Rating: 
Summary: I would like Liberals to respond
Review: I am writing this review after an extensive study of the comments made by others on the page about SLANDER. It seems to me that all the liberals say is that Coulter is doing exactly what she accuses the left of doing. True. I believe her main message is that too often in the mainstram media, the conservative voice is not allowed to be heard. She is voicing a concern that is frequently not allowed or desired to be heard. What I would like to hear from liberals is not that they think Anne Coulter is mean, unfair or unobjecive. How do you liberals respond to the charges made by Ms. Coulter? Is there any truth to the claims that she makes? I think that the really sad thing is that while I tend to agree with her, not that everyone should agree on anything, but do you find that there is any possible shred of truth to the claims? Is is not obvious that in certain instances there is a bias by some of the big time broadcasters? Dan Rather is an announced democrat and has made some statments that are biased in his reporting. Peter Jennings is clearly not a republican supporter and seems to me to have a very different slant when reporting conservative and liberal issues. This is consistent with the entire entertainment industry of which network news has an incestuous relationship. What bugs me is NOT that some of the anchors are biased, but that they would expect us to believe that they are NOT! American Journalism would like us to think that they are some kind of paretorian guard, protecting us from the lies of the evil govenment and the rich and powerful, they are not. Frequently they make and create the news and feed it to the people who watch with a slant. That is fine with me as long as I don't have to believe thay are feeding me the absolute TRUTH and to question the media is wrong. The way to avoid being influenced is to look at many sources and not just accept Peter Jennings, Richard Cohen or other liberals as well as not just accepting the word of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or other conservative hosts. Look for many views and try to be realistic. To me the value of Coulter's book and Bernard GOldbergs tome is not that they attack the left, but that they attack the people who push a leftist agenda under the disguise of JOURNALISIC INTEGRITY. I just think it is funny that either side finds a lot of fault with the other. It is not really possible to defend Richard Nixon nor is it possible to defend Bill Clinton. I just want to know how liberals defend Clinton? As a conservative I will tell you that Nixon needed to be moved out of office just like he was and I believe that Clinton deserved the same fate. Is there any honest communication possible? To close, read the book. It is funny interesting and full of informatioin that you won't be allowed to get anywhere else. It has a definite slant, but no more so than anything that the liberals of the media put out daily on network news or in the print media.
Rating:
Summary: Another exceptional book!
Review: Starting from a conservative viewpoint, Ann Coulter lays waste to liberals and Democrats across America. There is definitely some validity in saying that she hates liberals and this will probably put some readers off. The attacks however are always backed up by solid facts that are footnoted for easy reference. I doubt that she and Al Gore will form a lasting relationship anytime in the near future, but her documentation of his ridiculous claims ("I invented the Internet", "Tipper and I were the basis of the movie "Love Story" ", and "I started the investigation into Love Canal") would be hysterically funny if he weren't running for president. As it is, they present a tragic picture of a pathological liar. Very scary.
Rating: 
Summary: Well-written, scarily accurate - even if you are a liberal
Review: Ann Coulter does an absolutely magnificent job of not just saying the emperor has no clothes - she names his tailors! Even the most ardent liberal cannot deny the juxtapositions Ann exposes. Her examples are clear - there is very little gray. My only criticism is that, like many writers, Ann tries to fit in as many multi-syllabic words as will help the writer take on an intellectual tone. She doesn't need it. Otherwise, a powerful and entertaining book to read. I liked it much better than Bernard Goldberg's "Bias".
Rating:
Summary: Her humor is worth the read
Review: This book is even better than Ms. Coulter's newspaper articles (if possible), because she has more time to document and develop her postulations. Her humor is always delightful. Mainstream news people could benefit from this insight. They often ask why the public views them as liberal. Most of her information comes as no suprise to conservatives, but it is gratifying to see it documented in one volume. Conservatives are well represented by Ann Coulter.
Rating: 
Summary: Toss Another Book on the Hate Pile
Review: This book is another example of the eroding nature of political discourse in this nation. Ms. Coulter demonizes everything to the left of Newt Gingrich. No facts, of course- no substantive points. Only strawman arguments, half-truths, and flat-out lies. ...
Rating:
Summary: Well-researched, well-written, and funny as heck.
Review: This piece on what is wrong with today's liberalism is right on target. It is extremely well-researched (with hundreds of footnotes) and goes far beyond the name-calling methods of today's Democrats. And the best part? It is really quite funny. (You can tell it's right on target by the low rating given by liberal readers below ....the truth is obviously quite painful). The criticisms are indeed dead-on, for I myself believed most of the liberal claptrap for decades. Until I learned to read for myself. Thanks, Ann!
Rating:
Summary: Detractors have no merit; Slander is sa success.
Review: It is interesting that so many unimpressed reviewers fault Ms. Coulter with being biased, repetitive, and unfair in her arguments. It just so happens that the point she set out to make is exaclty what she thoroughly demonstrates with this book, and she did so with aplomb. If that makes her biased, unfair and repetitive, then so be it. She did not take into account all bias in the media precisely because it is leftist bias that she found to be gratuitous and luaghable, not bias in general. Neither do I think it fair to call her vitriol and sarcastic tone proof of her hypocracy, as many disaffected leftists have in their reviews, since, as she her self noted in the book, her ridiculing is well deserved. Insults common amongst the liberal media elite, such as conservatives thoughtlessly being considered "ugly", "stupid", "greedy", and fringe, Coulter claims, are slung about dogmatically and unapologetically. Conservatives are ridiculed without justification. However, all the insults issued in this jewel are well deserved. Throughout this profusely indexed book, no insult is made without ample evidence to warrant it. Ann Coulter is a skinny little woman with a big mouth and an even bigger mind. The exhaustive evidence presented in "Slander"
makes trying to attempt an honest debunking of her assertion almost impossible. Perhaps if an equally clever and astute individual could anul her thesis by scraping up enough evidence to expose a conservative bias in mainstream media, her thesis would have little or no validity. That is the only way. But the truth is that such that task is impossible. Therein lies the power of this book. "Slander" is an awesome read first and formost because it is sadly, hilariously, and infallibly true.
Rating:
Summary: Good title............but that's about it.
Review: I was worried that I would be alone in my disgust for this book, but I can see that other people recognise it for the trash it is. Ann Coulter tries to make a case that liberal extremeist are dangerous. However, she seems to ignore the fact that extreme conserveratives such as herself are just as bad. Her book is filled with hyperbolic statements, exaggeration, and mendacious nonsense. She can't make an argument for her ideas without prefacing the comment with some snide insult or vitrolic assult on liberalism. In fact, Ms. Coulter scatters these insults throughout the book as if they add some sort of credence to her ravings. I just can't see how the country is served by the egregious blather of a conservative extremeist. Ms Coulter makes statements about how the media is full of liberal bias, but doesn't say why it wasn't present when President Clinton was dissected, examined, and villified in the press during the Monica debacle. This book is filled with the same kind of dangerous propaganda that it pretends to expose. The only good thing about it is that it shows how ugly most extremeism can be, no matter where it comes from.
Rating:
Summary: A Review By Someone Who Actually Read The Whole Book
Review: Myself: The biases of a reviewer are very important in judging a review of a book of this nature, so here are mine. I am a libertarian because the classical word liberal used to describe Thomas Jefferson has been hijacked by the Democrats, who only believe in affording me liberty when I agree with their agenda. The Republican Party has plenty wrong with it too, and looks good only when compared to the alternative. I believe in limited government, maximum individual freedom and peaceful coexistence through minding our own business, staying strong and eradicating terrorists. In the words of that immortal song, GOD BLESS THE USA. THE BOOK: As my rating indicates, I found this a very enjoyable and informative book. The subtitle, "Liberal Lies About The American Right", accurately conveys the book's thesis. The voluminous footnotes (almost 1000) more than adequately illustrate her points.(Any reveiwer who says that she does not document her case is either totally biased or hasn't read the book.) SLANDER begins with an overview of Miss Coulter's viewpoint and then examines the media coverage and liberal viewpoints regarding several issues such as John McCain's presidential campaign, the adolation and subsequent vicious attacks on Bob Packwood as the liberals' agenda changed, the Clinton impeachment fiasco (regardless of which side you were on), and best of all, the coverage of the 2000 presidential campaigns by Bush and Gore and the subsequent Florida election brouhaha. And she does a wonderful job of showing how the media treatment of George W Bush changed in the patriotic fervor that followed the events of 9/11. Her well deserved prime example is the New York Times, which she credits in her introduction with making the book possible because of the target rich opportunity which they provide. She also illustates the many examples of the liberal supporters of free speech and art trying to suppress through such devices as campus speech codes opinions and political speech with which they do not agree. The author's insights combine with rapier like phraseolgy to skewer the opposition, and she puts her linguistic skills to excellent use. In fact, one of my few criticisms is that occasionally she gets carried away by her own hyperbole, an accusation which she frequently makes regarding her adversaries. Also, the frequency of the footnotes is almost overwhelming; yet I felt they should be read because many additional information regarding the referenced subject and I am a political junkie interested in all the details. As the title hopefully makes clear, this is a book with a point of view and not an attempt to provide a balanced study of the subject. But it is required reading for anyone who either agrees with the point of view or is simply interested in it.
Rating:
Summary: Fiction
Review: I'm amazed by how many people have overlooked the fact that a lot of Ann Coulter's arguments are based on lies. For the simplest example do a search on the New York Times website for some of the articles she quotes, some of her "facts" are completely made up. As a conservative I really expect better from those authors who have the public's attention.
| 
