Negative Positive
Title: Humor value but not useful for serious arguments
Review: The transparent ideological bias of the author and the intellectual laziness displayed by using straw men and streching the truth in places greatly limits the effectiveness of the author's agenda. I believe there is a real argument to be made that ideology (on both sides) plays too great a role in the intellectual discourse among academics, who should know better. This is not the best place to find such an argument, however. The book's appeal will be limited to those few inclined to "fall for stupid ideas" themselves. The irony in the authors' lack of self-reflection does offer the reader some humor value, perhaps. But the thoughtful conservative reader looking for reasoned arguments to make among serious people might want to look elsewhere. (Sadly, however, Gresham's Law seems to apply to current political writing).
Is the review positive or negative? 