The term "illegal immigrant" is hate speech?
Sounds like straight description to me but not to the loony Latina below. According to her, even Obama uses hate speech
"Knowing that words matter, and some more than others, it was disappointing to hear President Obama repeatedly use the term "illegal immigrant" in his recent healthcare speech to the joint session of Congress.
In the past, he has referred to this population by its more accurate description of "undocumented immigrants" and so the prevailing thought among immigrant advocates is that the President's use of the term was a subtle political olive branch to those like "Joe the Congressional Heckler" Wilson.
Yet, as we now know, the usage of the term didn't appease anyone but merely added to the antagonism already felt by some in the room -- not to mention that it elevated a term regarded by many as hate speech as now having White House approval.
Source
The claim that "undocumented immigrants" is more accurate is a laugh. It's not documents they lack but permission to be in the country. And as CIS points out, about half of them do have documents anyway, just not legitimate ones.
23 comments:
By her logic, a thief could steal someone else's property and claim it was an "undocumented purchase", thus avoiding the whole inconvenient "Police" thing.
Works for me. I've had my eye on my neighbor's stereo for a while...
The term 'undocumented worker' offends me.
~darko
I sort of like "undocumented customer"
obama is an illegal emmigrant.
Obviously, the latest tactic being used by the well organized, well funded, south American Marxist movement that advocates for these illegals is intimidation, which is about the only trick they have left.
Think about this. We are the only country in the world that is "unwilling" to protect it's own borders and people from foreign invasion. While we have hundreds-of-thousands of our combat troops stationed around the world, (for no rational, logical reason) our country, our people, and our economy are under siege from a massive army of "demanding" ILLEGAL foreigners, and all while the American sheeple watch TV. A nation of laws? No, we're a nation of fools!
Calling illegal aliens "undocumented workers" is like calling retarded kids "special."
Notice the above response from a Kool-Aid gulping Obamunist. These are the sheep who awake every morning and watch msnbc so they know what their "lines" will be for that day. They are (as are all those on the left) sad, lost, and above all, pathetic.
WORD OF THE DAY
SEPARATED TWINS, Hamboism
The most likely explanation for the alarming similarities between the ‘Dear Leader’ cult of personalities which surround Kim Jong-il and his brother in tyrannical narcissism, Barack Hussein Obama.
"They are (as are all those on the left) sad, lost, and above all, pathetic."
Self projection is a revealing thing.
J Birch is not a leftist, but I agree he is without an agument.
Anon,
Argument: n.
1. A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood.
2. A fact or statement put forth as proof or evidence; a reason.
3. A set of statements in which one follows logically as a conclusion from the others.
J. Birch made an argument. You responded with name calling. Acting like a feces flinging monkey is not making an argument.
But hey, keep it up. You're a great example of how irrational leftists actually are!
Use the Name,
"J. Birch made an argument."
He wrote: "They are (as are all those on the left) sad, lost, and above all, pathetic."
To which there was a response or "a statement in which one follows logically as a conclusion from the others," that he was self projecting.
It is an argument according to your definition.
"But hey, keep it up. You're a great example of how irrational leftists actually are!"
And you were saying something about "name calling?"
That was the conclusion. It's the final part of an argument. 'Course, I'm not surprised that you don't get it.
And of course, you missed my argument too. (Surprise, surprise, surprise.) Posting responses which lack rational arguments makes those responses (by definition) irrational. It's not name calling if it's a valid conclusion produced by examining the evidence.
"That was the conclusion. It's the final part of an argument. 'Course, I'm not surprised that you don't get it."
I did get it.
The conclusion is part of an argument, in case you didn't know. Therefore when someone makes a post with no supporting evidence and you wish to call that an "argument" or a "conclusion," the next conclusion is the person posting is simply self projecting.
"And of course, you missed my argument too. "
Actually, your argument was addressed but (surprise surprise) you chose to focus on that which you felt was wrong in my posts, rather than actually addressing what is wrong in Birch's and your posts.
Splinter, log, eye type thing.
"It's not name calling if it's a valid conclusion produced by examining the evidence."
I agree. His post lacked evidence and therefore all he was doing was calling names.
"Notice the above response…"
Referring to evidence; specifically, the previous post by—surprise, surprise—Anonymous.
Anon, your willful ignoring of the truth and attempted deflections are obvious. When someone says "Ignore the man behind the curtain", it's pretty obvious that's exactly where we should look.
"Referring to evidence; specifically, the previous post by—surprise, surprise—Anonymous."
Except of course his "conclusions" had nothing to do with the actual content of the post that was made by another person exercising his right to post anonymously.
"Anon, your willful ignoring of the truth and attempted deflections are obvious."
The truth is deeper than you wish it to be. You have demonstrated a degree of hypocrisy that is obvious.
"When someone says "Ignore the man behind the curtain", it's pretty obvious that's exactly where we should look."
When a person says "look how bad the other people are" without examining their own actions, you lose all credibility.
The only deflection being done here is by you.
Get a clue. You're not rubber, and I'm not glue.
I haven't heard such a response so lacking in thought and wit since kindergarten.
See, you have jumped to all sorts of conclusions here simply because someone chose to disagree with Birch. In your world, it appears that anyone that disagrees with what a "conservative" writes must be a leftist of some sort. It is a conclusion without support, but yet you ran with it.
Clearly Bogsidebunny does not exhibit coservative values and the Anonymous poster following him does not either.
Birch didn't do the cause and good in his response.
Yet you attack those who point such things out.
Maybe you need a clue yourself.
"I haven't heard such a response so lacking in thought and wit since kindergarten."
Just pointing out the level of your responses.
"Yet you (Luke) attack those who point such things out."
That is his normal operating procedure. Luke bring nothing of value to any discussion in the blog. Nothing but a right wing flamethrower.
Pot, meet kettle.
BTW, ever heard of George Orwell?
Sounds like you've been studying how to implement his writings:
"War is peace, slavery is freedom"
If we're going to call illegal aliens a type of "immigrant", then the correct adjective is "unauthorized", not "undocumented".
As for "Self projection is a revealing thing," indeed it is revealing, and it is exclusively done by the left.
Post a Comment