Catholic Online Forum

Jim,

I was thinking of the Battle of the Little Bighorn. I suspect Schultzz may have been thinking that 1876 was the Centenary of the US (or centennial as you would have it).

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Schultzz,



Then they are not alone; I certainly can't see it.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Joe,



Screened on tv this morning:



http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/ ... 630183.htm

The discussion begins at 8:05 in that 9:54 video.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

There are none so blind...

Communist Party USA Celebrates Obama’s Victory: “We Won!”

...and this from Pravda no less?

The Reason Obama is President

-small excerpt:



I guess the recently liberated Russians are clueless regarding Marxism and Socialism?

More like, the intellectual progressive elite are with heads in the sand clinging to delusional ideological thoughts that they can get it right this time... -the march FORWARD to Utopia must go on -WE are the ones we have been waiting for -WE can Win the Future!!!

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51

Well, I do, so I guess we disagree on Obama's agenda.

_________________
~~Karl~~

God bless you

Okay Jim and David and the rest of the peanut gallery, I meant to say 236 years instead of 136. Of course you already knew that and figured that entitled you to a license for a free for all. It was somewhat entertaining. But our member with "terminal cabin fever" (Jim "hang on" Banister), went through a plethora of worthless information just for a chuckle. But that's why he has been diagnosed with "termainal cabin fever".

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

James. You are excused because you most likely are not privy to all the information available in the minor media which would have shown you Obama's not so hidden agenda. The major media "white-washed" his agenda and basically ignored his real intentions.

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

I figured out it was a typo.

_________________
Bob C

Thank you.

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

And if Santorum (or Romney for that matter) had tried this, I wonder how things would have gone:


Sifting Through the Wreckage

_________________
Grace

As to the past, let us entrust it to God's mercy, the future to Divine Providence. Our task is to live holy the present moment. - Saint Gianna Molla

There are many suitable quotes in the article Sifting Through the Wreckage and this one seems to be spot on, "

"Whatever the clumsiness of Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” remark, the hard fact of the matter is that a critical mass of Americans are now so dependent on government (either directly or through public-sector unions) that any appeal to a larger national vision, much less a vision of personal responsibility, is impossible."

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

I've yet to receive encounter a single voter who indicated their vote was based in any part on being dependent on government.

_________________
Jeff Stevens

I did overhear someone on line say they were voting for Obama because they didn't want to loose their "Free Stuff"

_________________
Bob C

Jeff,



I've encountered several online who are disabled and concerned about their medicare and other benefits who indicated their primary reason for voting for Obama was said concern.

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict

I'm just guessing but I doubt you regularly encounter on a conversational level those who are dependent on the government, I don't mean SS and medicare recipients, those are non-negotiable being forced on us by the government but rather those 50+Million on food stamps or the millions on other forms of welfare. I wonder how many of the 90+ that are at our food bank every week voted for Romney?

_________________
BobA

Jeff,

I've heard this many times over the years myself, too. Perhaps growing up in NYC, being friends with a lot of different people, and always being interested in politics brought up such conversations more for me than would be for others. I've seen it in odd interviews on TV and occasionally in articles - people quoted as voting for that reason. Living in Massachusetts in political discussions it was commonplace to hear arguments of self interest - this is but one.

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

Daniel,



The Communist Party of America is pleased Obama won; therefore, Obama must be a communist.

Logic just isn't your forte, is it?

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Schultzz,



He's a liberal Democrat. He's not a socialist, much less a Marxist.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Well he makes a normal Liberal Democrat look like a raving conservative.

_________________
Bob C

How does the Church define socialism and adherents to it?

Pax et bonum

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

Bob,



In the absence of either a Crown or an established church, I'm not quite sure what an American conservative might be. It all seems to me to be differing shades of liberal.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Few people call themselves Marxists or Socialists today. Today most of those who are the descendants of those ideologies call themselves Structuralists or Dependency Theorists.

_________________
"Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic." Pope Benedict XVI

Barb,


Where I am they are called Greens.

The Greens Party has two factions: the Dark Greens who are environmental extremists, and the Eastern bloc (I'm not making this up) who are what's left over after the various communist parties dissolved themselves due to lack of interest.

Yes, few people call themselves Marxist - because there are few of them. Similarly there are very few neo-fascists. Political discussion over the last few decades has moved increasingly toward the centre - something to be encouraged.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)

Barb & James,

In my experience it is not uncommon to come across educated Americans who openly sympathize with Marx and communism. In schools the subject is more often than not discussed in the context of a failed experiment with good objectives and right thinking behind it. In actual campaigns, speaking to the public, you will not often hear this, but in causal conversation - absolutely.

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

I agree.

_________________
Bob C

American Conservatism is uniquely American and is a subset of Classic Liberalism

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51

A distinction without a difference when winning the future entails encroaching upon my individual God given liberties to serve the morally devoid collectivist mob.

The revolution was not won by logical argument it was won by blood and faith.

I am willing to die for what I hold dear.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51

It is called relativism -moral relativism. Something to be avoided.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51

It would be odd to find selfish self interested people that were not rich. No doubt it is the benevolent collective of poor that wish to win the future for all by electing the great community organizing platitude communicator.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51

I think some of them are over-educated. Just kidding. However, this is for real: my friend with a PhD (from a famous Catholic university) who teaches at a Catholic university and who describes himself on his Face Book profile as a "Marxist-Humanist Feminist Antiracist Pro-GLBT Internationalist."

_________________
Grace

As to the past, let us entrust it to God's mercy, the future to Divine Providence. Our task is to live holy the present moment. - Saint Gianna Molla

I didn't know the Church defined political parties or philosophies.

_________________
David L (CA)
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx

I don't know if this has been raised, but the President himself, right before the election told the Des Moines Register that he was sure he would get a second term because the Republicans had completely alienated the fastest growing voting bloc in the country, which was the Hispanic community.

I rarely agree with the President, but as a Latino priest, he is spot on in that assessment about the Republicans. In California, Republicans are generally despised by the Latino population across the board as being a party that denigrates Latinos or Hispanics as a group of illegal ne'er do wells and free loaders who should do the country a favor and "self-deport." Even Hispanics who are native or legal immigrants view Republicans as synonymous with "white racists."

What is shocking is how often Hispanics poll as being pro-life and not enthusiastic about gay marriage. They also make up a large part of the military recruits who fight in this country's wars. In many ways, they identify with values of the Republican party, but they want no part of it. It is the number one, uphill battle we priests in California face when we deal with the need to vote pro-life and pro-natural marriage. The Latinos agree with us but then vote solidly Democratic.

Latinos voted pro-Obama not because they are pro-Obama, but because they are anti-Republican. In some cases, in hotly contested districts, they voted 70% for Obama, which is astounding. I strongly, strongly suspect that when you subtract the Hispanic Catholic vote, you will find that a good majority of non-Hispanic Catholics voted for Romney. But once you throw in the Hispanic Catholics, the percentage swings to a Catholic majority for Obama. But really, it is the Hispanic Catholics pushing that percentage over the top for Obama, not the rest of the Catholic population.

Add to the mix the dominant presence Hispanics are assuming in the American Catholic Church, and you may see Catholic percentages always favor the Democrats for years to come, unless the Hispanics can be brought around to forgive the Republican party.

As a Mexican, I can positively state that when you get on our bad side, it is hard for us to forgive and we will never forget you are an enemy. When we are your friends, we will fight for you to the death. Unfortunately, for most Hispanics, the Republican party is considered an avowed enemy to Latinos. Each year, more and more are going to the polls to remind the Republicans of this, and this year, they were more than happy to give you the result you saw on Tuesday, November 6th.

I don't care how they do it, but the Republicans have a lot of work ahead of them. In California, Republicans are a dead and lifeless party because of just how much they are hated by Latinos with the intense hatred and grudge which a Latino is capable of, with few candidates, less influence and power, and with no prospects of recovery with the Latinos. But perhaps across the nation the Republicans might begin some fence mending. I don't know how, but they need to do it. The sooner, the better.

See this article by Mona Charen:
http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2012/11/09/charen-one-big-failure/?subscriber=1

_________________
Sincerely in Christ,
Fr. Angel

Fr. Angel,

I don't know what to say.

It's so damn hard to get into this country legally. It seems neither party could solve the tight bottleneck in the legal immigration line, so why only the Republicans get the blame?

It takes an average of 20 years (I haven't checked lately) for a Filipino to legally immigrate, even with a (relative or business) sponsor. They're told that their people is "oversubscribed" and the first answer is usually, "We lost your file."

Because of frustration, prospective immigrants learn to explore more "creative" ways to get in. Such as contracting a fake marriage for an exorbitant fee, but even with that, it's is so risky. I remember a Filipino priest at St. Patrick's in SF who, in his homilies, used to implore Filipinos not to engage in such activities because it's tantamount to cheating, which is a sin. I didn't think his homilies had much effect on his congregation, but at least he tried.

_________________
Pax et bonum,
Marie

JMJ

Hi Father Sotelo,

I have to admit that this has been personally very difficult for me. I've said many times, on these forum pages and elsewhere, that I believe we need to embrace all the hispanic illegal immigrants in our country. My concern hasn't been for winning elections but rather for tipping the balance back to Christianity. After reading Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations, and seeing the ever increasing influx of Muslims into our country (and growth of Muslims from within as well), it became pretty clear what the real battle will be for in this country over time. It seemed to me that a flood of immigrants from down South meant a flood of fresh Catholics into the country and not just Catholics but real, devout Catholics.

At least, that's what I thought.

Part of the reason I didn't think Obama would win was that I really, stupidly, naively believed that our Hispanic brothers and sisters were more dedicated and committed Catholics than our American ones. I believed they would vote their Faith more than their self-interest. I thought abortion, life, the Church and what our Church leaders were calling for would cause them to vote against the world's greatest anti-Catholic, anti-God, anti-religious freedom extremist.

But I think you're absolutely right that absent the Hispanic Catholic vote, most American Catholics actually voted with the Church. I find some solace in that and now look with new eyes upon my fellow American Catholics, in whom I have a new respect.

But it has been hard finding that I no longer can look upon my fellow Hispanic Catholics as once I did. Perhaps I gave them too much credit. I used to admire their faith and dedication to the Faith. Now I find myself having to stop myself from feeling the negative things I feel now. The disappointment.

I used to frequent the local Spanish Mass and did so admiring what appeared to be their placing of their Faith so high in their lives. But now I see they are no different than any other Catholics, and maybe even more lukewarm in some ways. Pro-life means nothing in the face of pro-self-interest.

At any rate, as I said, this has been the hardest part of this past election for me to deal with. The greatest disappointment. I had placed such hope in our Hispanic Catholics. Perhaps unrealistically. But at least I'm beginning to have more respect for our American Catholics.

God bless,
Barb

_________________
"Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic." Pope Benedict XVI

Spot on, Fr. Angel. It was disheartening to see how Republicans handled the immigration debate over the past 12 or so years when president Bush sought to find a reasonable solution that spoke both to law and order and human rights concerns and it was rejected by his own party. It went downhill from there. Though I thought in Arizona they attempted to address valid concerns of inaction, without presenting a comprehensive policy, failing to address the human rights side of the equation at the federal level amounted to being downright mean. Romney had the opportunity as the party's standard bearer to propose a thoughtful policy, especially in the absence of anything meaningful from the Obama administration and their failure to act, even when they held both houses of Congress and the presidency. Instead, we saw during one of the debates Romney answer a heartfelt question on immigration from a woman in the audience by basically saying the hypothetical person would be deported.

The same could be said on other issues too where there were basically off the shelf policies waiting to be championed. But this campaign thought they could win essentially on the economy alone. That's what we were told - even scolded about - when other serious issues were discussed. Keep it simple - we'll win on the economy. So much for that...

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

Fr. Angel,


Voting results among Hispanics in Florida seem to mirror what you are saying 52% of Cuban Americans, the largest Hispanic group in Florida, voted for Romney. However 81% of Purto Rican Hispanics, the second largest Hispanic group in Florida voted for Obama.

_________________
Bob C

Back in June I was at a children's birthday party in Alexandria, VA, and over wine & cheese and cake & coffee, as our children played Angry Birds with real, bean bag birds, knocking down wooden blocks arranged by the host with paper pigs taped on, I spoke with an acquaintance who is very active in conservative public policy, legal advocacy, and the conservative movement generally. When the conversation turned to the election, he was very serious and visibly sad. A hispanic Catholic, he gave his take on why we would lose, and if nothing changed, why we would continue to lose - an inhumane stance on immigration. A stance inconsistent with conservative values.

But the concern went deeper. One need only do the math to see what he means with respect to losing, and now in hindsight, look at the results. But that it was possible for this position to rise to the level that it did imparts something about those who advanced it. Not only couldn't they see the numbers, but their hearts couldn't see the truth. It is one thing to have a leadership failure based in miscalculation and quite another to fail based on a misunderstanding of the human condition, a failure of empathy and compassion.

Do we really want to be led by people who change their tone based on the numbers alone, only because otherwise they lose - or do we need a real change in leadership that truly understands in the core of their being that the policy itself or lack thereof was morally wrong - whatever the numbers. Especially in a movement that, by and large, prides itself on taking a thoughtful, moral approach, informed by truth, by Christian principles, in one nation, under God.

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

Fr. Sotelo,

Well written piece! Spot on and a real eye opener. However, I have had a personal apostolate in helping poor Hispanic immigrants whether legal or otherwise by buying them winter clothing and other items they need. They are often taken advantage of here through unreasonable rent charges. Because they don't want to start any trouble they take what they can get working menial jobs for many hours. I treat them with repect and dignity and often speak and joke with them in their language. They all like and respect me. I don't broadcast what I do for them but they all know I am sure. I am one of those conservative Republicans but when Jesus reminded us to help the poor He didn't exclude any for any reason least of all their nationality.

_________________
Pax et Bonum


Schultzz

To give credit I believe is deserved, Bush 43 had a reasonable and even bipartisan immigration reform bill. So much happened during those 8 years, it may be forgotten. It did not get enough votes in the senate in 2007 to close debate. It was considered a conservative victory at the time.

I see some signs of movement on latino issues now, in light of last week's elections. But I do think many Republican politicians have to fear, that if they vote for reform they will be "primaried" by more conservative candidates, challenged and defeated when they next face Republican primary election campaigns.

_________________
Charles MacKenzie

"For nature is one with rapine, a harm no preacher can heal;
The Mayfly is torn by the swallow, the sparrow spear'd by the shrike,
And the whole little wood where I sit is a world of plunder and prey."
-Tennyson

So is the proposal that we hand the country and Church over to illegal Latinos or else? I don't care what the nationality, if these people are Catholic they had/have a responsibility to vote accordingly, to do otherwise is and will always be a grave sin. This is a country of laws, although it's been hard to discern that this past decade, and it is by the law that everyone, all of us, all of them must govern our actions or we will have a complete breakdown of government, anarchy does not work. My Hispanic in-laws despise the illegal immigrant demands and actions of the past decades because of the stigma it brings on them all as a nationality. No amount of threat or coercion will make the illegal invasion of a country just nor will repeated amnesty for those already illegally in country solve the problem for the future, it only encourages more illegal entries.

_________________
BobA

Brian and my brother Schultzz,

That's all very nice, but how should the government solve the illegal immigration problem?

By giving all Latino illegals amnesty? Is that the politically-wise thing to do?

What about the South East Asian illegals? It should be noted that Asians went for Obama at a higher percentage than Latinos did. The Reps can give the Latinos amnesty and pretty soon there won't be any Asian Republicans left.

And should Republicans give amnesty to illegals only because they want their votes (i.e., pandering)? Didn't President Regan grant amnesty to about 3-million of them and as soon as he turned around, most voted Democrats? Do legal immigration laws matter anymore?

Is it a sin to violate immigration laws?

Why do Latinos (Christians) seem to have a harder time coming into the U.S. legally (not even for tourist visas) than people from the muslim countries? Why is it so hard for a brown-skinned immigrant applicant to pass an interview conducted by Black immigration officials? How did the 9/11 terrorists obtain their visas? How did the "foreign election watchers" obtain their visas?

I find these questions hard to answer. I remember the former SF Archbishop John Quinn saying that while we ought to help the undocumented immigrants, we should also remember that a sovereign country has the right to enforce its immigration laws.

_________________
Pax et bonum,
Marie

JMJ

Hi Marie,

Excellent questions. I should have clarified that my disappointment is with Hispanic Catholics not with the Republican Party's position on illegal immigration.

I have said many times that as a Christian looking out on the horizon, I am happy to see an influx of Christian immigrants from the South. I believe that as the country becomes more secular and as the Muslim population grows, we are going to have a far worse battle than that between political parties.

But I am not so quick to tell the Republican Party that they should support amnesty. The one thing that most differentiates the Republicans from the Democrats is respect for the law. Who am I to tell that Party that they should violate their own prinicples just to get more votes? And is that the right thing to tell them anyway?

We believe, as Catholics, that one cannot commit a wrong in order to attain a good end. Who is the Catholic Church to tell this nation to violate its principles and laws to accommodate people seeking a better life? A better material life? In the end, how is that any different than Democrats saying abortion should be okay in order to make for a more materially stable and comfortable life for women?

Especially if Hispanic Catholics are willing to put their own material well-being above the lives of the unborn? Above the religious freedom of all Americans?

If an Hispanic Catholic believes it is okay to vote for a pro-abortion extremist in order to advance his own material self-interest then who is he to turn around and tell a Republican American that he should violate his own beliefs and laws and principles out of compassion to him? "I don't have to be compassionate to the unborn but YOU have to be compassionate to me?"

Really?

So yes, Marie, I think you're right. As Catholics, we should be compassionate and do all we can for our brothers and sisters no matter who they are or what they've done. But we have no right, in my opinion, to ask the party of respect for the law and for the constitution to violate their own beliefs just to get more votes.

We need a solution, no doubt. But what that solution is, I have no idea. Maybe it should be the same solution we proffer for American Catholics? Preach and teach the need to place God above material self-interest.

God bless,
Barb

_________________
"Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic." Pope Benedict XVI

Its not about pandering for votes, its about justice and mercy. For many of us the discussion of immigration is principled and academic. That's great - we should all invite dispassionate discussion of such issues, looking at the hard facts and truths. But for many hispanic voters it is a reality they and their families live out every day of their lives.

When our response to the situation is 'law and order first' and the rest be damned, the expectation that hispanics will see that as the loving embrace of truth, take up the cause, and set aside their own family's second class citizenship to see the higher moral issues and elect someone who essentially promises the status quo or the deportation of their family members - well, I think that's a bit much. Especially when many in that same party sit back and ignore the higher moral issues whenever they can, and when they do speak to them, its just that - lip service.

From where I sit its not hard to see how hispanic families could look at the election, hold their noses as most of us do, and choose against the deportation of family members.

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

Well... one could easily modify your post...



No one is saying it's an easy issue to deal with. But if it's okay for Hispanic Catholic voters to vote their material self-interest, then why isn't it okay for wealthy people to vote theirs? Or pregnant women seeking abortions to vote theirs? Or American taxpayers to vote theirs?

We either believe the priniciples and laws matter or we don't.

If it's okay for some to break the laws of man and God in order to improve the material condition of their lives, then it is okay for all to break the laws of man and God in order to improve the material condition of their lives.

_________________
"Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic." Pope Benedict XVI

Barb,

I'm not trying to be mean here, but I don't think you get it. God's law includes, and the basis of our opposition to abortion rests on, the sanctity and dignity of human life, in all of its stages. That sanctity, dignity, and respect must extend to immigrants, whether they come here legally or illegally. And I'm not advocating amnesty. I'm saying some conservatives failed to respect life.

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

I hear this all the time, hogwash. Those illegal aliens made the choice to violate our laws, they intentionally invaded another country and they deserve what the laws prescribe. Treat them with compassion while they are in detention then send them back to the quagmire they created in their own country. They have just as much responsibility to correct their government as they demand we do ours for their benefit.

_________________
BobA

Hi Brian,

I quite agree. We are called to be compassionate to all who come here. That's not the issue at hand. The issue is what the Republican Party should have done to reach out to Hispanic voters. I have put forth that there's no easy answer to that. I don't think anyone can expect the Republican Party to violate their beliefs just to get more votes. Nor do I think they should be labeled as lacking in compassion because they believe in the rule of law.

How's the issue with illegal immigration differ from the issue with homosexual marriage or abortion or stem cells, etc etc?

Or what about people suffering from cancer who would like physician assisted suicide to be made legal? How lacking in compassion to not let them die peacefully!

I understand exactly what you're saying. I simply disagree with you.

God bless,
Barb

_________________
"Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes, not divine, but demonic." Pope Benedict XVI

BobA,

So we should bring back Operation Wetback? Is that the solution?

Pax et bonum,

_________________
-Brian

"This is the horrendous and hidden poison of your error: that you claim to make the grace of Christ consist in his example and not in the gift of his Person." - St. Augustine correcting Pelagianism

Brian, I am not seeing it your way, either, I'm afraid. Wouldn't that be like saying that we must respect property owners, whether they acquire it legally and fairly or whether through theft or fraud?

_________________
Grace

As to the past, let us entrust it to God's mercy, the future to Divine Providence. Our task is to live holy the present moment. - Saint Gianna Molla

It saddens me that we're back to choosing between mercy and purity, as if our only alternatives were amnesty on one hand or iron hostility on the other. And while we sit in this dilemma and decades roll by, the actual situation on the ground gets worse. As if none of us have any responsibility for keeping the status quo- as if we would only be responsible if we change the situation somehow.

I didn't like everything in the 2007 law proposed, or in several attempts that preceded that. But in rough outline it made sense, and apparently it was the best our representatives could muster. It was not amnesty, regardless of what talk radio is saying. It had a new class of visa's with no citizenship permitting residence. After eight years these folks could apply if they paid penalties and back taxes. It had another new class for guest workers, no path to citizenship, based on the labor needs of employers. It increased border patrol both in personnel and hardware. It made it harder for legal immigrants to get their non-citizen relatives on a path to citizenship.

But rather than do this, we followed Jeff Sessions and the status quo. When I walk in my neighborhood it seems all the yards are taken care of by hispanics. Afternoons in the parks, there are latina nannies with the (mostly) white infants they're caring for. We might not have fruits and vegetables at all if not for hispanics.

So I'd say, let's admit that doing nothing has a moral consequence and it isn't pretty. Surely we can do better than this.

_________________
Charles MacKenzie

"For nature is one with rapine, a harm no preacher can heal;
The Mayfly is torn by the swallow, the sparrow spear'd by the shrike,
And the whole little wood where I sit is a world of plunder and prey."
-Tennyson