Sorry Jeb, 'anchor babies' is a slur
Open mouth, insert foot. On Thursday, Jeb Bush stepped into controversy when he used the loaded term "anchor babies" to refer to the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants. In a testy exchange with reporters in New Hampshire, Bush said that he doesn't believe the expression is offensive and blamed Democrats for perpetuating the notion that it is an insult. "Do you have a better term?" he asked one reporter. "You give me a better term and I'll use it."
Despite his family ties to the Latino community, Bush is off base. The term "anchor baby" is a disgusting slur. It is inaccurate as well as offensive. It is dehumanizing to Latinos, immigrants and children who are as American as you and me.
The idea of an "anchor baby" is centered, in part, on the assumption that having an American-born child can protect undocumented people from deportation. The child, this line of thought goes, "anchors" a family in the United States and allows them to gain citizenship.
In fact, having a citizen child is no protection from possible deportation. In the first six months of 2011, for example, parents with U.S.-citizen children constituted 22% of deportees. Between 2010 and 2012, the United States deported nearly 205,000 parents of citizen kids. And in 2013, more than 72,000 were deported, according to The Huffington Post. (President Barack Obama's executive action plan, which is tied up in the courts, would grant temporary deportation relief to parents of children who meet certain requirements.)
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/opinions/reyes-anchor-babies-slur/index.html
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)'brilliant' rethugs a la Michelle Malkin, Ann Cooter. It has no basis in reality.
The idea is that foreigners will being the pregnant wife to the US where she gives birth to a US citizen who will later be able to bring his/her parents to the US under an expedited visa process. Thus the term "anchor' babies. Reality however demonstrates the ridiculousness of this idea.
First, for the 'anchor' baby to solicit visas for his/her parents, said baby must be an adult, 21 years of age. So right off the bat, the devious, scheming parents will have to wait at least twenty-one years before even being able to be considered for their visa. Secondly, if the parent(s) are present in the US illegally at the time the baby turns 21, add another ten years to their wait. Law requires they return to their country of origin and stay there 10 years before soliciting a visa to the US. So, in most cases, the 'anchor' baby parents would only have to wait thirty-one years in order to get their 'free' US visa.
Like most Rethug memes, once it's held up to any type of scrutiny in the light of day it just crumbles and vanishes. But as a thirty-second talking point, it's devilishly clever.
Rozlee
(2,529 posts)My family came to the US illegally in the late 1940s to work and only to work. I was born in the early 60s to my shocked 49 year-old mother. I did actually sponsor a foreign national for American citizenship. But, he was Brazilian and a Fulbright scholar who wanted to join his wife in America. He had no problem getting a work visa and getting hired as a contract petroleum engineer. But, I'm the only person I personally know who sponsored a foreign national for citizenship. We're just not lining up to do it.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Gothmog
(145,339 posts)W is coming off as the smarter brother
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)modrepub
(3,496 posts)..how about American Citizen? That's what the constitution (that's probably in your pocket) says.
murielm99
(30,745 posts)I thought it was merely descriptive.
I grew up in a community with a large number of Hispanic people. I knew that American-born children of illegals did not protect their parents. I met some people who were simply proud to have children who were born here.