Product Description
The hottest and most controversial book of the year! Find out who really controls the media in America.

“[Ann Coulter] is never in doubt. And that, along with her bright writing, sense of irony and outrage, and her relish at finally hitting back at political opponents (especially in the media) is what makes Slander such refreshing and provocative reading.”
—Los Angeles Times

“[Ann Coulter] is a fluent polemicist with a gift for Menckenesque invective . . . and she can harness such language to subtle, syllogistic argument.”
—Washington Post Book World

“The most popular nonfiction book in America.”—New York Times

“The real value of Slander . . . is not in the jokes or devastating exposés of liberal politicians and their allies, but the serious and scholarly study of just how entrenched the media prejudice is against anyone whose politics are even faintly conservative.”
—New York Sun

“Written with a great deal of passion . . . the real source of its strength—and its usefulness—was its painstaking marshalling of evidence . . . More important than [High Crimes and Misdemeanors] because it addresses a much broader issue, and one of lasting significance.”—National Review

Amazon.com Review
"Liberals have been wrong about everything in the last half century," writes conservative pundit Ann Coulter, author of the bestselling anti-Clinton tome High Crimes and Misdemeanors. They've been especially wrong about Republicans, she writes. The bulk of Slander, in fact, is a well-documented brief dedicated to the proposition that most of the media despises anybody whose political opinions lie an inch to the right of the New York Times editorial page. This is hardly an original observation, though few have presented it with such verve. Coulter is the shock-jock of right-wing political commentary, able to dash off page after page of over-the-top but hilarious one-liners: "Liberals dispute slight reductions in the marginal tax rates as if they are trying to prevent Charles Manson from slaughtering baby seals." There's a certain amount of irony about an author who says "liberals prefer invective to engagement" also declaring, "The good part of being a Democrat is that you can commit crimes, sell out your base, bomb foreigners, and rape women, and the Democratic faithful will still think you're the greatest." But then carefully measured criticism never has been Coulter's shtick--or her appeal. Fans of Rush Limbaugh and admirers of Bernard Goldberg's Bias won't want to miss Slander. --John Miller

CUSTOMER REVIEWS (Average Customer Rating: 3.0 based on 1237 reviews)

Libel: Conservative Lies About the American Left

This has got to be one of the worst books I've ever read. Ann Coulter might be a fairly intelligent woman, but her writing would never have you know it, as she unfortunately takes the tone of a conservative Michael Moore. On nearly every page of this ironically-titled book, Coulter does exactly what she accuses the Left of doing: she resorts to name-calling and joke cracking, she manipulates information, tells half-truths, and constantly makes ridiculous generalizations, avoiding the hard work of actually forming sound, convincing arguments. Of course all of her wonderful "references" are tucked away in endnotes rather than footnotes so that all of you fact-checkers are made to flip all the way to the back of the book and hunt down each source every time she seeks to give weight to one of her ridiculous claims. This book might be good for a [conservative] laugh, but other than that, it really cannot be taken seriously, as Coulter does her best to stoop to the exact same level of those "liars" about which she writes. The book would be best put to use in an introductory logic class in college, where students will be able to find a treasure trove of fallacies committed in Coulter's "arguments."
September 20, 2008

Slander

I really enjoyed this book. Ann Coulter really knows her stuff and I was impressed by all of the facts she presented in each of her arguments. She also writes with a sense of humor.
July 21, 2008

Veritas

That reported in the media erroneously can sometimes be classified as libel. Lies repeated at cocktail parties, even by those in the media, merit the classification of slander.

Those struggling to discover what is cropping up on the political horizon need only read Ms. Coulter's excellent book.

Published in 2002, this work proves two realities. How truth never changes, and how seldom politics ever does.

Anyone wondering at the blackout of once rising star Mike Huckabee can do the math from these pages. The reader may also deduce how Huckabee, with no national coverage in the months following his victory, rarely even a mention of his name, still won 35 percent of the vote in Texas. Notably the media commented not at all.

Though Coulter's review of American politics does not predict three Democrats, one in Republican mantle, would be in the presidential race at this time, yet her book points to this outcome. In fact, the implication of her work begs the question why more pastors don't disavow congregants.

Ms. Coulter's greatest contribution in this work is her prophetic pronouncement that the Internet would become the final bastion of free speech. Good thing Gore invented it. Though not for him, of course.

TL Farley,
author,
When Now Becomes Too Late,
Distant Reaches

When Now Becomes Too Late { Print Edition }

When Now Becomes Too Late { Kindle Edition }

{ Prophecy : The Rapture In Brief }

Distant Reaches { Print Edition }

{ True Life Adventures in Ireland, Boston, and On The North Atlantic

May 24, 2008

Brilliant with Clarity

I thought that I knew Miss Coulter from her television/radio appearances coupled with her columns. However, I was wrong. Her book is thoughtful and insightful. The rhetoric is far above her columns and while the bombs are there, she adds supporting data. Considering it was written in the last election cycle, it is very revealing in the Hilliary/Obama/McCain fiasco. I suspect that most of her detractors haven't read book because they focus on the minutae not the substance. It is a shame because she makes a very strong case about the bias in the MSM.
May 13, 2008

Liberal "Arguments" Are Mostly Epithets

"Prevarication and denigration are the hallmarks of liberal argument. Logic is not their (liberals') métier. Blind religious faith is". This is Ann Coulter's thesis in "Slander", one of the must-read political books of this decade. It is devoted to the proposition that, due to the facts that a) liberalism is based on emotion, and b) liberals had monopolistic control of the media from about 1950-2000, liberals for a long time did not have to debate, and therefore no longer know how to debate--most of their arguments are not arguments, they are epithets.

Coulter comprehensively demonstrates just how liberal the mainstream media is. This is buttressed by the liberals' own denunciations of Fox News and talk radio--why on earth would liberals ever complain about other opinions being broadcast, unless they believed that their opinions should be the only ones broadcast? Coulter answers by stating that "liberals don't try to win arguments, they seek to destroy their opponents and silence dissident opinions". As Coulter explains in one of her other books, "Treason", "As long as liberals refuse to concede a point, it remains 'unsettled'...liberals think they can defeat the truth with loudness." (Loudness and repetition, I might add.)

This phenomenon was on display after the Democratic debate in Pennsylvania on April 16. Asking tough questions of liberals is simply not done. Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous of ABC found this out. They were excoriated for asking tough-but-fair questions that Hillary and Obama would rather not have had to answer.

If liberals are so secure that their ideas are better than conservative ideas, why not allow tough questions to be asked and allow all points of view to be heard? If everyone had access to the views of both sides, wouldn't the public simply reject conservative ideas if they were so manifestly inferior to the ideas of liberals?

This leads to the next theme of the book--liberals don't want alternative views to be made available because conservatives (and those who agree with them) are too "stupid" to see the merit of liberal ideas. Stupid, in the mind of liberals, is anyone who disagrees with them. When a conservative answers a liberal non sequitur with a cold fact or with logic, the liberal instantly denigrates the conservative as "stupid", "divisive", "extreme", "hate-filled", "insensitive", etc.

Liberals derided Coolidge, Eisenhower, Reagan, Quayle, and Bush 43 as stupid. They knew they could not get away with calling Nixon and Gingrich stupid, so they were labeled "evil". Someone like Bush 41, who cannot be pigeonholed in either of those categories, is usually lambasted as an out-of-touch patrician. Because he was very conservative, Barry Goldwater was even called insane in 1964. Coulter also compares SAT scores of some liberals and conservatives (and shows which ideology was on the right side of the Cold War and other policy disputes) to demonstrate just how baseless the "conservatives-are-stupid" charge is.

This book is essential reading for those just becoming politically active. It demonstrates some of the double standards inherent in our politics today, and how those double standards stifle and warp much of the political discourse on cable news channels and in other forums of our politics as well.

April 25, 2008

SIMILAR PRODUCTS

How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter
by Ann Coulter

Godless: The Church of Liberalism
by Ann Coulter

Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism
by Ann Coulter

If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans
by Ann Coulter

High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton
by Ann Coulter