[alecqss]

After reading the review I would actually agree with Coulter. The author's method reminds me somewhat Kerry's favorite weaseling technique. "I never surrender sovereignty, but we have to pass a global test". Now, everyone knows that whatever goes before "however" is just for our soothing pleasure and what goes after "however" is the sure real thing. Plus author can go into a feat of outrage each time someone accuses him of intention to betray US national interests...

That book and the review goes exactly the same way - it emphasizes FUD; acknowledgment is brief and made as insignificant as possible, only to provide a sufficient smoke screen and a cover.

[BlueSky194]

How about Ann claiming that Canada sent troops to Vietnam.
When they never sent any troops to Vietnam.
The worst part about this, when it was proven that Canada didn't sent troops.
Ann still cant admit she was wrong.

[JTN]

That book and the review goes exactly the same way - it emphasizes FUD; acknowledgment is brief and made as insignificant as possible, only to provide a sufficient smoke screen and a cover.

You have got to be joking. The words "Coplon was a spy." are put there only to provide cover for what? His belief that Coplon was not a spy? What do you think he was trying to cover?

[ChessExpert]

After reading the review I would actually agree with Coulter.
I'll take your word for it.

Now, everyone knows that whatever goes before "however" is just for our soothing pleasure and what goes after "however" is the sure real thing.
I've never heard it before, but that sounds right.

That book and the review goes exactly the same way - it emphasizes FUD; acknowledgment is brief and made as insignificant as possible, only to provide a sufficient smoke screen and a cover.
Again sounds good.

I've had a nagging suspicion that the "conservative" writer from that bastion of conservatism, Seatle, WA, might be a little too good to be true. Yours, is one of the posts that reinforces my thinking.