Rating: 
Summary: Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on T
Review: Liberals will just love this book!! They will think that this book is just so much fiction. Therein lies the problem with a lot of what Ann Coulter has written. The problem is that LIBERALS do not see a problem, with the way that they have been able to influence the way we Americans view the past. They are rewriting history!! They complain about the hellish brutality of McCarthyism. How about the way in which the Democratic "Socialist" Party of the United States allowed not thousands, but MILLIONS of people to be killed by inhumane dictators of Communist regimes. That is a disgrace to the very values that the United States has stood for. The WAR on Terror continues at this time . I for one am very glad that we have a president who will not just TALK about going after the enemy of America, but will lead the fight against Terrorism. I would like to thank Ann Coulter for her hard work in writing this book. Hopefully she has opened some journalists eyes to the slanted ways that todays columnists are writing about our AMERICAN Heritage. May they see the error of thier ways.
Rating: 
Summary: I wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt but......
Review: Having seen Ms. Coulter's appearances on television talk shows many,many times,I found her to be obviously intelligent and sharp-witted. I also found her to be rather rude, condescending, strident and possessed of opinions that often make her seem rather deranged. Watching her on TV,she seemed to be more performer than a serious political analyst.Maybe, I thought, she saved her more thoughtful and reasoned commentary for the sedate world of publishing rather than the circus atmosphere of talk-show television. How wrong I was. Ms. Coulter is even more disturbing in print that she is on the small screen. On television, she just seems to spit out the most outrageous thing that comes to her mind even if it has seemingly no basis in reality.In writing a book,you would have thought that she would have had more time to actually think about what she was writing and to check her facts. Sadly,this is not the case. Ms. Coulter seems just so full of venomous hatred and doesn't even try to hide her disgust with people who do not share her rabid opinions. This book really cannot and should not be taken seriously.
Rating:
Summary: The test to find out if you're a communist
Review: Read this book. If you don't love it, you are, were or most likely always have been a communist. I love it.
Rating:
Summary: Hardhitting and expository
Review:
This book is bound to average three stars. Conservatives will give it five, and the liberals whom it attacks will obviously rate it as low as possible out of sheer spite and anger at the accusatrions in it. The only thing that will raise (or lower) its rating will be the numbers of each group that review it.
It is very well written, well edited, and full of facts, names and history that are well documented in the notes at the end of the book. The facts and names are pretty well indisputable, and the history is, well, accurate or all lies, depending upon whether the reader is a conservative or a liberal. I am a conservative, and so I give it five stars and proclaim that the history and conclusions she draws are accurate--right on the money! Consequently, liberals will inevitably vote that this review is not "helpful," though they have not read the book, and most conservatives will give me a positive vote. That's the way it works with politically "controversial" books. What does Ann say in this book? You need to read it! I wish it could be made available to all Americans, and that all would read it, even if only out of curiousity. It describes how the liberal establishment has always defended communists--even spies like Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs--passionately, refusing to believe their guilt even when it was demonstrated beyond a doubt; how they have vilified their accusers, like Whittaker Chambers and Joseph McCarthy, even when the Venona project which decoded Soviet cables to its agents in America proved the accusers right, and that the accused were indeed paid Soviet agents. It describes how FDR and Truman promoted Alger Hiss even after being reliably informed that he was a spy, and how Dean Acheson and other top officials stood by him and refused to believe his guilt even after he was proven guilty and unanimously convicted by a jury of perjury when he said he was not a spy (the statute of limitations for his spying activities prevented his prosecution for that). She describes how the Roosevelt and Truman administrations were shot through with Soviet agents, and that McCarthy's biggest fault was that he understated the danger. The Venona project, which broke the Soviet codes in 1943 and was kept secret even from Roosevelt and Truman (the code-brakers didn't trust Democrats because they were Soviet sympathizers, and their administrations were riddled with communists) and the Soviet's own archives, opened after the end of the cold war, named names and described the activities of top people in our government who were paid communist agents or active sympathizers: Alger Hiss, Roosevelt's trusted advisor at Yalta,where FDR gave Poland to the USSR, and who set up the UN and was its Secretary-General during the inception phase; Harry Dexter White, assistant secretary of the Treasury Department under FDR, who hired at least 11 Soviet agents to work for him and conspired with Frank Coe and Solomon Adler to kill a critical loan to Nationalist China; Lauchlin Currie, administrative assistant to FDR; Duncan Lee, chief of staff to the head of the OSS (forerunner of the CIA); Harry Hopkins, special advisor to FDR, described by the KGB as a Soviet Agent of "major significance"; Henry Wallace, vice president under FDR (he insisted that peace would be assured "if the United States guaranteed Stalin control of Eastern Europe"); Owen Lattimore, foreign policy 'expert'who loitered around the State Department and surrounded himself with Soviet spies, and whose specialty was China (which we lost to communism); and Joseph Davies, FDR appointed ambassador to the USSR who told the AP in 1946, "Russia in self-defense has every moral right to seek atomic bomb information through military espionage if excluded from such information by her former fighting allies." President Roosevelt, who affectionately called Joe Stalin 'Uncle Joe' said of the Soviet Union in his fourth inaugural address, "In order to make a friend, one must be a friend." President Truman, in 1946, wrote in his diary that the Russians "Have always been our friends and I can't see any reason why they shouldn't always be." She points out how the elite liberal press (New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Boston Glode, et al) have consistently vilified any and everyone who accused Soviet agents like Hiss and the Rosenbergs, indulging consistently in ad hominem attacks (accusing Whittaker Chambers of being a homosexual, and having a homosexual relationship with his brother, who had committed suicide; depicting Joseph McCarthy as unshaven and with flies buzzing about him in their cartoons, and coining the term 'McCarthyism' for anyone who looks at liberal pinkoism with anything other than admiration. What does Ann say in this book? You will have to read it. I guarantee that it will open your eyes and tell you things about our history in the last century the significance of which you did not realize. I was in China throughout 1948, and watched as our State Department built up Mao Tse Tung to the detriment of our wartime ally, Chiang Kai-shek, and eventually led to his ruin and China's entry into the communist sphere. The same thing happened in Yugoslavia, when the Truman State Department supported the communist Josep Tito, whose first act upon taking over the country was to execute General Draja Mikhailovitch and his followers; Mikhailovitch was the wartime leader of the Chetniks underground who saved the lives of countless American flyers shot down after air raids over axis territory. Tito, of course,led the opposing communist Partisans. I think this book is hostorically accurate, and an eye-opener. I'm glad I bought it, and wish that everyone could read it. Joseph (Joe) Pierre, USN (Ret.)
author of Handguns and Freedom...their care and maintenance
and other books
Rating:
Summary: About as deep as a shadow
Review: H.L. Mencken noted that for every problem there is an answer that is clear, obvious, simple and wrong. And Coulter finds just that answer to every problem she sees. There is always someone to demonize, something to overlook, and someone to glorify merely because it fits her party line.
By this same logic, we can see that many of history's traitors are today's heroes. People such as Galileo, Copernicus, Columbus and Einstein were traitors to the conventional wisdom of their days - and we are all the richer for it. What Coulter cannot admit is that often, conventional wisdom is wrong. The real traitor here is Coulter herself - who believes that the freedom of speech she herself feels free to exercise should not be exercised to criticize the almighty government. When will modern conservatives (who, after all, aren't nearly so conservative as they are intolerant) realize that hyperbole and dogma are not a substitute for reasoned dialogue?
Rating:
Summary: What a bunch of junk
Review: This book was written for rudimentary readers who cannot or will not think for themselves. It is pretty much a fantasy read.
Rating: 
Summary: Something you don't want to hear
Review: Coulter delivers a scathing, powerfully witty rants throughout her entire book. Some of the more notable pieces include an inarguable defense of Reagan, a hillarious list celebrity quotations, and some unquestionable facts (e.g. SENATOR McCarthy not being a member of HUAC, the HOUSE committee responsible for Hollywood blacklisting). She occassionally loses the reader with over-the-top rhetoric and unabashed sarcasm, but her points are (usually) well-made, pointing out the inherent flaws in today's politics; her arguements are always factually air-tight. Looking through some of the reviews, many people seem to evade the bare fact. This proves Coulter's theory of liberals choosing vague emotional pleas over reality. One reviewer simply types, "Supporting McCarthyism; how unAmerican," a comment so ignorant and hypocritical, its beyond rational thought. Another comments that JFK's initiation of the Bay of Pigs demonstrates how stuanchly anti-Communist he was. These comments just beg the question, "Did these 'reviewers' even read the book?" Unfortunately, the book's flaming rhetoric alienates moderates, it's adherence to fact infuriates liberals, and it's conservative view only appeases hardline conservatives. So, if you're a liberal, don't bother reading this (just write an ignorant, blaise review on Amazon.com), if you're a conservative, give it a read (it'll give you some decent ammunition) and if you're a moderate, take it out from the library. Once you get past the chest-pounding and harsh language, you're left with a savvy, factual, intriguing book.
Rating:
Summary: Ann hasn't missed a beat yet
Review: She does tend to go a little over the top, but regular readers of Ann's recognize that this is her style and her delivery is often made with tongue more or less in cheek. Also, she is strongly partisan and makes no secret of it. This evidently deeply offends leftist-liberals who much prefer that anything published that's partisan be a) partisan in favor of leftist-liberals only and b) carefully disguised as non-partisan and objective. A previous reviewer demanded to know why if what Ann says is true, why has nothing been published about these things before? Actually a great deal has been published about them, and Ann references and cites some of these other sources in her book. The problem with them is that they have tended to be arcane, scholarly and/or not promoted to the general readership, so Joe Average has never heard of them. Ann's work is scholarly too (e.g., end notes and sources given throughout the book), but she also knows how to punch all the right buttons to make sure that what she writes will be widely read--here of course her past successes as a No. 1 non-fiction best seller haven't done her any harm. She sure does get reviewers and interviewers sputtering. Chris Matthews demanded FIVE TIMES that she say whether Jack Kennedy was a traitor, even after she had already answered No. Checking every single reference to JFK in her book shows there is absolutely nothing to suggest that she thought him a traitor. On the contrary, she gives examples of Kennedy's strong support and praise for Sen. McCarthy, with which of course she is in complete agreement. So Matthews' insinuation was without any basis in fact.
Rating:
Summary: Inflammatory pure and simple...emphasis on simple
Review: This book is so patently inflammatory, that it doesn't even deserve comment. And yet, here I am commenting! I will keep it short. I have believed for many years, after biting my lip and actually listening to Rush Limbaugh for a time, that he is a pragmatist, i.e. one who is doing what he knows will maintain, and even increase, his fan base for the simple purpose of putting money in his pocket. I see a man in Rush, who perhaps has no real moral identity at all, but has built a facade of "morality" to address and exploit a market. Simply put, he tells people what they want to hear, so he can make money. He exploits people's ignorance, so he can sell "power ties" and rake in the profits of his syndicated radio show. I will not dignify Ann Coulter's insane rhetoric with much more than a simple ditto to what I said about Rush. She is following in the footsteps of Rush, and trying to make money by exploiting Americans innate ignorance, their hatreds and their biases. She is part of the problem in this country, not part of the solution. The solution is almost as simpleminded as Coulter (although I believe she's really sharper than she let's on!). People need to speak to one another in a civil fashion and work it out. People, and Americans specifically, need to see other people, and Americans specifically, as not "the enemy" as characterized by neo-conservative pundits like Coulter, but as people of differing opinions with whom a consensus needs to be arrived at. This "them and us" rhetoric needs to stop. What ever happened to the honorable estate that was expressed in the term "loyal opposition"? If we allow the boorish and graceless culture exempified in Coulter's book, and rhetoric, to continue, we all will lose. We are all concerned with the same issues, and we should simply show respect for differences of opinion. This book is garbage. Enough said.
Rating:
Summary: Step AWAY from the crack!
Review: I noticed a similarity between Ann Coulter and Joe McCarthy... They both say something extremely stupid, and people actually start believing them. I'm sure that if you dig deep enough, you can discover that... Hitler was actually a Jew!
| 
