That may be the case. I'm approaching taj from the perspective of a different psychological model. He's not stupid, necessarily, but he's got some underlying story he tells himself about how the left is awful, and needs to be fought back however possible that he needs to fit things into. So the left is saying that comparing Obama to a monkey is racist, and being a racist is bad, but it's totally not because of Obama's race, which means that the left comparing the current president to a monkey is racist or they're a bunch of untrustworthy hypocrites trying to compel righty types into behaving in a certain way. The problem with this is that the jury rigged explanations that they tell themselves for how everything fits into the overarching story contradict each other. That's totally fine by them because questioning those contradictions would be totally missing the point of a psychological safety valve, but if you hammer them on the inherent contradictions in their worldview, they can't meaningfully answer or engage without threatening the illusion they've propped their sense of self up with. That's why I've been trying to pry at a good number of the righties here with questions like that and pressing them hard to answer. Basically I'm trying to see if I can cause them a big enough spike of dysphoria with their worldview that they can't hold it together. Even if it doesn't work, it's good fun, and I'm vaguely optimistic overall. Has Blue Max been sighted around these parts recently? He strikes me as probably the most likely candidate for being accurately represented by this model, so I hammered him on it first.
Basically I'm trying to ask questions that they cannot answer if they want to keep up the fiction to themselves that they are good people fighting back against those horrid libs.