Rating: 
Summary: Sorry, the facts do add up
Review: After reading some of the reviews, I decided to start looking up Ann Coulter's references (to the facts). Here accusations are well referenced and do pan out.By the way, I do provide technical editing to several major book publishers and I have some experience checking references. The bottom line the book does do a good job with the facts. Regardless of your political opinion, you should read this book. Those on the right will get a lot of ammo and those on the left will learn that all is not rosy with their party.
Rating:
Summary: Ann Coulter's Book Shocking to Liberals Because It's True
Review: When a liberal opens Ann Coulter's book, it must be "shock and awe." For all these years, liberals have used the power of the academia and the media to demonize conservatives, but they have done so mainly through emotional arguments, not substantive arguments refuting conservative philosophy. Here comes Ann Coulter's book. She carefully documents many of the cases where conservative political thought has been "slandered" by liberal commentators who are quick to call Republicans "dumb" -- and that alone is usually the end of the debate. She also makes arguments and comments that are not seen in other conservative books. Witty and sarcastic, she poses interesting questions such as why liberals are quick to condemn someone as a member of the "religious right" when such a group does not really exist. She also further disproves the argument that Falwell and Pat Robertson all think alike or are "hard right." Very interesting commentary you will not find anywhere else.
Rating: 
Summary: Coulter's slanders
Review: In her book Slander Ann Coulter bashes Al Gore about Love Story years after the story has been debunked. Either she did no research, or she knew the truth but wanted to mislead readers anyway. The truth you won't find in Coulter's book. The truth is Gore told a reporter he was sitting next to, that he had read in a Tennessee newspaper that Erich Seagal had used he and Tipper as models for Love Story. Love Story author Erich Seagal had been misquoted. He had used both Tommy Lee Jones and Gore as models for Oliver but Tipper was not the model for Jenny. The Love Canal Flap occured when the RNC doctored a quote by Gore, and the media went with the doctored quote. She was wrong about the New York Times not having Dale Earnhardt on the front page the day after his death. They did. The article she was refering to written a few days later was written by a southerner. It had a respectful tone in contrast to the way she depicted it.
Rating:
Summary: Liberals beware!
Review: Ann Coulter is a great author. This book, her second, is a great addition to any library, unless of course, you happen to be a liberal, then this book is not for you to read. It picks up where Bernard Goldberg's Bias leaves off. I highly recomend this book if you want to know the truth about the liberal threat to America.
Rating: 
Summary: Suicide blonde
Review: Physical beauty, articulate - but often meaningless - speech, and blonde hair do not compensate for such nuggets of anti-wisdom as: "Liberals have been wrong about everything in the last half century." Surprise news flash! A conservative being shocking and sensationalistic! Wow! How novel. For starters, liberals were right about pollution in Houston decades before the GOP there would admit anything! To spend money on this book which is just as easy to skim through, then wipe with at your local library (which wouldn't exist without "liberals") is a horrible and unjustified utilization of these pages. Sinking hard-earned money (middle class liberals, read "harder") into this book is not nearly as appealing as muting the TV and watching the author move in silence. Beauty becomes beast quite quickly in this era of bigot-worship. On the up side, she looks a heck of a lot better than O-Reilley and at least seems to have more brain power. Ahhh, if only she could utilize it better.
Rating:
Summary: Good points, but mind-numbingly repetitive and subjective
Review: The author could have easily covered all of the key points in this book in half the number of pages. Yes, the liberals enjoy almost monopolistic control of the press. Yes, they resort to name-calling and other childish tactics when confronted. And yes, their party platform brings far more comparisons to commmunism than it does a free, democratically-based society. But I found myself skipping paragraphs and sometimes whole pages because I grew tired of reading the same message over and over again. The book is also inconsistent in its use of references. Although Ms. Coulter makes an attempt to provide factual references to backup her statements, on many occasions she fails to cite the references for her quotes. In my opinion, this makes those quotes meaningless. A similar, but far superior example of fact-based conservative writing is "Useful Idiots" by Mona Charen. Finally, I can't deny that the writer makes little effort to keep this book on an objective level. She labels and uses name calling in much the same way as the people she's writing about. If you're going to criticize someone for being juvenile and emotional you'll make a much better case if you don't use the same tactics yourself. While I myself am a strong conservative, I could not consciously use this book to defend my arguments against liberals, because it is inconsistent in the use of references and far too subjective to be taken seriously.
Rating:
Summary: slander...by the author
Review: If you give a darn about things like this--debunking a blonde "liberal media detective"--you can look up her "facts" quite easily; the library is a good start. My main qualm with this book is that I actually did investigate some of her claims, and found them to be bogus. Fortunately, I borrowed this--OK, I'll be nice--book from my own library and so didn't have to flush any of my hard earned money down the drain. Hope you won't either.
Rating:
Summary: Giving the Left a Taste of Its Own Medicine
Review: ... ! For years, I have been frustrated and aggravated by the rhetoric that I've heard from the left. I'm tired of the name-calling and the demonizing. I'm offended when, instead of debating in a civil manner, they exaggerate and distort. Throwing around terms like "racist" and "genocide," to attack anyone who opposes affirmative action, for instance, is irresponsible and reprehensible. Calling it "censorship" when decent people object to their tax money being used to support "art" that desecrates religious symbols is preposterous. "Why," I wondered, "don't conservatives fight back with the same tactics? Let the liberals get a dose of their own medicine" Well, Ann Coulter does exactly that. She uses the same kind of inflammatory, derogatory, venomous "hate speech" on them that they've used against conservatives for years. And, having read it, I find that it's just as annoying and offensive even when it's used to promote ideas with which I agree. On reflection, I think that it's beneath the values of the Republican Party and conservative Americans to devolve to the left's brand of insults and mud-slinging. I'd recommend reading Sean Hannity's Let Freedom Ring or The New Thought Police by Tammy Bruce, instead.
Rating:
Summary: Unbelievably inaccurate, poorly researched, and ridiculous
Review: I don't have the time or energy to go into everything the new darling of the right got wrong in this book. There are plenty of resources on the internet that can do that for you. If you're going to read this, check it out from a library or borrow it from someone like I did. Don't waste your money. If you're already convinced that all liberals are just evil to the core, diabolically planning the destruction of America and everything good in the world- then you'll be convinced. If you feel good about reading how stupid everyone who disagrees with you is, then read on. If you want to actually learn something, research the subject of politics, or just receive accurate information, this is not the book for you.... How can someone who makes statements like "Invade their (Arab) countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity" and who jokes about how she wishes Timothy McVeigh had blown up the New York Times building before being caught even be treated seriously by the American public? If conservatives were more interested in actually learning about the world in which they live, rather than constantly assuring themselves that their gut instincts are right, this country may be able to progress in a socially conscious, internationally respected, and economically beneficial way. Check out the first appendix at the website for "What Liberal Media?" by Eric Alterman (read the book too) for a blow by blow account of how silly Ann Coulter and her book are.
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining Rabble Rousing & Liberal Bashing
Review: As an independent, I'm often interested in many points of view. As you can tell from the title, this book pulls no punches. If you are looking for a well-thought out, rational argument to back up the idea of a "liberal media", this is not the book for you. If you are looking for an impassioned book to back up your established conservative opinion, this book will offer the the perfect validation to prove the liberals are to blame. This book comically attacks the liberals (for almost everything!) and offers well-documented proof to back it up. Interestingly, though, the conservatives never seem to do anything wrong. It makes one wonder if we are seeing the whole picture. (Perhaps "wonder" is an understatement.) The author is admittedly sharp, funny, and passionate about her beliefs. She has the qualifications that lend her credibility on her ability to research. To be able to present a fair unbiased position, however, is not her goal. As a small piece in a larger diversified selection of reading, I would recomment this book. On its own, I think it is just entertaining and should be taken as such. P.S. One comment about a past review -- obviously the author's background surpasses that of the late Katherine Graham. Ms. Graham was not groomed to be a publisher. (She headed up the Washington Post only after her husband tragically passed away, and initially she planned to do it only until her son could take over.)
| 
