The mistake here in our liberals of the forum's thinking is the same mistake the biased author of the article makes, and puts IN his article....From the GQ article on the opening page the author starts off painting a picture of a backwoods redneck, that he obviously doesn't understand, and in fact looks down on for his way of life....He starts the article saying this....
"How in the world did a family of squirrel-eating, Bible-thumping, catchphrase-spouting duck hunters become the biggest TV stars in America?"
squirrel eating? bible thumping?
Both of these descriptors are used to paint a negative picture of rural Americans, or people of faith. Then in the next sentence of the article Magary extends his confused slur to the general viewership of the show by describing those who watch as:
"And what will they do now that they have 14 million fervent disciples?"
"fervent disciples" is used to describe them IMO, to paint the picture of extremists could be the only people tuning in.
It's insulting to say the least, but don't let our feathers get ruffled, we don't have that right according to leftists that distort, dissemble, and twist his words in the article, all for the sake of manufacturing a contrived controversy.
In the opening plate setting load of Bull that this Magary sets up is this one....
"Out here in these woods, without any cameras around, Phil is free to say what he wants. Maybe a little too free. He’s got lots of thoughts on modern immorality, and there’s no stopping them from rushing out. Like this one:
“It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”
Perhaps we’ll be needing that seat belt after all."
Is this guy for real? Oh, so witty...."there's no stopping them" He's the goddamn interviewer for Christ sake, he set him up to hear what Robertson had to say, and knew what he would say on this, then the "Perhaps we'll be needing that seat belt..." comment is just crap, what a tool.
As for what Phil said there, he only said that HE prefers women....But in Magary's mind that is wrong, and can't understand obviously how someone could be heterosexual. He's an idiot.
Then just the next paragraph down he set's Phil up to be a southern bigot as well by asking him what he thought of living in the south during the civil rights era....But he doesn't show the question/answer as an honest reporter would do, instead, he has his answer, and with editorial licence chop's it up to say, or imply what HE (Magary) wants to get across about Phil:
"Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana
“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”
This comment was inserted in the middle of describing how Phil went to LouTech, and dropped out giving his QB spot to Terry Bradshaw...So, what it's relevance was to begin with is not clear, unless you know that the article was a hit piece aimed at painting this guy as some sort of Racist/Homophobe/Redneck.
It is Magary who inserted the "Pre civil rights" tag to the comment, NOT Phil. And Phil makes it clear that his experience was what HE saw with his own eyes, not the overall movement, and treatment of the times....
All this is, are liberals using this article designed to deliver a manufactured outrage into the lap of those special interest groups like GLAAD, and HRC that they knew would get all flustered over the mere mention that someone is heterosexual, instead of gay, and they succeeded.
How dumb that liberals can't read in context, or look at the interview with fairness in what is quote, and what is added to stir them up....IOW, a real lack of critical thinking on their part...