Now on ScienceBlogs: Map that Campus L

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

Thoughts from Kansas

You will notice that it lacks definiteness; that it lacks purpose; that it lacks coherence; that it lacks a subject to talk about; that it is loose and wabbly; that it wanders around; that it loses itself early and does not find itself any more. --Mark Twain

Search

Profile

Josh at work Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at the National Center for Science Education. He is also a graduate student at the University of Kansas, completing a doctorate in the department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. When not modeling species distributions or battling creationists, he writes about developments in progressive politics and the sciences.

The opinions expressed here are his own, do not reflect the official position of the NCSE. Indeed, older posts may no longer reflect his own official position.

Sb/DonorsChoose Drive


Thanks!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Subscribe to TfK:

Accolades

Best of Kansas City

Good posts from history

The Birth of Intelligent Falling

A failure of Intelligent Design

Why it's called Intelligent Design Creationism

Write a letter to the editor

My photo albums.

Support TfK

Affiliate programs: buy through the links, and TfK will get a percentage.

Buying some music for your friends?

Apple iTunes

Or maybe some gift certificates?

Buy me things from my Amazon.com wishlist.

Buy yourself things!

Search Now:
Search Amazon.com

Good government

Find your state legislators

Help elect sensible leaders

Re-Elect Nancy Boyda!

Internet neighbors

Add yourself to the Frappr map!
Check out our Frappr or add yourself to it!

Blogroll

« Teach the strengths and weaknesses … of the NAS? | Main | Gravity, evolution, and a peek at Bill Maher »

George H. W. Bush on civility in politics

Category: Policy and Politics
Posted on: October 20, 2009 9:25 PM, by Josh Rosenau

In a radio interview today, George Herbert Walker Bush complains about the "lack of civility in politics":

The Republican elder statesman said, "It's not just the right." He complained, "there are plenty of people on the left."

While he said he does not believe in personal name-calling, he singled out MSNBC personalities Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow calling them "sick puppies."

"The way they treat my son and anyone who's opposed to their point of view is just horrible," Mr. Bush said.

"When our son was president they just hammered him mercilessly and I think obscenely a lot of the time and now it's moved to a new president," he added.

With a chuckle, Mr. Bush said his son's critics "weren't singled out as much as they should have been."

For what it's worth, President Obama was and is one of his son's critics, and according to the Boston Globe:

The unprecedented number of death threats against President Obama, a rise in racist hate groups, and a new wave of antigovernment fervor threaten to overwhelm the US Secret Service…

Obama, who was given Secret Service protection 18 months before the election - the earliest ever for a presidential candidate - has been the target of more threats since his inauguration than his predecessors.

I think it's fair to say that W's critics have been singled out. Indeed, David Neiwert has done a great job cataloging the eliminationist rhetoric emanating from conservatives.

It's true, of course, that people said mean things about President W. They said he didn't care about black people (just because he let a city full of black people drown), they say that he was a war-monger (just because he sold a needless and foolish war). They called him a torturer, just for authorizing torture. They called him a fascist, just for locking his critics in fenced off enclosures (free speech zones!), illegally tapping their phones, exploiting a state of military emergency to unite government and industry, establishing secret prisons, etc. I guess that balances out the overt death threats directed at President Obama, candidate Obama, liberals and Democrats in general and liberalism's most visible representatives in particular. Yep, the equivalence is perfect.

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/122842

Comments

1

I think Keith Olbermann sometimes shows to much of his sportscaster heritage, and Rachel Maddow is occasionally a little arch. However, the major criticism a conservative could legitimately make of them is that they exhibit excessive facticity.

Posted by: Jim Thomerson | October 20, 2009 9:36 PM

2

What did G.H.W. Bush say about Geraldine Ferraro after their VP debate in 1984? Was that civil? Whose campaign produced the Willie Horton ad? Was that civil? Which ex-president's wife said the victims of Katrina were better off? Was that civil? Methinks somebody shouldn't talk about civility in politics until they act civil themselves.

Posted by: Joe | October 21, 2009 6:13 AM

3
They called him a fascist, just for locking his critics in fenced off enclosures (free speech zones!)

It's worth remembering that Democrats have had these Orwellian "free speech zones" at their recent conventions too. (Wiki)

Neither side of the political aisle is willing to stand up for freedom.

Posted by: Physicalist Author Profile Page | October 21, 2009 9:07 AM

4

Certainly George H. W. Bush has no credibility in savaging media liberals for critiques of his son's presidency, considering the dark history of George H W's political record. He is, for example, the person who employed the political assassin Lee Atwater and gave his son's arch villain, Karl Rove, his first job. Poppi's son's record as President is a major disaster for the nation,the full blowback for which the country is yet to experience. More significant, the elder Bush's long-term unsavory activities and machinations (as well as past generations of the Bush family) raise serious doubts about the questionable Bush legacy, which the major media refuses to cover. If you want the facts and the truth, read "Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, and What Their Influence Means for America," by Russ Baker.

Posted by: M. Deane | October 21, 2009 10:16 AM

5

Ah, GHW Bush, the man who, among other things, used the Willie Horton ad and whose wife wouldn't say it but it rhymed with "witch". Not to mention a daughter who was part of a mob to prevent counting the vote in a state governed by one son so that the Republican dominated Supreme Court could award the presidency to another son.

Lecturing us about civility. I won't use the word but it rhymes with "lip is split".

Posted by: Anthony McCarthy | October 21, 2009 3:37 PM

6

This may be where the Overton window of possibilities may come in. If there really were leftist radicals to point to, then we wouldn't have to waste time defending against the spurious HW Bush clutched-pearls approach to honest fact-based arguments.

Posted by: Benjamin Nelson | October 22, 2009 10:21 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM