Wall Street Journal Bans “Anchor Baby” term

The comment thread to the Linda Chavez Op-Ed defending Birthright Citizenship in the Wall Street Journal today (which I discussed here) has a revealing post: Barbara Despain wrote:

Interesting this forum would not let me use the term an…chor..& .baby. WOw, now that IS PC coming from the wsj. Shocking.

Shocking is the word. Attempts have been increasing by hard-line Treason Lobby types to ban the term “Anchor Baby”. To see this from the WSJ shows where in the spectrum the newspaper is on this issue. And on Free Speech. “Anchor Baby” is of course an eminently reasonable and polite term for the phenomenon. As I noted the other day, opponents sometimes dishonestly maintain that only the ability to sponsor parents for legal residency when 21 is at issue. But in fact a citizen child is eligible for a lush array of benefits, many of which like food stamps can be shared with family members. Furthermore the possession of a citizen child does in fact sway opinion when deportation is in question (for no good reason).

Generally the comments display a sound grasp of the damage done to the country by large-scale low quality immigration. A number, though, are under the illusion Linda Chavez is a real Hispanic. They should read THE 43rd PRESIDENT: Woman in the News: Linda Chavez By Steven A. Holmes The New York Times January 3, 2001 This reports Chavez is

A Hispanic from New Mexico who does not speak Spanish

(actually her mother was Anglo)

her marriage to a Jew, Christopher Gersten, and the rearing of her three sons as Jews — have prompted some to term her a traitor to her people.

Her people? Throughout Linda Chavez` career, it has been clear who her people are: the Neoconservatives.