Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
22 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Many Good Items For Discussion -- But the Mix of Fact, Jabs & Humor Undoes the Message, March 21, 2009
Honestly I believe Ann Coulter brings a lot of good points to the table, but in such a manner as to destroy the possibility of actually influencing American politics and culture through her writings. The constant interjection of side points and comments requires the reader to have much more knowledge than most Americans possess, and certainly vastly more than commanded by the "useful idiots" she castigates. If this book is designed to wake up the electorate or effect change in the body politic, then it fails miserably. Rather it comes out as a never ceasing mix of truly eye-blinking facts followed by off-point snide remarks, regardless of their accuracy, and then some humorous comments that often are funny only to the extremely well-informed. In this format, the book is self-defeating.
Take for example the comments concerning Bill Ayers on page 90. Coulter makes several telling points concerning the Ayers' concentration on his terrorist days as being the highpoint of his life (and unfortunately giving him a pass on his current activities in training new followers dedicated to the destruction of the US), but then says as a correction that "Ayers is a professor of education, meaning that he is less qualified to teach than the entire population of the United States." I found this comment extremely funny, although it is an exaggeration (education professors are probably less qualified to teach than only about 90% of the population.) However, the mass of readers will not understand the truly abysmal standards in teaching education that exist in the US today and why that comment is both true and hilarious. When one teaches entire courses in how to make lesson plans or how to cut out paper dolls for teaching aids and then gives everyone an "A" grade if they attend all class sessions, then surely that person is at the bottom of the curve. But the comment detracts from the subject at hand and confuses the average reader.
It seems that everyone is focusing on the massive problem of single motherhood that is having catastrophic effects on the health and future of the US and that Coulter covers in Chapter Two. Apparently many liberal readers or persons who have single mothers as friends simply cannot get past the idea that the CHOICE to have a child while single, not marry the father, and not give the baby up for adoption is narcissistic and truly devastating to the child's eventual welfare. For a better understanding of this phenomenon see "Promises I Can Keep - Why Poor Mothers Put Motherhood Before Marriage" by Edin and Kefalas, and "Unequal Childhoods" by Annette Lareau. In spite of Coulter's comments that many interpret as "mean spirited", her criticism of the ennobling of single motherhood by fleckless liberals (who evidently wish to construct a vast underclass that they can control and act paternalistic towards) is on point. The reader should closely examine the case of the "octomom" to see a very extreme example of pathology in this problem.
The main theme of the book that the adoption of "victim" status to attack possible critics -- even when no one is victimizing the individual -- is well worth comprehending and a subject for futher research. My favorite chapter is the sixth that focuses on (in part) the absolutely dominating far-left (not just liberal) bias in the meadia which is the primary force for disinformation and propaganda in the US today. Fake stories attacking Republicans receive top billing, and true stories about Democrat malfeasance are ignored by the main-stream media. The evidence is overwhelming that this is the case as Coulter points out, but again her constant comments and obscure side points damage the presentation. I can understand why the "Guilty" parties rage against this book -- not only for exposing the truth to a very large measure, but also because the author's writing style makes them look both evil and silly. Let's choose just one -- evil or silly. And the author makes a seminal contribution when she objects to using the word "courageous" to describe every little statement made by a liberal that might be unpopular to people paying taxes and working for a living.
In short I recommend this book but wish the author had confined herself to a scholarly style without the snide (but accurate) remarks and humor than tend to undermine the message with those not already in the choir. One is tempted to assume that the author uses this style to aggravate and annoy, rather than to inform and act as a catalyst to effect change. One is even tempted to assume that the continued malfeasance by liberals and the far-left is important so that more books like this one can be produced. I doubt that the reader benefits nearly as much as the author due to her chosen style.
|
|
|
19 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A joy to read, April 2, 2009
Ann Coulter is a joy to read, for those of us who are in the right. She is smart, witty, and enjoyably nasty. She does her homework without being a boring grind. Her books have plenty of substance; she doesn't rant much; she has a lawyer's reasoning ability and the timing of a good stand-up comedian. She doesn't talk down to her readers, and makes politics, and political invective, entertaining.
The extreme reactions to her - major newspapers failing to carry her, or the harpies of The View shouting her down - just show she's right how intolerant the faction of alleged tolerance, actually is. Coulter is no more nasty on the right than Frank Rich or Maureen Dowd are on the left; that op-ed pages typically regard her as too controversial while Rich or Dowd are somehow mainstream, is a crime against thought.
In "Guilty" she takes apart the liberal reliance upon victimhood to advance its cause, and suggests, to the contrary, that liberals are the victimizers, a refreshing thought.
The underlying theme of all her books is media bias: how the mainstream media takes the liberal line hook, line and sinker, how it fails to cover the left with the same scrutiny and savagery with which it covers the right, and how it repeatedly fails to notice that the liberal king (well, co-facilitator) is wearing no clothes. Except maybe when they're admiring Michelle Obama's arms or Barack's beach photos.
The chapter on single motherhood and the plague it represents is excellent. Single motherhood is the fount from which a disproportionate number of social ills spring; as Coulter frequently points out, various economic and educational achievement disparities between blacks and whites disappear when single motherhood is taken into account.
She's such a joyous warrior. I admire her total chutzpah in arguing that U.S. history's major assassins - as liberals whine about the constant supposed threat to Obama's life - were almost all, in the broad scheme of things, creatures of the left. Is it a stretch to paint John Wilkes Booth - an actor, opposed to the violence Lincoln visited upon the South - as a liberal? You be the judge. But ask why history tends to launder out Charles Guiteau's having grown up in the Oneida Community, a free-love commune in Western New York (the women didn't much like him, Coulter writes; his nickname was "Charles Gitout". I grew up in Western New York, even won a contest on local history as a student, but was never taught about this.) The first major act of Palestinian terror in the U.S. was RFK's assassination; that, too, goes down the memory hole. JFK conspiracy theories usually gloss over Oswald's marriage to the daughter of a KGB colonel. She was allowed to marry him and they were allowed to emigrate, but the KGB had no plans for him? Occam's razor could use a good stropping here.
I use the word "chutzpah" above because I'm Jewish. Unlike my liberal brethren, I take no offense at Coulter's remarks about Jews and others who accept Christianity as being "perfected". I understand what Coulter is getting at: you're allowed to believe your own religion, and you are not compelled to find all others the equal of yours. If you did, why would you devote yourself to yours in the first place? The best diversity stance for a truly religious person to take is, other religions may have something to offer, but mine is a little better, which is why I'm proud of it and think it's worth living by. I think that about my religion; and I don't begrudge Coulter the right to think it about hers.
Jews who allege this to be anti-Semitic violate the commandment against false accusation. Making weak or unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism dishonors the memory of every Jew who ever actually suffered from it, and feeds resentment of Jews in the present day. I'd rather have one Ann Coulter on Israel's side, than a thousand liberal Jews whose "support" of Israel is so totally diluted as to render it no support at all - by their misgivings about its right to self-defense and to statehood; by their bottomless concern for those poor Palestinian victims, and by their appeasement of genuine anti-Semitism on the left.
But without false charges of anti-Semitism, and sexism, and racism, and bigotry - could liberals ever fool enough voters?
|
|
|
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Thanks, April 10, 2009
Never could understand why single motherhood was held so virtuous while the associated child suffered exposure to all sorts of negative outcomes. If you ever pondered over the same observation, you should read this book. It alone makes the book worth while.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Bernard Goldberg
by Mark R. Levin
by Dick Morris
by Ann Coulter
by Ann Coulter
See all Editorial Reviews
