Negative Positive
Title: Can't be taken seriously
Review: For all her zeal in providing citations, Ann's conclusions are obviously colored by her ideology rather than by the facts. Her arguments that Truman and Marshall's actions at the beginning of the Cold War "accidentally" protected the world from communism require mental acrobatics beyond the abilities of most people, as well as require the convenient neglect of a significant fraction of the historical record. Anyone reading David McCullough's "Truman" can readily see this. As an ideologue by definition is someone who, when reality does not coincide with their ideas, pick their ideas over reality, she can't really be taken seriously as a historian or pundit.
Is the review positive or negative? 