This isn't biased or anything, is it?

[Tahoma 2,298]

I believe the aforementioned about undocumented immigrants was an excellent example. Prior to moving to the US, I had not heard of this term. The point of that example is that by changing the classification of someone, their conduct and public perception is altered. After all, there is a reason why political slogans and cliches have a great power to influence people in the US. Whereas, the same tools and strategies are almost non-existent in political campaigns in countries like AUS. My first federal election here was quite a bizarre and surreal experience, illustrating Americans are gullible to mere wording.

Reality is common sense for most. For example, someone who has not entered a country using legal channels is not merely some undocumented worker/migrant. Otherwise why not allow me to perform open heart-surgery and have me claim I am simply an undocumented surgeon. In reality, such a label does not sound the same as being told I am not a doctor.

First world countries do not allow opinion or ambiguity to guide a country alone. Otherwise as is the case in the US, nothing would be ever done or accomplished. With so many opinions and such a reliance on them, America has a classic case of too many Chiefs and not enough Indians.

Your words are fairly reasonable. But I do perceive a frustration behind them, and so what I'd really like to know is what makes you and your gut feelings about illegal immigrants so different from mine. Maybe it's your experience, maybe it's your inborn constitution, maybe it's a combination. Why does one person wake up feeling like "ya know, we're all humans, and I can see where they're coming from (illegals), and I'm looking for a way to make things work for everybody" when another person wakes and feeling like, "ya know, these people are breaking the law and it won't stand. I've had enough. I'm angry."

I don't want to debate whether illegals should be afforded compassion or intolerance. I just want to talk about why you think we have different takes and responses to these realities. I think the debate would quickly devolve and nobody's going to budge from their stance, so I'm just curious about what we think creates the disparate perceptions. Let's be anthropological about it for a minute.

Well, that's easy enough...he doesn't know any undocumenteds...he doesn't know their families...and he's never walked a mile in their shoes.

[Peikko 1,575]

By that logic the only thing higher taxation on the rich is supposed to achieve is to redistribute the wealth. Therefore, every headline should refer to such a tax as a "redistribution tax."

You are certainly entitled to your emotional response to an attempt to control borders. Apparantly, the media outlet responsible for that headline agrees with you. But if you condone this sort of manipulative language being used by the media, then turnabout is fairplay.

What emotional response are you talking about? I find the term 'seperating fence' gauche, but in what way is it 'manipulative'? What is the sinister meaning conveyed by 'separating' that isn't already implicit in the term fence?