David Horowitz, who recently labeled senior sociology lecturer Sam Richards and English professor Michael Berube as "dangerous academics," professes to have done the academic community a service by revealing the malignant liberal underbelly of America's universities ("Horowitz claims 2 teachers are unfit," Feb. 28).

Unfortunately, I cannot speak in Berube's defense; however, I can attest that Richards is anything but a meddling overzealous liberal. After taking his Soc 001 (Introduction to Sociology), I am baffled as to where or how Horowitz came to the conclusions that Richards was singling people out for their beliefs, advocating a political agenda, or most-uncouth of all: that
he is "an amateur academic." I was never singled out for any belief I had, nor was anyone else alienated or ostracized. Rather, his class offers open discussion to social issues, which I am sure a few aging and shortsighted conservatives find offensive and intrusive to their primitive ways, but it is quite stimulating to those of us who value a broad educational perspective.

As for Richards' political agendas, he has a certain dislike for the current administration (which no doubt offends our muck-raking conservative author), but in no way does he use his classroom as a propaganda campaign to challenge any of the United States' ideals or leaders. Moreover, I have never read a more offensive and abhorrent comment than the one made against Richards' teaching. I'll let Richards' approval rating speak for itself, but I find Horowitz's shameless disregard for fact in the worst taste.