The farce of Obama’s lipstick on a pig comment reminds me that leftists often behave something like toddlers touching a hot stove. Non-leftists warn them not to use some tactic or to advocate some policy because history shows that it leads to woe, but like a toddler warned about touching a stove, they do it anyway and get burned.
Leftists began accusing non-leftists of communicating in a euphemistic code back in the ’70s, when leftists denounced the use of the phrase “law and order” as racist code. Later, leftists said that the invocation of “states’ rights” during the ’80s, by western states who were upset by the high degree of federal control over the majority of their lands, was racist even though the matters involved had nothing to do with racial relations. All along, non-leftists scoffed and warned leftists about the consequences of presuming to read the minds others.
For the past 30 years, leftists have educated the public to look for the hidden message in everything that politicians, activists and pundits say. Now, like a howling toddler, the Left find themselves surprised that Obama got burned by using the lipstick-on-a-pig idiom. Given the Left’s history of pouncing on the least little verbal ambiguity of non-leftists, why should not the rest of us hold leftists to the same standard?
As with the trap of identity politics, leftists employed a tactic purely for its immediate benefit, without thinking of the long-term consequences. Now they’re sucking on their burned fingers.
Leftists do differ from toddlers in one important way: toddlers eventually learn not to touch hot stoves.