Read my lips: Media's love for George H.W. Bush more about hatred of Donald Trump

[mystery-ak]

 By Charles Hurt - The Washington Times - Sunday, December 2, 2018

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

It has been nothing short of miraculous in this new season of Advent to hear all the Hosannas and applause for our recently departed former President George H.W. Bush.

In The New York Times, Mr. Bush was heralded for his “uncommon grace.”

The Washington Post called him a “giant of a man.”

“The most kind and considerate person I’ve ever known.”

“The most beautiful creature I had ever laid eyes on.”

Not your typical remembrances from jaded politicos about mere mortals. Especially if that mortal happens to be a Republican politician.

Where were all these lofty accolades when Mr. Bush was alive? Where was all this love when he was president? Where was this towering regard for the man when he was losing his re-election campaign in 1992?

more
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/2/read-my-lips-medias-love-for-george-hw-bush-more-a/

[EasyAce]

By Charles Hurt - The Washington Times - Sunday, December 2, 2018

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

It has been nothing short of miraculous in this new season of Advent to hear all the Hosannas and applause for our recently departed former President George H.W. Bush.

In The New York Times, Mr. Bush was heralded for his “uncommon grace.”

The Washington Post called him a “giant of a man.”

“The most kind and considerate person I’ve ever known.”

“The most beautiful creature I had ever laid eyes on.”

Not your typical remembrances from jaded politicos about mere mortals. Especially if that mortal happens to be a Republican politician.

Where were all these lofty accolades when Mr. Bush was alive? Where was all this love when he was president? Where was this towering regard for the man when he was losing his re-election campaign in 1992?

more
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/2/read-my-lips-medias-love-for-george-hw-bush-more-a/

Read my lips, Mr. Hurt: It is entirely possible to reject a man's performance in office without rejecting the thought or the fact that he was concurrently one of the most decent men ever to hold his particular office. I often referred to Mr. Bush in life as President Lips, but that was strictly in regard to his performance in the White House. He was evidence enough that the most decent of men can often be the most wrong of men and that that does nothing to sully their essential character. (Remember, if you will, Mr. Hurt, that when Teddy Kennedy roused a Democratic National Convention with his "Where was George??" keynote, the standard response---and it didn't come from Republicans strictly---was, "Dry, sober, and home with his wife!")

It is also possible to accept a man's performance in office, to whatever volume or extent you approve of it (even his most incessant critics accept the small handful of good things or moves he has done or made), without rejecting the thought or fact that he is concurrently one of the worst role models and most amoral and vulgar philistines ever to hold or perform the office.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Read my lips, Mr. Hurt: It is entirely possible to reject a man's performance in office without rejecting the thought or the fact that he was concurrently one of the most decent men ever to hold his particular office. ...

True, but the media demeaned that "decency" without mercy. Remember these media themes?

 

The author of this essay is not diminishing President George HW Bush @EasyAce , he is highlighting the hypocrisy of many in the media and their true motivation for now pouring out the accolades missing during Bush's time in office.


 

[EasyAce]

True, but the media demeaned that "decency" without mercy. Remember these media themes?

 

The author of this essay is not diminishing President George HW Bush @EasyAce , he is highlighting the hypocrisy of many in the media and their true motivation for now pouring out the accolades missing during Bush's time in office.

@Right_in_Virginia
You're not entirely wrong, and I didn't suggest Mr. Hurt really sought to diminish Bush, but I seem to remember pieces like that during his presidency as talking of his political positioning and performing more than his personal character. And I do remember far worse written in that regard about him (and other presidents, for that matter) than what Newsweek and Time came up with.

[musiclady]

Read my lips, Mr. Hurt: It is entirely possible to reject a man's performance in office without rejecting the thought or the fact that he was concurrently one of the most decent men ever to hold his particular office. I often referred to Mr. Bush in life as President Lips, but that was strictly in regard to his performance in the White House. He was evidence enough that the most decent of men can often be the most wrong of men and that that does nothing to sully their essential character. (Remember, if you will, Mr. Hurt, that when Teddy Kennedy roused a Democratic National Convention with his "Where was George??" keynote, the standard response---and it didn't come from Republicans strictly---was, "Dry, sober, and home with his wife!")

It is also possible to accept a man's performance in office, to whatever volume or extent you approve of it (even his most incessant critics accept the small handful of good things or moves he has done or made), without rejecting the thought or fact that he is concurrently one of the worst role models and most amoral and vulgar philistines ever to hold or perform the office.

Hear!  Hear!