re: #63 Charles

Wonderful. And then they act surprised when Latino voters abandon the GOP in droves.

Perhaps they think Latinos/Hispanics will forget soon. Like in California.

re: #88 robdouth

The verses are horribly offensive, but as quick problem with the link you mentioned: are we not allowed to say illegals anymore? I find it Orwellian to hear someone say that the term is offensive to immigrant rights organizations is kinda silly isn’t it. It’s an accurate term, even if it’s taken on a perjorative meaning. It also serves a descriptive function, whereas certain racial epithets are strictly perjorative.

Words carry power. The term “illegal” dehumanizes people, and makes it acceptable for unacceptable actions to occur. Did you know that entering undocumented (or overstaying your visa) in the USA is equivalent to a parking or a speeding ticket? Are those people also equally criminal?

Would anyone lend credence to an article that said CAIR took offense to the term terrorist, or some 9-11 truther group took offense to the term truther. Please note I’m not comparing immigrants morally with the other two groups,

Yet you just did…

I’m just saying it seems rather silly that if just because someone take offense to something, doesn’t mean it should be considered a horrible and offensive term.

As I said, words carry power. Screaming at the top of your lungs that your adversary is a liar is of bad taste, but carries little after-effect. Calmly stating that your adversary is a cockroach carries a different connotation, justifying any physical action against them (after all, who doesn’t want to get rid of cockroaches?).

Most importantly, the idiot putting the song out should be out of their jobs, but color me pathetic if I find fault with the arguement, even when that person is right, but it’s the way I am.

So, he’s right that “illegals” carry diseases into the US?

Sometimes I’d rather be wrong but use sound reasoning then be right with incorrect reasoning, because the first leads to the likelihood that I’ll be right in the future more often then the 2nd.

In this I concur.