What do you think?
Rate this book
Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America
“Liberals seem to have hit upon a reverse Christ story as their belief system. He suffered and died for our sins; liberals make the rest of us suffer for sins we didn’t commit.”
Who are the victims here? To hear liberals tell it, you’d think they do nothing but suffer at the hands of ruthless entities like the “Republican Attack Machine” and Fox News.
Really?
It’s just another instance of the Big Lie, of course, told so often that some people have actually started to believe it. In Guilty , Ann Coulter explodes this myth to reveal that when it comes to bullying, no one outdoes the Left. Citing case after case, ranging from the hilariously absurd to the shockingly vicious, Coulter dissects these so-called victims who are invariably the oppressors. For
•Single Getting pregnant isn’t like catching the flu. There are volitional acts involved–someone else explain it to Dennis Kucinich. By this purposeful act, single mothers cause irreparable harm to other human beings–their own children–as countless studies on the subject make clear.
•The myth of the Republican Attack The most amazing thing liberals have done is create the myth of a compliant right-wing media with Republicans badgering baffled reporters into attacking Democrats. It’s so mad, it’s brilliant. It’s one kind of lie to say the Holocaust occurred when the Swedes killed the Jews. But it’s another kind of lie entirely to say the Holocaust occurred when the Jews killed the Nazis.
•“Brave” In addition to being beautiful, compassionate tribunes of the downtrodden, liberals are brave. I know that because they’re always telling me how brave they are. Why, five nights a week, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann courageously books guests who completely agree with him. It doesn’t get much braver than that.
•Obambi’s While B. Hussein Obama piously condemned attacks on candidates’ families, his media and campaign surrogates ripped open the court-sealed divorce records of his two principal opponents in his Senate race in Illinois.
•The offenders are offended!: Republican senator George Allen’s career was destroyed when he made a joking remark to a privileged Indian American harassing him at campaign stops. When did rich kids become a new protected category that must be shielded from words that are insulting in other languages? How did Sidarth become a specially anointed victim? What did we ever do to India? And why didn’t we ever hear about the far more offensive anti-Semitic flyers of Allen’s opponent Jim Webb?
One essential and recurring truth about self-righteous liberals, says Coulter, is that “they viciously attack all while wailing that they are the true victims.” With Guilty –a mordantly witty and shockingly specific catalog of offenses that liberals would rather we ignore and forget–Ann Coulter presents exhibits A through Z.
From the Hardcover edition.
Who are the victims here? To hear liberals tell it, you’d think they do nothing but suffer at the hands of ruthless entities like the “Republican Attack Machine” and Fox News.
Really?
It’s just another instance of the Big Lie, of course, told so often that some people have actually started to believe it. In Guilty , Ann Coulter explodes this myth to reveal that when it comes to bullying, no one outdoes the Left. Citing case after case, ranging from the hilariously absurd to the shockingly vicious, Coulter dissects these so-called victims who are invariably the oppressors. For
•Single Getting pregnant isn’t like catching the flu. There are volitional acts involved–someone else explain it to Dennis Kucinich. By this purposeful act, single mothers cause irreparable harm to other human beings–their own children–as countless studies on the subject make clear.
•The myth of the Republican Attack The most amazing thing liberals have done is create the myth of a compliant right-wing media with Republicans badgering baffled reporters into attacking Democrats. It’s so mad, it’s brilliant. It’s one kind of lie to say the Holocaust occurred when the Swedes killed the Jews. But it’s another kind of lie entirely to say the Holocaust occurred when the Jews killed the Nazis.
•“Brave” In addition to being beautiful, compassionate tribunes of the downtrodden, liberals are brave. I know that because they’re always telling me how brave they are. Why, five nights a week, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann courageously books guests who completely agree with him. It doesn’t get much braver than that.
•Obambi’s While B. Hussein Obama piously condemned attacks on candidates’ families, his media and campaign surrogates ripped open the court-sealed divorce records of his two principal opponents in his Senate race in Illinois.
•The offenders are offended!: Republican senator George Allen’s career was destroyed when he made a joking remark to a privileged Indian American harassing him at campaign stops. When did rich kids become a new protected category that must be shielded from words that are insulting in other languages? How did Sidarth become a specially anointed victim? What did we ever do to India? And why didn’t we ever hear about the far more offensive anti-Semitic flyers of Allen’s opponent Jim Webb?
One essential and recurring truth about self-righteous liberals, says Coulter, is that “they viciously attack all while wailing that they are the true victims.” With Guilty –a mordantly witty and shockingly specific catalog of offenses that liberals would rather we ignore and forget–Ann Coulter presents exhibits A through Z.
From the Hardcover edition.
496 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
About the author
Ann Coulter
26 books430 followersAnn Coulter is the author of seven New York Times bestsellers — Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America (January 2009);If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans (October, 2007); Godless: The Church of Liberalism (June 2006); How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must)(October, 2004); Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism (June 2003); Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (June 2002); and High Crimes and Misdemeanors:The Case Against Bill Clinton (August 1998).
Coulter is the legal correspondent for Human Events and writes a popular syndicated column for Universal Press Syndicate.
She is a frequent guest on many TV shows, including The Today Show, Good Morning America, The Early Show, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Hannity, The O'Reilly Factor, The Glen Beck Show, HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, and has been profiled in numerous publications, including TV Guide, the Guardian (UK), the New York Observer, National Journal, Harper's Bazaar, and Elle magazine. She was the April 25, 2005 cover story of Time magazine.
In 2001, Coulter was named one of the top 100 Public Intellectuals by federal judge Richard Posner.
A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
Coulter clerked for the Honorable Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.
After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.
Coulter is the legal correspondent for Human Events and writes a popular syndicated column for Universal Press Syndicate.
She is a frequent guest on many TV shows, including The Today Show, Good Morning America, The Early Show, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Hannity, The O'Reilly Factor, The Glen Beck Show, HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, and has been profiled in numerous publications, including TV Guide, the Guardian (UK), the New York Observer, National Journal, Harper's Bazaar, and Elle magazine. She was the April 25, 2005 cover story of Time magazine.
In 2001, Coulter was named one of the top 100 Public Intellectuals by federal judge Richard Posner.
A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
Coulter clerked for the Honorable Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.
After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 175 reviews
January 30, 2009
The only people who read Coulter are Extremists; she fuels their political conviction. There is nothing moderate about Guilty. It doesn’t persuade, argue or take stance. It is a blatant venomous rant against the Left. It is too obvious to be humorous, too predictable to be exciting. Her research department is a handful of college conservatives running Lexis-Nexis searches for articles she can assault. Her proof of Liberal media bias consists of out of context quotes from obscure politicians and anorexic young starlets. I can forgive her rabid shtick; she’s just making a living working a niche. I can’t forgive her complete lack of wit and talent. Guilty is an unbook. It is a collection of quotes and acidic refutations that could be rearranged randomly without anyone noticing.
April 7, 2011
Less a book than a piece of carefully calibrated propaganda for Ms. Coulter's tweets, GUILTY will find exactly the audience it is intended to, and speaks directly to their prejudices and anxieties, like all good fascism does. So you can expect middle class values ensrhined as a kind of self-congratulatory gospel of intolerance. No sense of global politics, no sense of history, and no real grasp of the imaginary statistics that might back up her (un)shocking assertions about the evils of social responsibility, free thought, and political context.
If Coulter's ideas were more original or her wit sharper I would admire her. I cannot even dislike her as a cardboard pundit, because she is a blonde face on a bland machine. As it is I think she is a very lucky lady milking her moment for every shekel she can squeeze out of the moron majority.
Lots of idiots to harvest, so her scythe will stay busy...
If Coulter's ideas were more original or her wit sharper I would admire her. I cannot even dislike her as a cardboard pundit, because she is a blonde face on a bland machine. As it is I think she is a very lucky lady milking her moment for every shekel she can squeeze out of the moron majority.
Lots of idiots to harvest, so her scythe will stay busy...
October 2, 2013
Ann Coulter Pushes GOP To Shut Down Government Over Obamacare headline on 8 August 2013.
“You need to win elections, and that’s how you actually change stuff. I was working for the U.S. Senate after the 1994 election,” Coulter said. “Things were going gangbusters. … And yet, the government got shut down in the end of 1995. … It really, really hurt Republicans.” Ann Coulter on Hannity, discussing the same topic, on 22 March 2013.
January 14, 2009
Wow! After I heard NBC banned Ann Coulter because of this book, I just had to read it. Liberals are just SO sensitive. She has all the names, dates and stats. Ambrose Bierce said "Use emotion when the facts are against you".
July 30, 2011
When I picked up this book at the library (I wouldn't actually spend money on any book she writes) I was determined to read it with an objective focus, despite the hateful titles which one could judge by the cover. I just wanted to see what kind of arguments she presented. Yet I knew full well there'd be a lot of eye rolling.
Obviously I skimmed most of it but it didn't take long for me to surmise that very few people would actually take her seriously. She's there for shock value and the amusement of extreme conservatives. Oh, yeah, and she's hot. I'm sure most of her fan base are men who hear nothing but "blah blah blah" while waiting for her to bend over so they can get a glimpse of her cleavage.
See? Her attitude just taunts a person to retaliate in a nasty way. I'd never normally put someone down like that.
She likens politics to bullies on the play ground, which is actually quite accurate. Her use of the name B. Hussein Obama is a direct example of how bullies would act; make fun of the person, make personal attacks. It's like calling the kid with glasses "four-eyes." My favorite description of the President is "jug-eared clodhopper".
However, she seems to use insults as support for her arguments, presents opinion as fact, such as, racism doesn't exist and Watergate was a boring story. Yes, there are facts that she points out about liberals screwing up and how they've wasted vast amounts of money following their hearts. But aside from annoying behavior she fails to prove how liberals and their "wolf pack" media actually negatively affect America as a whole, such as wild swings in the stock market, extensive environmental damage or widespread health complications.
It's nit-picking, indulgence of cutting people down. She's in the same ball field as the Westboro Baptist Church - representing very few opinions.
Obviously I skimmed most of it but it didn't take long for me to surmise that very few people would actually take her seriously. She's there for shock value and the amusement of extreme conservatives. Oh, yeah, and she's hot. I'm sure most of her fan base are men who hear nothing but "blah blah blah" while waiting for her to bend over so they can get a glimpse of her cleavage.
See? Her attitude just taunts a person to retaliate in a nasty way. I'd never normally put someone down like that.
She likens politics to bullies on the play ground, which is actually quite accurate. Her use of the name B. Hussein Obama is a direct example of how bullies would act; make fun of the person, make personal attacks. It's like calling the kid with glasses "four-eyes." My favorite description of the President is "jug-eared clodhopper".
However, she seems to use insults as support for her arguments, presents opinion as fact, such as, racism doesn't exist and Watergate was a boring story. Yes, there are facts that she points out about liberals screwing up and how they've wasted vast amounts of money following their hearts. But aside from annoying behavior she fails to prove how liberals and their "wolf pack" media actually negatively affect America as a whole, such as wild swings in the stock market, extensive environmental damage or widespread health complications.
It's nit-picking, indulgence of cutting people down. She's in the same ball field as the Westboro Baptist Church - representing very few opinions.
October 16, 2009
Shrill, opinionated, one-sided and poorly argued: Personal versus substantive attacks. If this book was researched like her other books, a lot to the "facts" about the "Liberal Media" are based on misleading Nexus/Lexus search results. Takes offense at the mainstream, and calls it Liberal. Bunches together all sorts of groups into an amorphous mass of undifferentiated "Liberal."
And, she is wildly inaccurate in a lot of places. Take, for instance, her scoffing at the Obama campaign's fears of the "Right-Wing Attack Machine." Yet this machine actually does appear to exist, just below the radar.
Here's an example from "W's" 2004 bid: In the SC Primary, ads suddenly "appeared" hinting that John McCain had a love child w/ a black woman. Asinine. Unfounded. But the target audience is clear: either overtly or covertly racist white people. Follow that up with the Swift Boating of Kerry in the general election.
Twice, the same thing happened: An unfounded, hearsay attack, running counter to established facts appeared at the right time to push W into office. Plausible deniability from the campaign. Empirically, such strongly correlated phenomena point towards one conclusion: Something is likely happening. I doubt it is a conspiracy. But it does smack of a well run marketing campaign.
So, here's the net result of W's election and the "Right-Wing/ Republican (Rove's ?) Attack Machine:" Two Vietnam vets who served with honor are dragged through the public square. A half informed public running around, trying to distinguish the real from the false--If they have the time or energy after school and soccer practice and laundry and dishes and home improvement projects. Is that the America we want? Is it ethical for political wonks, who know the facts, to willfully deceive? Is there no decency left in this country? Think of that when you listen to claims of Right-Wing patriotism.
The likely reason why the attacks did not take place in 2008 is that A) Democratic strategists, by mentioning the attacks before they actually happened effectively "inoculated" the masses against spurious, viral smears; and B) McCain was, at base level, a man of extreme honor. Not perfect, but a man worthy of respect.
Coulter's style throughout the book is more mean spirited than funny. Though I thought that her calling Obama O-Bambi was witty. But not particularly moving.
BTW: I found her take on the potentially destructive impacts single motherhood has on children and society thought-provoking. Even through her insensitive shrillness. But I question whether her data is accurate: Is it coming from peer reviewed sources? Or from rightist think-tanks without the requisite intellectual rigor that peer review entails, like the Cato Institute? Is single motherhood the cause or the symptom of societal ills?
And, she is wildly inaccurate in a lot of places. Take, for instance, her scoffing at the Obama campaign's fears of the "Right-Wing Attack Machine." Yet this machine actually does appear to exist, just below the radar.
Here's an example from "W's" 2004 bid: In the SC Primary, ads suddenly "appeared" hinting that John McCain had a love child w/ a black woman. Asinine. Unfounded. But the target audience is clear: either overtly or covertly racist white people. Follow that up with the Swift Boating of Kerry in the general election.
Twice, the same thing happened: An unfounded, hearsay attack, running counter to established facts appeared at the right time to push W into office. Plausible deniability from the campaign. Empirically, such strongly correlated phenomena point towards one conclusion: Something is likely happening. I doubt it is a conspiracy. But it does smack of a well run marketing campaign.
So, here's the net result of W's election and the "Right-Wing/ Republican (Rove's ?) Attack Machine:" Two Vietnam vets who served with honor are dragged through the public square. A half informed public running around, trying to distinguish the real from the false--If they have the time or energy after school and soccer practice and laundry and dishes and home improvement projects. Is that the America we want? Is it ethical for political wonks, who know the facts, to willfully deceive? Is there no decency left in this country? Think of that when you listen to claims of Right-Wing patriotism.
The likely reason why the attacks did not take place in 2008 is that A) Democratic strategists, by mentioning the attacks before they actually happened effectively "inoculated" the masses against spurious, viral smears; and B) McCain was, at base level, a man of extreme honor. Not perfect, but a man worthy of respect.
Coulter's style throughout the book is more mean spirited than funny. Though I thought that her calling Obama O-Bambi was witty. But not particularly moving.
BTW: I found her take on the potentially destructive impacts single motherhood has on children and society thought-provoking. Even through her insensitive shrillness. But I question whether her data is accurate: Is it coming from peer reviewed sources? Or from rightist think-tanks without the requisite intellectual rigor that peer review entails, like the Cato Institute? Is single motherhood the cause or the symptom of societal ills?
February 27, 2009
I used to like Ann Coulter's stuff, especially Treason, which I think is her best book... but this one was just irrational screaming. I only made it through about a chapter and promptly returned it to the library. She does bring up some interesting points, but she does it in such an unnecessarily inflammatory way, it undermines her credibility severely. She needs a good editor to tone down the crap.
February 4, 2009
Ann, in her usual pointed way, makes a forceful case that those who claim to be victims are often the ones who have created havoc on others. There is plenty examples of liberal hypocrisy which should make any fair thinking person angry at the unfairness of it all. The main stream media is a rich target at which Ann takes deadly aim.
February 11, 2014
Why?, you may ask. Well, 1) I have never actually read an Ann Coulter book, having only heard her views as one of those conservative talking-heads on news shows as well as some of her early appearances on Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect (remember that show?), and her name seems to come up frequently in some of the books I have read recently, so I figured I would make the attempt; 2) I consider myself a liberal, and I honestly wanted to know why Coulter and fellow conservative Republicans appear to hate me and my fellow liberals so much; and 3) I do not want to contribute anymore to the already-polluted national conversation in which both sides bicker endlessly by trying to out-insult each other without actually listening to what either side has to say, so I sincerely wanted to read and attempt to understand the other side of the argument.
I chose "Guilty" out of her steadily-growing body of work for no apparent reason, completely arbitrarily. Let me start by saying that it is clear that Coulter is an intelligent person, who clearly and passionately cares about politics and its place in the world today. Let me also start by saying that I actually found myself agreeing with some of what she had to say, mostly regarding the media, and probably would have appreciated more of her arguments if it weren't for the way she formulated her arguments.
To explain: It's apparent from reading her book that Coulter may not have taken a college course in debate, speech, or basic rhetoric, or, if she did, may have skipped the day in which it was discussed that one's argument loses credibility when you mock, ridicule, insult, or verbally assault your opponent or the very people whom you are trying to convince. It's also not always wise to interject humor, especially when such humor is inappropriate, insensitive, or just plain mean-spirited.
To exemplify: In Chapter 2: "Victim of a Crime? Thank a Single Mother", Coulter argues that single mothers (women who choose single motherhood, that is, as opposed to widows and divorcees who are involuntary thrust into single motherhood) not only cost taxpayers roughly $112 billion every year (according to a 2008 study) but place an extra burden on our nation's law enforcement because "of their higher likelihood to neglect or kill their children in order to spend more time with their boyfriends". (This statement, by the way, is NOT supported by any cited study.) She goes on to list several well-publicized murder cases involving single mothers and their children, including Susan Smith and Casey Anthony. Now, while her argument appeals primarily to emotion rather than logic, Coulter's tirade against single mothers is going pretty strong, up until this: "In 1998, twenty-five-year-old single mother Tami Lynn Richards left her two children, three and one and a half years old, alone in their apartment while she went to a bar to drink and listen to a band. One of the boys set a fire when he was playing with matches he found in the apartment. Both boys died. On the other hand, from what I hear, the band was pretty awesome." There is a proper time and place for humor, but I'm pretty sure a discussion of two young boys killed in a fire through a mother's neglect is neither. It's in poor taste and callous.
In another example from Chapter 4: "Witless Witnesses to History", Coulter's argument turns to government insiders who write tell-all books. Specifically, she refers to Scott McClellan's book "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception", a book that I read and, admittedly, found to be rather tame in its accusations, which made Bush out to be less of a monster and more of an easily-suggestible and somewhat incompetent commander-in-chief. Strangely enough, Coulter doesn't attack McClellan's main arguments, which are primarily Bush's misleading if not outright deceptive campaign to start a war in Iraq based on false intelligence, his incompetence and possible (but unprovable) involvement in the Plamegate affair, and his complete snafu from day one of Hurricane Katrina. She doesn't mention these at all. She does, however, mention that McClellan "claimed to have overheard Bush telling someone on the phone that maybe he had done cocaine after all!" Really? Is that seriously the only take-away message she got from the book? Or maybe she was just being sarcastic. It's okay to accuse some of these tell-all writers of just wanting to jump on the anti-Bush bandwagon. I agree with her on that point, but she could have ended her argument there, but, no, she had to go one unnecessary step further and insult McClellan's weight by repeatedly referring to him as a "butterball", at one point referring to him as "a little worm", "a retarded press secretary", and insinuating (several times) that he is probably gay. Huh?
In later chapters, Coulter continues her verbal assault on specific liberals (by name) and liberals in general by referring to most of them as "left-wing zealots" (okay, sure, some of them are), "Communists" (iffy), "anarchists" (not really...), and "pacifistic" (? Surely not all, but since when was pacifism a bad thing anyway?). While some of Coulter's main points about liberals often playing the victim card to score points may be on the money, it's hard to buy much of what she says because most of it is couched in the very same tactics of insult-slinging and unsubstantiated "facts" and statistics that she accuses liberals of using.
I haven't given up on Coulter, because, as I've mentioned, I think she may have some excellent points to make. I just wish she'd make them and quit whining already...
I chose "Guilty" out of her steadily-growing body of work for no apparent reason, completely arbitrarily. Let me start by saying that it is clear that Coulter is an intelligent person, who clearly and passionately cares about politics and its place in the world today. Let me also start by saying that I actually found myself agreeing with some of what she had to say, mostly regarding the media, and probably would have appreciated more of her arguments if it weren't for the way she formulated her arguments.
To explain: It's apparent from reading her book that Coulter may not have taken a college course in debate, speech, or basic rhetoric, or, if she did, may have skipped the day in which it was discussed that one's argument loses credibility when you mock, ridicule, insult, or verbally assault your opponent or the very people whom you are trying to convince. It's also not always wise to interject humor, especially when such humor is inappropriate, insensitive, or just plain mean-spirited.
To exemplify: In Chapter 2: "Victim of a Crime? Thank a Single Mother", Coulter argues that single mothers (women who choose single motherhood, that is, as opposed to widows and divorcees who are involuntary thrust into single motherhood) not only cost taxpayers roughly $112 billion every year (according to a 2008 study) but place an extra burden on our nation's law enforcement because "of their higher likelihood to neglect or kill their children in order to spend more time with their boyfriends". (This statement, by the way, is NOT supported by any cited study.) She goes on to list several well-publicized murder cases involving single mothers and their children, including Susan Smith and Casey Anthony. Now, while her argument appeals primarily to emotion rather than logic, Coulter's tirade against single mothers is going pretty strong, up until this: "In 1998, twenty-five-year-old single mother Tami Lynn Richards left her two children, three and one and a half years old, alone in their apartment while she went to a bar to drink and listen to a band. One of the boys set a fire when he was playing with matches he found in the apartment. Both boys died. On the other hand, from what I hear, the band was pretty awesome." There is a proper time and place for humor, but I'm pretty sure a discussion of two young boys killed in a fire through a mother's neglect is neither. It's in poor taste and callous.
In another example from Chapter 4: "Witless Witnesses to History", Coulter's argument turns to government insiders who write tell-all books. Specifically, she refers to Scott McClellan's book "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception", a book that I read and, admittedly, found to be rather tame in its accusations, which made Bush out to be less of a monster and more of an easily-suggestible and somewhat incompetent commander-in-chief. Strangely enough, Coulter doesn't attack McClellan's main arguments, which are primarily Bush's misleading if not outright deceptive campaign to start a war in Iraq based on false intelligence, his incompetence and possible (but unprovable) involvement in the Plamegate affair, and his complete snafu from day one of Hurricane Katrina. She doesn't mention these at all. She does, however, mention that McClellan "claimed to have overheard Bush telling someone on the phone that maybe he had done cocaine after all!" Really? Is that seriously the only take-away message she got from the book? Or maybe she was just being sarcastic. It's okay to accuse some of these tell-all writers of just wanting to jump on the anti-Bush bandwagon. I agree with her on that point, but she could have ended her argument there, but, no, she had to go one unnecessary step further and insult McClellan's weight by repeatedly referring to him as a "butterball", at one point referring to him as "a little worm", "a retarded press secretary", and insinuating (several times) that he is probably gay. Huh?
In later chapters, Coulter continues her verbal assault on specific liberals (by name) and liberals in general by referring to most of them as "left-wing zealots" (okay, sure, some of them are), "Communists" (iffy), "anarchists" (not really...), and "pacifistic" (? Surely not all, but since when was pacifism a bad thing anyway?). While some of Coulter's main points about liberals often playing the victim card to score points may be on the money, it's hard to buy much of what she says because most of it is couched in the very same tactics of insult-slinging and unsubstantiated "facts" and statistics that she accuses liberals of using.
I haven't given up on Coulter, because, as I've mentioned, I think she may have some excellent points to make. I just wish she'd make them and quit whining already...
January 18, 2011
This would be my favorite of her books because she really slams the double standard and silliness of the liberal position. The classless slander and debasement of anything to do with republicans or conservatives.
She over and over again shows the complete breakdown of the liberal logic, which is a brand of insanity rather than any form of logic. She clearly explains how liberals find a victim of some supposed atrocity that the right has done and then goes to work to either ruin the supposed perpatrator of injustice or at least make them run and hide because of the shame they bring down on them. I nearly needed a barf bag to read this book because of the many well documented cases she writes about with her usual wit and sarcasm that her fans so enjoy.
Chapter two really opened my eyes to the mess created by single mothers, I was shocked to see the ramifications of this movement, she documents the statistics, the cases, the liberal bafoons that promote this lifestyle as it tears our country down day by day. Its clear that the liberals aren't for america, they are for doing whatever keeps them in power.
Chapter three she points out the silliness of the claim that there is a republican attack machine, all the while it's really a Democratic Attack machine, and of course backs it up with all the newspaper reports that show the bias on the search engine nexus, again the insanity caused my stomach to burn with disgust.
Chapter four describes the lefts desire to go to great lengths to show the failings of the Republican party and its members by the kiss and tell books by members of the Rep. party who switched sides write, it is always the morons of the republican party that leave to join the party of change, she goes over the countless examples of the Dems inability to reasonably look at History or its own mistakes and judge soundly, instead they name call, point fingers and throw tantrums whenever their side is held to the same standard as Repubs. Too many details to give account but eye opening to say the least.
Chapter five is about sex and scandal, the left has innapropriate sex and it's no big deal, hetero or homosexual sex, the right has innapropriate sex in or out of marriage, hetero or homosexual sex and its a scandulous hailstorm of negative press, there could be identical instances and the right would be raked over the coals, while the left would get a pass, again countless sightings by Ann makes you wonder if you are really living in a dream sequence.
Chapter six was more of the same but its what I fear is the chapter that defines our time, the lefts need for domination of power, humans have a propensity toward that, they (democrats) are the power-mad do nothings that are a commercial for this brand of wickedness.
They held control of congress for near 50 years, and I suspect their goal is to try again to gain that power, they have destroyed the ability to think critically with the educational system they employ, laws are made to shut people up so they can't dissent, they have most of the lawyers, the schools, the judges, the supreme court possibly, so the last thing is capitalism which is teetering, with countless regulations and will topple if they have their way. They received a gift wrapped control of the U.S. by more than 50% of Americans in November. Scary stuff this chapter so read with a tissue to wipe the tears as you see the best country in the history of this world being swallowed by those who think they can help by doing the very same things they accuse the right of doing, fascism, dictatorial power, jihad against our constitution and a loss of liberty that has never been seen in America nor expected by the utopian liberals who don't get it.
Chapter seven was the last and my favorite because it shows the emotional makeup of liberals better than anything I've read. They seem to remind me of the last kid picked in kick ball in grade school, and they are now going to show the world that they can't be kicked around now that they are senators, they are important, they are sticking up for the little guy, they care, they will be there for the down trodden of society, yet all their programs fail, because they instill laziness. Ann communicates again and again that if people want to do nothing they should suffer the consequences not be fed funds from others who are doing something. They don't mind making laws that hurt the average person because they don't effect their (Congress)standard of living, their safety, their education, they shield themselves from those woes because of money, power and connections. Liberals have bought into the idea of questioning authority, as long as the authority is conservative, they have bought into the idea of stopping racism even if they become racists in doing so, they save one child from scorn while scorning another, Ann points these things out page after page, and I have shaken my head in disgust so many times I have a neck brace now. If you are liberal read this and be open to the possibility that the smoke that has entered you from your posterior has clouded your judgment, and if you are conservative read this for knowledge of the leftist agenda and to make the NY Times mad for having it on the best sellers list for a long time...well at least for the few more months of their existence anyway.
She over and over again shows the complete breakdown of the liberal logic, which is a brand of insanity rather than any form of logic. She clearly explains how liberals find a victim of some supposed atrocity that the right has done and then goes to work to either ruin the supposed perpatrator of injustice or at least make them run and hide because of the shame they bring down on them. I nearly needed a barf bag to read this book because of the many well documented cases she writes about with her usual wit and sarcasm that her fans so enjoy.
Chapter two really opened my eyes to the mess created by single mothers, I was shocked to see the ramifications of this movement, she documents the statistics, the cases, the liberal bafoons that promote this lifestyle as it tears our country down day by day. Its clear that the liberals aren't for america, they are for doing whatever keeps them in power.
Chapter three she points out the silliness of the claim that there is a republican attack machine, all the while it's really a Democratic Attack machine, and of course backs it up with all the newspaper reports that show the bias on the search engine nexus, again the insanity caused my stomach to burn with disgust.
Chapter four describes the lefts desire to go to great lengths to show the failings of the Republican party and its members by the kiss and tell books by members of the Rep. party who switched sides write, it is always the morons of the republican party that leave to join the party of change, she goes over the countless examples of the Dems inability to reasonably look at History or its own mistakes and judge soundly, instead they name call, point fingers and throw tantrums whenever their side is held to the same standard as Repubs. Too many details to give account but eye opening to say the least.
Chapter five is about sex and scandal, the left has innapropriate sex and it's no big deal, hetero or homosexual sex, the right has innapropriate sex in or out of marriage, hetero or homosexual sex and its a scandulous hailstorm of negative press, there could be identical instances and the right would be raked over the coals, while the left would get a pass, again countless sightings by Ann makes you wonder if you are really living in a dream sequence.
Chapter six was more of the same but its what I fear is the chapter that defines our time, the lefts need for domination of power, humans have a propensity toward that, they (democrats) are the power-mad do nothings that are a commercial for this brand of wickedness.
They held control of congress for near 50 years, and I suspect their goal is to try again to gain that power, they have destroyed the ability to think critically with the educational system they employ, laws are made to shut people up so they can't dissent, they have most of the lawyers, the schools, the judges, the supreme court possibly, so the last thing is capitalism which is teetering, with countless regulations and will topple if they have their way. They received a gift wrapped control of the U.S. by more than 50% of Americans in November. Scary stuff this chapter so read with a tissue to wipe the tears as you see the best country in the history of this world being swallowed by those who think they can help by doing the very same things they accuse the right of doing, fascism, dictatorial power, jihad against our constitution and a loss of liberty that has never been seen in America nor expected by the utopian liberals who don't get it.
Chapter seven was the last and my favorite because it shows the emotional makeup of liberals better than anything I've read. They seem to remind me of the last kid picked in kick ball in grade school, and they are now going to show the world that they can't be kicked around now that they are senators, they are important, they are sticking up for the little guy, they care, they will be there for the down trodden of society, yet all their programs fail, because they instill laziness. Ann communicates again and again that if people want to do nothing they should suffer the consequences not be fed funds from others who are doing something. They don't mind making laws that hurt the average person because they don't effect their (Congress)standard of living, their safety, their education, they shield themselves from those woes because of money, power and connections. Liberals have bought into the idea of questioning authority, as long as the authority is conservative, they have bought into the idea of stopping racism even if they become racists in doing so, they save one child from scorn while scorning another, Ann points these things out page after page, and I have shaken my head in disgust so many times I have a neck brace now. If you are liberal read this and be open to the possibility that the smoke that has entered you from your posterior has clouded your judgment, and if you are conservative read this for knowledge of the leftist agenda and to make the NY Times mad for having it on the best sellers list for a long time...well at least for the few more months of their existence anyway.
May 18, 2011
Many people, and not just liberal, see red when the name of Ann Coulter is brought up. This has very little to do with the design of her book covers, and everything to do with the perception of her being unduly confrontational and mean-spirited. And yet many of her critics when pressed are seldom able to come up with any particular statement of hers that is outrageous, but rather relay and hearsay and other secondary sources. Granted, she does make many outlandish statements, but they are made as a joke and people who take them too seriously usually don't have very good sense of humor or are unable to appreciate irony. What her critics usually don't hold against her is the factual validity of her writing. Unlike many other pundits with a few books credited to their name, Ann writes and researches all of her books on her own. Despite the healthy dose of humor in her writing, she is not an author of light-reading material. There is a lot of thought-provoking stuff in her books. "Guilty" is no exception. From the opening pages till the end it presents the reader with some of the more outrageous behaviors that have either been neglected or downright praised by the media. The most outrageous of these is the recent cult of single motherhood. As Ann points out, being brought up by a single mother is one of the most significant risk factors for all sorts of problems later on in life. There are many women who with no fault of their own end up raising children on their own, but these are not the women that Ann has an issue with. What's at stake are the women who choose to raise their children with no father around, and these women are increasingly lauded as role models in today's culture. This trend has negative consequences that are already being felt, but are likely only to get worse in the upcoming years. Unfortunately, most of those who criticize Ann for this book miss the point that she was trying to make. This is just one of the examples of the material that is covered in the book. It will inform you, entertain you and outrage you - all at the same time. We are fortunate to have someone like Ann write about these things.
March 19, 2009
so sorry, but i must admit to a guilty pleasure. i love to read ann. she is witty and brilliant in her assessments of the people and times we live with and in. while one may not always agree with her analyses, she always tells it as she sees it. great fun to get a different perspective on the current culture. she knows it too. folks should just learn to take her statements and enjoy her refreshingly candid pronouncements and go with the flow. she is the conservative response to bill maher who makes his same kinds of statements to great liberal acclaim. if camille paglia likes her, how can anyone object? you go, girl.
October 14, 2009
An insulting, shrink-wrapped skull. Her treatment of the 9-11 widows was sickening -- she essentially told them to shut up and go enjoy their money while she takes center stage on the cable shows (and rakes in $20k per speaking appearance). What a waste of a law school education.
December 14, 2015
I read this for the comedic value and even then it was unbearable. It's like the author was being serious about this.
Oh wait, she was?
Wow.
Oh wait, she was?
Wow.
February 11, 2013
Here are some things about Ann Coulter
1. She's a not a very nice person (at least her "writing" voice is nasty, she may be perfectly lovely in person)
2. She's a hypocrite (she "whines" more than any liberal I've ever met)
But on the other hand
3. She is brilliant
4. She is funny
I read her stuff because it gets me thinking, I always have a visceral reaction and would love to meet this woman in person and argue with her.To be fair and opened minded there are plenty of things I agree with her about as well, but her generalizations force you into an opposing corner as soon as you don't agree with her premises. I don't think she can comprehend that there are independent minded political people who don't "buy into" a particular party's entire platform. She is an extremist to put it mildly.
1. She's a not a very nice person (at least her "writing" voice is nasty, she may be perfectly lovely in person)
2. She's a hypocrite (she "whines" more than any liberal I've ever met)
But on the other hand
3. She is brilliant
4. She is funny
I read her stuff because it gets me thinking, I always have a visceral reaction and would love to meet this woman in person and argue with her.To be fair and opened minded there are plenty of things I agree with her about as well, but her generalizations force you into an opposing corner as soon as you don't agree with her premises. I don't think she can comprehend that there are independent minded political people who don't "buy into" a particular party's entire platform. She is an extremist to put it mildly.
June 17, 2015
A masterful polemic, GUILTY covers a lot of familiar ground, but does so in a way that feels fresh and invigorating. Sure, everyone is familiar with liberal bias in the media, but never have I seen the topic covered in such an engaging, definitive, and irrefutable manner (and in just a handful of chapters, too!).
The American Left has created a national narrative in which members of the Left forever play the role of victims and martyrs, while those on the Right are always cast as bullies and aggressors. For the Left, this narrative never falters, even in situations where reality is the exact opposite. It's as though a liberal could punch a conservative in the face for no reason whatsoever, and the next day THE NEW YORK TIMES would denounce the conservative for hurting the liberal's fist.
Ann Coulter has made several controversial statements in the past, and a couple of them might rightly be considered offensive. That doesn't make Coulter the worst person on Earth, as so many on the Left would have you believe. The problem with edgy people is that they sometimes go too far. But imagine how boring the world would be without them. I'm sometimes offended by guys like Louis C.K. and Chris Rock, but that doesn't mean I don't look forward to their next project.
The only part of this book that any normal person might find "shocking" is the chapter criticizing single motherhood. I think the basic point Coulter is trying to make is solid, but she's definitely guilty of over-simplifying a very complicated issue. Her tone in this chapter is also unnecessarily harsh, and I suspect this was done intentionally to spark controversy and get people talking about the book. Still, I respect her for tackling an issue that most pundits wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. I also respect that, although her personality is always on full display throughout this book, she never uses herself or her personal experiences to illustrate a point. Often, conservative writers tackle media bias by showing how they themselves were mistreated by the media, and how they responded in heroic fashion. Refreshingly, Ann doesn't do this, and it's a better book for it.
The American Left has created a national narrative in which members of the Left forever play the role of victims and martyrs, while those on the Right are always cast as bullies and aggressors. For the Left, this narrative never falters, even in situations where reality is the exact opposite. It's as though a liberal could punch a conservative in the face for no reason whatsoever, and the next day THE NEW YORK TIMES would denounce the conservative for hurting the liberal's fist.
Ann Coulter has made several controversial statements in the past, and a couple of them might rightly be considered offensive. That doesn't make Coulter the worst person on Earth, as so many on the Left would have you believe. The problem with edgy people is that they sometimes go too far. But imagine how boring the world would be without them. I'm sometimes offended by guys like Louis C.K. and Chris Rock, but that doesn't mean I don't look forward to their next project.
The only part of this book that any normal person might find "shocking" is the chapter criticizing single motherhood. I think the basic point Coulter is trying to make is solid, but she's definitely guilty of over-simplifying a very complicated issue. Her tone in this chapter is also unnecessarily harsh, and I suspect this was done intentionally to spark controversy and get people talking about the book. Still, I respect her for tackling an issue that most pundits wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. I also respect that, although her personality is always on full display throughout this book, she never uses herself or her personal experiences to illustrate a point. Often, conservative writers tackle media bias by showing how they themselves were mistreated by the media, and how they responded in heroic fashion. Refreshingly, Ann doesn't do this, and it's a better book for it.
January 20, 2009
Ann Coulter researches every possible case where liberals play the victims in order to advance themselves in some way. There are some interesting ideas in this book, and as always, Coulter's research is vast. In some of the chapters, like the first one, I started to get restless with all of the cases where liberals rescued or attempted to rescue victims. I wondered why we needed so many examples. I guess Coulter decided that if she didn't just pack each chapter with a million examples, her point would be dismissed.
Coulter's personality is often biting, especially when being interviewed on TV. When I read her columns or in this book, I often found her dry sense of humor funny and ironic. Some people can't take it, so if that is you, skip this book.
Interestingly enough Chapter 2 on single moms has been thoroughly covered by a couple of Dems--Bill Cosby and Juan Williams. Ann gives her opinion, which coincides with Cosby's and Williams in content, but not in tone. This is really a common sense issue that has become off limits in a politically correct way. I said this in my review of Juan William's Enough, and I will repeat it again. Get an education and get a job before getting married. Don't get married until you are 21, and do get married before having kids. Then, once you have kids, give them your love and attention. Statistics show that following that advice will severely cut your chances of living in poverty and being a drag on society. Really, who thinks a 14 year old is prepared to raise a child? Who does this benefit? Everyone loses--the child, the child raising the child, and society.
Another chapter discusses the biased press/media. Ann lays it all out--I've heard most of it before, but she makes good points.
Coulter's personality is often biting, especially when being interviewed on TV. When I read her columns or in this book, I often found her dry sense of humor funny and ironic. Some people can't take it, so if that is you, skip this book.
Interestingly enough Chapter 2 on single moms has been thoroughly covered by a couple of Dems--Bill Cosby and Juan Williams. Ann gives her opinion, which coincides with Cosby's and Williams in content, but not in tone. This is really a common sense issue that has become off limits in a politically correct way. I said this in my review of Juan William's Enough, and I will repeat it again. Get an education and get a job before getting married. Don't get married until you are 21, and do get married before having kids. Then, once you have kids, give them your love and attention. Statistics show that following that advice will severely cut your chances of living in poverty and being a drag on society. Really, who thinks a 14 year old is prepared to raise a child? Who does this benefit? Everyone loses--the child, the child raising the child, and society.
Another chapter discusses the biased press/media. Ann lays it all out--I've heard most of it before, but she makes good points.
July 15, 2015
One knows exactly what they're reading when they open a book written by Ann Coulter. She's a firebrand no doubt. I've found her entertaining for quite some time. I've also found that most people who excoriate her haven't actually read her books or truly considered her perspective. Sure, she's highly opinionated and at times way too extreme. I don't particularly agree with her extreme views in many cases, but I always finish one of her books surprisingly intellectually rewarded. You won't read any peer-reviewed material hear, but you'll read arguments that have been painstakingly researched and verified through data, polling, and entertaining comparison. I wish other pundits were as meticulous in their preparation as her. They'd probably be far more successful.
I will admit that the book began to drag along in some parts since she was basically saying the same thing but beating it into my head with endless examples. Two chapters made the book VERY interesting, the second chapter and final chapter.
I recommend everyone read this then truly consider what she's saying. She's not completely wrong.
I will admit that the book began to drag along in some parts since she was basically saying the same thing but beating it into my head with endless examples. Two chapters made the book VERY interesting, the second chapter and final chapter.
I recommend everyone read this then truly consider what she's saying. She's not completely wrong.
June 20, 2009
This book was AMAZING! Ann Coulter speaks the uncomfortable truths that many of us want to ignore. She seemlessly blends the serious nature of the topics with her "Coultertarian" humor that made me feel at some points like I was laughing at a funeral. It was the comic relief that helped Coulter transcend the issues and bring to light those things in our society that, unless controlled at the root, will eventually lead to our demise.
Regardless of your feelings, this book will get your blood flowing. You'll either be outrageously angry at Coulter and her "nutty right-wing" conspiracy theories, or you'll feel pumped and ready to hop on the bandwagon. I felt the latter, but don't jump to assume your feelings about it until you've read it.
Regardless of your feelings, this book will get your blood flowing. You'll either be outrageously angry at Coulter and her "nutty right-wing" conspiracy theories, or you'll feel pumped and ready to hop on the bandwagon. I felt the latter, but don't jump to assume your feelings about it until you've read it.
September 25, 2009
Okay...going out on a limb here. Some will read this and be very......disillusioned to say the least. Please think before you block me, okay?
I like Ms. Coulter. She is admittedly a bomb thrower and agitator, but there is the proverbial "method to her maddness". This book in particular lays out the absurdity of our political and media world.
Okay some of you won't find this an enjoyable read, but some will love it.
I like Ms. Coulter. She is admittedly a bomb thrower and agitator, but there is the proverbial "method to her maddness". This book in particular lays out the absurdity of our political and media world.
Okay some of you won't find this an enjoyable read, but some will love it.
January 22, 2009
Ann Coulter writes like she speaks which is entertaining in the spoken word but frustrating to read.
July 25, 2011
I have only one problem with Ann Coulter, and that is that she writes books to settle scores. Unlike Inigo Montoya, who observed in "The Princess Bride" that "there's not a lot of money in revenge," Coulter has built a lucrative career on using her razor-sharp wit and impressive research to skewer progressives at every turn. She can be mordantly funny, but because -- in public, at least -- she has no "off" switch, she can also be mean. Those traits make her book writing maddeningly inconsistent.
The four-chapter debunking of Darwinian orthodoxy that Coulter performed in her book "Godless" was masterful, yet odds are good that the people who most needed to read it did not. Two years later, this book -- "Guilty" -- has a similar problem. Her diagnosis of the dominant liberal pathologies is difficult to argue with, but the book has seven chapters, and I only really liked two of them.
The difference between the chapters I enjoyed and the ones I did not had nothing to do with pulled punches, because Coulter *never* pulls her punches. Nevertheless, her best work reads like an artfully choreographed sparring match with conventional wisdom, while the padding around it forsakes any resemblance to sparring to become instead an exercise in carpet bombing. In other words, when this willowy blonde has time on her hands and access to premium databases, she either goes yard or strikes out -- there is no "small ball" in her writing game.
If you think single motherhood is a value-neutral proposition, or are enough of a political junkie to wonder whether former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry successfully undercut the credibility of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" who challenged his self-aggrandizing narrative of brief service in Vietnam, then read chapters 2 and 3 in this book; Coulter will set you (and the public record) straight in 78 scintillating pages. Unfortunately, the rest of "Guilty" does not rise to that same high standard.
The four-chapter debunking of Darwinian orthodoxy that Coulter performed in her book "Godless" was masterful, yet odds are good that the people who most needed to read it did not. Two years later, this book -- "Guilty" -- has a similar problem. Her diagnosis of the dominant liberal pathologies is difficult to argue with, but the book has seven chapters, and I only really liked two of them.
The difference between the chapters I enjoyed and the ones I did not had nothing to do with pulled punches, because Coulter *never* pulls her punches. Nevertheless, her best work reads like an artfully choreographed sparring match with conventional wisdom, while the padding around it forsakes any resemblance to sparring to become instead an exercise in carpet bombing. In other words, when this willowy blonde has time on her hands and access to premium databases, she either goes yard or strikes out -- there is no "small ball" in her writing game.
If you think single motherhood is a value-neutral proposition, or are enough of a political junkie to wonder whether former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry successfully undercut the credibility of the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" who challenged his self-aggrandizing narrative of brief service in Vietnam, then read chapters 2 and 3 in this book; Coulter will set you (and the public record) straight in 78 scintillating pages. Unfortunately, the rest of "Guilty" does not rise to that same high standard.
January 15, 2009
the book has been out a few days now. so we can begin to see ratings from people who've actually read it. this is an indictment of the media, pure and simple. coulter acts as prosecutor, judge and executioner. she goes about it like a chess player, anticipating counter arguments, and then the counters for the counters. three or four moves ahead.
so far all the media attention has focused on two or three "mean" comments about single motherhood. well, it's really an entire chapter. and since no one has disputed a single fact put forward, what does that say? it's just that we don't need another book making the case that there is a liberal media bias. by this point, anyone who disagrees with that ideas is too dense to waste time on.
she is most interesting when focusing on the presidential campaign. could have easily expanded on that, and left the rest. still worth the read.
so far all the media attention has focused on two or three "mean" comments about single motherhood. well, it's really an entire chapter. and since no one has disputed a single fact put forward, what does that say? it's just that we don't need another book making the case that there is a liberal media bias. by this point, anyone who disagrees with that ideas is too dense to waste time on.
she is most interesting when focusing on the presidential campaign. could have easily expanded on that, and left the rest. still worth the read.
July 29, 2011
In her 7th book attacking liberalism, controversial political satirist Ann Coulter cuts through the pervasive left wing bias of the mainstream media to proclaim liberals GUILTY of opportunistically portraying themselves as victims. In GUILTY: Liberal “Victims” and Their Assault on America, Coulter is at her mordantly witty best castigating liberals as faux victims. Chapter 2 where liberals complicit with the established media venerate single mothers to the detriment of their children was particularly enlightening.
May 12, 2011
She's smart, very smart. She's good looking. She has a supremely acerbic, acidic, wryly humorous wit. She's in love with herself I suspect. I know I am. In love with myself that is, or very very fond of at least. A healthy dose of egoism along with a pinch, dash, or splash of egotism might do us all a bit of good. My motto (one of many) the last few years is that I'm contributing to my fellow man by taking care of myself, at my own expense and not someone else's. Rational self-interest. But I digress.
I'm FINALLY finished reading her most recent book (2009) Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America. (She has a new as-yet untitled book coming out this June.)
Her books, from Wikipedia:
Bibliography
Coulter, Ann H. (1998). High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton. Washington, DC; Lanham, MD: Regnery Pub. and distributed to the trade by National Book Network. ISBN 0895263602. OCLC 39380711.
Coulter, Ann H. (2002). Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right. New York, NY: Crown. ISBN 1400046610. OCLC 49673076.
Coulter, Ann H. (2003). Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 1400050308. OCLC 52133318.
Coulter, Ann H. (2004). How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 1400054184. OCLC 55746549.
Coulter, Ann H. (2006). Godless: The Church of Liberalism. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 1400054206. OCLC 69594152.
Coulter, Ann H. (2007). If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 9780307353450. OCLC 156784826.
Coulter, Ann H. (2009). Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 9780307353467. OCLC 230728938.
The titles alone give you an idea of her "Conservative" wit, with a capital C.
GUILTY is one of the first "political current events" books I've read, though as a well-referenced and fact-packed litany of liberal media invective toward conservatives it will remain informative for a long time. Some of my other reads in this current, well-footnoted, still timely genre include:
State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America (August 22, 2006) ISBN 0-312-36003-7
America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It (2006, ISBN 0-89526-078-6) by Mark Steyn
Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (ISBN 0-385-51184-1) January 2008 by Jonah Goldberg
GUILTY is not that long (265 pages not counting footnotes) but I felt like it was going to take forever to get through it (just a little over 2 weeks of intermittent reading while fussing with a broken ankle actually). It is such a thorough, heavily footnoted catalog of the Dominant Liberal Establishment Mass Media's (Mike Rosen's term, not Ann's) assault on Conservatives that it quickly becomes somewhat mind numbing. The book generally covers the period from the Clinton Administration through the election of Obama in 2008.
What stunned me was the pervasiveness of her proven liberal bias throughout the media and liberal establishment. Have I been a recluse? Living in a shell perhaps, or with my head in the sand? Perhaps I've just been swayed by Ann's assault on the liberal assault and she brainwashed me. More and more these days, not only because of books like this, I feel like I've awoken in a foreign country, like uhhh, say, Siberia! Definitely not a free country. Over regulated, over taxed, over nannied. Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelli... Scotty? Scotty!?!
You go girl!
I'm FINALLY finished reading her most recent book (2009) Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America. (She has a new as-yet untitled book coming out this June.)
Her books, from Wikipedia:
Bibliography
Coulter, Ann H. (1998). High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton. Washington, DC; Lanham, MD: Regnery Pub. and distributed to the trade by National Book Network. ISBN 0895263602. OCLC 39380711.
Coulter, Ann H. (2002). Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right. New York, NY: Crown. ISBN 1400046610. OCLC 49673076.
Coulter, Ann H. (2003). Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 1400050308. OCLC 52133318.
Coulter, Ann H. (2004). How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 1400054184. OCLC 55746549.
Coulter, Ann H. (2006). Godless: The Church of Liberalism. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 1400054206. OCLC 69594152.
Coulter, Ann H. (2007). If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 9780307353450. OCLC 156784826.
Coulter, Ann H. (2009). Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America. New York, NY: Crown Forum. ISBN 9780307353467. OCLC 230728938.
The titles alone give you an idea of her "Conservative" wit, with a capital C.
GUILTY is one of the first "political current events" books I've read, though as a well-referenced and fact-packed litany of liberal media invective toward conservatives it will remain informative for a long time. Some of my other reads in this current, well-footnoted, still timely genre include:
State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America (August 22, 2006) ISBN 0-312-36003-7
America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It (2006, ISBN 0-89526-078-6) by Mark Steyn
Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning (ISBN 0-385-51184-1) January 2008 by Jonah Goldberg
GUILTY is not that long (265 pages not counting footnotes) but I felt like it was going to take forever to get through it (just a little over 2 weeks of intermittent reading while fussing with a broken ankle actually). It is such a thorough, heavily footnoted catalog of the Dominant Liberal Establishment Mass Media's (Mike Rosen's term, not Ann's) assault on Conservatives that it quickly becomes somewhat mind numbing. The book generally covers the period from the Clinton Administration through the election of Obama in 2008.
What stunned me was the pervasiveness of her proven liberal bias throughout the media and liberal establishment. Have I been a recluse? Living in a shell perhaps, or with my head in the sand? Perhaps I've just been swayed by Ann's assault on the liberal assault and she brainwashed me. More and more these days, not only because of books like this, I feel like I've awoken in a foreign country, like uhhh, say, Siberia! Definitely not a free country. Over regulated, over taxed, over nannied. Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelli... Scotty? Scotty!?!
You go girl!
July 22, 2011
It's good be be a victim in America, argues Ann Coulter. Using a variety of media sources, polls, etc., Coulter shows that liberals have carefully created special classes that they claim to be victims of whites, capitalism, the wealthy, males, or any other politically unpopular class, race, philosophy, etc. (Coulter emphasizes that what she is talking about is above and beyond the real racism or prejudice that rational people acknowledge has actually happened.) However, in the process of trying to right the "wrongs" that these classes have supposedly suffered, liberals actually create real victims by extorting apologies, money, status, or favors out of less favored groups.
The best description of Guilty is that it's an Ann Coulter book. Coulter is excellent at preaching to the choir. If you already agree with her, as I often do, you will find her remarks funny, witty, and spot-on. Those who don't agree with her will find the book grating and her humor irritating and insulting. Coulter's style is simply too confrontational to actually convert anyone to her point of view.
I liked Guilty quite a bit, but I didn't find it as eye-opening as her earlier Treason. The evidence Coulter uses to prove her thesis will be familiar to anyone who pays attention to American politics; there's not a whole lot of new information here. The end of the book also seems to come abruptly, as if Coulter simply ran out of things to say and didn't feel like providing a satisfactory summary or conclusion. However, Coulter's wit makes Guilty an entertaining and worthwhile read.
The best description of Guilty is that it's an Ann Coulter book. Coulter is excellent at preaching to the choir. If you already agree with her, as I often do, you will find her remarks funny, witty, and spot-on. Those who don't agree with her will find the book grating and her humor irritating and insulting. Coulter's style is simply too confrontational to actually convert anyone to her point of view.
I liked Guilty quite a bit, but I didn't find it as eye-opening as her earlier Treason. The evidence Coulter uses to prove her thesis will be familiar to anyone who pays attention to American politics; there's not a whole lot of new information here. The end of the book also seems to come abruptly, as if Coulter simply ran out of things to say and didn't feel like providing a satisfactory summary or conclusion. However, Coulter's wit makes Guilty an entertaining and worthwhile read.
November 17, 2009
I finished it this morning on the metro! I absolutely love Ann Coulter! I highly recommend her. She's ballsy on a whole new level. If you get the chance, look up her interview with the View's Joy Behar about waterboarding and you'll see what I mean.
Joy: You're for waterboarding, how about we waterboard you?!
Ann Coulter: You're for abortion, would you like to be aborted? I have an idea, let's abort the terrorists then we're all happy.
Bah ha ha ha! She's awesome. In her past books I thought she was a little too partisan and defended the Republicans too much but in this one I really enjoyed her pitch not so much as a Republican but more as a conservative and let the Republicans have it also. She especially attacks, as I call them, the Democrat-envy stricken Republicans. They wish they were Democrats and pine to the media, giving apologies when none are warrented or go out of their way (and outside their "Republican" platforms) to please a media that will not be pleased. This book centered entirely on the victim complex and showed the insane arguments that are associated with liberal "victims". Her writing style flows as if you were having a conversation with her. It is easy to imagine her right there talking to you, which I really enjoyed. Plain, logical, bold. Regardless of sides, I think this book is certainly worth a read if, for nothing else, to explore whether you agree and disagree and why.
Joy: You're for waterboarding, how about we waterboard you?!
Ann Coulter: You're for abortion, would you like to be aborted? I have an idea, let's abort the terrorists then we're all happy.
Bah ha ha ha! She's awesome. In her past books I thought she was a little too partisan and defended the Republicans too much but in this one I really enjoyed her pitch not so much as a Republican but more as a conservative and let the Republicans have it also. She especially attacks, as I call them, the Democrat-envy stricken Republicans. They wish they were Democrats and pine to the media, giving apologies when none are warrented or go out of their way (and outside their "Republican" platforms) to please a media that will not be pleased. This book centered entirely on the victim complex and showed the insane arguments that are associated with liberal "victims". Her writing style flows as if you were having a conversation with her. It is easy to imagine her right there talking to you, which I really enjoyed. Plain, logical, bold. Regardless of sides, I think this book is certainly worth a read if, for nothing else, to explore whether you agree and disagree and why.
November 17, 2009
I realize this author has burned a lot of bridges with people by not speaking in tones deemed appropriate by the media, but I found the examples and arguements she raised in this book very telling of the left's tactics in our evolving democracy.
I have been involved in several political campaigns and organizations over the year's and the idea of being forced to apologize for not wanting a bigger government, higher taxes, and more people assessed based on where they or their parents are from rather than how good they are at what they do is a huge negative for our economy, and I believe our country.
Ann writes in a very entertaining, engaging way that certainly is a breath of fresh air for the typical NPR, CNN, and the L.A. Times reader like me.
Her endings are always a bit abrupt and she doesn't really suggest realistic courses of action to fix the problems she assualts the left with, but raising the issues themselves into the political discussion in our country is, I think, a needed thing in a free country.
I would recommend this book to any non-cry baby person who pays taxes and votes.
I have been involved in several political campaigns and organizations over the year's and the idea of being forced to apologize for not wanting a bigger government, higher taxes, and more people assessed based on where they or their parents are from rather than how good they are at what they do is a huge negative for our economy, and I believe our country.
Ann writes in a very entertaining, engaging way that certainly is a breath of fresh air for the typical NPR, CNN, and the L.A. Times reader like me.
Her endings are always a bit abrupt and she doesn't really suggest realistic courses of action to fix the problems she assualts the left with, but raising the issues themselves into the political discussion in our country is, I think, a needed thing in a free country.
I would recommend this book to any non-cry baby person who pays taxes and votes.
July 20, 2011
I don't think the book was intended to be a demonstration of the Godwin's law but with a comparison between Nazis and liberals in the fourth paragraph of the "essay"... well, unfortunately, it is not the only one...
So, for Coulter, liberals are actually fascists and the real victims are rich and powerful conservatives like herself, Bush or Palin. Radical? no, of course not! Ridiculous? How dare you say that? Just dumb and written like the speech of a teenager? If you ask that, it means you're part of the Grand liberal conspiracy. Yaaarghh!!
So, for Coulter, liberals are actually fascists and the real victims are rich and powerful conservatives like herself, Bush or Palin. Radical? no, of course not! Ridiculous? How dare you say that? Just dumb and written like the speech of a teenager? If you ask that, it means you're part of the Grand liberal conspiracy. Yaaarghh!!
July 4, 2012
I expected to like this book...but in a cautious sort of way. Like, I-appreciate-but-find-unbelievably-rude sort of political book. In a way, she does some name calling, but I really loved how much sense she makes. She calls the donkey a donkey and doesn't soften her blows. Its facts! its real! I've seen it happen and I love reading her writing. She doesn't completely "toe a party line". She points out the flaws of Repubicans (though not the extent she rips on liberals)
A good book, I personally enjoyed it.
A good book, I personally enjoyed it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 175 reviews