Posted on 03/26/2006 11:09:56 AM PST by Crackingham
Murky self-described patriot groups call them "terrorists." On combative talk radio shows the term is "illegal aliens." Advocates for immigrants prefer the Emma Lazarus-evoking "economic refugees." The most common label attached to the estimated 12 million foreign-born people living in the United States without visas may be "illegal immigrants," even though some grammarians argue that the adjective can modify actions and things (like left turns and hallucinogenic drugs) but not people. President Bush, a proponent of offering citizenship to at least some of them, has used the more optimistic and implicitly promising term "undocumented immigrants."
.......
Tumbling in the air of the debate like so many juggled balls are enough words and catch phrases — some old, some new — to form a peculiar dialect of the national ambivalence: Guest workers. Willing workers. America's security. Permanent temporary residents. Immigrant smuggling syndicate. Earned legalization. Virtual fence. Birthright citizenship abuse (coined by lawmakers who would cancel the citizenship rights of children born here to illegal immigrants). Anchor babies (the term coined for such children). Police state (what Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York says would result if illegal immigration were criminalized). Two-time losers (Justice Antonin Scalia's phrase for illegal immigrants who are deported twice — one such immigrant brought a case heard by the court last week).
George Lakoff, a linguistics professor at the University of California at Berkeley and author of "Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate," says the different language used in any public policy debate is ultimately a contest for the public mind. "Metaphors repeated often enough eventually become part of your physical brain," he said. "Use the word 'illegal' often enough, which suggests criminal, which suggests immoral, and you have framed the issue of immigration to a remarkable degree."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Twice a week visits to the range is now prudent.
I am sure that they will have "force multipliers" meanwhile the American patriot will continue to be disarmed by the one world traitors in office regardless of party
I am sure that they will have "force multipliers" meanwhile the American patriot will continue to be disarmed by the one world traitors in office regardless of party
Which is, coincidentally, just about the number of active gang members in LA county.
And then there's this:
"...some gangs actually direct members to join the military to learn how to handle weapons. "The intelligence that we have thus far indicates that they may try to recruit young people who have clean records and encourage them to keep their record clean to get into the military. They would get great weapons training and other types of training and access to weapons and arms, and be able to use that knowledge," she said. "They're taking training that is great and very altruistic and turning around and using it for criminal activity."
Source is here: http://www.nysun.com/article/29230
Winds of CW2 stirring.....
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.