 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled edit
This is a great article! It finally puts the word "bash" in its proper, modern perspective as an oft used tool for propagandists. For example, it hasn't gone unnoticed that if you constantly go after Bill Clinton (whether it's warranted or not) that it's often regarded as mere criticism; but if you point out any of the Bush administration's failures (no matter how obvious, fact-based and focused) it's often referred to as "Bush bashing". It's a sinister method of trying to dismiss someone else's statement of fact without have to bring up any of your own supporting facts, whatsoever. I dream of the day when this kind of tricky wording no longer works on some Americans and they just look at the facts presented and make up their own minds. Cowicide 19:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
side note: Google results: 441,000 for the term "bush bashing" / only 32,400 for "clinton bashing"
Thanks again, for a great NPOV ARTICLE. Cowicide 19:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't the spelling be "prejudicial"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TimBurleson (talk • contribs) 18:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
One can be bashed as the result of faulty identification as membership in a group. It is possible to be gay-bashed despite being heterosexual.Pbrower2a (talk) 12:40, 10 July 2016 (UTC)