I will be continuing to refer to Presidents -- -elect, ex- and standing -- along with other prominent political figures, by using honorific and last name, full name, naked patronymic or on rare occasions, by first name.
This making-up of cutesy-insulting distortions of people's names, dredged-up ancient versions the family hasn't used since Ellis Island and/or combinations with the names of infamous dictators is childish. Don't like the person? Say so. Better yet, say why.
It's not going to be easy to avoid writing "The Donald" or "Hils," or (because I delight in obscurity) making reference to Marlo Thomas's long-suffering television boyfriend, but I'll make the effort.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
4 years ago
3 comments:
I agree- calling a person names like Obummer, Hitlery. or the Trumpster are childish and stupid, and cheapen political discourse by distilling political disagreements down to personal schoolyard arguments, rather than a serious debate on the issues. I want to be better and more mature than that.
Thank you for doing the same.
Agreed!
I still address the President as such, regardless of who he (or she) is.
I think DJT might catch on, though, as LBJ and JFK did before.
And that's not disrespectful, I think?
gfa
Such names have been a useful "tell" that opinion writing is aimed at preaching-to-the-choir rather than aimed at being convincing to the general reader (or even at readers currently on the other side).
Post a Comment