UMm....I am one of those people that don't see words as "bad" or "good". More like, appropriate & inappropriate. Is "retard" inappropriate? Sometimes. But not all the times. Thinking back to the times I've used it, I've actually not used it to mean stupid or inept, but when I'm being hindered by a process or something...which, btw, is one of the definitions for retard. Are my kids allowed to sling it around as an insult? Nope! Inappropriate! Are they allowed to say stupid? Not as an insult, but if something is genuinely stupid, SURE!

I can't say I'm surprised that ANY politician would defend they're own party. That's they're job, I suppose. All I have to say is shame on both of them for using "retard" in a derogatory way. Professional people should know better. It only makes them look stupid if they can't find the correct or polite way to display their ideas.

As to the first part of the question, I think Sarah Palin would've jumped down Limbaugh's throat in a nanosecond if he was a liberal. The usage was slightly different, but it certainly wasn't sensitive -- I believe he said we can “no longer call a retard a retard," which I don't see Palin endorsing in the least. When Letterman said something insensitive toward her family, she didn't care that he was using comedy and satire, now, did she? As to the second, and more important, part, I think the word, at least as it's currently used, should be retired. But I think that's way too simple a way to look at it. My son and I have talked about "retard," and we've also talked about "butthead," and "asshole," "shit," "bitch," "jerkface," "poophead," and others as they come up. My line to him is, sure, there are certain words you'll see consistently proscribed, but the point is, if it's used to hurt someone, and if that's the only or primary usage of it, then no. Find another way to say what you need to say, or remain silent. According to our way of thinking, "retard" is indeed bad, and it's no better or worse than "freak" or "asshole" or any number of other words (although I do understand how it could be uniquely bad to a group who have heard it used to put them down specifically). We hit a stumbling block at "bitch," because my son's smart enough to know that's also the name of a female dog. Can you say female dog without hurting someone's feelings? Yes. Is saying it that way helping anyone or in any way necessary? Probably not. Then it's hurtful. Don't say it. On the other hand, we allow (in our home, not at school) the limited usage of saying someone did something "stupid" and the like, because we've all established enough respect that we've long since made it clear we're labeling the action (and we all do stupid things), not the person. We don't say "retarded," but if we labeled an action as such, I don't imagine it would be done in a hurtful way. "Retard" is only used to label people. No good. That's it. No trickety trick. No some-groups-allowed, some not. Try your best to not be hurtful. Seems simple enough.

What Palin did was hypocritical, bar none. I'm sure what Dana is saying about the two situations being different is true (I'm not familiar with what happened first with the Chief of Staff), but the word was used equally as insensitively in both situations, Rush does actually call Democrats "retards" a few times in that rant, and not just satirically either. And I agree with AZ Writer, if it were a liberal or Democrat using it in the way Rush did, I am pretty sure she would never have defended them. And the fact that she defended his use of the word, in whatever context it was said, when she herself has a child with Down's makes my head spin so hard I can't see straight. As for the word, I hate it. HATE it. At least in the context it is used in now. I try not to use it. It's the same as those people who go around calling everything "gay". As if gay were something we should avoid at all costs, something that's just terrible, something that the person could help. Hello, being gay or retarded are none of those things! Why do we walk around talking like they are? I also agree with sheena.jean, these people are professionals, they are in the public eye, they should know better. Not that I hold them to a higher moral code than myself, because we're all just people after all, but they do have a major influence over large groups of people, and I believe that kind of power should require a bit of responsibility.

"Kids don't even know words are bad until someone teaches them how to use them in bad ways." I think that is kind of key, here. And part of the reason I try not to label things as "good" or "bad". It's simply "okay" or "not okay" or even "not okay in this situation". I know at some point, my kids are going to start using 3 & 4 letter words with their friends b/c it's "cool"...but I'm hoping that by keeping the "bad" label off of them, they'll think about it a split second longer before it flies out of their mouth at another person. That said, I would never have my child use a word in it's dictionary sense, if I know the general population uses the word in a negative connotation. I will teach my child the word donkey or mule, before I teach her the word ass, lol. If any of that makes sense...

We don't swear around our daughter (yet). If she hears someone say the word "stupid" she is shocked. I know reality will hit soon enough and she will start hearing and using words that we haven't used in her presence up until now. I'm okay with that, and also okay with the fact that some might view our approach as naive. But it's given us a lot of opportunities to discuss words that can be hurtful. So "stupid" when used to describe a person is not okay - but more appropriate when struggling with a stubborn zipper (stupid zipper). Same for retard. I used it all the time when I was a child, but now.... it is (and always has been) a derogatory term so we don't use it. There's a movement out there right now to end the use of the word altogether and I'm all for it. Thanks to a blogger friend (with a child with special needs) who pointed me toward it. http://www.r-word.org/

Exactly. It's all about the intention and usage behind the word, and being aware of how others receive it. If she hears someone say the word "stupid" she is shocked. My son heard someone bang his head on his car trunk lid in the parking lot when he was four or so. The guy let off a huge stream of expletives: "@#$% car! @#&^%#ing stupid piece of @%$@#!!!!" (Or something like that. I don't remember the exact expletive string, but it was long and creative.) He looks at me all horrified. Oh boy, I figured, here it comes. "Mom! He said 'stupid!'" It's all relative, I guess. Kids don't even know words are bad until someone teaches them how to use them in bad ways.

When I was pregnant with my daughter her quad test came back twice for at risk for Downs Syndrome. From that point on, we agreed that it was a family rule not to use that word. Thankfully, she is perfectly healthy. I do admit that I have slipped a couple of times in using the "R" word. I feel horrible when it happens.

NOT OKAY!!! I don't really keep up with what Sarah Palin says or doesn't say. I kind of make it a point not to, so I won't comment on her... But, as for the R-bomb. NOT NECESSARY! I totally agree with bwankle who echoed exactly what I was thinking in terms of the word gay. There is nothing wrong with the word itself or both of its proper meanings. But, it has become derogatory slang. Language is a powerful tool and underlying values and judgments are conveyed through word choice. People with disabilities are already marginalized, to continue to use the R-bomb is a perpetuation of that marginalization. It is just not funny or necessary. Think about the times you may have used it - would you feel embarrassed or guilty if a person with a mental disability had heard you? If the answer is yes, then why not take it out of your vocabulary? I prefer person-first language that respects the individual person instead of the disability. Too often people with disabilities are seen only in terms of their limitations and differences. The word retarded may have a place in the DSM or some doctors' offices, but it has such a negative connotation that it doesn't need to be used in every day language. Mental disability, cognitive disability, developmental delay are all ways to describe a person with a disability. The exception to my personal rule is to respect the language that the person who actually HAS the disability when possible. Some people identify with certain pockets of disability culture and have re-claimed words like "cripple" or "crip" and decide to use it themselves. In that case, I support their own decision. ONE LAST THING: I cringe when I hear people with disabilities described as "suffering" from them. Really? Do you know they are suffering? If so, then fine. But, if they are just a person who thinks/speaks/talks/act differently or in ways you don't understand, then they might not be suffering, you know. I just think it would suck to always be seen in a negative light when maybe I'm just perfectly fine the way I am, and the only thing I'm suffering from is how other people see me.