Two points: due to his atrocious style, it's always difficult to be sure whatever the fuck George Will is yabbering about at any given moment. It's hardly our fault if ole' George writes to be misunderstood and nails his mark dead centre. A side point: why hasn't some editor taken him aside and made him write like not a wanker? Or, alternatively, how come some sub-ed doesn't just beat the shit out of his bile until it resembles normal-people English? Or, best of all, taken him out back and put a .22 between his eyes? This is a dude who is literally paid hundreds of thousands of dollars just to put some half-formed opinions onto a page in readable form and he still fucks it up. Come on. How many investigative journos could you afford not to fire if he just fell down the stairs one day?
Secondly, either way George Will is completely wrong, and being unbelievably offensive. No biggie.
Sure, the argument is poorly made. Still, I prefer it when people are criticised for what they actually said rather than some other thing.
I honestly had no idea who he was before this incident, so I cannot comment re: putting a .22 between his eyes. I'll take your word for it.
So less offensive in the same way saying "I hate black people" is less offensive than saying "I hate niggers".
I realise you're not actually asking for a response here, but: not really. Both those statements express the same idea, the only difference in offensiveness being choice of words. I hold that there is a meaningful difference in between what George said and what he was accused of saying, one of those statements is much more powerful outrage fuel than the other*, and the difference relies on content rather than word choice.
And that's more time than I expected to spend today discussing the various amounts of offensiveness of the poorly-made statements of this guy.
*And since this is the internet, that's the one that gets a hashtag.
