Pictured to the right is a Halloween costume which was listed on the website of Target Stores. A Southern California immigrant rights group has asked Target to stop selling the costume because it is offensive to immigrants. Target spokesman Joshua Thomas stated that his company is removing the costume from the site after receiving several complaints.
If you would take a close look at the costume, it is obviously an orange jumpsuit with the words ' illegal alien ' written across the front. The mask is obviously one of an alien from outer space and it is also holding a green card in its right hand.
Well alrighty then. I'm left scratching my head in utter confusion. For the life of me, I fail to see how this costume would offend any legal immigrant. However, if you are an illegal alien from the planet Platron or perhaps an illegal alien from a foreign country and you are offended by this costume, then your best bet would be to turn yourself in to ICE( Immigration and Customs Enforcement) or self-deport yourself. Then you will never have to look at this hideous costume ever again.
Now we must address this horrible piece of cloth. Anyone who pays attention to the news would know that this thing offends multitudes (translation..a small number of people living in our country, including U.S. Citizens, who have somehow managed to gain a great deal of power)
Barb Holcomb, the manager of the Oaks Apartments in Albany, Oregon, banned tenant motor vehicles from displaying the U.S. Flag as well as flags from other countries ( hey, at least she is fair).
In her defense, Barb stated
" I'm trying to avoid any conflict. I have a problem when tenants' rights to free speech comes into conflict with other tenants' rights of peaceful enjoyment. This policy is not a violation of anyone's civil rights. We are a diverse community here, and we've had previous problems with this sort of thing "
Oh Holy Moly. Just what the heck has happened to our country when we have people who are offended by the U.S Flag? Or any flag for that matter? Personally, I have an issue when people display a foreign flag above or below the U.S Flag. However, I do understand their right to do just such. But when we have landlords putting restrictions on the display of flags, then in my opinion, we have a serious problem and we are one step closer to becoming a totalitarian state.
Then again, I believe that quite a few of the folks who are offended by the U.S. Flag would have no problem with the U.S. Government managing their health care, their bank accounts, their rate of pay and who knows what else.
But the heck with all of that. To boil it all down in a nutshell, if you live in the United States of America and you are offended by the piece of cloth pictured to the right, you have the right to do just such. You are also free to leave anytime that you wish.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 129
As for the Oregon thing, that's just plain sad. It should never be illegal or "against the rules" to display an American flag unless it's done with disrespect or it's in a position or place where someone can physically be hurt by it (like putting a flag pole in the middle of the street, etc).
If all of the immigrants in this country were to boycott every retailer, I seriously doubt that such an action would have any negative impact on the retailer's sales or profits.
I'm really confused.
I seriously doubt that Wal-Mart would have suffered any loss as a result of a boycott from this small group, so why did they give in? I'm confused.
If all of the immigrants in this country were to boycott every retailer, I seriously doubt that such an action would have any negative impact on the retailer's sales or profits."
Actually, according to the Census Bureau, immigrants account for around 12% of the population. If we assume they account for the same percentage of shoppers, then I think it's clear that such a boycott would have a significant impact.
Think about it, Tim. You work for a big retailer, right? If your sales and profits suddenly dropped 12%, don't you think that might have a fairly significant impact?
There are weeks that we have a 12 percent decrease and there are plenty of weeks that we have a 36 percent increase. We have been supposedly boycotted in the past, but I didn't notice any departure from the norm. I have had disgruntled customers say that they will never shop with us again, then when the next big sale paper hits their mail box, they are banging on the front door before opening.
Retailers lose old customers and pick up new customers all of the time. So I'm not confident that boycotts have a negative impact on sales and profits.
My response was to the specific hypothetical situation you suggested. Such a boycott would result in a sustained 12 percent drop in sales (again, assuming that the immigrant population represents the same percentage of customers as it does of the total population).
"We have been supposedly boycotted in the past, but I didn't notice any departure from the norm."
Boycotts can be ineffectual for many reasons, including because not enough people participate.
"I have had disgruntled customers say that they will never shop with us again, then when the next big sale paper hits their mail box, they are banging on the front door before opening."
And this is another possible reason for an ineffectual boycott -- lack of commitment. Consider people who frequently complain about foreign-made products, yet are constantly buying them.
"So I'm not confident that boycotts have a negative impact on sales and profits."
I think it depends on the boycott. A lot are ineffective, but some can be very effective. As I recall, a few years ago Target was boycotted by the American Family Association, and Target caved into their demands within a week.
Our company recently released a new signing program. It was tested in one store before it was released company wide... and that store experienced an 11 percent sales increase over the same period last year. During the same period that the signing program was being tested, the store where I work was experiencing a 22 percent increase over last year. So can it be proven that the test store was having a sales increase because of the new signing program? It's the same with boycotts. I'm not sure that they can be proven to be effective. I think that companies such as Target cave in too quick.
I think a well-managed boycott with strongly-committed participants can definitely have a significant impact, both in terms of sales and profits and in terms of public relations.
One aspect of a good boycott is for the organizers and/or participants to make sure the targeted company is getting the message. I remember one boycott organizer encouraging participants to send the company copies of their receipts from doing business with the competition.
Of course it helps if you make sure who's actually competing with whom. Shopping at Store Y instead of Store X doesn't really matter if they're both owned by the same company.
"I think that companies such as Target cave in too quick."
Maybe. I think in this case, it was a fairly simple decision that it's better to remove a product that's been identified as offensive, rather than to continue selling it. On the other hand, as far as I know, Target has not given in to pressure to allow Salvation Army bell ringers to operate outside their stores around Xmas. I think they pick their battles, and this one was pretty much a no-brainer.
If I had been in charge of Target's public relations, I would have told the immigrant group to shove it.
I think it's often difficult to understand why other people might be offended by something you yourself don't find offensive. For example, I would never decide where I would and wouldn't shop based on whether they use the word "Christmas", and yet apparently some people think it's a really big deal.
As Prima Donna, some people find the term "illegal alien" offensive in general. Others may be offended with equating illegal immigrants with prisoners. As I pointed out, I think the fact that the costume includes a green card and is jumpsuit with an illegal immigrant label on it is both confusing and inappropriate. Do I find it offensive? Not really, but then it takes a lot to offend me.
I think that people could draw the same conclusion about pretty much any halloween costume. Sometimes I wonder if people are actually offended or are they just stirring up some crap out of boredom?
Maybe. Apparently the whole notion of Halloween is offensive to some folks. I checked out some of the other costumes Target sells on its website, and I'm surprised they haven't gotten complaints about some of them. Who knows, maybe they have.
"Sometimes I wonder if people are actually offended or are they just stirring up some crap out of boredom?"
I think there will always be people who put a great deal of effort into ensuring that they're always offended and outraged by something.
I agree.
Hopefully I will offend a few Amerian Liberals who hate our country as well as a few immigrants. Now that's a win/win situation no matter how you spin it!
As for the flag issue, this is a reason why I would never want to live in a condo or other community governed by some "community association" or the like. These people (no matter what side of the political spectrum they're on) get power-happy and start trying to micromanage the lives of their tenants.
No thanks. I'm very glad I own my home and I'm free to display whatever I want on my house or the bumper of my car.
Here in Florida, they are affectionately called "Condo Nazi's" or "Condo Commando's".
According to one poll that I once read, only about 10 percent of U.S. Citizens believe in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
"What are these school teachers / administrators thinking, too?"
They are breaking down under pressure from that 10 percent. Just why, I don't know. This confuses me.
The real Americans are in the majority, but these days, the minority rules.
The flag incident? That ticks me off.
It obviously offends legal immigrants as well. Let them leave as well. But oh..wait a minute..these folks are smarter than we are and they are better workers..so we need them because they are superior to us. Our economy would fold without them.
" The flag incident? That ticks me off. "
Me too, but you must remember that we should be required to put the interests of the immigrants as well as the interests of the American Liberals first at all costs. After all, the minority rules our country...right?
As for the flag ~ that sort of thing really ticks me off! I don't what's happening to this country these days but people have got to wake up before some commies start trying to fly their flags over ours or instead of ours around here... :O)
As for the flag issue I say,"It is the symbol representing our country.If you come here to live, accept it." End of quote. The freedoms that our country represents and that we fight to preserve are precisely what living here is all about. If you are from another country but want to live in the US then you should accept our flag. I have no problem with flags of other countries being displayed. After all we should all have pride in our homeland and the US Constitution gives us the right of freedom of speech. But if you display your countries flag then I think you need to be prepared to defend that choice against remarks from others.
The flag issue is another game of the liberals PC BS. If you find the American Flag offensive you need to leave or keep your mouth shut. A lot of men and women died for that flag and what it represents. Given the current direction of this country and it's administration, the hammer and sickle displayed on May 1 (MayDay) will become mandatory.
Eamon W. Oct 18, 2009, 9:32am EDT
Who cares if the illegals are offended. Their presence here is offensive to a majority of law abiding, tax paying, citizens. These big retail outlets make me sick with their PC BS, that's why I avoid them. I hope Sheriff Joe Arpaio bought a bunch of them before they were pulled and dresses the illegals in his custody in them.
The flag issue is another game of the liberals PC BS. If you find the American Flag offensive you need to leave or keep your mouth shut. A lot of men and women died for that flag and what it represents. Given the current direction of this country and it's administration, the hammer and sickle displayed on May 1 (MayDay) will become mandatory.
TOTALLY!!
For another perspective (sarcasm) see my comment about the American flag in the "Mortgage Lending to Foreign Nationals" thread.
As for the costume, LOL, looks OK to me. In fact, for any of those people just moving into a new house, and have all those bare walls to contend with, maybe you could get one of these costumes and just pin it up on the wall. It would certainly add some color and pizazz to the room.
As for the flag, sorry but I am not taking mine down. This is getting absolutely ridiculous.
There is no doubt that there are foreigners, both legal and illegal, in our Country who don't like us very much. However, we also have Americans who don't like us very much either. Just as I said in the body of this article, anyone who is offended by the U.S. flag is free to leave anytime. You don't have to bow down and worship it, but at least show some respect.
Flag stupidity = I agree w/Col. George. If I lived there... I wouldn't!
The illegal alien thing? I am offended they would remove it and call on a boycott of Target.
I'm not sure, but ain't lookin' too good.
Thanks Lee, Mark and Chuck. Good comments.
Lee P. Oct 18, 2009, 12:41pm EDT
What's happening to America? I'll fly my flag if I want to and move if I'm told by a bunch of Nazi's that I can't. The alien suit is cute and funny and if anyone wants to dress up like an old grandma with a cane and reading glasss, I shall laugh and not be offended. Give me a break....!
Nazi beliefs indeed.....or perhaps Marxist. We seem to be heading towards one or the other of these totalitarian systems.
We have some serious problems here folks. Things are becoming upside down and bass akcwards from the way that they should be.
If someone wants you to remove your US flag, then maybe they need to move back to where ever the hell they came from.
Think that you are correct there Dan. Scary stuff...we should all be very very concerned about these issues.
In the battle of Iwo Jima, Feb. 1945, 6,825 Allied troops (mostly US Marines) lost their lives. After the battle, survivors raised the US flag there (as in my logo), as a symbol of the price paid to defend the nation.
Without that price, those of us alive at the time, may well have been slaughtered. Younger Americans may never have been born. This is what should be thought about the next time some idiot suggests banning the display of the American flag.
An issue like that of the apt. mgr. & the flag happened here in Florida in recent years. The court decide that it had no right to demand that the US flag be taken down. The court referred the matter to a fedral jurisdiction...nothing more was heard about the issue!
Awww. How nice. I would say "if you do not like that fact then either move back where you came from or MOVE BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM...!"
I agree!
Many find the term offensive and dehumanizing because it criminalizes the person rather than the actual act of illegally entering or residing in the United States. The term does not give an accurate description of a person’s conditional U.S. status, but rather demeans an individual by describing them as an alien. At the 1994 Unity convention, the four minority journalism groups – NAHJ, Asian American Journalists Association, Native American Journalists Association and National Association of Black Journalists – issued the following statement on this term: “Except in direct quotations, do not use the phrase illegal alien or the word alien, in copy or in headlines, to refer to citizens of a foreign country who have come to the U.S. with no documents to show that they are legally entitled to visit, work or live here. Such terms are considered pejorative not only by those to whom they are applied but by many people of the same ethnic and national backgrounds who are in the U.S. legally.“
As for the flag, well, their property, their rules. If you don't like their rules, then ya get out. No big deal.
This, however, doesn't constitute either. Unless the Martians are the ones who are upset, I don't see where the issue is.
But, who knows? Perhaps I am just in the Halloween mood.
I'm pretty sure that if I were to travel to a foreign country, they would have a lot more offensive words for foreigner than ' alien'
I am no longer an alien.
But part of my point here is that our Government, corporations..ect seem to cater to the wishes of a few and in turn, they give these small special interest groups a great deal of power.
I just don't like those American flag car flags at all. They wind up flying off the cars and in the streets. I stop and pick them up. Fly your flag where it isn't going to wind up in the mud please.
I don't recall this. But if by "they" you mean the government, then you're still wrong. While the people may have come here illegally, the government issued green card makes their presence here legal. No country's immigration policy has to be fair, but it should be fairly administered.
I do have to correct my comment. It's not that they (the government) suddenly allowed illegal immigrants to get green cards. It's that the government had finally come to their senses and decided to STOP giving illegal immigrants green cards. So a flood of illegal immigrants put in their application before the deadline. And that's why my application got flooded away.
See http://www.visalaw.com/01apr3/12apr301.html for more info about 245(i).
This is my story.
I am not so sure that this statement is accurate. Please note that I said that I was not sure...........especially when it comes to displaying the flag of this nation. This is not strictly private property as in a citizens privately owned home. Were these rules agreed to prior to the signing of a contract?
Then there is of course the 1st Amendment which clearly states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Somehow I think that this apartment complex manager might find herself at odds with the first amendment. Now a condo-association is a different ball of wax, one that a person buys into............being a party to setting their own rules.
WRONG ! Hundreds of thousands of US troops died in World War II defending the US from foreign invaders who sought to enter our land uninvited, occupy it by the millions, and transfer hundreds of billions of $$$ of our economy to their country (Germany & Japan).
Now, all those things that our courageous ancestors died to prevent, are happening from illegal immigration, and the TOLERANCE of it by "our" elected officials, is one of the primary reasons. The tolerance of this is one of the most despicable things I've ever seen.
It is important to tolerate what should be tolerated. It is equally important, if not more important, to not tolerate what should not be tolerated.
It is not pejorative and it does not dehumanize people. It is simply an accurate representation of these particular people. They, by having committed the federal crime of EWI, are here ILLEGALLY. Hence the word "illegal". Those who overstay visas also are here illegally. Alien simply tells that they are nationals of another country, not the USA, hence the term "alien". Illegal alien. 100% correct language usage.
Those groups who call for this phrase to not be used, do so in furtherance of their political agendas, not some concern about illegal aliens.
As for the statement "it criminalizes the person rather than the actual act of illegally entering or residing in the United States", this is silly. The word "illegal alien" doesn't criminalize anyone. Illegal aliens who commit the crime of illegally entering the USA, criminalize themselves when they do that.
Maybe these recognitions Lou has received might have something to do with it :
1. The Peabody Award.
2. The Luminary Award by the Business Journalism Review.
3. The Horatio Alger Association Award for Distinguished Americans.
4. Emmy Lifetime Achievement Award from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
5. The Man of the Year Award from The Organization for the Rights of American Workers.
6. The George J. Kourpias Excellence in Journalism Award from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
7. The Eugene Katz Award for Excellence.
8. The Hugh O’Brien Youth Leadership in Media Award.
9. The National Space Club Media Award.
10. “Father of the Year” by the National Father’s Day Committee in 1993.
Also is the recognition that the term "illegal alien" is not offensive to anyone, despite some goofball groups (NAHJ, Asian American Journalists Association, Native American Journalists Association and National Association of Black Journalists) who pretend that they're offended by it.
As for the flag issue, I think it sucks. If I were a tenant there, I'd fight it, in court if necessary. I don't know what the laws are in Oregon regarding how much control landlords have over tenants, but I would hope that trying to inhibit freedom of expression in such a manner would be illegal. If it were the government trying to impose such a ban, it would be totally unconstitutional, but with regard to a private rental arrangement, it's a bit iffy. My best guess is that while the owner can make rules regarding usage of common areas (like parking areas, etc.), they can't make rules about tenants' cars.
But whether it's legal or not, I don't approve of landlords attempting to stifle tenants' freedom of expression. And that's what flying a flag -- any flag -- is all about. Whether a tenant wants to fly an American flag, or a P.O.W. flag, or a gay pride flag, or a Nazi flag or a Confederate flag, they should be free to do so. Others should also be free to express their approval or disapproval, but not to force the person to stop flying their flag.
And the same should apply to those who choose to burn (stomp, pee on, etc.) a flag (as long as it's theirs). Those are also forms of expression that should be (and in many cases, are) protected.
The good news with the flag thing is that the ban has been lifted. In fact, it had been lifted for quite some time before this article was written. Still, it's an issue worth talking about, and no doubt similar situations will continue to pop up from time to time.
One cool thing to come out of it all was what Barb Holcomb said to the media when explaining that she'd gotten rid of the rule:No BS. No spin. No excuses. I think that's pretty damned cool.
Personally, I don't see how legal immigrants would find the costume offensive since it clearly says ' illegal alein' on the front. If illegal immigrants are offended, then too bad so sad in my book.
You're right about the anti-immigrant bigotry that is prevelant in our Country. However, anti-immigrant bigotry too often gets confused with genuine concern about the illegal immigration issue. Then again, some of the legal immigrants, as well as international students, don't do themselves any favors when they isolate themselves into racial and ethnic groups..which you can witness in just about every city and on every college campus. Sure there are Americans who will turn their nose up in the air to these folks, but there are Americans like me who would be more than glad to befriend them and help them in any way.
" But whether it's legal or not, I don't approve of landlords attempting to stifle tenants' freedom of expression. And that's what flying a flag -- any flag -- is all about. Whether a tenant wants to fly an American flag, or a P.O.W. flag, or a gay pride flag, or a Nazi flag or a Confederate flag, they should be free to do so. Others should also be free to express their approval or disapproval, but not to force the person to stop flying their flag. "
I agree with you 100 percent. I'm not all that crazy about people flying foreign flags nor pissing on and burning ours, but I do respect their right to do so.
"One cool thing to come out of it all was what Barb Holcomb said to the media when explaining that she'd gotten rid of the rule:
I made a policy. I was wrong.
No BS. No spin. No excuses. I think that's pretty damned cool. "
A respectful response on behalf of Barb Holcomb. Thanks for pointing that out.
Thanls for stopping by Wilbur. I was wondering when you would.
Yeah, and yet the green card indicates a legal immigrant, so it's confusing at best.
"If illegal immigrants are offended, then too bad so sad in my book."
I can see where Target might see it differently, given that it's likely that a considerable number of illegal immigrants shop there.
"However, anti-immigrant bigotry too often gets confused with genuine concern about the illegal immigration issue."
Very true.
"Then again, some of the legal immigrants, as well as international students, don't do themselves any favors when they isolate themselves into racial and ethnic groups..which you can witness in just about every city and on every college campus."
No argument there, either.
"Thanls for stopping by Wilbur. I was wondering when you would."
No worries. I don't check my Gather mail very often, so it was just a bit of luck that I got your message when I did.
It doesn't. And Target hasn't been accused of violating the Constitution, or any other law, over the incident.
From a PR perspective, I'd say they might get a bit of mileage out of refusing to cave in to a boycott that was being used as an attempt to get them to stock items that other customers find offensive.
I don't think that this was about choosing not to be offensive. I looks to me like they broke down under pressure like a bunch of pussies. That's how I see it, but I know that you tend to see things in a different color than I do. Maybe we just come from different sides of the railroad track.
"Trespassers will be shot", when it comes to the flag of our country, and the flag that my friends and peers have fought and died for, I reserve the right to fly it any fu**ing place I please. And if you have a problem with that get the hell out of my country!!!
Busting on the US flag huh? Sadly, nothing new there anymore either.
You think it should be hard to claim offense? I don't really understand what you mean by that comment, Charles.
I figure unless it physically harms someone, people have a right to do or say even ignorant things but this whole issue is an example of someone being over sensitive
No arguments here, but so what? Whether a person truly finds something offensive, or if they simply don't agree with it, how does it apply in this particular situation? Whether they are offended or simply don't agree with Targets decision to sell the costume, there's no reason why they shouldn't boycott the store if they want to, is there?
"I figure unless it physically harms someone, people have a right to do or say even ignorant things but this whole issue is an example of someone being over sensitive"
OK, so if people have the right to say or do what they please, then surely that includes the right to say that they are offended by something, and the right to boycott a business that does something that offends them, right?
So how would it work to somehow make it hard for people to claim offense?
I think that you have a good point there Charles. With me working in retail, I see this quite often.
At our store, we have company advertisements playing on the Musac system and we also record some on our local p/a system and our local ads often play over the company ads on the musac system. One day when this happened, a customer told me that she thought that was rude. I replied " I'm truly sorry that you were offended by that, but really lady, you must have too much time on your hands if something like that ruffles your feathers "