I still don't get it.

The article says, "Samuel Wurzelbacher, the Ohio man hailed as "Joe the Plumber" by Republican John McCain's presidential campaign last year, said he believes gays are "queer" and said he won't allow them near his children." Does he deny calling them "queer"? No. He gives us a vocab lesson.

She remains adamant, so, I thought I needed more clarification.

Huh? According to the text of the article you site, the one which you claim needs to be read in its entirety, he did call them "queer". He calls them queer, exactly as the title indicates. Of course, he tried to explain it away as meaning "odd"...but he did call them queer.

I guess you could claim that the paper used his words to make it a bigger story than it really is. In fact, you and I probably agree that this is a non story. My opinion, however, is heavily influenced by the fact that I think Joe is a non-story. But, unless I'm mistaken, this is exactly what Mr. The Plumber wanted. He could have used 100 other more common terms. He didn't. He chose a term which has been twisted into a disparaging connotation.

So, one of three things is going on.
A. He's time traveled from sometime prior to 1940.
B. He's an idiot.
C. He's a media strumpet.

Hey, how 'bout that. I used my own ancient term. Regardless, while both B and C may be true, it's probable that "C" brought us to this particular story.