COLUMN: Colorado’s ruling Dems play language cops | Jimmy Sengenberger

Being in Colorado’s ruling class has its perks. For the dominant Democrats of the state House, it’s like that moment in “History of the World: Part I,” where Mel Brooks gleefully proclaims, “It’s good to be the king!”

Or, in modern political parlance, “It’s good to be in the supermajority.”

Nowadays, their power transcends shaping public policy. Not only are they restricting the terms of debate — already limiting legislative discourse to two hours or less on their chosen bills — but now they want to control the very terms their opponents can use IN the debate.

Last weekend, Republican representatives received a memo ripped from a dystopian dictionary — listing freshly taboo words and phrases concerning immigration now banished from the House floor. The forbidden lexicon: “alien,” “illegal,” “illegal alien,” “undocumented alien,” “invader(s),” “interloper,” “squatter,” and even “fresh off the boat” — each deemed verboten as if a royal proclamation from King Louis himself.

Instead, the “acceptable” words in the 2024 edition of the Colorado House Dictionary include such kindly words as migrant, immigrant, undocumented immigrant or person, noncitizen and new arrivals.

“It is also unacceptable, dehumanizing and inaccurate to describe immigration as an ‘invasion’ or as a ‘horde,’ and to describe whole groups of people as ‘criminal,’ or ‘anchor babies,’” the memo admonished.

Never mind the inconvenient truth that trespassing into the United States is definitionally an illegal and thus criminal act — or that “alien” is still in our state and federal statute books.

Never mind that, just four short years ago, a six-season show called “Fresh Off the Boat” — about a family of Asian immigrants — was hailed by critics and fans alike. (Oh! How we needed the word police then.)

Mention this show in the Colorado House today — or utter that oh-so-common word, “interloper” — and you might find yourself on the linguistic chopping block.

Of course, the whims of political correctness always change — yet the vocab cops now subject their own colleagues’ language to legislative scrutiny.

Republican representatives were on the wrong end of the gavel when they dared to defy the ban amid debate on a HB1280, creating a grant program for nonprofits providing migrant services within a year of arrival.

Rep. Ron Weinberg was among those “gaveled down” — a South African immigrant whose American journey began “fresh off the airplane” as a teenager and whose “visa fell off” when he unwittingly became an “undocumented alien” after turning 18.

Weinberg dared to share his personal story — only to be ordered “Halt!” by presiding Rep. Kyle Brown.

“Am I not allowed to speak on my personal experiences on this bill that is about immigration?” Weinberg asked with palpable frustration.

“You are absolutely allowed to talk about your personal experiences, about your experiences as an immigrant, about your experiences coming into the country,” replied Brown.

“There is nothing in this bill that says anything about any person being illegal, and there is nothing in the bill that refers to any particular person as an illegal alien,” he continued. “And those are considered by many to be pejorative terms. So, I will prefer that you use the words immigrant, undocumented immigrants or migrants in the course of this conversation.”

Ah, yes, “considered by many” — all that’s needed for linguistic tyranny to make its mark on the minority. Declare a word “pejorative,” and it is thus. As the character Syme remarks in Orwell’s dystopian novel, “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words” — channeling the new House Republican reality.

Much like The Party in “1984,” the Democratic Party is wielding language control to manipulate not only the debate but the power structure of the House.

For Weinberg, it came “from left field.” “It’s wildly frustrating,” he confided. “I didn’t even see it until an hour before the bill came up. I don’t really know where it came from. I’d never used these terms.”

Let’s be charitable: Maybe House Speaker Julie McCluskie wants to keep peace with her left flank — the Elisabeth Epps and Tim Hernández types who always crank up the rhetorical dial but rarely face a slap on the wrist.

Honestly, though, does the motivation matter?

“The heart of the issue is, ‘Where does this end?” Weinberg said. “And that’s why I went down and purposely used the words they told me not to use — especially words that I’ve never used in my life. ‘Interloper?’ When has someone said interloper in the well? It’s almost like playing Bingo on the House floor.”

Let’s be real: These linguistic gymnastics are about refocusing attention onto “welcoming” illegal immigrants while conveniently dodging the detrimental consequences inflicted on Americans by the Southern border crisis — growing homeless encampments, skyrocketing taxpayer costs, reduced services to citizens and rising fentanyl deaths. Things have gotten so bad that Denver City Hall recently dispatched a delegation to El Paso, Texas, to implore the local honchos to stop sending more migrants.

Yet, rather than tackling the crises spiraling out of control, House leadership is too busy playing word police and cracking down on criminally pejorative speech.

“This is the biggest issue in the country right now, and they’re trying to stop me and say ‘new arrivals? Are you bloody joking?” Weinberg lamented. “It’s just wrong. It’s not good governance…There’s just so much control that they don’t have to listen to us.”

Ah, the joys of single-party rule. Ain’t politics grand?

Jimmy Sengenberger is an investigative journalist, public speaker, and longtime local talk-radio host. Reach Jimmy online at Jimmysengenberger.com or on X (formerly Twitter) @SengCenter.