Liberals set up 'NY Times' story to turn anti-gay Republicans into Todd Akin. Or something
Over the weekend, The New York Times ran a piece about the word "homosexual" and how it's naturally fallen out of favor, particularly with the LGBT community. It was an interesting exploration of linguistics, humanity, and progress. Nothing controversial.
But according to Rush Limbaugh, the whole thing was some sort of journalistic plot to reshape minds and attack GOP candidates. The GOP thought leader, who asserts that "gay is a stolen word," ranted about it at length on his show yesterday, saying in part:
So where this is gonna end up, what they're then gonna do is they're gonna go out and they're gonna look at Republican candidates. This is what this means. They're gonna look for a Republican, probably running for state senate someplace or state legislature, who calls gays "homosexuals," and they're a gonna harp on this guy as the next Todd Akin. This is what is being set up.
This is a New York Times story, by the way. "For Manys [sic] Gays and Lesbians, the Term 'Homosexual' is Flinch-Worthy," and it's just indicative here. Liberalism cannot survive if it's described. Liberalism, liberals are very, very uncomfortable when they are accurately described or behaviors or their politics or what have you. So they have to hire guys like Lakoff to come up with less damaging ways to say things.
FULL RANT: Lakoff (Rhymes With) Advises Democrats to Make "Homosexual" a Dirty Word—March 25, 2014 [RUSH]
I'm sure he sees just as sinister of a plot in the way the word "straight" has come to replace "heterosexual"—right?
comments powered by Disqus