Random Nuclear Strikes

He says it’s snowing where he’s at and he wants me to find him some skis that fit on his hooves.

Seattle PI columnist, Robert Jameson and I agree about something!

I’m so astounded that I don’t know what else to say, so here’s the column

‘Illegals’ term isn’t divisive, it’s the truth

A hijacking of the English language just took place.

It happened earlier this month when Seattle activists accused Senate candidate Mike McGavick of using “divisive” language by invoking the word “illegals” in an ad.

In the TV spot, McGavick’s camp says Sen. Maria Cantwell “voted to allow Social Security benefits to illegals.”

Liberal activists, led by Hate Free Zone Washington, a social-justice group, blasted such language, calling it “dehumanizing.”

“This kind of anti-immigrant rhetoric is inflammatory,” the activists claimed, “and does nothing to solve the real problems to our broken immigration system.”

Immigration policy in America is broken.

The system doesn’t reflect the millions of people who sneak in and help our economy by cooking in restaurants, working as nannies, picking fruit or building homes.

But to suggest people who come from Latin America or Canada or wherever without valid paperwork are somehow here legally is ridiculous.

As David Ray of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, put it: “Referring to an illegal alien as an ‘undocumented immigrant’ is like calling a bank robbery an ‘unauthorized withdrawal.’ ”

“Undocumented workers” or “unauthorized migrants” are euphemisms used for a reason — to sugarcoat uncomfortable truths.

 

You see this verbal jibber-jabber all over the place.

Actually Robert, you only see this in liberal circles. Everyone I know and speak to talks very plainly, not because they are stupid, but because they mean what they say and are not ashamed that they say it.

Robert may be a few years behind the curve on this one, but to see a guy who has come out and blasted Microsoft for not attempting to influence public policy on the topic of same-sex marriage, and wrote an entire column claiming that having sex with animals did not constitute animal cruelty.

Not that I actaully want his agreement on this issue, but he does expose the pussy-footing around with the language of immigration to a rather bright light.

What makes the linguistic spin surrounding illegals brain-numbing is that using polite words or phrases doesn’t magically give people legal status. It does wipe out accurate language in the name of protecting the feelings of people who are in this country without permission.

I’m usually on the same page as Pramila Jayapal of Hate Free Zone, but not this time.

“Factually, no human being is ‘illegal,’ ” says Jayapal, director of the social-justice group. “People commit acts that are illegal. Many of our august Congress people have committed illegal acts — but we do not call them ‘illegal.’ ”

Jayapal points out that being in America without valid immigration papers isn’t a criminal offense. The immigration system was set up as a civil system, not a criminal one. Immigration violations, she says, are typically considered civil violations.

That said, people without papers aren’t following the rules. That makes them illegal immigrants or illegal aliens or illegals for short.

Have you ever noticed that when deranged activists like Jayapal point out items such as criminal acts by members of government, they 1. Never specify which acts they consider illegal, and 2. Forget that despite these acts, millions of people still want to cross the border by any means possible?