Posts Tagged ‘racism
The self-proclaimed language police of the progressive left have now decided that using the term “illegal alien” is inherently racist and inhuman, and damages the immigration debate. The leaders of this movement are asking that everybody stop using the term altogether. For once, the left got it right… sort of.
Set aside for a moment the sheer absurdity of grouping “illegal alien” together with the “N-word.” Set aside the fact that illegal alien gangs have themselves been committing racially-motivated violence (mostly against blacks) for years. Set aside the irony of the left claiming they are “humanizing” a debate while simultaneously branding millions of people as racists simply for using a factual term.
I actually agree with the left that the term “illegal alien” should be dropped. I even go so far as to generally agree with their statement that “people are not illegal.”Allow me to explain.
Punching someone in the face for no reason is illegal, but we do not refer to that person as an “illegal pugilist“. Selling drugs is illegal, but we do not refer to the dealer as an “illegal businessman”. Stealing is illegal, but we do not refer to the thief as an “illegal acquisition specialist.”
Typically, we refer to people’s ACTIONS as being illegal, not the people themselves. The people who commit those illegal actions? We call them criminals.
But what about the charge of racism? I can actually see how someone might object to being called an illegal alien on racial grounds. After all, in today’s society, “alien” has a much different connotation than it did a few hundred years ago.
It kind of makes sense that folks would find racial overtones in being compared to funny looking beings with odd colored skin and strange facial features.
The left would have us replace “illegal alien” with a term like “undocumented immigrant”, or “unauthorized immigrant.” Nevermind that these terms are contradictory, since being an “immigrant” to the United States implies both documentation and authorization. It’s kind of like saying bureaucratic efficiency, or political ethics, or progressive socialism.
Then there’s the hilariously ludicrous replacement term “NAFTA refugee,” which apparently has been coined to give the progressive left a succinct way to blame U.S. capitalism for the plight of Mexican citizens… you know, rather than the systemic corruption of their government, dysfunctional legal system, and rampant drug violence. But that’s another story.
The left is right though: it’s time to drop the I-word. It’s time to stop using the term “illegal alien,” because it lacks sufficient accuracy and context. Instead, I propose we all start using a far more descriptive term to describe those who cross our borders illegally; a term which may have even been coined right here on this very site two years ago:
As I said before, “criminal” is a much more correct and accurate way to describe a person who commits an illegal act than as an “illegal”. And using the word “Entrant” simply describes an action, thereby avoiding the inaccurate and contradictory use of “immigrant,” as well as the racial component of comparing people to little green men (or huge, scary, acid-spitting harbingers of death).
So today, let’s acknowledge that words are indeed important. Let’s follow the lead of our friends on the progressive left. Let’s agree that “illegal alien” is inaccurate, insufficient, and possibly charged with interplanetary racism.
Today, let’s begin using the far more accurate and race-neutral term of criminal entrant.
The 10th anniversary of 9/11 is coming up this weekend. Others have written about how this specific event has been hijacked by political correctness. I will discuss how the left nitpicks what is worthy of remembrance and what is not.
I am a docent at LACMA, the largest art museum in Los Angeles. Like Kevin life in Boystown – it’s very lonely there. There are a handful of GOP voters but although we acknowledge one another, we stay under the radar.
LACMA, a proud far left institution, has purchased a very disturbing ‘artwork’; it is basically a full size display of a black man being castrated by 5 masked white men – after being accused of raping a white woman. (I won’t publicize this work. If you must, go to LACMA’s website for details). 50 years ago the artist couldn’t sell or display it here in America. Of course Europe and Japan have been thrilled to shame America by displaying this travesty for years.
The museum, the LA Times, and NPR are all celebrating this most important event – a way to shame and insult America. They who claim to be beyond race are stoking the racial flames, because to be honest, we as a society have moved beyond those awful days of lynching. Today more violent evil crimes are perpetrated by black against themselves or white people. Just look at the murders in Chicago or the black flashmobs. I am not suggesting we create art to teach and inform the public about these events – that is what news media is for.
Which brings me to the whitewashing of 9/11 — within a month of the event, we no longer saw or heard the news reels of the towers falling. The images of 200 people hurling themselves out of the windows of the towers, the awful sounds of their bodies hitting the pavement, have been erased from our memories.
The left is doing its best to erase the evil of 9/11, because they and the Islamists share a common enemy – us. On the other hand, we as a nation have progressed far in race relations – real true honest progress. That dismays the left, they hate that to such a degree that they will go out of their way to shove it back down our throats. They will see to it that although this mythic event in the mind of the artist 50 years ago, the image is shoved into our faces as if this was the news headline of today. Of course in doing so they once again show us who the real racists are.
I will be vocal about my opposition to this ‘exhibit’. I have my response to my horrified fellow docents who will call me narrow and closed minded. I will ask them why we don’t have a piece of artwork displaying the thousands of gay men being hung today in Iran? Why is this issue less worthy of art? Is it because slamming white racists from 50 years ago is so much easier than dealing with real issues that affect people today?
Leah, a tea party, American Jewish mom in Los Angeles
According to Malkin, Bobby Rush has told FOX News that not seating Senator Burris was RACIST!, and that if Burris wasn’t black, he would have been seated.
Harry Reid and Senate Democrats are, thus, RACISTS!
Normally, we’d be all over Rush’s case for this, the way we were whenever the Obama campaign and its surrogates cried RACISM! RACISM! RACISM! as a weapon during the campaign, against the Clintons and McCain/Palin, at every available opportunity.
But, and it really is an Oprah-sized butt here, growing increasingly large every day (like its namesake), Rush is actually close to the truth with Reid — who is on Patrick Fitzgerald’s taped conversations with Rod Blagojevich telling the Governor of Illinois NOT to appoint a black replacement for Obama in the Senate. Reid claims this is because a black replacement won’t win re-election in Illinois when 2010 rolls around…so Reid’s not doing this out of any desire to lash out at the black community, but instead because strategically he wants to hold onto the Illinois seat and personally believes no black candidate can do that.
So, technically, Reid’s not a RACIST!, so much as he’s a bumbling idiot who runs his mouth, and who still has not addressed the directive he made to Blagojevich ordering him to not appoint a black replacement for Obama. In interviews, Reid and his surrogates NEVER explain what he REALLY meant…instead they just attack Blagojevich for allegedly trying to sell the Senate seat. That’s the oldest trick in the interview books: when asked a question, just ignore it and talk about something else instead. No one on TV will call you out on it. Try it the next time you are interviewed for something.
If you watch TV interviews, pay attention to the interviewer. She or he will ask a guest a question, concentrating on whatever was practiced in advance. Then, the interviewer pauses and lets the guest respond. Instead of listening to what that person is saying, the interviewer is focusing on getting the next question out. Especially in short segments, where the interviewer practiced three questions to ask, and wants to get to all three, without leaving room for a follow up question if the guest dodges whatever was asked originally.
We learned to do this about midway through the campaign this year. Whenever we went to an event where we knew media would be present, we had three prepared sound bites we practiced ahead of time, and no matter what we were asked, we said one of those three things. Sure enough, even though we dodged the original question, the sound bites always made it on the air or in print, and no one ever called us out for not answering whatever we were asked.
And Reid is not going ANYWHERE NEAR answering questions about his directive to not replace Obama with another black Senator.
Normally, we address race-baiting and cries of RACISM! RACISM! RACISM! with shots of hunky guys frolicking in their underwear, since ridiculous false charges of RACISM! can only be countered with equally ridiculous instances of gratuitous beefcake — but Rush has a point, so instead we’ll throw this bit of gratuitous fun at Reid (and the enabling media) for refusing to explain the seemingly bigoted conversation between Reid and Blagojevich.
So, take this, Harry Reid:
Maybe an apple a day can chase some of your stupid away (not that we think for a minute there’s enough apples to ever make you a competent, capable, sensible, pragmatic, or effective and functional member of the public, let alone a decent Majority Leader in the Senate).
We love this guy. Representive-Elect Anh Cao (first Vietnamese member of Congress) asks to join the Congressional Black Caucus (the most racist group in Washington)
Representative-Elect Anh Cao, the first Vietnamese member of Congress, representing a heavily black district in Louisiana, has requested to join the Congressional Black Caucus in an effort to best serve his constituents.
The Congressional Black Caucus is the most racist group in the United States Congress: it has consistently refused to allow every white or Hispanic Representative who has tried to join, when those Representatives wished to serve their black constituents by being part of the Caucus.
Let’s see how the CBC treats Cao. We’re betting he’s refused membership as well.
No one should be able to cry about racism while practicing it against others.