It's good to know this country's academics aren't above political cheap shots. An article by Rob Krueger and Jody Emel in Local Environments, which was assigned for my environmental hazards class, starts off "The anointing of George W. Bush as the 43rd official inhabitant of the White house..." and later in the paragraph refers to W as "King George."

The thing is, the article isn't even about the Bush administration's environmental policy. It's about gold mine licensing in Montana. "King George" is just part of the context-setting introduction. Now, I understand the desire to locate an article within the larger context, but is it really necessary for every environmental studies article to begin with a couple paragraphs about how our environment is in crisis before getting to the specific substance at hand? You're just supporting the market for needlessly broad generalizations.