Many of you know that the framers went to remarkably convoluted lengths to avoid using the word “slavery” in parts of the Constitution that protected slavery, for example:
No person held to service or labour in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due.
Some political desks are going to similarly ridiculous lengths to avoid using the term “racist” to describe the racist statements of Donald Trump:
LOL, everyone made fun of @nytimes for using "racially charged" too much in their copy so they switched to "racially infused" instead. https://t.co/53VnPUdGiH— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) July 15, 2019
Well, what do you expect them to do, climb Wokeback Mountain? This is probably where we’re headed:
Racially charged. Racially tinged. Racism-flecked. Marbled with racism. Racism adjacent.— Emily Nussbaum (@emilynussbaum) July 14, 2019
Trump next summer: get out of our white country you degenerate mud people @nytimes: trump causes controversy with racially zesty stump speech— Mass for Shut-ins (podcast) (@gin_and_tacos) July 15, 2019
Except it would probably actually read “a speech some Democrats say was racially zesty.”