It was Democrats. Say, how about a few other outright lies from Ms. Coulter? 2) On page 97 she wrote that transcripts from the NSA's "Venona" project (this was the code name for a project where messages between Moscow and their foreign missions were intercepted and decoded) "absolutely" prove that famed journalist I.F. Stone was a spy for the Soviets. However, two SCHOLARS, John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, wrote a book that was entirely about this work, called, "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America." In it they wrote that "[t]here is no evidence in Venona that Stone ever was recruited by the KGB." 3) She claims, as do many other Republican apologists, that Reagan's "Star Wars" brought the Soviet Union down. However, Gorbachev told Reagan in 1985 that the USSR had a response to Star Wars: the Topol-M missile. The Soviets have that missile now. We still don't have Star Wars. Why would this have brought them down? But let somebody else give more proof. The expert on Soviet nuclear ability, Steven Zaloga, in his book "The Kremlin's Nuclear Sword," wrote that "the Soviet strategic nuclear forces were not a significant cause of the Soviet collapse" There's your proof. But I doubt if you'll change your mind just because she's a liar.
Rating:
Summary: Well researched...hard hitting
Review: Like the reviewer below, I too served in the US Navy. However, I don't think that has any relevance to this book. This book is well researched and footnoted and provides clear and convincing evidence of the left's blind eye towards socialism and communism. I haven't heard a single reviewer who has whined about this book provide a single fact refuting any of the book's content. They just make ad hominems against the author. No subtance, just vicious attacks....typical.
Rating:
Summary: Pleasantly surprised
Review: I have to admit that, while I support Ann's work, initially I was not too thrilled about the material. Who wants to read about scandals from 40 years ago? However, the book was very educational and made me re-think rumors I had, over time accepted as true, especially as it applies to J. Edgar Hoover and Joe McCarthy. Ann makes the very valid point that these men were hated and despised by the left in their day. Only in the last decade or so were there accusations of homosexuality and cross-dressing, long after these men could not defend themselves If any New York Times reporter could have proven, what I now believe are ridiculous assertions back then, they would have won pullitzer prizes. It further cements her premise that liberals demonstrate their inablitly to argue a point without name calling. If you are considering buying this book and looking at the reviews I suggest that you disregard all 1 star ratings. These ratings are blinded by politices. No fair minded person could give this book a one or a two star rating and I doubt very seriously that they even read the book. Even that Collasal Jewel of glittering ignorance, Michael Moore's book deserved a 3 rating for mere audacity. My personal opinion is that "Slander" had more entertainment value but "Treason" is a must read for the educational benefits. She gets in some good ones on the Hollywood crowd toward the end and my only complaint would be that I don't want to wait another year for her next book.
Rating: 
Summary: Elephant Talk
Review: Perception daunting
Coulter's truth, Zinn's truth; the same
Choirs and preaching
Rating:
Summary: Rehab of Joe McCarty a tough sell but she may have done it.
Review: I enjoyed this book largely for the non-mainstream presentation of an era that us baby boomers were just too young to actually tune in on. If her views are correct about McCarthy being sucessfully discredited from all angles by an adgenda driven left wing, then we've all been had. At least in the name of openness now, this ought to be subject of objective dialogue from reasonable poeple, not tirades from the badly biased ends of the political spectrum who dominate all aspects of news media. I hope some legitimate debate evolves. Ample resources have been footnoted to drill down into her points and presentation of history of the era so her detractors will have to challenge her on the facts she presents not just take on her ideals and beliefs. I wish Coulter had left her venom for the Clintons out of the mix (a venom I share, however) as I think it would have come accross more as an accademic piece than a rant. I think this is a great book all in all.
Rating: 
Summary: A Passionate Counter-Point
Review: Many of the people giving negative reviews here seem to be reviewing the author, not the book! I prefer to discuss the book itself. "Treason" would be a far more effective book if its tone were more level; yet it is still often clever, and Coulter's acerbic wit shines through on a number of occasions. The book is a bit vitriolic at times and does not infrequently descend into mere name-calling. Nevertheless, it is a well-researched volume presenting a great deal of under-publicized information and a number of convincing arguments. This is no passing, emotional editorial comment; it contains 36 pages of meticulously recorded notes and an index. Ann Coulter points out what few would dare to: that the validity of a politician's patriotism ought to be fair game in the political debate and that there are indeed liberals have repeatedly coddled and misjudged tyrants while ignoring threats to America's national security. I doubt very much that anyone other than a conservative will bother to read this book in its entirety, but if you are a liberal with an open mind and a strong constitution, give it a try.
| 
