Ann "no holds barred" Coulter has undoubtedly never been classified as a delicate flower as a popular conservative commentator. And you can be sure that the Left quickly became aware that her long blonde hair and luscious gams (never hidden by scandalously short skirts) did not mean that she was some dimwit bombshell just tooting the Right�s horn.

Coulter has spunk, and she is ferocious in attacking the Left for every wrong they commit, whether real or perceived.

The blitzkrieg of knowledge she has had her disposal only makes her arguments that more delicious, as dissenters on the other side are completely thrown off, first by the sweet smile of the one attacking them, second by the information disarming their points.

So you can be sure that when her book Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right came out, it would be on my list. Imagine my surprise when the most open-minded people I know, my sister and brother-in-law, bought the book for me for Christmas. Now THAT is true sacrificial holiday giving!

By no means is Slander an intellectual repository. This is high entertainment.

The book itself isn�t anything new to me; it�s like a 200-page column of hers that I read a couple of times every week. I've seen and heard it all before, and don't need convincing by more anti-liberal bluster, no matter how fun. The invective is the same, and many of the points I�ve read on conservative web sites (National Review Online, blogs, columns at Townhall.com, etc.) numerous times.

That�s not to say this is all retread. There is some new information and citations that are worth checking out, with numerous examples to back up the title of the book.

For instance, she notes a PBS radio host stating that the image of the Republican Party as �pro-woman, pro-minorities, and pro-tolerance� was in �sharp contrast to the delegates on the floor, 60 percent of whom self-identified as conservative Christians.�

Excerpt of Slander: For a fleeting moment, after the September 11 attack on America, all partisan wrangling stopped dead. The country was infused with patriotism and amazingly unified. ... Liberal sneers about President Bush's intelligence suddenly - abated at first for reasons of decorum, but then because of the indisputable fact that Bush was a magnificent leader. In a moment of crisis, the truth overcame liberal naysaying. After having demeaned President Bush as a lightweight frat boy hopelessly ignorant of foreign policy, even Democrats were overcome with relief that Al Gore was not the president. The bipartisan lovefest lasted precisely three weeks. That was all the New York Times could endure. Impatient with the national mood of patriotism, liberals returned to their infernal griping about George W. Bush - or "Half a Commander in Chief," as he was called in the headline of a lead New York Times editorial on November 5, 2001. From that moment on, the left's primary contribution to the war effort was to complain.

Asides such as these from the Left are so normal it�s difficult to believe that they�re made daily, as they just assume that all Republicans - especially the religious right - are vile beings full of hate who seek to commit genocide on anyone neither white nor Christian. Don�t be fooled; many on the Left believe just that, and Coulter spends a lengthy chapter detailing condemnation of the religious right.

Coulter names names and pulls no punches in attacking the Left as they should be, for elitism, hypocrisy and for being so power-hungry that there is no tolerance for different ideas, and if you disagree you�re a right-wing extremist fascist. In part she blames this loss of civility on the previous president�s tactics:

�Professional Democrats have clintonized the entire party and they will destroy anyone who stands in their way. � No matter how inured one becomes to liberal hate speech, the regularity with which Republicans are compared to Nazis still astonishes. � Aren�t these the same people constantly demanding campus speech codes, an end to �intolerance,� and �hate speech� laws � so that no one�s feelings get hurt?�

Meanwhile, during the 2000 election, Bush was constantly derided as a moron from the Left press as Gore was lauded as a genius. Of course, "If Bush is a dope with a 566 on the verbal SAT, but a 485 (by Gore) makes a Democrat 'cerebral'"? ... "After college, Bush earned an M.B.A. from Harvard; Gore failed out of divinity school and dropped out of law school at Vanderbilt University. Gore failed five of his eight classes at divinity school. Here's a question for modern philosophers: How many classes does a Democrat have to fail in order not to be called 'smart'?"

Besides political Dems and the media, limousine liberals, especially from Hollywood, get a once-over from Coulter as well, for the high-and-mighty �do as we say, not as we do� approach to politics. Not to mention that they preach equality, yet chain themselves off from the rabble as much as possible.

Coulter notes the differences between the ideologies, pointing to 1984 when Republicans at a National Convention luncheon were given party favors of books on the Star Wars defense system, while �at the Democratic National Convention event attended by (Feminist godmother, Gloria) Steinem, the party favors were condoms.�

Speaking of feminists, Coulter would like to have a word with them regarding Clinton�s sexual trysts. Notably, Ann has problems with self-described arbiters of women's rights kneeling in front of the predator-in-chief just so that he would protect abortion at all costs.

Coulter knows that liberals fight dirty and political "debate" is oft putting to common folk because of it. She doesn't hold back, although at times in the book I look for more information and less attack. Columnist John Leo complains that the Left doesn't foster free speech, it tries to suppress it. There is no tolerance for different ideas, and those who don't agree with them are labeled as extremists or right-wingers or old stand-bys: racist, homophobic, sexist, et al.

Even as Coulter decries the Left for falling into childish name-calling when their arguments are declared false, she can pull out some rather creative nicknames herself of those on the Left � who deserve it, sure, but it�s still a bit of hypocrisy, no matter how much she can back it up.

Of course, she's also doing a service for liberals. You see, liberals will argue that they aren't liberals, since it's apparently a dirty word all around now. They are �progressives.� Yet, conservatives have no problem identifying themselves. So tell me, who's forthright about their policies? Liberals should be honest about their beliefs; it will be a cleansing experience, the calm before the storm, which means Coulter on cable news ripping a new one into their notions that John Ashcroft is evil and President Bush is a moron, yet simultaneously a Machiavellian genius.

Coulter's writings should be titled, Daily Affirmations for Conservatives. She could sell desk calendars that provide a new shot at liberals every day, such as, "Republicans are simultaneously portrayed as the swine in third class and 'the rich' (which, on the basis of Democrat tax proposals, evidently means 'any guy with an alarm clock.')"

She ends with a warning of the siren call of the Left: "Conservatives already know that people they disagree with politically can be 'charming.' Also savagely cruel bigots who hate ordinary Americans and lie for sport."