Guilty: Liberal

Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America

3.5 173
by Ann Coulter

View All Available Formats & Editions

“Liberals seem to have hit upon a reverse Christ story as their belief system. He suffered and died for our sins; liberals make the rest of us suffer for sins we didn’t commit.”

Who are the victims here? To hear liberals tell it, you’d think they do nothing but suffer at the hands of ruthless entities like the “Republican Attack…  See more details below


“Liberals seem to have hit upon a reverse Christ story as their belief system. He suffered and died for our sins; liberals make the rest of us suffer for sins we didn’t commit.”

Who are the victims here? To hear liberals tell it, you’d think they do nothing but suffer at the hands of ruthless entities like the “Republican Attack Machine” and Fox News.


It’s just another instance of the Big Lie, of course, told so often that some people have actually started to believe it. In Guilty, Ann Coulter explodes this myth to reveal that when it comes to bullying, no one outdoes the Left. Citing case after case, ranging from the hilariously absurd to the shockingly vicious, Coulter dissects these so-called victims who are invariably the oppressors. For instance:

•Single mothers: Getting pregnant isn’t like catching the flu. There are volitional acts involved–someone else explain it to Dennis Kucinich. By this purposeful act, single mothers cause irreparable harm to other human beings–their own children–as countless studies on the subject make clear.

•The myth of the Republican Attack Machine: The most amazing thing liberals have done is create the myth of a compliant right-wing media with Republicans badgering baffled reporters into attacking Democrats. It’s so mad, it’s brilliant. It’s one kind of lie to say the Holocaust occurred when the Swedes killed the Jews. But it’s another kind of lie entirely to say the Holocaust occurred when the Jews killed the Nazis.

•“Brave” liberals: In addition to being beautiful, compassionate tribunes of the downtrodden, liberals are brave. I know that because they’re always telling me how brave they are. Why, five nights a week, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann courageously books guests who completely agree with him. It doesn’t get much braver than that.

•Obambi’s luck: While B. Hussein Obama piously condemned attacks on candidates’ ­families, his media and campaign surrogates ripped open the court-sealed divorce records of his two principal opponents in his Senate race in Illinois.

•The offenders are offended!: Republican senator George Allen’s career was destroyed when he made a joking remark to a privileged Indian American harassing him at campaign stops. When did rich kids become a new protected category that must be shielded from words that are insulting in other languages? How did Sidarth become a specially anointed victim? What did we ever do to India? And why didn’t we ever hear about the far more offensive anti-Semitic flyers of Allen’s opponent Jim Webb?

One essential and recurring truth about self-righteous liberals, says Coulter, is that “they viciously attack all while wailing that they are the true victims.” With Guilty–a mordantly witty and shockingly specific catalog of offenses that liberals would rather we ignore and forget–Ann Coulter presents exhibits A through Z.

From the Hardcover edition.

Read More

Product Details

The Crown Publishing Group
Publication date:
Sold by:
Random House
Sales rank:
File size:
2 MB

Read an Excerpt



Liberals always have to be the victims, particularly when they are oppressing others. Modern victims aren’t victims because of what they have suffered; they are victims of convenience for the Left. There’s no way to determine if an action is offensive by looking at the action. One must know who did it to whom, and whose side the most powerful people in America will take. Republican senator Trent Lott committed a hate crime when he praised former segregationist Strom Thurmond at a birthday party, but a year later, Democratic senator Chris Dodd did nothing wrong when he praised a former Ku Klux Klanner, Senator Robert Byrd—who was also a sort of “community organizer.”

Playing the game of He Who Is Offended First Wins, the key to any political argument is to pretend to be insulted and register operatic anger. Liberals are the masters of finger-wagging indignation. They will wail about some perceived slight to a sacred feeling of theirs, frightening people who have never before witnessed the liberals’ capacity to invoke synthetic outrage. Distracted by the crocodile tears of the liberal, Americans don’t notice that these fake victims are attacking, advancing, and creating genuine victims.

Just as we’re always told that schoolyard bullies are actually deeply insecure, liberals rationalize their own ferocious behavior by claiming to have been wounded somehow. What about the little guy our poor, insecure bully is beating the living daylights out of? How’s his self-esteem coming along? That is the essence of liberals: They viciously attack everyone else, while wailing that they are the victims.

Liberals’ infernal habit of accusing others of what they themselves are doing distracts attention from who is really being attacked. No one is victimized by a mouse: Real victims are those who are called the oppressors by the powerful. Just as Nazi mythology made ordinary working Germans believe they were victims of Jewish oppressors—in order to oppress the Jews—today’s media-certified victims are the true oppressors, and the alleged aggressors are the real victims. To find the authentic victims in most situations, one can simply refer to the people the mainstream media urge us to hate, beasts such as George Bush, the Duke lacrosse players, Joe McCarthy, Jesse Helms, Tom DeLay, the Swift Boat Veterans, and Sarah Palin. But often the victims are nameless, faceless victims of repellent liberal policies that are promoted on behalf of counterfeit victims, such as single mothers or “the poor.” Media-anointed victims inevitably create actual victims who became so the old-fashioned way: They earned it.

Fake victims have become so crucial to liberal argument that you need a pathos-meter to follow politics in modern America. Every policy proposal is launched or opposed on the stories of victims. When Senator Hillary Clinton sought more federal money for New York City in 2007, she made a big show of attending Bush’s January 2007 State of the Union Address with the son of a New York City police officer, Cesar A. Borja, who had died that very day of a rare lung disease he had allegedly acquired from working “16-hour shifts” at the World Trade Center after the 9/11 attacks.

The New York Daily News had told the tear-jerking story of Cesar Borja a few weeks earlier in an article claiming that “when the twin towers fell,” Borja “rushed to ground zero and started working long days there.” Now he was dying of a rare lung disease, a result, the Daily News suggested, of his having “volunteered to work months of 16-hour shifts in the rubble, breathing in clouds of toxic dust.”1

Senator Hillary Clinton seized on the 9/11 victim’s story, parading Officer Borja’s twenty-one-year-old son at the State of the Union Address. She even sent President Bush a letter—made available to the press—inviting him to meet Officer Borja’s son, at the same time requesting more federal funding for New York’s emergency workers. The federal money allocated thus far, she said, was “only a down payment in repaying our debt to those who came to assist us in our hour of need.” She asked the president to “honor” Officer Borja’s memory and those who had “lost loved ones as a result of the 9/11 attacks.”2

Bush met with Officer Borja’s son and agreed to the additional federal funding for those suffering nonspecific health problems related to the 9/11 attack. Senator Clinton then released another letter noting “our responsibility to take care of those who took care of us”—those who, she said, “selflessly risked their lives and their health at Ground Zero.”3

Then it turned out the story of Officer Borja’s glorious heroism on 9/11 was a complete hoax. Borja had not “rushed” to the disaster site after the attack. He only started working there, directing traffic, near the end of December 2001, by which time much of the rubble had been cleared away. He was not a volunteer—this was his job. Indeed, the only reason he was working sixteen-hour days was to boost his pension just before he retired. In all, Borja had worked seventeen days at the World Trade Center, most of them in 2002.4 Borja retired in June 2003 and did not begin to develop pulmonary fibrosis until 2005. There were other possible explanations for his rare lung disease, such as his pack-a-day cigarette habit until five or six years before the 9/11 attack.5 Officer Borja had done nothing dishonorable, but he had not selflessly risked his life at Ground Zero, as Hillary Clinton claimed in order to beg for more taxpayer money for New York City.

Asked about its make-believe reporting on Borja’s undaunted heroism, the Daily News observed that “the paper had never explicitly said Officer Borja had rushed there soon after Sept. 11, only that at some point he had rushed there.”6 No matter—he had served his purpose and New York City got its federal funding.

All the Left’s seminal imagery keeps turning out to be a hoax.

daddy was diving repeatedly into ground zero—when he was nowhere near the place. The New Republic’s “Baghdad Diarist” told sickening tales about the brutish behavior of American troops in Iraq—and then he signed an affidavit admitting he made it all up. John Edwards was the loyal husband to his cancer-stricken wife—except it turned out he was carrying on an extended affair with Rielle Hunter.

The Democrats dredge up victim after victim, but it’s hard to find one real story. Why do liberals keep coming up with hoaxes for our edification? Time and again, liberals transform themselves into chaste Victorian virgins fainting over the suffering of their victim du jour—but then the facts come out, and liberals react like Emily Litella on Saturday Night Live: “Never mind.”

You know you’ve really made it in America when the Left weeps for you. But this much-sought-after victim status is evanescent, lasting only as long as the fake victim’s bellyaching advances the liberal agenda. Poor, long-suffering Valerie Plame, Joe Wilson, Scott Ritter, Cindy Sheehan, the Jersey Girls, Scott McClellan—all putative victims of the Republicans—weep alone these days. The liberal establishment has moved on.

It’s so popular to be a victim in modern American society that people are constantly faking their own hard-luck stories—and not just in the “personal statement” essay in their Harvard applications. Among the recent hoax memoirs was one in 2008 by “Margaret B. Jones” called Love and Consequences: A Memoir of Hope and Survival. Jones claimed to be a half-white, half–Native American girl who grew up in a foster home in South Central Los Angeles, raised by an African American mother. She said she ran drugs for the Bloods in the middle of the deadly crack wars of the 1980s, losing her foster brother to the gang wars. Jones gave interviews using an urban black patois, referring to her fellow gang members as her “homies.” In her book she passed on urban wisdom, such as “Trust no one. Even your own momma will sell you out for the right price or if she gets scared enough.”

But then it turned out Margaret Jones was really Peggy Seltzer, a suburban Valley Girl, who grew up with her biological family in affluent Sherman Oaks, California, where she attended a private day school. The closest she had come to the projects was watching Project Runway on Bravo. Her hoax was exposed when her sister, Cyndi Hoffman, called the publisher after seeing Seltzer’s photo by a book review in the New York Times—which praised the book as a “humane and deeply affecting memoir.”

Even when caught red-handed, Seltzer claimed to be serving a greater good: “I thought it was my opportunity to put a voice to people who people don’t listen to.” She said others had told her “you should speak for us because nobody else is going to let us in to talk.” Admitting it was “an ego thing,” she explained, “I don’t know. I just felt that there was good that I could do and there was no other way that someone would listen to it.”7

Also in 2008, a Holocaust memoir published in 1997 was exposed as a hoax. In the book, Misha: A Mémoire of the Holocaust Years, Misha Defonseca described her parents being arrested and deported by the Nazis when she was six years old. She wrote that she went to live with the De Wael family, who gave her the name “Monique,” but she so missed her parents that she embarked on a trans-European trek to find them. Wandering alone throughout Europe, she said she killed a German soldier, was sheltered by a pack of wolves, and saw a train full of Jews headed for the death chamber. So her story was believable.

The memoir was a smash bestseller in Europe and Canada and was on its way to a triumphant success in the United States with both Oprah and Disney expressing interest in the book. But a money dispute with the publisher delayed negotiations—and in the meantime the book was exposed as a fraud.

Defonseca really had been born “Monique De Wael,” a Belgian Catholic, whose parents were arrested and later executed by the Nazis for being part of the Belgian Catholic resistance. Defonseca had never gone in search of her parents. To the contrary, she renounced the name of her brave Nazi-resisting parents, saying she had “wanted to forget” her real name since she was four years old because she had been called “daughter of a traitor” after her parents were arrested. She added that all her life she “felt Jewish . . . it was my reality, my way of surviving.”8 In short, she did everything she could think of to sound more Jewish but complain about being seated too close to the air conditioner.

Another award-winning Holocaust memoir, Binjamin Wilkomirski’s Fragments: Memories of a Wartime Childhood, was published in 1995 and—although it was never an official selection of Oprah’s Book Club—was exposed as a hoax by 1999. Wilkomirski claimed to have survived Nazi concentration camps as a small boy, drawing gruesome tales of watching his mother die, rats crawling out of dead bodies, and children eating their own fingers. Genealogists later established that he was the illegitimate child of a Protestant woman, and he had spent the war years safely ensconced in Switzerland with his adoptive parents.

This literary Munchausen syndrome produces Jewish girls trying to be black and gentiles claiming to be Jewish Holocaust survivors. So naturally, when a con artist threesome sought fame and fortune in America, they invented a young fiction author by the name of JT LeRoy, who was a cross-dressing child prostitute, drug addict, vagrant, and AIDS victim. Among the fake transgendered prostitute’s celebrity entourage were Lou Reed, Courtney Love, Winona Ryder, Carrie Fisher, Tatum O’Neal, Debbie Harry, Madonna, and Liv Tyler—all of whom, when assembled under one roof, conveniently constitute a quorum for a 12-step meeting.

The con artist LeRoy explained his attraction to celebrities, saying, “Artists want to hang out with other artists because that’s the language they talk”9—which may have been the truest thing “he” said. The nonexistent LeRoy was celebrated in a glamorous write-up in Vanity Fair, a glowing profile in the New York Times, and a song, “Cherry Lips,” by Shirley Manson—a trio of honors known in the Hamptons as a “hat trick.” A fawning piece in the Boston Globe said of LeRoy’s hard-luck stories, the “perversity of religious fundamentalists is a near constant in American gothic writing.”10 Everything always changes, except the avant-garde, which is always the same.

From the Hardcover edition.

Read More

Customer Reviews

Average Review:

Write a Review

and post it to your social network


Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See all customer reviews >

Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America 3.5 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 173 reviews.
lakergirl03 More than 1 year ago
The fact that people who don't read her books feel they need to comment on Ann says alot about the power she has. She tells the truth,isn't afraid to be politically incorrect & makes you laugh through the whole book. Ann takes some very dry issues & makes them funny & very interesting to read. I have read all her books & have never been disappointed.Ann is a talented writer w/a lot to say & a humorous way of saying it. Ignore any of the nasty tings you might have heard & give this book a try,you won't be disappointed.
JSC3716 More than 1 year ago
As can be seen in reviews, like the one prior to this, Ann know how to tweak Liberals. She is as always funny yet truthful. A delightful read. Naturally this will have the lefties crying and whining again, as they always do when the truth is told about them. If only every leftists brother could marry a girl like Ann, I'm sure there would be a lot less lefties in the world. I look forward to her next book.
Twilightreader09 More than 1 year ago
I'm glad she came out with another one. I find myself more and more interested in political books, NOT Obama's but one's with wit. I actually am a liberal and love to hear both sides. I think it keeps the mind sharp and its the way more people should think.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Ann Coulter does what she always does: challenges the things you thought you always believed. She doesn't care that you don't agree and she certainly doesn't care that your masculinity is called into check while she dances intellectual circles around you. "Guilty" is the same scathing narrative you've come to expect and love from Coulter, but this time she's directed her venom towards the liberal media. Never a popular subject among liberals, Coulter dissects the coverage of a myriad of sensationalized news stories and blasts the "victims" that same media force-feeds the general population in the form of "hard-hitting news."

Not only is this book hilarious, though only if you are either conservative or an intelligent enough liberal, but it's also extremely well-documented. A recommended read to anyone who is disgusted by the blurred line between entertainment and actual news.
Mike55 More than 1 year ago
it is always amazing to me to see the lengths that liberals will go to to spread their hate mongering views on others. I guess they hate Ann Coulter and her new book because it is true! Is it difficult to hear? maybe but that doesn't negate its truth. I think liberals need to get a passing familiarity with the US Constitution, and the writings of the founding fathers who stressed liberty, freedom, and the free market economy. The emphasis is on the individual and not the oppressive federal government that they were seeking to break away from. Conservatism is true Americanism, while liberalism is a call for the return of the oppressive intrusive government.

This book is excellent at exposing the challenges of society, and the victim mindset of liberalism, and how it is infecting our nation. If you want something in America you have to work for it, and that is the core of conservatism, hard work, family values, and a commitment to national security. liberals can keep hating Ann, Rush, and Sean, but they are still right!
mattinva More than 1 year ago
Ann takes a lot of heat for her in-your-face writing style. But there's no doubting the accuracy of her work. If you don't believe her, there are numerous footnotes that support nearly every paragraph in the book.

Guilty's chapter on single mothers is a great example. Many people are howling in outrage that she would target single moms. But study after study shows that children from mom-only households are more likely to wind up in jail, in poverty, abused, commit violent crime, earn less, etc. That's not a judgement on any individual mother. That's just fact. Kids from 2-parent households are much more likely to succeed.
AmericanVA More than 1 year ago
I haven't had the opportunity to read the book yet, but I look forward to it. As a gay man in America, who happens to be quite conservative, I, too am appalled at all the liberal crybabies who think they deserve everything without having to actually lift a finger to get it. Be grateful you live in this amazing country where you can piss and moan all you want without consequence. But, please, allow everyone the same freedoms as you. We worship God. You don't have to. You have that right. Amazing isn't it. We want to protect our borders. You don't have to want the same thing. Again, amazing isn't it. More power to Ann for writing what's on her mind. You don't have to like it or read it. Amazing country that we live in. You have a choice. Liberals are selfish. Everything is about them. Think big picture. Think long term. Keep writing Ann.
Capitalist More than 1 year ago
Common sense and keen observations. What a relief!
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Very current witty view of today's America, especially the Liberal/Conservative argument. Coulter brings home data-based points (with references) as opposed to opinions to complete a strong statement about politics and the media today.
George_Ranson_Jr More than 1 year ago
While Ann may occasionally go a few steps too far even for my conservative taste, she certainly can hit her mark. I knew I had to buy this book after reading the review of "Anonymous" (such a stout-hearted nom de plume) above. As they say, "the truth hurts" and all of the seething vitriol from the left (including you, Anonymous) is all the sales pitch any good conservative should need.
BobbyJay More than 1 year ago
Great detailed chronology of the far left liberal mendecant mentality .. Ayn Rand would be proud of Ann .. This book is a view into the future should the current administration and the liberal Congress continue their march toward Socialism ..
ron_weasley_fan More than 1 year ago
You either love Ann or hate her. Liberals hate her, and she loves that I'm sure. Here's the thing about this book: it is loaded with FACTS! It's in Ann's style, yes. She is witty and conservative, no denying it. But, in this book, she has all the facts right there to make a fair-minded liberal gap with his mouth open, stammering away to find an out (the only problem is there is no such thing as a fair-minded liberal, but that's something entirely different). If you've never tried an Ann Coulter book, try this one.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
This was my first Ann Coulter book that I have read and I have found it to be very interesting. I really found that her arguments were very interesting. I liked hearing a different point of view than what we hear everyday on the news. She challenge many in this book, which I liked reading about. She made very valid points that she had back with hardcore facts and made her sources known. This in my opinion was a good choice to read, and to hear another person that challenged what so many believe.
VMAlaska More than 1 year ago
Statistics on social problems related to cheildren of unwed mothers is astounding. Certainly brings into focus the damage government entitlement programs have brought to US society, the injury to our economy, and collective value system. Recommend it to anyone - even if they feel they typically disagree with Ann Coulter's views.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Of course I knew going in that I would agree with the author. Which could make any book pretty dull. But I was most impressed with the way she nailed every point with name and date.
Tunguz More than 1 year ago
Many people, and not just liberal, see red when the name of Ann Coulter is brought up. This has very little to do with the design of her book covers, and everything to do with the perception of her being unduly confrontational and mean-spirited. And yet many of her critics when pressed are seldom able to come up with any particular statement of hers that is outrageous, but rather relay and hearsay and other secondary sources. Granted, she does make many outlandish statements, but they are made as a joke and people who take them too seriously usually don't have very good sense of humor or are unable to appreciate irony. What her critics usually don't hold against her is the factual validity of her writing. Unlike many other pundits with a few books credited to their name, Ann writes and researches all of her books on her own. Despite the healthy dose of humor in her writing, she is not an author of light-reading material. There is a lot of thought-provoking stuff in her books. "Guilty" is no exception. From the opening pages till the end it presents the reader with some of the more outrageous behaviors that have either been neglected or downright praised by the media. The most outrageous of these is the recent cult of single motherhood. As Ann points out, being brought up by a single mother is one of the most significant risk factors for all sorts of problems later on in life. There are many women who with no fault of their own end up raising children on their own, but these are not the women that Ann has an issue with. What's at stake are the women who choose to raise their children with no father around, and these women are increasingly lauded as role models in today's culture. This trend has negative consequences that are already being felt, but are likely only to get worse in the upcoming years. Unfortunately, most of those who criticize Ann for this book miss the point that she was trying to make. This is just one of the examples of the material that is covered in the book. It will inform you, entertain you and outrage you - all at the same time. We are fortunate to have someone like Ann write about these things.
Book_Listener More than 1 year ago
I was almost overwhelmed at the detail in Ann's research. Unfortunately, it simply made me feel powerless to do anything about the presented problems in our government. With all of the recent talk about Iran's potential "revolution", I'm beginning to think that the U.S. is ready for one as well.
TBMO More than 1 year ago
As usual, Ann Coulter provides a witty and irreverent classic on things political. Her research and backgrounding is, as usual, thorough and complete. A very provocative read.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Another good book by Ann Coulter. She always writes what I am thinking - wish I could express myself like she does! Never politically correct which is why I like her writing.
DFWReader More than 1 year ago
Ann Coulter can be sarcastic and edgy in person and in print but you have to read her books to know she's also smart and witty as all get out. Her research is thorough and enlightening, even if you think her opinions go too far. Reading Coulter's books is my Guilty pleasure.
MOMATSEVENGATES More than 1 year ago
Go Ann!!!! Bring us some more. We all need to hear more truth and start thinking for oursleves--you inspire that kind of reation.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
I bought this book for my husband and he loved it . Read it every weekend until it was done. Now it is my turn. Great for discussion among an appreciative crowd. Liberals would hate it. It paints a very realistic picture of what is going on out there for all those people who love to put their heads in the sand!! Time to look up!
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anyone who follows the media and politics has long known much of what Ann Coulter writes in this book. Her research and references are well-documented, as usual, with her acerbic wit a little more hyperbolic than usual. I expect more from her books, insights and connections that are not this easy to pick up from other sources. For those who don't understand the Conservative complaints about the Liberal media, this work provides good examples.
BitsyB More than 1 year ago
Ann Coulter is not for the sheepish! Her razor sharp tongue leaves the foe bleeding. I knew much of what she mentions, but I did learn many new things about the left's plan to socialize our country.
ConservativeinMA More than 1 year ago
If it weren't for Ann Coulter and a few other conservative pundits we would be hard pressed to find true reporting. The left uses smoke and mirrors to cloud issues that don't paint a rosy picture of themselves and the media are complicit. I love the tone, she writes like she speaks, you can hear her voice. This is an eye-opening book, filled with information everyone should know about. Conservative in Massachusetts