I'm sure by now most of you have read or heard about the backlash from President Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel's use of the word "retarded" in describing certain Democrats. Some people, including former Alaska governor Sarah Palin are calling for him to step down from his position.
Before I go any further, I would like to make it very clear that I am not a fan of the Obama administration, and especially not a fan of Rahm Emannuel. Frankly I would love to see him resign, but his use of the word "retarded" is not even remotely close to a reason for him to do so.
I think ordinary Americans have put up with enough hypersensitivity from special interest groups, who try to control how normal people speak. Even in the last 20 years, words like "fat," "gay," "black," and "he" (rather than "he or she") have transformed from objective descriptions to sensitive and politically dubious terms.
The word "retarded" literally means "slow." "Retarded" has been used to describe people of very low intelligence, to suggest they process certain information slowly. No one seriously argues this is false or a mischaracterization. Rahm Emanuel was conveying, with exaggeration, that some liberals were failing to grasp obvious truths. He meant precisely to criticize them for being "slow," or "retarded."
Some groups are angry Emanuel used the word "retarded" as an insult. But he used it to convey an absence of intelligence -- and isn't that what "retarded" legally means? Won't it always be a little insulting to suggest low intelligence? Is intelligence now an off-limits topic? These special interest groups only want us to use the word "retarded" with winces and sympathetic smiles on our faces, amid platitudes for those less fortunate. At this point, how can we criticize anyone, without offending some group with similar characteristics? I propose that, rather than supervise others' vocabularies, these groups should be a bit less sensitive.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
