Questions I would ask in response would be: How do we determine if anyone has translated a Bible version to be "politically correct"? How can we know the motives of others? What standards of proof should be required before suggestions of political correctness (or heresy, or any other claim) are justified? Might the legal standard of "innocent until proven guilty" work? Will Christians require any kind of accountability and empirical proof for the claims that are made under their banner? Or do we revert to an Old Testament standard: Every man did that which was right in his own eyes?
For myself, I wish for a higher standard. I wish for empirical support for any claim presented. If we claim to know why someone has done what they have done, then we should provide some kind of proof to justify our claim. Without such proof we revert to subjectivism, a form of relativistic humanism which is often decried so strongly by those who themselves practice it, perhaps unknowingly, for what they sincerely believe to be righteous causes.
Frankly, I am tired of hearing years of generalized, subjective accusations made against various Bible versions:
"This one is too liberal."
"This one is too literal."
"This one is bowing to feminist concerns."
"This one is just a paraphrase."
"This one doesn't deserve to be sold in Christian bookstores."
"This one is dumbed down."
"This one leaves out entire phrases or verses."
Let's give details and support for our claims. And let's make sure that any support we do give is based on the realities of the biblical languages and the languages we are translating to, not simply our opinions, however sincere, about what a translation wording should be.