Slander

Rating:
Summary: A book review, not a political rant!
Review: I had a big laugh while reading over some of the reviews of Kenneth Timmerman's recent Jesse Jackson autobiography--one reviewer admitted he hadn't read the book...he just wanted to weigh in with his opinion that everyone was picking on Rev. Jackson. Likewise, I suspect many of the folks who read Bernard Goldberg's "Bias" ripped into him without reading his work, and that may be the case with "Slander." In any event, here's an honest critique from someone who just finished Coulter's latest.

On one hand, Coulter is hectoring and repetitive. This work, while reasonably well-written, could have been condensed into 40-50 pages because the author makes many of the same points time and again. You are indeed bludgeoned with her bluster about the inability of The Left to fight fair and tell the truth. Even though it's interesting reading, it almost brings on a headache at times.

That said, Ms. Coulter makes some excellent points. The final chapter deals with the Religious Right, and she's on target when she states that the religious right is more a myth than an established group of people who can be villified--yet she points out many Republican politicians who step carefully to avoid being identified with this woefully out of touch group of people.

I have to agree that there's a definite double standard when it comes to name-calling--I'm absolutely fed up with Hollywood types like Julia Roberts, Richard Gere, Rosie O'Donnell and Alec Baldwin using words like "stupid," "repugnant" and "classless" to describe our president. Why is Al Franken allowed to call Rush Limbaugh "a big fat idiot" while the Right is taken to task for not being "sensitive" enough?

Much of what Coulter gripes about has to do with the media. Far as I'm concerned, she doesn't quite have the street-level credibility Bernard Goldberg had because of his many years at CBS, but she does offer intelligent, clear-headed assessments of the same kind of bias Goldberg passed along. She's right when she states that the editorial pages of the New York Times and Washington Post greatly shape the political landscape of our country, because the mainstream network news departments often look to those papers as their cue for the day's top stories. Are these papers--and the mainstream broadcast networks--passing along news in a fair, balanced and non-judgmental way? Not hardly, and everyone knows it. Along those lines, her description of the attempts to damage the credibility of Fox News Channel executive John Ellis during the 2000 presidential election is very, very interesting.

Ultimately, much of this stuff was covered in Goldberg's book, but it's required reading if you enjoy following politics. I dare say that Coulter has created a firestorm on the major broadcast networks as she has promoted her book--worth digging up on the NBC "Today Show" web site is her interview with Katie Couric. Ms. Couric was most defensive, and sparks flew.

Rating:
Summary: So True
Review: You will never watch the news or listen to the radio the same way again. It makes one realize how manipulative the liberals are in todays society.

Rating:
Summary: mistake-filled, vitrolic, emotional, contradictory
Review: it's a shame this kind of [book] passes for "informed discourse" in today's society, it almost makes one feel sorry for the republicans and conservatives who claim this book as some kind of model of good writing. clearly, there are too many errors, invectives masquerading as 'facts,' mean-spirited personal attacks, and plain old nonsense for any intelligent person to bother in detail. But for conservatives, I'd have to say don't waste your time with this, because in a few years when no one listens to her nonsense anymore, you'll be embarrassed you read this instead of say, The Fountainhead. Utter silliness.

Rating:
Summary: Outstanding!
Review: By far the best political book that I have read in years. Ann Coulter has a way with words that has no equal. Not only is the book extremely well documented, it is "laugh out loud" funny. As she documents in her book, conservative books and authors are kept out of the mainstream, so don't look for this on Oprah's list. Buy this book!

Rating:
Summary: some goods points but easily could be written about right
Review: Slander focuses on Ann Coulter's belief about a massive left wing conspiracy bringing down American right. In her book, she does bring out some interesting topics such as the common use of of such terms of 'right-wing' republican or 'religious conservative' while terms such as 'left-wing' democrat or 'pro-union libeal'. However, a lot of her basis for saying this is her searching terms into a lexis-nexis search. Just because the media fails to use certain terms as much as others doesn't mean that they don't exist on realilty. Though, the I agree the media use of such term does in a way demonize them. Of course there are plenty or left-wing democrats and pro-union democats, just as many as right-wing republicans or religious conservatives. Such labels to conservatives have not really hurt their cause, electing popular presidents like Ronald Reagan, and both Bushes or appointing supreme court justices like Rehnquist and Thomas or cabinet members like Ashcroft. In addition, one can see the popularity of such conservatives as Rush Limbaugh, O'Riley and even Ann Coulter herself. Yet I find it interesting that Coulter takes such a hard line stance against moderates in the Republican such as Todd-Whitman and some Senators she describes as the 'New York Times favorite Republicans' (page 177) including Shelby, Specter, Snowe, Collins and Chafee. It's interesting to hear her describe them in such a way, because she seems to say that liberals act in that matter.

Coulter does make some good points such as how the media fails to attack the Democrats from taking money and depending on unions and special interests similar to the Republicans taking money and depending on groups such as the moral majority, the NRA and big business. Also, she deals with how the media is critical of people who used to work for republicans while not giving the same to people who used to work for democrats. Also there are points about liberals are quick to label the right as stupid, idiotic, racist... without really going into much detail about why. Coulter also provides a good defense of Fox News and other right-leaning news sources such as the Wall Street Journal as a means of getting the conservative cause out. This helps to balance things out against more left-wing news sources. In terms of demographics, she does bring out how the so cold religous right is more likely to vote democrat then such special interests to the Democrats such as African-Americans and single-moms.

Rating:
Summary: A bleeding heart liberal enters the fray
Review: As one of the liberals Coulter takes exception with, I approached this book with some trepidation; how could I read this book without responding defensively at every turn? I am more or less the prototypical version of the liberal Coulter dissects in this book: feminist, left leaning, wary of fundamentalist doctrines, ardent abortion rights defender, NPR listener, etc etc and it was a little tough to read page after page of this text--Coulter is *really* angry at liberals. I disagree with much of what she has to say, and I did a little bit of indignant sputtering along the way, but I also found some common ground. Maybe we've earned some of this vitriol. I think there are some places where she makes some good points; ad hominem arguments *don't* advance discourse--calling people you disagree with names is demeaning, distracting and obscures the shades of reality's gray with stark black and white. I don't think that liberals are *exclusively* to blame for all the ills she cataglogs, but I do agree that there has been plenty of mean spirited name calling, petty complaining and plain old bad behavior demonstrated time and again in media, politics and popular culture.

Ultimately my biggest criticism of this book is that Coulter does what she accuses liberals of doing, over and over again. On page 17 she writes "there is nothing so irredeemably cruel as an attack on a woman for her looks...so which women are constantly called ugly?" She lists a series of well known women democrats and then writes "no, none of these, because only liberals would be so malevolent." She concludes the paragraph "and this from the party of Bella Abzug." Why is this neither irredeemably cruel or malevolent? Because it's being used to make a point? Coulter argues that snobbish liberals consider conservatives stupid hicks, but isn't she doubting the intelligence of her readers when her rhetoric is steeped in the very points she is criticizing and she assumes that this will pass unnoticed?

Rating:
Summary: Reality check
Review: I picked this book up after hearing it's author on the Matt Drudge radio show. I have to say....thank you Matt!!!

Once I picked this book up, I couldn't put it down. Though I wish it were longer(200 pages), I enjoyed every minute of it. It took about one day to read.

She combines facts with great humor. In addition, her book has footnotes which require an additional 50 pages to hold. Right after I finished, I bought "Bias" as a follow up.

The truth hurts, and the negative reviews of some reviews demonstrates that. Her listing of events on election night 2000 are eye opening. In addition, she tells readers where some of our TV anchors and print media reporters got their starts(Working for democrats). Some people might not enjoy the book as much, probably because it is part of the "right wing conspiracy".

I do have one complaint, someone else has already borrwed the book, read it, loved it, and given to a friend. I fear I will never see it again!! Don't lend it out.

Rating:
Summary: Dealing with reality
Review: The only possible reason not to be impressed with Ann's linear thinking and well documented presentation of facts in her very sarcaustic style is that the reader is a liberal and the truth hurts.

Ann presents the left and their dishonesty in media in such a way that it cannot be denied. Those who find her book offensive will employ discredidation and more slander to undermine her presentation of the facts, thereby validating her Conservative views and statements of facts.

Ann is an in your liberal face Constitutional Lawyer her knows her stuff and is a force to be taken seriously by the Left.

Rating:
Summary: Ann, will you marry me?
Review: A great exposé on the far-reaching infiltration of liberal bias in today's media. Ann pulls no punches in this tell-all work, (which I'm convinced many liberals know all too well is true, but can't admit). All the entries (as far as I could tell) were based on documented fact, and support many of the same "dirty little secrets" that Bernard Goldberg first revealed in his book, "Bias", about the severe left-slanted spin prevalent in today's major news and entertainment media.

She also comments on the Fox News Channel, and why American viewers are abandoning the traditional news venues like CNN and ABC in droves, in search of more accurate, truthful reporting. The public is tired of being spoonfed liberal tripe (like when the millennium "supposedly" began), and are more and more in search of factual data, sans the tiresome spin and hype that the left is infamous for dispensing. If you are one of those people, you need to get this book! First rate work by the sexiest conservative on the planet. *****'s Ann!

Rating:
Summary: Leave Your Brain at the Door and Call in the Hate!
Review: Ann is obviously dogmatic in her views. She is intent on trashing the liberal threat in every aspect of American life. However, she does this by making some unsubstantiated claims and unfortunate leaps in logic. The gaps in her book become evident in her apparent fear of liberals corrupting the country. She sees phantom liberals hiding in every corner, burning flags on every street, and plotting to resurrect Trotsky in a moments notice. She obviously feels very strongly about her view, and she brings up some good points and issues that need to be discussed, but she reaches conclusions that she doesn't support very well. If you want a book to get you fired up, read it. But it's really just the conservative "Stupid White Men" by Michael Moore. Both are good political candy in their own ways, but neither makes any lasting impression on the discerning reader.