Posted on 05/02/2013 8:28:52 AM PDT by chessplayer
The immigration debate took a similar absurd turn yesterday thanks to the Los Angeles Times which announced to the world that it would not only cease referring to people who had violated American immigration laws as “illegal immigrants,” it would also refrain from using the latest politically correct term “undocumented” to describe them as well.
Why not call them, in the interest of accuracy: “Persons in line to be registered as Demonrats.”
Los Angeles Slimes: ‘Undocumented’ Is Also Racist
Much better
Yeah, that’s racist!
Attention Los Angeles Times.........FU and STFU.
Future historians will mock the suicide of the American Republic.
The terms illegal alien and undocumented are not racist, not aimed at any race- just people that are here illegally from other countries or who entered legally but overstayed or otherwise violated their entry agreement. The term undocumented was made up by the left because they did not want to use the legal term illegal alien. The left wants everyone to believe there is no legal way for people from Mexico to come here to work/live. That is nonsense, more entry permits and work permits are issued to citizens of Mexico than any other country.
The left wants to zero in on illegals from Mexico, and it is true that is the largest portion. The truth is there are illegals from many countries, which include every race. Any changes that are made to immigration laws, any amnesty will apply to many others- this is a real issue as we have seen with the Boston terrorists. Truth is if we make it easier for people to come here to live/work/attend school we are making it easier for terrorists as well.
By Matthew Sheffield May 2, 2013
Do you remember when the musician Prince changed his stage name to a symbol as a form of protest against his music label? Since no one could pronounce it, he was generally referred to as “the artist formerly known as Prince” in the press.
The immigration debate took a similar absurd turn yesterday thanks to the Los Angeles Times which announced to the world that it would not only cease referring to people who had violated American immigration laws as “illegal immigrants,” it would also refrain from using the latest politically correct term “undocumented” to describe them as well.
Perhaps this was inevitable given the fact that trying to use the word undocumented to refer to someone who overstayed a visa is clearly inaccurate. There are, in fact, documents that prove the individual in question came to this country at some point.
“The alternative suggested by the 1995 guidelines, ‘undocumented immigrants,’ similarly falls short of our goal of precision,” the paper admitted in a memo released to employees.
But rather than take the easy way out and use the fully accurate term “illegal immigrant,” the Times has decided to favor circumlocution instead:
In covering both individuals and groups, the goal is to provide relevance and context and to avoid labels.
Use the term "illegal immigration" to describe the phenomenon of entering or residing in a country in violation of the law.
Avoid using "illegal immigrant" or "undocumented immigrant" to describe individuals except when necessary in direct quotations. [...]
Be specific whenever possible in describing an individual’s status:
- "Authorities said he crossed the border illegally."
- "She entered the country to attend college but overstayed her student visa."
- "He was brought here as a child by his parents, who entered the U.S. without a visa."
While the policy was stated formally yesterday, as the Times’s ombudsman noted, the paper has already been following this practice for some time. There is also a full copy of the memo at the link if you wish to read it.
In the announcement, the Times admitted that the terminology change was made after the Associated Press banned its writers from referring to people in the country against the law as “illegal immigrants” last month.
So what are you supposed to call these illegal border crossers?
And let’s not forget Paladin’s man, Hey Boy.
"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."
GFY, LA-Slimes!
Anything that identifies an illegal as different from legal immigrants and citizens is racist, so we might as well go back to using the term wetback. It is simple, no more racist than saying illegal or undocumented. Finally there is virtue to be found in PC values and multicultural propaganda. We can’t win for losing, so why bother with niceties?
Have you taken the San Francisco #30 bus through Chinatown on a Saturday afternoon lately?
They have documents. Phony, but they have them. Some are even legitimate frauds knowingly sold by corrupt staffers in license bureaus who take extra money under the table.
No, I’m afraid haven’t been to SF in many years. I’m up north of you near the Canadian border. I do, however, shop at Costco on Saturdays so I think I get the picture. The Hong Kong crowd from the Vancouver area likes to shop on our side of the line.
they should just call them unregistered Democrats instead.
And, beelzepug, you woman hating prick, remember Hey Girl? I am still alive at 86... 
and can still kick your lily white, misogynist ass from here to Frisco Bay--
Beesepug? Don't piss off Hey Girl... 
Not only can she do as say, she not give you chinaman's chance!
Gadzooks! What... 
did I start on this thread?
OMG!!!
No it's not.
Let's get a few other BS inventions out of the way... whether they're designed to shut down debate, or to add to "newspeak" for political purposes.
"It's the right thing to do," most often isn't. Saying it doesn't make it so.
"That's not who we are," applies to the speaker only and most often is the direct opposite of Constitutional provisions and hundreds of non applied laws.
"Racism" or "racist" has been so abused is now belongs to the utterly discredited "fascist" and "Nazi" epithets. Totally ineffective.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.