[habs4ever]

They both could be correct, up to point...though I think Coulter isn't really capable of making a long extended argument, when a short, meaty diatribe would suffice.She's a polemicist better suited to the machine gun fire of 1200 word columns and 15 minute spaces on cable TV shows.

If I want depth, why read beyond Whittaker Chambers? You have the best, why settle for an also ran...

[TheDon]

"I think Coulter isn't really capable of making a long extended argument, when a short, meaty diatribe would suffice."

If you read her book, "Treason" you would know that not only can she do both, she can do them both at the same time! Such talent is not easy to come by.

As for "Witness", I think most people have never heard of Whittaker Chambers. Ann's book introduces the whole Communist infiltration of the US government to a new audience.

You are right to an extent, that she is largely covering ground covered by others. But, I would have you note that her book is not exclusively covering such a limited time span. She links the same liberals, and their heirs in the modern Demoratic Party, with those who continue to this day act in a treasonous way toward our nation, i.e. they engage in behavior which gives aid and comfort to our enemies. That's why you should read the book.

Ann provides a new perspective on the past and present behavior of the liberals and Demorats which is quite damning.