Political Correctness

The liberty principle for this Freedom Friday concerns the need to use correct nouns in describing people and circumstances. When liberals/progressives change the meaning of words in an effort to be "politically correct," the result is confusion - and confusion is one of the foundations for chaos and weakness. In order to eliminate as much confusion and chaos as possible, Americans must reject political correctness and "call a spade a spade."

Liberals/progressives have changed the meaning of many words. In fact, no one quite knows what to call these particular people because sometimes they refer to themselves as liberals and other times they are progressives. Now that we call them liberals/progressives, I wonder what name they will choose next.

When I was a child and young woman, the word "gay" meant happy and carefree; now it means homosexual males. The State of Hawaii is called the Rainbow State, but the gay and lesbian community has taken the name Rainbow Coalition. This group has completely changed the idea of "gay" and "rainbow."

Our national leaders have taken great effort since 9/11 to make sure that Muslims understand that the United States is not fighting against all who follow the Islamic religion. Everyone seemed to be very careful to differentiate between "peaceful Islamists" and "radical Islamists" until we were told to stop calling the terrorists "radical Islamists." In reality all Islamists are members of the same religion and all belief in the same Koran. Some Islamists have taken more radical actions than others, but how will the "peaceful Islamists" act in the future? One of the basic principles of their religion is that Sharia law will take over and control the world. How can anyone who follows this principle be considered to be peaceful? Having said this, I support the American principle that everyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

Under the Obama Administration the word "terrorist" has become obsolete. We are not to use this word even though terrorists continue to plan more attacks. As we remember the 9/11 attack on the United States by radical Islamist terrorists, the Obama Administration wants to change the sacred American day of mourning and remembrance to a day of service with an acknowledgement that nations across the world have felt the evil and horrible brunt of terrorism. It was America that was attacked on 9/11 and thus this day should be reserved to remember and mourn this attack on our nation. The Obama Administration obviously has different feelings about how to commemorate the day because they put out a list of 9/11 "talking points" with the goal to "present a positive, forward-looking narrative." The guidelines state, "As we commemorate the citizens of over 90 countries who perished in the 9/11 attacks, we honor all victims of terrorism in every nation around the world. We honor and celebrate the resilience of individuals, families and communities on every continent, whether in New York or Nairobi, Bali or Belfast, Mumbai or Manila, or Lahore or London."

An interesting and irritating part of this deal is that the administration put out two sets of instructions: One set of instructions was written for domestic officials speaking to Americans, and the other set of talking points was written for U.S. Embassy officials worldwide when they speak to foreign audiences. The instructions encourage/urge officials to "minimize references to al Qaeda" because al Qaeda's involvement in the September 11 attacks is "increasingly irrelevant" since the killing of Obama bin Laden.

How can we separate the fact the al Qaeda plotted and planned the most horrible terrorist attack in the history of the United States? How can we forget that members of al Qaeda trained and carried out the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on American soil? Even though Osama bin Laden is dead, there are other members of al Qaeda who hate the United States and want to destroy our freedoms. Why should we stop discussing the possible future threats of this organization?

Another way that liberals/progressives are trying to change our language is in referring to those people who enter our country unlawfully. These people were called "illegal aliens" for many years before the "compassion" of liberals/progressives changed the term to "undocumented immigrants." If people come into our nation unlawfully, they are here illegally. Why not call them "illegals" or "illegal aliens?" Calling them "undocumented immigrants" changes the meaning!

Now our government is employing its creative use of language again. As the government issued official communications about Hurricane Irene, the Federal Emergency Agency (FEMA) kept calling itself the "federal family." Government or federal government describes those in control of our nation; family denotes warm and loving feelings. Maybe the terms "Big Brother" or "Big Sister" are being taken literally. The government leaders obviously want us to have more favorable feelings towards them. Right now, our "federal family" is dysfunctional; maybe we need to get an annulment or divorce!

Don't get fooled by the new words and new meanings. Don't get drawn into the confusion and chaos that results from changing the meaning of words. Don't fall for political correctness!

Immigration End Run

Did law-abiding President Barack Obama make an end run around Congress when his administration announced the halt of deportation proceedings of people who are in our country illegally? Did the Obama administration make this immigration decision for political reasons or for the good of the nation? Did Obama find a way to ignore his previous comments when he said that he must obey the laws as written by Congress and that he does not have broad authority to halt deportation?

Apparently, the immigration rights groups have put so much pressure on the administration that the Department of Homeland Security changed its policies. DHS announced on Thursday, August 18, 2011, that it will halt immigration proceedings on a case-by-case basis against illegal aliens without criminal records who meet certain criteria - attending school, having primary responsibility to provide for other family members, or having a family member serving in the military.

The DHS established the "Secure Communities" program in 2008 that called for police to submit suspects' fingerprints to DHS in order for them to be cross-checked with federal deportation orders. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano sent letter to Congress last Thursday claiming that she has discretion to focus on "priority cases" and that both DHS and the Justice Department will review all cases currently being processed to determine who meets the new criteria. As I understand it, the new rule applies to those who have already been apprehended and are currently in deportation proceedings but who have not been officially ordered out of the country by a judge. The new rules may affect nearly 300,000 people.

The new move was praised by Hispanic activists and Democrats who have pushed Obama to act on this matter. The administration needs the Hispanic vote to prop up Obama's falling numbers of supporters. Hispanic voters are a key bloc for the re-election of Obama, and they have been disappointed by Obama's failure to keep his 2008 election promises. The new rules are already paying dividends for Democrats because advocacy groups for Hispanics are praising the new policy.

The new immigration rules make an end run around Congress where the battle to establish comprehensive immigration reform is stalled. Republicans want stronger enforcement of current laws as well as a program that would allow workers to come into our country to work but eventually return to their home countries. Democrats want legislation to legalize approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants who are now in the country; they also want a guest-worker program that would lead to citizenship.

More than 1 million illegal aliens have been deported since 2007 when this issue stalled in the Senate. A record number of undocumented immigrants - 392,000 - were deported in fiscal year 2010. Democrats claim that the system is broken and that illegal immigrants are receiving unfair treatment. They also claim that deportations are causing families to break up.

Representatives Peter King (R-NY), chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, and Candice Miller (R-MI), chairwoman of the Homeland Security subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security released the following news item: "This new non-enforcement policy announced by the Obama Administration Thursday is a blatant attempt to grant amnesty to potentially millions of illegal aliens in this country."

I believe that the Obama Administration did make an end run around Congress. Because Republicans and Democrats cannot agree on comprehensive immigration reform, Obama decided to do things his way. I believe that the new rules were put in place for political purposes because Obama needs the Hispanic vote in order to win re-election in 2012. I believe that Obama was claiming the need to obey the law of the land only until he could get away with changing the policies. I believe that the only way we can stop Obama and his liberal/progressive cohorts is to get him out of office as quickly as possible. The election in 2012 cannot come too soon!