From Reuters:
Lake Superior State University’s 32nd annual List of Words Banished from the Queen’s English for Mis-Use, Over-Use and General Uselessness featured such linguistic gems as “Gitmo” for the U.S. base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; euphemisms such as “undocumented alien;” and such Internet-inflected synonyms as “pwn,” as in the phrase “I pwn (own) you.”
I agree with most of the words selected for banishment from the American lexicon. “Awesome” is one of the words that Lake Superior State University has selected for oblivion. My 17-year-old niece thinks that everything is so “awesome.” She sprinkles that adjective more generously than Oprah sprinkles miniature marshmallows in her hot chocolate. “Kristen did you like “Rocky Balboa”? “Uncle Robert, it was an awesome movie! For an old geezer Rocky is awesome! You are awesome for giving me the money for the movie.” Anyone over the age of 21 who uses the word “awesome” looks like an “awesome” fool.
“Camp Gitmo” sounds like a Club Med paradise — not like a place where suspected terrorists are incarcerated. Journalists should avoid using the term “Camp Gitmo” for the U.S. base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
From Reuters:
The list also suggested that the partners of pregnant women might save some embarrassment by avoiding, “We’re pregnant,” when only one of you is, the list said.
I’ve only heard one guy say “we’re pregnant”, and I felt like beating the Bejesus out of him. Just because some fool goes to a Lamaze class with his spouse, that doesn’t entitle him to say “we’re pregnant”.
But I take strong exception to the desire of of these eggheads to banish the term “undocumented alien”. I guess they would prefer us to use “illegal alien, but that phrase is the epitome of political incorrectness. We are all god’s children, there is no such thing as an illegal human being. And certainly Hispanics are not “alien” to the border areas where most migrate to. Need I remind my readers that those large swaths of land were stolen from Mexico? Undocumented workers should be welcomed with open arms; our economy would suffer greatly without their services.
Undocumented workers are awesome and anyone who refers to them as “illegal aliens” should be sent to Camp Gitmo.
DrDamage said,
“a resident born in or belonging to another country who has not acquired citizenship by naturalization (distinguished from citizen).”
The term illegal refers not to their status as a human being, but to their status as a resident of the United States. Their residence in the United States is, indeed, illegal. It is therefore entirely appropriate to describe these criminals as “illegal aliens”
The government of the United States has every right to enforce its own laws within the territory internationally recognised as belonging to the U.S. regardless of Mexican fantasies of reconquest. If mexicans wish to seize US territory and make it their own, they should be considered a military threat to the US and dealt with accordingly.
December 31, 2006 at 2:11 am
John Dias said,
“Undocumented workers” is a euphemism for “people who are breaking the law by living within our borders.” We should not embrace lawbreakers with open arms, simply because they provide utility to our economy. Rather, we should embrace the people who wish to provide such structural economic support to the country by making it much easier for them to come here legally.
I believe that anyone who is peaceful and law-abiding should be allowed to come to the United States and compete for whatever jobs they are qualified to do. The primary purpose of a job is to serve the purposes of the employer, not to “provide a living” to somebody; the benefits to the employee are secondary to those of the employer. This setup has the beneficial effect of creating more jobs, even though job creation is not an altruistic phenomenon; jobs serve the purposes of the employer. And if an employer can get the best workers for the lowest price (likely this will be immigrants), then more power to such employer. Jobs will abound, capital will flow more freely, products will lessen in price — all because employers will have more options in a larger pool of applicants if immigrants are allowed to arrive in greater numbers.
I realize that the above economic analysis is probably not shared by RPR, the consummate liberal. But economic libertarianism creates strange bedfellows with adherents of social liberalism. To those who say increased immigration will threaten the homogeneity of culture, I say let economics guide immigration policy.
Do I support people streaming across our borders in defiance of immigration laws and restrictions? No. But I do support major relaxations of such laws and restrictions, so that those who do come here can come with their families and avoid sending their earnings outside the U.S. And yes, let them learn English in order to assimilate. But at least they should be allowed to work here, legitimately, at the behest of employers who need them.
John Dias
December 31, 2006 at 2:25 am
Robert Paul Reyes said,
The few undocumented workers who depart, do so of their own volition. Undocumented workers are here to stay; branding them “illegal aliens” doesn’t serve any useful purpose.
Hopefully, the Democratic-controlled Congress will pass a comprehensive immigration bill that provides for a path to citizenship for these millions of industrious workers.
December 31, 2006 at 2:33 am
DrDamage said,
No more so than euphemising them as “undocumented workers” does. The term illegal alien is accurate and communicates what the speaker wishes to say. Language does not need to do anything more.
“I guess they would prefer us to use “illegal alien, but that phrase is the epitome of political incorrectness”
All the more reason to use the term exclusively so as to assert independence from those who would dictate that which is “acceptable” and that which is not for their own nefarious purposes.
December 31, 2006 at 2:47 am
John Dias said,
OK, now my B.S. detector just went ballistic. Your interest is not in the industriousness of these “undocumented” workers. Your interest is in the political benefit such workers would have to the Democratic party if they were to become full citizens. In that case, a massive spending spree of social welfare and entitlement programs would ensue (which, I suspect, would be just fine with you). This increased entitlement spending would then strain the economy, negating the overall economic benefit that such immigrants now provide.
As always, with liberals it’s always about the power.
John Dias
December 31, 2006 at 2:47 am
Robert Paul Reyes said,
Your interest is not in the industriousness of these “undocumented” workers. Your interest is in the political benefit such workers would have to the Democratic party if they were to become full citizens. In that case, a massive spending spree of social welfare and entitlement programs would ensue…
I didn’t use the term “undocumented freeloaders”, but “undocumented workers”. Even the most rabid anti-immigration disciple of Pat Buchanan would have to admit that these undocumented workers are the epitome of the Protestant work ethic. These hard-working folks would not be a drain on our economy.
December 31, 2006 at 2:56 am
Zoro said,
And since we’re on the subject of overused terms and words, I nominate the term “there is no such thing as an illegal human being” to be pushed to the front of the list. There are plenty of “illegal human beings”, crossing over illegally from Mexico, who are in the US committing henious crimes like rape and murder all over the country.
I also object to any liberal, yourself included, breaking out the bible and pronouncing us all to be “God’s children”. Although the statement is arguably true, it is also monumentally hypocritical coming from a representative of a political group that has waged war on Christianity and Christian ethics for the last forty years.
Finally, whatever happened to the great sucking sound of jobs going to Mexico after NAFTA was signed? It seems to me that the actual sound today is similar to a Tsunami. There’s a tidal wave of ungrateful illegal huamn beings hitting America and flooding its prisons, its social welfare system, its hospitals, its schools, its culture, and its security.
You liberals paint the illegals aliens like they were all the same, i.e., just poor honest guys lookin for a yob. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe half come to the US to commit crime?
If a country, any country, has immigration laws in place it’s mainly to help keep out the riff-raff. Don’t you understsand that principle Robert? Are you a dumb as Bush is on this subject?
Cheezus, everytime I read a liberals column it just confirms to me, again, how patently thick and naive you guys are…and how blind you are to the destruction of your own American civilization from within.
December 31, 2006 at 3:33 am
amfortas said,
December 31, 2006 at 3:38 am
Robert Paul Reyes said,
“You liberals paint the illegals aliens like they were all the same, i.e., just poor honest guys lookin for a yob. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe half come to the US to commit crime?”
Zorro, you should read this Web site:
http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=403
Debunking the Myth of Immigrant Criminality: Imprisonment Among First- and Second-Generation Young Men
By Rubén G. Rumbaut, Roberto G. Gonzales, Golnaz Komaie, and Charlie V. Morgan
University of California, Irvine
December 31, 2006 at 3:49 am
John Dias said,
Then, Robert Paul Reyes wrote:
I didn’t use the term “freeloaders” to describe those who benefit from social welfare and entitlement programs, but you have apparently conceded that the term “freeloaders” precisely describes such people. And all this time, I thought you were a liberal, RPR! What a concession — freeloaders are those who benefit from programs which are part and parcel of the Democrat party’s agenda. Did you really mean to say that?
To clarify, just because somebody is working in a low-wage job does not mean that they are providing more economic benefit than economic detriment. There are a host of government entitlement programs for working citizens. You may argue that such programs are justified on some moral level; that is a subjective and political question. But you would be wrong to imply that because someone is working in a low wage job, that they are therefore pulling their own weight. Already our own citizens put a drag on the economy with the government benefits and entitlements they receive. These programs create deadweight losses on the economy that prevent it from thriving, and it’s made even worse when the recipients are not returning to the economy an equal benefit as they received. These are existing citizens. Now you add new citizens, former immigrants who are then naturalized. They will be seeking whatever government benefits they can qualify for, and as low-wage workers, they will absolutely qualify for many such programs. Entitlement programs tend to create permanent dependency.
Liberalized immigration should be tied to a paring down of entitlements for all citizens, but you’ll never see that happen in a government run by Democrats (whose political fortunes are tied to dependency on such entitlements). Unless liberalized immigration is tied to reduced entitlement spending (neither party has sufficient will to do this), the drag on the economy will outweigh the benefit of any low-wage workers. It’s too bad we’re in this situation. Our country’s addiction to public largess is what denies us of the cumulative benefits we would otherwise enjoy from the added capital — and ingenuity — of immigrants.
John Dias
December 31, 2006 at 4:22 am
grizzlieantagonist said,
Si’, Sr. Reyes.
December 31, 2006 at 5:19 am
grizzlieantagonist said,
But there are a number of evils that would have to be tolerated under that standard.
I have a feeling that Sr. Reyes would regard poverty and racism as “evil” — but guess what, those things are here to stay, as well (”the poor we will always have with us”). Both those things actually might be exacerbated by the invasion from the South.
Using Sr. Reyes’s logic though, trying to uplift people would just be a waste of time — absolutely useless — because after all those things are “here to stay”.
Drug abuse and alcoholism are here to stay, as well. So why treat people for them and why encourage them to eliminate those influences? Those things are “here to stay”.
On the other hand, maybe evil should be opposed just because it’s evil — regardless of whether there is any immediate chance of stemming its tide or not.
December 31, 2006 at 5:25 am
Robert Paul Reyes said,
President Bush’s domestic legacy is a monster deficit; we should spend our finite financial resources on more productive endeavors.
December 31, 2006 at 5:38 am
DrDamage said,
Very few people have expressed any reservations about people who obey the law and immigrate to the US with all proper forms and procedures observed. It is those who demonstrate their disdain for US law by entering the US illegally who attract the anger and condemnation of those who oppose illegal immigration.
December 31, 2006 at 5:52 am
DrDamage said,
December 31, 2006 at 5:56 am
BRIAN said,
We are all god’s children, there is no such thing as an illegal human being. And certainly Hispanics are not “alien” to the border areas where most migrate to. Need I remind my readers that those large swaths of land were stolen from Mexico? Undocumented workers should be welcomed with open arms; our economy would suffer greatly without their services.
Mr Reyes,
You know very what the term ILLEGAL ALIEN means. You are playing somantic games to obfuscate the situation. It is a chapter out of the liberal playbook to change the meaning of words to inlfuence thoughts.
You know that assertation that “large swaths of land was stolen from Mexico” is laughable. You do remember that Mexico started a war with the U.S.A. right? Losing that war is what made Mexico forfiet that land.
I also want to know just how our economy would suffer from the removal of an entier class of people that artificially drive down the wage structure in the agricultural labor and service industry. Don’t give me the argument that the ILLEGAL ALIENS are doing jobs Americans won’t do that is false. The ILLEGAL ALIENS are doing jobs that Americans won’t do for slave wages.
December 31, 2006 at 7:01 am
Nasty McPhilthy said,
More than two-thirds of the defendants charged with an immigration offense were identified as having been previously arrested. Thirty-six percent had been arrested on at least 5 prior occasions; 22%, 2 to 4 times; and 12%,1 time. Sixty-one percent of those defendants had been convicted at least once; 18%, 5 or more times; 26%, 2 to 4 times; and 17%, 1 time. Of those charged, 49% had previously been convicted of a felony: 20% of a drug offense; 18%, a violent offense; and 11%, other felony offenses. Twelve percent had previously been convicted of a misdemeanor. Defendants charged with unlawful reentry had the most extensive criminal histories. Nine in ten had been previously arrested. Of those with a prior arrest, half had been arrested on at least 5 prior occasions. Fifty-six percent of those charged with a reentry offense had previously been convicted of a violent or drug-related felony. By contrast, under half of those charged with alien smuggling, a third of those charged with unlawful entry, and just over a quarter those charged with misuse of visas and other charges had previously been arrested. The criminal histories of these defendants were generally less extensive: more than 70% had been previously arrested fewer than 5 times. Sources: US Department of Homeland Security, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, National Security Institute, National Association of Chiefs of Police, US Department of Justice.
December 31, 2006 at 8:14 am
Will Malven said,
If your going to bring facts into this discussion then you are not playing fairly. You know Liberals like RPR are allergic to facts. Please desist from this discriminatory and unfair practice.
Opinion counts for far more than such an unfair use of facts.
P.S. It is permissable to mention facts as long as they were told to you by the tooth-fairy, the Easter bunny, or a professor from an elite university, but beyond that please restrain yourself.
December 31, 2006 at 9:12 am
Zoro said,
One thing’s for sure, Bush screwed the pooch on immigration. Why he didn’t devote a bit more energy pressuring Mexico to reform its economy to compete with the US, on a job level, will forever be a mystery.
Look at the past fifteen years. What’s wrong with this picture?
Mexico discovers even bigger oil reserves, combined with the ever rising price of crude…its citizens flee to America for jobs.
After NAFTA is signed US heavy and light manufacting industries close shop in the United States to open new plants in Mexico…its citizens flee to the US for jobs.
Mexico sees a huge boost to the tourism industry, bringing in hundreds of millions in foreign revenue each year…its citizens flee to the US for jobs.
Mexico should be at least as rich as Brazil. It has tremendous natural resources. It also has construction, manufacturing, engineering, agriculture, universities, tourism, a single language, a democratic form of government, and a basically proud, patriotic, hard working and decent citizenry. There is no reason on earth why Mexico should not be one of the richest countries in South America. Hell, I’ll even go out on a limb and say that it should be Mexico, and not the US, who has a problem with illegal immigration.
Why, for example, can Singapore and Hong Kong, neither of which have any natural resources whatsoever, beyond its people, become economic miracles while a country like Mexico can’t achieve an economic level high enough to keep its own people from risking injury, imprisonment and even death in order to find work in a country who’s national language is English?
If I was the president of Mexico I would be ashamed of the fact that every day my fellow Mexican citizens were trying to escape their mother country in order to pick fruit for the gringos. It boggles the mind.
December 31, 2006 at 9:47 am
amfortas said,
Entropy is like that, my friend. God’s idea, not mine. The Universe seems to work on the principle that if you leave it alone it will fall to bits. Constant expenditure of energy is necessary to build anything and then there is all that bloody maintenance to do just to stop it falling down.
The Sisyphus story was about just that. The human condition. We are condemned to do whatever over and over and it is never ending toil. Death and taxes. Keep shovelling cash into Government pockets; keep shoving people out of the boat.
(Addendum - Have you ever asked yourself what benefit we get out of all that death? We keep on dying and it doesn’t do us a bit of good.)
December 31, 2006 at 10:03 am
RScott said,
This is so easy to be rediculous! It’s really quite simply, make them subject to OUR laws and legal system. Send our feminazi courts after them for child support, “domestic violence”, the crime of being male, etc. and they will RUN home!
As far as them destroying our current benefits - we already have seen that in what they have done to emergency rooms; public schools are next. People are not going to vote to tax themselves to support the illegal or to provide services to other people. When Colorado schools (some) were missing 75% of their students during illegal rallies in the spring of 2006, the message to voters was pretty clear. The few citizens with children will send their kids to private school and refuse to double-pay by voting for taxes that will not even support Americans!
December 31, 2006 at 10:54 am
TheRanger said,
December 31, 2006 at 11:40 am
Squiggy said,
Guys, RPR is a monster we’ve created. We keep reacting to his nonsense and it props up his monstrous ego. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but his posts increase in direct proportion to us proving his ideas are idiotic.
Boycott lunacy! Leave Robert Paul Reyes to stew in his liberal fallacies.
December 31, 2006 at 2:52 pm
Robert Paul Reyes said,
“I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but his posts increase in direct proportion to us proving his ideas are idiotic.”
This statement doesn’t make any sense; there is no relation between the frequency of my posts and feedback from my fellow writers and our readership.
I post an essay almost every day, come hell, high water or sarcastic conservatives.
December 31, 2006 at 3:43 pm
Robert Paul Reyes said,
“See, Rob Reyes and his leftwing ilk are the real racists, and they envision a predominately hispanic power structure in the future for the US.”
The population rate of Hispanics in America is booming and that will eventually translate into ecomonomic and political power. That’s not a “racist vision” on my part, that’s reality.
December 31, 2006 at 3:55 pm
KVolz said,
December 31, 2006 at 4:27 pm
roger said,
women don’t reproduce.
the entire species does.
December 31, 2006 at 11:45 pm
Robert Paul Reyes said,
“the “we” in “we are pregnant” recognizes the fact that 50% of the DNA code and biomass resident in the incubator is his.”
Let’s get real! The man doesn’t have to lug around an incubator inside his body for 9 long months.
December 31, 2006 at 11:50 pm
roger said,
women have been doing it since the beginning of time, and have only just recently started complaining that this is somehow a disadvantage or ungodly burden, and strictly for political reasons. you write like somebody that doesnt have kids.
the good women out there consider pregnancy a blessing and actually enjoy it.
then there are those that dispise it and look at pregnancy as a curse and something that “somebody did to them”. a lovely thought.
it’s biology. it’s as normal as taking a (expletive deleted).
January 1, 2007 at 1:10 am
Squiggy said,
One point out of hundreds? Even a blind idiot throwing darts has to hit something once in a while. And while the chance of you being darted is pretty low, it’s still better to not get into range.
And yes, anybody who can say “Undocumented Workers are Awesome” has a monstrous ego that blocks out his capacity for common sense.
January 1, 2007 at 6:52 am
Lurk said,
Does anyone really believe that even a miniscule fraction of the millions of burgalars can be forced to stop?
Does anyone really believe that even a miniscule fraction of the millions of undocumented sexual predators can be forced to quit?
Does anyone really believe that even a miniscule fraction of the millions of gang bangers can be forced to disband?
…
Does anyone really believe that we should quit enforcing the law because we cannot prevent every infraction?
January 2, 2007 at 9:50 am
jaustin9698 said,
How much of what you say do you believe and how much is just to get a rise out of the readers?
January 3, 2007 at 11:12 am
Robert Paul Reyes said,
My essays are mainstream liberal editorials, it’s only in the context of the ultra-conservative MND environment that they appear to be radical.
January 3, 2007 at 11:17 am
PolishKnight said,
This already happened with the swift meat packing raid. On the contrary, Robert, illegal immigrants know all too well that it’s trivial for a determined government to round them up and deport them. Legal citizens already have to jump through hoops to get a driver’s license, register their children in school, etc. This is not to control illegals but rather ironically due to the welfare state tracking deadbeat dads. There’s also regular traffic stops for drunk driving. You don’t notice any of this?
As you well know, it’s not the dream of picking lettuce or bussing tables that drives millions of illegals to the states but the dream of benefitting from the massive welfare state. Cut that off and it’s all over, baby.
January 4, 2007 at 9:55 am
Lurk said,
Hmmmm….
Where would an illegal alien get a Social Security Card? And a Social Security Number? Sonds like Identity Theft in addition to illegal entry. Can you even begin to imagine the fun you can have when someone is reporting wages under your SSN to the IRS, but not withholding sufficient taxes? Just think of the entertaining hours and hours of audits and the taxes owed. But, once they have the SSN, I’ve heard that all kinds of havoc can be brought your way.
Doesn’t sound like a bunch of honest hardworking individuals as much as opportunists.
January 4, 2007 at 2:54 pm
PolishKnight said,
In the meantime, it’s already reported that despite millions of illegals already in the states, that farmers are having problems finding enough workers to pick crops. So if they’re already that fussy about what work they’ll accept, imagine what will happen once they get amnesty!
Also, it’s quite common in the socialist paradises many of them came from (and they wave flags for when they have “pro immigrant” rallies) for them to riot over working conditions and entitlements. So the second they become legal, expect to see those on a regular basis too (especially in major cities that tend to be Democratic.) (Side comment: If you ever decide to fly to Europe, don’t go through DeGalle, the French labor unions shut it down on a regular basis.)
It will be pretty hilarious to watch Democrats unable to go to work because some weekly protest has shut the city down.
January 4, 2007 at 3:48 pm