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" 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 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, as liberals are not usually in the habit of exposing themselves, at length, to alternative views (conservatives who watch TV or go to public schools, on the other hand, have no choice but to do so). "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.
Rating: 
Summary: A Big Zero
Review: I think this book gives voice to the feelings of some Americans, but the facts that support these views are distorted, misrepresented, and sometimes just plain false. It is not heard to actually check on some of these fallacies yourself. Google is a wonderful thing.
Rating:
Summary: Worth hype
Review: I've waited for some time to read Ann Coulter's book "Treason." While she does give outright copious notes and a list of references, she tends to repeat things already written (that's why the 1-star is removed). But still this should be a part of any college politics/government course--if the whino lefties who run and pollute the minds of our impressionable youth WILL ALLOW THIS BOOK AND OTHERS OUT THERE. Any of these one-star liberal nutsos--YOU'RE THE ONES COMMITING TREASON. AND DON'T EVEN THINK BOWING DOWN TO CLINTON OR GOD FOR FEND HOWARD DEAN WILL HELP YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Coulter rules, so does Fox News and Savage! The conservative movement has exploded like lava out of a volcano!
Rating:
Summary: Amusing
Review: I bought a copy of this book for amusement sake, after seeing Coulter on various news channels. I am a deployed US soldier. I would call myself a moderate, but I would say I'm liberal leaning on plenty of subjects. More often than not, I lean towards the civil rights, as that is one reason why I enlisted. I'm a democrat and I was elected to a township office before I was deployed. I find it amusing to be called a traitor when I'm several thousand miles away from my country serving my country. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, of course. I'm also a pagan, so be careful for those that call Coulter a witch. Us witches tend to be nicer than ultra-hardcore right wingers. I see Ms Coulter's tactics as that, tactics. Issues don't matter as much as appearances. I admit, from the tactical perspective, trying to equate liberalism as being unpatroitic or treasonous is ingenious. However, trying to make it to the top based on worshipping the dark deity Hatred is unwise, for such a sword can easily cut the beholder. To question what we are told is the essense of being American. I was once told that disagreeing with posting the ten commandments in courts or schools was unAmerican, to which I just smiled. If it is the will of the President and Congress to send us to war, so be it. Just remember what we're supposed to be defending, and that's liberty. To question is not inheriently treasonious, to SILENCE questioning is the most treasonous act I can think of. However, I do wish Ms Coulter could spend a couple of months in the mud, living off MREs, fieldstripping an M16 every morning. Maybe she'd realize what it's all about. Call me a traitor while she's living the good life back in the States? Heh, righto.
Rating:
Summary: If you made the a drinking game out of everytime she used...
Review: ..the word "Liberal" you would be drunk after the second page.I being a fan of the 'psudeo political' books I had to read a few pages to investigate the hype and what I found was one of the biggest works of fiction that seems to pass for politics these days.It was filled with attacks that seems to offensivly slanders anyone who seems to be anyone of the left side of moderite.I don't mind pointing out the lefts fault (Heck they have more than the right sometimes) but to refer to anybody who is not a war monger as an enemy I do have a problem with.If she could spend as much time investigating facts as she does doing her hair and makeup then we might have an slightly insightful book.But if it was that informitive then you would not need to plaster her face on the cover,would we.
Rating: 
Summary: Coulter's a loon...from a proud conservative.
Review: As someone who has left the left, and looks at the democratic party with more disdain by the day, I'm proud that there are conservatives out there - most notably the staff of the Weekly Standard, and Russ Smith, writer for the NYPress and Wall Street Journal - who have distanced themselves from this loon. Who the hell is she kidding about McCarthy? Ever heard of Dashiell Hammett, Ann? He may have been a Communist...but he left his decadent lifestyle behind to serve his country...and McCarthy rewarded him by ruining his life. Also, Coulter's statements after September 11th, "we should invade them and force them to convert to Christianity", were embarrasing and were the butt of many jokes. It's a shame that so many conservatives on this site let Coulter speak for them. Thankfully, the intellectuals...Kristol, Barnes, Krauthammer, etc., have avoided this moron.
Rating: 
Summary: Stimulating Read if You're Not Afraid...
Review: You don't need to agree with Ann Coulter to appreciate her book. Actually, one of the main points she makes in interviews is how liberals resort to name calling when they are frustrated and can't come up with a reasonable debate. Judging by the reviews here, I'd say she just might be right. (I read the reviews to find out about the books here, not as a way to slander others.) Her book is NOT intended to be read literally in tone. She is poking fun, trying to make you think, daring you to ask questions. Conservatives have been putting up with liberal press and artificial PC bias for quite a while so perhaps they are not quite as sensitive. It is, therefore, natural that those with a more liberal bent, are stunned to find that not everyone agrees with them. Give the book a try. You might find out some things you didn't know before. Coulter does bring up some points I hadn't considered before and this motivates me to do more reading to form my own opinions. I think she is a very intelligent woman and gutsy to boot.
Rating:
Summary: Daaaannnnnnnggggg!
Review: WOW!!! This is a put-up or shut-up work. She puts herself on the line. This work begs for more research and less commentary. I now have to look back through the McCarhty era again. What in the heck do liberals believe in, or want anyway??? When O' Reilly had her on his show, he only brought up the Kate Moss comment. Her drubbing of the Hollywood elite was useless. No one listens to them anyway. But it's why they believe what they do, or do they even know. Uncommon courage, and a great smile. Maybe Hollywood's jealous because they can't find a blonde with brains Sorry, liberals, you have to explain yourselves. Calling her a witch reflects on you, not her. Oh, but that's your most valuable tool anyway. Ann, please don't start your own religion. Because I'd be tempted to change.;-)
Rating: 
Summary: These reader reviews are hopeless
Review: Folks, is there one among you capable of reviewing a politically charged book for its literary merits? It is, after all, like...you know...a BOOK. It's not a speech on Fox News, it's not a handout at a rally. It's . . . a . . . B-O-O-K. And as books go, this one is passing. Literate, witty, argumentative, but by no means vitriolic to the point of alienating intelligent readers who might disagree with her points (please note "intelligent"). If you can't review a book for its form as WELL as its content, what are you even doing here?
Rating:
Summary: Way to go, Ann, but stop pulling punches!
Review: I always suspected liberals were responsible for everything evil today, and now Ann has proved it with her use of footnotes and funny sentences! Democrats who write that this is garbage prove her point, because she said they would say that! I used to be sort of a bleeding heart but the U.S. was attacked by Al Qaeda and now I know that the only thing the world understands is force. I give it 3 stars just because I had a few problems with some of the arguments. A columnist at my local paper said it best: Aside from becoming rather tedious after about page 10, Treason fails to explain a number of pertinent points. For example: Who's a liberal? And what is "the left"? Coulter appears to believe that these terms are synonyms, and further confuses both of them with the Democratic Party -- which has, she claims, been suffering from "pusillanimous psychosis" since World War II. But Scoop Jackson was a Democrat, Jeanne Kirkpatrick was a Democrat, even Ronald Reagan started out as a Democrat (and this was after World War II). Robert F. Kennedy actually worked for Sen. McCarthy, as Coulter herself mentions, but fails to elaborate upon. Half the members of the House Committee on Un-American Activities were Democrats. The Truman administration prosecuted Alger Hiss. Kennedy stood up to the Soviet Union in Berlin and Cuba. Indeed, there were members of the left who were active anti-communists. Coulter actually quotes George Orwell a couple of times without mentioning that he was a socialist, presumably because she doesn't know. She doesn't mention the anti-communists in the American trade union movement, presumably because she hasn't heard of them, either. Her cartoonish, childlike interpretation of history allows for no nuances -- nor can it help her explain the present. She is notably silent on the subject of Democrats who supported the war in Iraq, for example, making only two glancing references to Sen. Joe Lieberman, and implying that every single Democrat who voted in favor of the resolutions to invade Iraq did so for crude political reasons. But if you tar everyone with the same brush, how can you know, really, what actually happened? All of this, of course, might be funny if it were meant to be funny, but it doesn't seem to be. Coulter hasn't got an ironic or witty bone in her body. Her insults are crass and dull-witted, and her jokes fall flat. She has no sense of history and skips back and forth from the Truman administration to the Reagan administration, as if 40 years made no difference. She quotes liberally from newspaper cuttings, television interviews and other conservative diatribes, apparently having done no actual research at all. Worst of all, this is the kind of rhetoric that will allow everyone else to dismiss her as a crank, putting off real debate about these issues for another decade at least.
| 
