Fund Your Utopia Without Me.™

07 July 2014

No, Sally, 'Illegal' Is NOT The New 'N-Word'

Federal detention centre for UACs in Nogales, Arizona

Today, CNN published an op-ed by Sally Kohn wherein she compared the use of the term 'illegal,' as in an immigrant, who illegally enters the country or illegally overstays a visa, which is exactly how such an individual is described in Federal law, to the 'N-word' and the 'F-word' (no, not that f-word).  Via 

During the civil rights era, Alabama Gov. George Wallace was asked by a supporter why he was fixated on the politics of race. Wallace replied, “You know, I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about n*ggers, and they stomped the floor.”

In the 1980s, during the rise of the gay rights movement, North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms accused a political opponent for supporting “f*ggots, perverts [and] sexual deviates of this nation.” 

Today, opponents of immigration reform attack undocumented immigrants as “illegal immigrants.” Even worse, like anti-immigration extremists, some prominent elected officials use the term “illegals.” Maine Gov. Paul LePage, a Republican, said, “I urge all Mainers to tell your city councilors and selectmen to stop handing out your money to illegals.” 

Not the same thing? Of course it is. 

Once upon a time, the n-word and f-word were utterly acceptable terminology in undermining not only the basic rights but basic humanity of black people and gay people. That those terms seem radically inappropriate and out of step with mainstream culture now is only because social movements and legal and political changes have shifted the landscape. But make no mistake about it, words matter, not only in reflecting certain dehumanizing attitudes toward historically marginalized groups but in actively perpetuating and rationalizing that dehumanization.

No, Sally, what's offencive is pretending that breaking the law, bringing in diseases, and placing an enormous burden on already massively indebted governments - from the Federal level down to the smallest village - while ennobling the 'poor, oppressed' person, who enters the country illegally, and attempting to shame and smear all of those concerned about a really serious issue. Further, I, personally, and many people just like me, who came to these shores legally, played by the rules, and spent lots of money, time, and effort to become citizens, are appalled. You and your fellow 'Open Borders, Open Arms' champions are, basically, calling us 'suckers.'  We find THAT offencive.

Ms Kohn, back in the 1990s and through Gordon Brown's disastrous run-in with Gillian Duffy, a life-long Labour voter and pensioner, the Left - and, in fairness, many of the Tory muffins - called anyone, who raised any sort of objection, concern, or question about the enormous influx of immigrants from Eastern Europe, 'bigots', 'racists' (Who knew that Bulgarian and Romanian were races?). Nowadays, with the absolutely staggering burden on public services (You know that so-called 'free' healthcare provided by the NHS? Well, its probably going to start charging some patients in addition to expanding its already long list of treatments and drugs that are simply unavailable - and, quite often, are labelled 'elective' even though they are routine in the US) and the fraying of the cultural fabric that holds society together, even the staunchest, most radical Labourites and cheap-labour-loving, multiculturalist Tories (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here) no longer deny that there isn't a serious problem and people are quite right to be concerned.

The population of the UK is around 61 million, but because of the EU, it is going to beginning opening the doors (even wider) next year to the poor Bulgarians and Romanians (**does anyone have a hankie that I can borrow?**). Forget about the cost and cultural issues for Britain. Think about what that means to their own countries. What kind of future will they have if 21 million (projected) of their 'best and brightest' depart for other shores???

I understand that you live in Brooklyn. When you and your family retire for the night, do lock your door or leave it unlocked and wide open?  Don't you, wisely and appropriately, have a right to decide who is permitted into your home? Don't you take appropriate steps to protect your child from possible dangers? Why is it perfectly acceptable for you to be secure in your home, but unacceptable for us to demand that the nation's security and sovereignty be protected and respected?

Further, I completely understand what your heart is saying, but your head needs to do some math and comprehend the reality of the situation. Yes, we'd all love to have every man, woman, and child on the planet happy, healthy, wealthy, and wise, but only Utopians believe that is remotely possible. Encouraging unaccompanied children to make the arduous trek to America under the 'supervision' of coyotes and drug dealers is not only irresponsible, but is also incredibly inhumane. According to several sources, around one-third of the females (and, I am a sure a number of the males) are RAPED on the way.  Is that what you want for any young woman or girl?

Obama has said that these kids are the 'best and the brightest' and 'America's future.'  If so, why does he hate the countries of Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador sooooo much? Is he a mean-mean-meanie Colonialist and imperialist or something?  I mean, if these kids are going to change the world, why would you want to deprive their home countries cesspools of their brilliance?

In the past, I have heard you, as well as many others on the Left, basically, tell pro-lifers that, if they aren't going to adopt unwanted children, then they should 'Just STFU, already!'

Fine. Reciprocity is fair play.

How about you and your friends, starting with Nancy Pelosi, who is worth around $26 million and said that she 'wish[ed] that she could take these children home with her' after visiting an UAC shelter in Texas, start adopting and footing the entire bill for these kids, who, I am constantly being told, are 'American's future'? Instead of Sheila Jackson-Lee handing out lollipops, how about she takes several kids into her home? C'mon, Sally, you and your partner can set the example for everyone by, graciously and personally, taking complete responsibility for a few of these children.

Otherwise, 'JUST STFU, ALREADY!' and send them their parents.

No comments: