To the Editor:
In Dan Richman's column "Ideology is not equivalent to stupidity" (The Dartmouth, August 13) I found a number of interesting tidbits. One is a rather Rush Limbaugh-esque narcissistic bent. He referred to those who suffer through his articles as "my readers" and then went on to presume that we devoted few might not only agree or disagree, but do it with vigor. Ever humble, he complimented himself on the deluge of letters he gets from his adoring fans. He then prattled on about ideology and having his feelings hurt.
The problem I have with Richman's articles is that they are poorly written and, at least from my vantage point, do more to harm his cause than help it. Though quite liberal, I occasionally agree with the sentiments and "ideology" expressed by Richman. Unfortunately it is the sophomoric and dogmatic presentation of the ideology that repulses me. I realize that not everyone can write like William Safire or George Will, but the poor quality of writing (over-generalizations, ludicrous assertions, derogatory labels, ad nauseum) does a disservice to those views he espouses. Though Richman's rebuttal to criticism was titled "Ideology is not equivalent to stupidity" I think an appropriate title would have been "Ideology presented as stupidity."
