I have a friend in Upstate New York who was recently arrested after he tied one on, drove and hit a guardrail. His blood alcohol level was slightly over the state limit of .08 and the prosecutor was in no mood to negotiate.
Despite the fact that my friend has a family, is the lone moneymaker, is expecting his second child and is a regular volunteer for charitable events in the area, the prosecutor pushed hard for a six-month jail sentence in addition to reparations.
It’s easy to be torn on an issue like this. As a friend, you want to believe the man has been woke up by this event and is likely to get his stuff in order. On the other hand, you know that what he did, though not hurting anyone, could have very easily been much worse and, let’s face it, is against the law — so a price must be paid, albeit a harsh one.
I am relatively sure that the far left liberal Democrats in this country wouldn’t disagree with me, but that’s only because there isn’t much upside to turning the language of the law inside out in order to gain the potential vote of one 30-something white guy.
That isn’t stopping them, however, when it comes to the millions of illegal immigrants this country is going bankrupt trying to keep fed, housed, educated and medically covered.
Yes, I said illegal immigrants — which is the phrase that liberals are now attacking, but is exactly what they are.
Look up the word “illegal” in any dictionary and what you will find is something along the lines of “contrary to or forbidden by law.” Pretty short and sweet. Not a lot of wiggle room, if any, for perception.
Liberals, especially the mamby-pambys at CNN, seem to think use of the word “illegal” next to “immigrant” isn’t nice. They claim that “when you label someone an ‘illegal immigrant’ or just plain ‘illegal,’ you are effectively saying the individual, as opposed to the actions the person has taken, is unlawful. The terms imply the very existence of an unauthorized migrant in America is criminal.”
Of course an immigrant in this country without a valid visa, identification and/or documentation is and should be considered a criminal. If sneaking into this country by any means and cheating its taxpayers into funding their existence on our soil isn’t illegal, then why do we pay hundreds of men and women to serve as Border Patrol to keep the Mexicans at home; or why do we pay hundreds of people to check passports and IDs at our borders?
Naturally, Democrats have a hard time adhering to true definitions. Exhibit A: Bill Clinton’s infamous “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
Of course, even The New York Times weighs in on the side of CNN by saying that the word “illegal” is often “a code word for racial and ethnic hatred.”
Are these people serious?
Here’s an example they give: If someone gets a speeding ticket or commits a murder or doesn’t pay their taxes, are they considered illegal? They say no, and they are correct. However, they conveniently don’t say whether the individual who commits those crimes are also in this country illegally. If they are, then they are a criminal before they even commit the second crime.
It’s really an issue that’s not rocket science, but the liberals are now attacking our dictionary and want to turn the definition of “illegal” into their own brand of wacky rocket science.
And they take it further by saying consideration should be given to someone here illegally (my word) who may have a good job, a family, served in our military and/or is getting an education. And to liberals, “consideration” is defined as “looking the other way … until election time, when it’s time to collect the debt of votes.”
My friend has many of those credentials, but got no “consideration,” and shouldn’t have. And neither should the illegal immigrants.
— W. Curt Vincent is the general manager and editor of the Bladen Journal. He can be reached by calling 910-862-4163 or by email at firstname.lastname@example.org.