The National Council of La Raza [NCLR] is upset
with Tennessee state representative Curry Todd:
Just when you thought extremist rhetoric couldnâ€™t get worse, it did. Late last week, a Tennessee state representative named Curry Todd compared immigrants to rats. ... On November 9, during testimony from Finance and Administration officials at a meeting of the Fiscal Review Committee, Todd asserted that giving U.S. citizen children of immigrants health coverage was a license for immigrants to â€?go out there like rats and multiply.â€? [Video link is from the original.]
Of course, Todd didn`t specifically refer to Hispanics, but I can agree that Todd`s language wasn`t appropriate for an official in an official setting. However, being a hyper-sensitive Hispanic
, NCLR`s A. Elena Lacayo went on in this Breaking Alert to also lambaste what Todd later offered as an alternative:
Representative Todd has not apologized, only saying that he should have used a more â€?palatableâ€? term like â€?anchor babies.â€? This reprehensible phrase for United States citizens is equally offensive and unacceptable.
So "anchor baby"
is forbidden, too. Except that it shouldn`t be. An official, and surprisingly frank, U.S. State Department fact sheet from February 2009, Fraud in the Refugee Family Reunification (Priority Three) Program
, contains this notable sentence:
It is important to note that the initial DNA testing was limited to members of families applying for the P-3 program, and not between the applicants and the anchor relative in the United States.
Got that? "Anchor relative"
! And if you read the fact sheet, you`ll see that "anchor" is used there with precisely the same meaning as we intend when we employ it in "anchor baby"
: The anchor
individual anchors his or her relatives in the United States. (Another commonality: Both anchoring situations are generally to the detriment of the U.S. citizenry.)
So ... an arguably legitimate complaint from La Raza promptly devolves into officially-confirmable bleating silliness.