Tag Archives: Politically Correct

Oh the Huge Manatee: Target Catches Unnecessary Grief for Color Label

5 Apr

Ah the PC police are at it again. Seems someone on planet earth was yet again offended by what another person did. Shocking isn’t it? Apparently Target, the step above Walmart retailer, had a plus sized dress for sale with the color description of “Manatee Grey”.

While on the surface this could appear to be a cheap shot at fat/overweight women and it seems someone got their feelings hurt by his knee-jerk reaction. The offendee? Susan Clemens (aka Twitter user @suZen). She found the discrepancy between the color label of the plus size version of the dress and the “regular” size version, which uses the color label “Dark Heather Grey”.

Continue reading


Called Out: AP Drops “Illegal Immigrant” From Style Guide

3 Apr

Journalism used to be about telling an unbiased, factually correct story. The information was gathered and put into a form the general public could consume without distorting information. Sadly those days are gone and the Associated Press (AP) has capitulated in the demise of true journalism. Quite ironic.

In the latest blow, the AP has decided to bow down to political correctness and become intellectually incorrect by removing the use of the term “illegal immigrant”. Why do so? Senior Vice President and Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll states the style book is trying to rid itself of labels[1]. Huh? Human beings naturally group, classify and label everything around us.

Ms. Carroll wrote on her blog:

“The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term ‘illegal immigrant’ or the use of ‘illegal’ to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that ‘illegal’ should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.”

Now those learning or currently practicing “journalism” will be seen in a negative way if they use technically correct term “illegal immigrant” as a descriptive term. The AP has long lost its credibility of being an unbiased, true journalistic entity. This current move clearly illustrates, yet again, their move to show their bias. Giving a weak excuse which anyone without cataracts can see through.

Continue reading

Tis the Season: The “War” Against Christmas in Full Swing, Again.

6 Dec

As if retailers having a “war” against Thanksgiving wasn’t enough for the public to endure this holiday season, the annual “war” on Christmas is in full swing. Sure the idea of not wanting people to be offended sounds fine, in theory, but the practice leaves much to be desired. In an effort to sanitize the world of select groups of people being offended, everyone gets offended. Ah the law of unintended consequences comes up yet again.

Let’s see what joy sanitizing the Christmas holiday is bring to people in the Offended States of America. There’s the good news of seniors in a retirement complex being told they cannot have a Christmas tree anymore in the common area.[1] Of course no one in the complex has objected to the tree. No the management company has decided the seniors who pay them to live there cannot have it any more. Why? Well it’s apparently a religious symbol. Wait, what? In case anyone doesn’t know, the Christmas tree is not a religious symbol. I sure haven’t seen Christmas trees mentioned in the Bible, Torah or Quran. Maybe I missed those verses though.

What’s next? Perhaps Santa Claus. Could forget the passage of scripture regarding his role in the Christmas story. It’s right there in….uh….hang on I’m sure someone will find it.

What could be more in line with bringing happiness to the faces of boys and girls than when Nativity scenes are being taken down due to threats of lawsuits[2] by a few or by such freedom loving organizations like the ACLU or Freedom from Religion Foundation. Can’t you hear the children’s shouts of excitement? These scenes, which were placed out for years, are now attacked because people feel offended by them, or so they say. Yet no one is forcing those people to believe nor look at the nativity scenes. And they certainly are a lot less offensive to the masses than a crucifix in a cup of urine.

Most non-belivers I have spoken with agree with most believers regarding this type of attacking of Christmas and Christmas symbols is overboard. All it ends up doing is increasing the divide between people who have different points of view. The United States is not a theocracy by any stretch, but it does, like it or not, have faith and religion coursing through the veins of it’s history and traditions. To try to sanitize and appease those who claim to be offended because of both does a disservice to this nation’s history and it’s future.

References –

  1. Seniors decry ban on Christmas tree in their complex in Newhall – Daily News
  2. Lawyer Says Nativity Was Illegal; Century Declares Nativity Scene Surplus – NorthEscambia.com