George H.W. Bush is the former president who once declared, “…I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God.”
His remark was so out of line that several on the Right felt obligated to deny he made it. (But believing what the Right says — without independent evidence in support of it — takes a remarkable leap of faith these days; and, so far as I know, Bush himself has not denied he made the remark.)
Given his track record, it really shouldn’t surprise anyone that Bush seems to think Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann are on the same level as various Right wing pundits. That is, he recently referred to Maddow and Olbermann as “sick puppies” — just as if the two were the liberal equivalent of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.
To be sure, Maddow and Olbermann are editorial journalists who not only report facts but also give their opinions about the facts they report. Limbaugh and Beck would love to be considered on the same level as them, for it would increase their credibility. But neither Limbaugh nor Beck take nearly the same care with the facts as do Maddow and Olbermann. The two sides might be equally opinionated, but one side usually checks its facts much more honestly than the other.
When people like George Bush imply or state that there is an equivalence between Left and Right in this country, they are living in the past. What they say might once have been true. But with the rise of such cynics as Rush Limbaugh, and such cynical organizations as WorldNetDaily and FOX News, the current Right has become quantitatively less reliable as a source of fact than the current Left.
At least that’s how I see it. Someday, the pendulum will swing again and it will be the Left who is the least trustworthy. But for now, I believe anyone who thinks, like George Bush, that Rachel Maddow is as unreliable as Glenn Beck has not been paying attention. Certainly not been paying attention.