The death of the 41st president George H. W. Bush has resulted in the usual gushing and fawning obituaries that are used to paint a rosy picture of US politics by ignoring all the awful things he did. Today’s front section of the Plain Dealer was pretty much devoted to praising him, extending over 12 pages. Even this obituary that did not go overboard in praising him ignored his failings.
Fortunately there are people like Mehdi Hasan who do not forget and are disdainful enough of the false privilege we give to public figures to remind us of the more unsavory aspects of his career, such as his war crimes, racism, and obstruction of justice, not to mention that he was also a serial groper of women.
Silly question. I mostly hear about this when it concerns conservative people who die. Does this even happen for someone who isn’t conservative? Or do dead progressives and liberals get described as “controversial figures”* or something similar instead?
* I don’t have a problem with coverage of past events that is favorably worded when describing the recently deceased. Writings around the time of death are going to be opinion pieces, not the beginnings of an accurate historical record. Sweeping them entirely under the rug feels like the real problem to me.
I wonder if he was involved in the invention of “extreme rendition.”
He was an aristocrat -- from the Brown/Harriman/Bush cartel that allegedly tried to get Smedley Butler to overthrow the republic. I don’t know the degree to which he was involved in using sportsball stadium franchises to loot Houston, but they should still have “hang Bushes on sight” signs up. Oil.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/02/george-hw-bush-family