Um, no.
The alleged remarks by GHWB seem rather pedestrian to me.
Let’s go over the facts.
An (allegedly) fully accredited reporter has an (alleged) exchange with the Vice President on August 27 1987. In an airport. This is over a year before the 1988 election, when it wasn’t even clear who the Repubs would nominate. Somehow, I am less than shocked that the NYT, WAPO, WSJ etc didn’t assign their crack reporters to the story.
The story is (allegedly) reported in the Boulder Daily Camera on Monday February 27, 1989. It is also mentioned by the Secular Humanist organ, “Free Inquiry” magazine, Fall 1988 issue, Volume 8, Number 4, page 16.
Atheists complain. Some write letters. The following is asserted:
=> C. Boyden Gray, counsel to the president, (allegedly) replies on White House stationery on February 21, 1989: stating that substantively Bush stood by his original statement: “As you are aware, the President is a religious man who neither supports atheism nor believes that atheism should be unnecessarily encouraged or supported by the government.”
=> White House employee Nelson Lund writes to the American Atheist General Headquarters, Inc. on April 7, 1989, which reportedly states that Mr. Gray was adhering to his statements in the February 21, 1989, letter.
=> On February 5, 1990, Mr. Nelson Lund replied again on White House stationery–stating, “We believe that our position has been adequately explained in previous correspondence.”
=> UPI reports on the irritated atheists on May 8, 1989.
The point: The charges here and the paper trail are rather specific and therefore falsifiable. I conclude that either we are dealing with a rather elaborate fabrication, or the Bush41 administration was given every opportunity to retract the President’s (alleged) slur against American atheists, but refused to do so.
I suspect the latter. Furthermore, I find it unsurprising. It’s not like atheists had or have any significant political organization.
ambushed
---- There’s more than adequate reason to believe that Bush hated atheists to the point of not considering them valid citizens.
“Hate” is a strong characterization. I’d prefer, “Profoundly indifferent, and openly contemptuous.”