OWNING THE TERMINOLOGY

I've spoken at length on this blog about why the words we use to discuss the immigration debate are so important. The antis know this as well so you'll see terms like "illegals", "amnesty", "lawbreakers", "anchor babies", etc. used over and over again. That is why it is important to find terms that are not emotionally charged to discuss the subject. If Americans react rationally, we win. If they react based on emotion and anger, we're going to have a harder time. Peter Brown has a nice piece at Politico.com discussing the issue.

Comments

[Dream Act guy]

no name, you're free to say the n word and other nasty words. Why don't you? After all, you're so cool that you don't want to be "PC."

[Jack]

'That is why it is important to find terms that are not emotionally charged to discuss the subject. If Americans react rationally, we win.'

Please. While it is certainly true that many of your opponents favor an alarmist tone, your side avoids technically correct and precise terms in favor of whatever sounds most benign and innocuous. And your side is often shameless in the lengths it goes to play on people's emotions as opposed to their reason.

Interesting analogy in that article. Some tidbits:

'In the end, the opponents got the better of the [affirmative action] fight.'

'Quinnipiac University polls conducted during the past two weeks found 80-plus percent of voters, including large majorities of Democrats, in Ohio and Pennsylvania — two of the most important general election swing states — are opposed to providing licenses to illegal immigrants.'

It's always nice with the PC cops put all the rules down on one sheet of paper.

Where do we line up for the frontal lombatomies?