Rating: 
Summary: A wink to other readers...
Review: I loved the book. To those of you that read it and enjoyed it, let's see if what Ms. Coulter says is reflected in these reviews... :)
Rating:
Summary: Accurate take, but Ms. Coulter falters in her conclusion
Review: Excellent volume, overall, but the this excerpt from a recent interview with Katie Couric is relevant to the comment that I'd like to offer on this book:'Ms. COULTER: Yes, a little bit more than that, and that is that political debate with liberals is basically impossible in America today because liberals are calling names while conservatives are trying to make arguments. And when every one of your arguments is characterized as an attempt to bring back slavery or resegregate lunch counters, it's a little hard to have any sort of productive debate." This is where Ms. Coulter fails to step up to the bar in the conclusion of her book. Having made that statement, she, like so many of us, refuses to see the elephant in the living room. And that is that we cannot live in the same society with those with this sort of mindset. At the foundation of the liberal worldview lies the absolute conviction that reason is no guide to action; that one cannot live by principle; that the truth does not matter, and that anything goes if it feels good. Liberals are not friends of liberty, justice and reason. Men of reason and good will can disagree, but for the most part, they are content to let reality be the final arbiter. Facts, reason, logic and a ruthless respect for the truth are the common currency of civilized individuals. The problem with liberals is that You can never simply shrug your shoulders and walk away if you happen to disagree. They'll clap a hand on your shoulder, spin you around and 'improve' your judgement with a gun in your face. Their implicit faith inthe notion of the ultimate malleability of human nature is all that's needed to justify the murderous sprees that have dominated the history of the last century. No mountain of corpses too high, no ocean of blood too deep when it comes to the perfection of the New Man. Remember that the arguments of the left usually devolve into who can justify the most mass murder and tyranny. Liberals and their ilk all know that that's what it would take to realize their sick dreams of dominion over every sphere of human thought and endeavor. Worse, liberals demand that we applaud them for it. At the end of the day, what's left is open warfare. Time to stop deceiving ourselves.
Rating:
Summary: She hit the nail on the head...liberals can't hide anymore!!
Review: Finally, someone has taken the time to meticulously document the myriad of lies and accusations that the left has been waging against the American right for decades. Slander not only debunks the many myths that the liberal media have created about conservatives (ie. how does one become a member of the non-existant religious right?) but it also delves deep into the liberal psyche to expose the true cause of their malicious ways...HATE. Liberals hate conservatives and their ideas and the only way to keep them quiet is to systematically discredit their every thought and idea by repeating mind numbing propaganda so that the average American doesn't have a choice but to eventually accept what their being told...in their predictable 3rd grade liberal mentality...Liberals are good, Conservatives are bad (and of course my daddy can beat up your daddy, too.) Coulter has exposed liberals for what they are (idealess, hate filled, quasi-communists) with air tight research and documentation that could easily rival the Starr report in its depth and accuracy. I highly recommend Slander to anyone who wants to know the truth about the American left and how it is trying to sabotage the American way via Orwellian tactics. Ann is my hero!
Rating:
Summary: To Slander or Not To Slander
Review: Most of the reviews I've read, especially from the left, miss the point of Ann Coulter's new book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right. The main point is that liberals don't argue ideas anymore, they attack people. The left's reviews of her book here on Amazon.com illustrate her point! If you disagree with liberals you are evil, agree with them and you are good. They are more self-righteous than Christian fundamentalists! If you are able to get by the metaphors, humorous pokes and even some invective, you should read this book. Ann does not confuse invective with argument like liberals do. Her arguements are cogently presented and supported with waves of evidence that only a person in denial could reject. Her invective only drives home the point. I think her book is important because it documents with hard evidence that the left is (as Andrew Sullivan and others have said)intellectually dead. The cure is many shots of reason and maturity, not to mention a great deal of soul searching, until the beast is in remission.
Rating:
Summary: A Liberal's Nightmare...
Review: Miss Coulter is one of my new favorite columnists and television personas. She is part of the new breed that will scream and yell louder than the liberal elite. As to her latest book: The first thing I noticed is that Slander is incredibly well-documented. Almost every line is cited and she clearly states how she arrived at her information sources (i.e. LexisNexis, etc.) At times, this can be somewhat tiresome, because it seems for certain sections that we are reading just fact after fact without any opinion. However, it does solidify her opinions even more because she provides so much backup to her points. In regard to the writing style, Miss Coulter has a sense of humor. She is sarcastic and funny. She uses real life quotes to draw out the humor as opposed to trying to make funny points in her own words. I fin dthe book an extremely entertaining read. In terms of content, the book doesn't exactly cover any "new" ground although it does a very good job of solidifying some previously made points. She discusses media bias, the liberal methods of attack, the 2000 election, the rise of the conservative news, and liberal trends throughout history. She makes clear points that will be revered by conservatives and disparaged by liberals. Miss Coulter does not hide her dislike of the liberal attitudes, mindsets, and agenda and she attacks. If you are looking for someone to provide both sides and present a logical, comparative argument then this book is not for you. If you want a straight opinion piece backed up with numerous examples, written in a brash and entertaining fashion, then this book will be for you. Enjoy, I did.
Rating:
Summary: Hit pigeons flutter!
Review: Wow, first I read the book and then I read the reviews!! I can see why so many cranks are writing blistering reviews. This book has more footnotes than my Ph.D. thesis and the reaction to this author brings home her point more than anything else she could put down on paper. Suggestion for Coulter: take the one star reviews and use them to hype the next printing (and the paperback edition) of this most important tome.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant.
Review: Cutting. Incisive. Witty. Charming. Well-reasoned. Concise. Arrogant - but justly so. Illuminating. Accurate. Depressing. Insert your choice of admiring adjective HERE. Coulter reminds me of the few really good college professors I had the fortune to learn from. TNSTAAFL, folks, which is why the liberals in government are eating your lunch for you.
Rating:
Summary: outstanding
Review: After reading Bias I thought there would not be much to add. I was wrong. Ann Coulter uses many of the themes in Bias and takes them to a completely new level. I believe this is a great book for anyone who wants to give an honest look at the media and the distortions that are given.
Rating: 
Summary: Ironic Title, to say the least
Review: ADDENDUM 7-12-02: NOTE TO THOSE WHO ASSUME I HAVEN'T READ THE BOOK; You are correct- I didn't spend a cent on the book; it's available at my library. You are incorrect to say that I didn't read it. You are also incorrect to say that I didn't refer to it's content in the review: I count at least three specific references to content in what is a very short review. Might I suggest that you are projecting your own behavior when you make such assumptions about others? Now, here's what I think of it: Coulter's use of ad hominem attack and downright falsification would qualify this work as slanderous, were her subjects not public figures and hence unable to sue under New York Times v. Sullivan, one of the great liberal decisions of our time that protects her right to liken a morning talk show host with whom she disagrees to Eva Braun, and then in a calculated "backstep", to Joseph Goebbels. This book represents more of the same crying -- or howling-- wolf that the right has perfected. The former tobacco industry apologist who has made a name for herself not through accomplishment in any tangible sense, but rather through making herself into a product and then getting placed, continues the tired routine of whining about how biased "the media" is, in an age where liberal voices have been all but silenced in the torrent of right wing opinion mongering on radio, cable and network news. A movement that fancies itself intellectually viable ought to think twice before embracing a person who views Pat Robertson as insufficiently conservative, as Coulter does in this lightweight doodle.
Rating: 
Summary: beating the subject to death...
Review: First, I agree with her thesis, but I don't think there is enough here to support a whole book. The first chapter is a brilliant essay on the subject, and it may be worth the price of the book to read it. Most of the rest seems redundant. She does provide a lot of footnotes and references, which indicates that she is at least trying to back up her positions with sources one can check into. I doubt that most of her opponents will bother, but at least the information is there. Now, let's review the reviewers... the most fascinating thing I find is that most of the unfriendly reviewers I have read or seen on TV do exactly what she accuses liberals of doing, e.g. call names, comment on her appearance, cite Diane Sawyer as an example of a supposed Republican who is now in the major media, etc., and they fail to see the irony of this. I think that this predictive value (if you will) of her writing supports her thesis as well or better than the references.
| 
