Journalists Get Creative About Illegal Aliens

Years ago, the anti-American domestic left began a campaign to throw our borders open (meaning our southern border) and make martyrs out of border-jumpers who are automatically criminals by virtue of their entry into the United States. No longer could we call them "illegal aliens." Presto change-o, they became "undocumented workers." Sort of like "ministers without portfolios," or perhaps "drivers without licenses."

Over the years, as states began to issue drivers licenses willy nilly to anyone who asked (and not necessarily in English), they became less undocumented, and a large number of them had no jobs that didn't involve standing on a streecorner or joining a gang, so "undocumented worker" was universally recognized as a misnomer. In order to avoid confusing them with Martians, "aliens" wouldn't work, so by some osmosis advocates on both sides of the issue settled on "illegal immigrants" as common parlance to describe the incoming criminals.

A skunk by any other name would stink as badly, but the left is very big on word-play in an attempt to de-demonize the "others." The "immigrants" part was OK with the left, but God forbid we should call them "illegal." A "Diversity Council" of the Society of Professional Journalists recently harrumphed, argued, debated, and agonized over how to turn that skunk into a rose. Once decided upon, the lockstep press is expected to abide by the outcome. And another euphemism is born: The Unauthorized Immigrant.

Oh, brother! They decided that these darlings are indeed immigrants, and immigrants are automatically good. So they had to get rid of any taint of criminality by removing the word "illegal." Undocumented still sounded a bit too much like an illegal act. But "unauthorized" sounds about as illegal as chewing gum in church. So they settled on it. Prepare to see the MSM using that phrase from here on out. It will take a while for all the media zombies to get the word. But they will.

Spontaneously jumping into the water to rescue a drowning child is "unauthorized," but it sure ain't illegal and it neuters the sting of being called an "illegal or undocumented rescuer." A spokesman for the journalists said that the label "illegal" remains offensive to Latinos, and especially Mexicans, and to the fundamentals of American jurisprudence. Only an idiot journalist could say the former, and only an ACLU lawyer could say the latter with a straight face. Given the activity we've seen at recent unrestricted immigration rallies, the only ones who would be offended are limousine liberals, leftists, and of course, illegals.

Considering that most Latinos (or Hispanics, or Chicanos, whatever the current correct appellation is) are not illegals, what would they have to be offended about? during World War II we were much more adamant about illegal aliens being specifically ethnic (Germans and Japanese). Today, most thinking Americans are concerned about the wave of immigrants who are overwhelming the system, and Mexicans are certainly among them, but the ease of crossing the border illegally, and occasionally violently, has not escaped our friends in Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah.

The spokesman for the journalists said further that "only a judge, not a journalist, can say that someone is illegal." That is nonsense on stilts. First of all, the First Amendment allows us to say anything we want so long as it isn't genuinely libelous or slanderous (in other words, the truth). We have seen that kind of timidity for other criminal activities with the advent of the perpetual use of the word "alleged criminal" to describe the perpetrator of a crime witnessed by hundreds of people and recorded on tape, digital devices and cell phones. But fear of lawsuits caused that. When describing the hordes of people entering the United States without permission, what word describes them better than "illegal?"

The spokesman also added that "some believe the phrase 'illegal alien' originated with fiery, anti-immigration groups along the U.s.-Mexico border, such as the Minutemen." Apparently this clown doesn't know any history older than last week. The first time I heard the expression "illegal alien," it came out of the mouth of my best friend's father in 1957. Incidentally, his father was a legal immigrant from Mexico with a good job. In other words, he was a "documented worker" having both papers and employment. He passed away a few years back, but he would have laughed sardonically at the current phrase du jour.

The representative from the Miami Herald joined in the complaint that "illegal" implied tried and convicted, and should therefore be shunned entirely. Well, sir, the Miami Herald headline from the day before read "Miami police cracking down on drunk drivers." Shouldn't all drivers be offended by being called drunks? After all, drunk drivers are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, aren't they?

Alan Goodman of the Culture and Media Institute finds the whole thing ludicrous. He went a bit farther with the "illegal" analogy by pointing out that any class called criminal would be highly offended. For instance, the Associated Press recently headlined "Newport News police want to reduce car thefts and put the thieves in jail." That defames an entire class. If AP doesn't want to call the undocumented border-crossers a criminal class, shouldn't it be at least as solicitous of the "car thief community?" Surely it isn't illegal to steal a car until it has been proven in a court of law that the car was, in fact and at law, stolen. AP has approved the new "unauthorized immigrants" mantra, naturally. But it's not about to accept the obfuscation of a community of "alleged car thieves" or "suspected car thieves." But they might go for "unauthorized drivers."

What it really amounts to is that the Society of Professional Journalist (an oxymoron if I ever heard one) no longer reports on illegal immigration. It is instead advocating illegal immigration, and not wanting to be a co-conspirator in a massive crime, it chooses to call the skunk a rose.