The tributes to George H.W. Bush have been heartfelt and impressive, bringing many people of differing views together to mourn his passing. His values clearly apply to all of us.
I found the exception to be the print reporter (Times?) who, praising President Bush’s World War II service, then had to slander his son by saying the elder Bush served in combat while his son “merely” joined the National Guard to avoid regular service. (The younger Bush flew a fighter and the National Guard is nothing to be embarrassed about.)
When even a tribute to a respected, deceased leader has to include an egregious attack on his son to make a partisan point, it means that the writer harbors fanatical hatred. To me, that’s despicable, and the writer doesn’t deserve or merit a publishing outlet.