The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

Another Perspective

Heeding Archbishop Gomez

By & on 12.15.11 @ 6:09AM

Must the GOP shoot itself in the foot over immigration?

If the GOP is to win back the White House in 2012, it cannot afford to alienate Catholic and Latino voters. Just as the shift of support from Catholic and Latino voters helped George W. Bush into the White House twice, it can do the same for Barack Obama.

Because of its impact on these two groups of voters, the debate over immigration will be one of the deciding factors in the 2012 election.

It was no surprise that after the rancor of the 2005 immigration debate the level of Latino support for the GOP presidential candidate dropped from 44% in 2004 to 31% in 2008. How significant is this drop in terms of numbers and in terms of the Catholic vote itself? The percentage of Latino voters is growing steadily, moving from 8% in 2004 to 9% in 2008. Over 19 million Latinos were eligible to vote in 2010, but they are under-registered (60%) in comparison to African Americans (70%) and Whites (74%). The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund is projecting a 25% increase in Latino voters in 2012 compared to 2008. As one study put it, “With significant voter registration drives the Latino vote can go from influential to essential.”

Somewhere from 64% to 70% of Latinos identify as Catholic, thus constituting a growing percentage of the overall Catholic vote. Among all Catholic voters, there was a big swing in 2008, from 52% - 47% for Bush in 2004 to 54% - 45% for Obama. However, among white Catholics, McCain still had the edge, 52% - 47%. It was Latino Catholics who made the difference.

A major study in 2008 estimated that Latinos make up nearly 32% of the Catholic population in the United States, but another study in 2011 puts it at 40% with more than half of them Catholics under the age of 25. According to the latest Census figures, Latinos make up 15% of the nation’s total population.

The growing Latino presence among U.S. Catholics, however, does not tell the whole story about why immigration has become a major issue for Catholic voters. For several years all Catholics have been intensely lobbied by their bishops to demand “Justice for Immigrants.” The bishops’ conference is on the record in support of the DREAM Act, and the USCCB has made it clear they consider immigration reform a top priority in the 2012 election.

Most recently, in a letter to immigrants issued December 12 on the Feast Day of Our Lady of Guadalupe, thirty Catholic bishops wrote:

“Despite your contributions to the well-being of our country, instead of receiving our thanks, you are often treated as criminals because you have violated current immigration laws.”

Signers included Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles and Archbishop Gustavo Garcia-Siller of San Antonio, the leading bishops of Mexican descent in the country. It’s notable that Archbishop Gomez has become a leading voice on this issue. Since Gomez first became auxiliary bishop in Denver under Archbishop Chaput, he has earned wide respect for his pro-life, pro-marriage efforts among the kind of Catholic voters often aligned with the Republican Party.

It’s inevitable that all religiously active Catholic voters will consider what bishops like Archbishop Gomez have to say on the subject of immigration. Some bishops have reported resistance in the Catholic business community to their arguments on immigration. Archbishop Gomez attempted to address their concerns in a speech given to a meeting of Catholic business leaders this past February. He recognized that many immigrants were in the country illegally, commenting, “That bothers me. I don’t like it when our rule of law is flouted. And I support just and appropriate punishments.” But the present forms of punishment impose “penalties that leave wives without husbands, children without parents. We are deporting fathers and leaving single mothers to raise children on little to no income.” Archbishop Gomez added, “We have always been a nation of justice and law. But we have also been a nation of mercy and forgiveness.”

Archbishop Gomez’ arguments are somewhat different from the official statements from the USCCB. Those arguments are bogged down in the confusion of conflicting rights; the right of the immigrant to seek the necessary goods of life versus the right of the state to secure borders. Gomez, on the other hand, stresses the similarities between what America has always stood for and the character of Hispanic immigrants — he describes them as having “strong traditions of family and faith, community and hard work,” and most are Catholic and hold “deep conservative values.”

Gomez eschews the rights’ argument and stresses the benefits to our nation: “Today’s immigrants — like generations of immigrants before them — are the hope for tomorrow’s America. We need to find the political will to make them our fellow citizens. If we can, I know that together we will build an America that is stronger, more religious, and more moral.”

We think that Archbishop Gomez is articulating a kind of third way in the immigration debate, one that politicians would be smart to consider. White Catholics who lean Republican may not embrace the DREAM Act, but many have already grown tired of the conservative tirades against “amnesty.” They, like Gomez, want to find the “political will” to seek a solution that combines compassion, security, and economical viability.

Republican strategists should tread very carefully when it comes to immigration reform. The GOP already has the image of being anti-immigrant, and with the Catholic community becoming more and more Latino that could be translated into being anti-Catholic. It’s a mistake, for example, to respond to the Dec. 12 letter from the bishops as did the communications director of the group Federation for American Immigration Reform, who accused the Catholic Church of seeing “immigration as a recruiting tool.” This is the kind of comment that was flung around regularly in 2005 — it’s not only false but can be heard as containing a note of bigotry.

In an article published last week, we argued that the principles of Catholic social teaching can become a source in overcoming the policy deadlock to create sensible immigration reform with bipartisan support. By viewing immigration through the principle of the common good, the way to deal with the 11,000,000 undocumented immigrants can begin to resemble the scenario sketched by Archbishop Gomez. Does it really serve the common good to focus on punishing those millions who have broken the law, rather than recognizing the contributions they have made and will make to our country? After all, it was the irresistible human desire for freedom, happiness, and prosperity that led the original colonists to the land we now know as America.

Page: 1 2  

About the Author

Deal W. Hudson was chair of RNC Catholic Outreach and is the author of Onward Christian Soldiers: The Growing Political Power of Catholics and Evangelicals in the United States (Threshold). He is president of Catholic Advocate in Washington, D.C.

About the Author

Matt Smith, vice-president of Catholic Advocate, was Associate Director of Public Liaison responsible for Catholic outreach under President George W. Bush.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (146) |

JimP| 12.15.11 @ 7:27AM

Briefly, IMHO, the GOP needs to stand for the rule of law (enforcement of the illegal immigration laws), sealing the border (against criminals and illegal immigrants) and then hash out what to do about the illegals already here who “live in the shadows”. If Catholics and Latinos can’t accept this as GOP policy then they should by all means vote for Democrats. Pandering to a group who are already here in violation of the law (criminals), who have taken jobs away from U.S. citizens, who are a burden on the public assistance roles and who do not want to assimilate, only enjoy the “milk and honey” provided for them by others or afforded them by being in the U.S. ILLEGALLY and their sympathizers hasn’t worked in the past and is counterproductive in the long run.

I recall when the Catholic Church and all the other Christian denominations expected their parishioners to obey the law, not be parasites and not take advantage of others. In Mark 7:20-23, not only does Jesus Christ declare that both greed and envy are evil. He condemns both the greed of the rich man and the envy (a form of greed) of the poor man.

Timothy L. Pennell| 12.15.11 @ 10:34AM

The BORDERS must be SEALED. It's just that simple. You don't sit around in Leaky Boat, arguing about a Destination, until you FIX the Leak. When the Leak has stopped? Bon Voyage.

I, at first, was completely against what Linda Chavez had to say about this Situation. She wants us all to have Compassion, as our Towns and Cities start looking more and more like TIQUANA, every day. I wonder how much "Compassion" she would show, if the ILLEGALS had HAITIAN names, instead of Hispanic ones, and where she lives, started taking on all of the Looks and Smells of Porte Au Prince?

Having said all that. I still believe that we have to find a THIRD WAY. For the most part, these are Honest, Hard Working People, who have traveled a long way, to Provide for their Families. But, they are not alone. Our JAILS are full of their Countrymen. They bring DISEASE across the Border. They OVERWHELM our Schools, our Emergency Rooms, our Courts and Prisons. And they Overwhelm our Social Safety Net. That is why the Border needs to be SEALED, first.

Does the BISHOP leave his front door open, when he goes to bed at night? Does he leave his Car Running, with the doors unlocked, when he goes inside a building? Of course not. That would be STUPID. That would be DANGEROUS.

I care little for what Catholic Bishops have to say, these days. Their complicitness with every Left Wing Revolution that came down the Pike, and the ANTI-AMERICAN crap that they spread, all through the 70's and 80's was bad enough, but their Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil, where the MOLESTATION of little boys was concerned, has made what they have to say, not so important, anymore. Their Credibility Quotient, has diminished to almost ZERO. Plus, they're a Business, and they desperately need New Customers. Make no mistake.

Imagine, if Obama, and his Attorney General, hadn't flooded Northern Mexico with THOUSANDS of High Powered Automatic Weapons. These people, who only want to work, could live right there, along the Border. Well, not ALL of them. Only the Mexicans. You see, Mexico doesn't play any games, when it comes to ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Oh,no. They STOP you. They CHECK YOUR PAPERS. Then they LOCK YOU UP, then DEPORT YOU. You know. The same things that they're SUEING Arizona, for doing. And with the Gun Running Twins - Obama and Holder - joining them in their Suit.

Illegal Immigration is ILLEGAL. If you are Hungry, it's still Illegal to STEAL food. If you need Medicine, and you can't afford it, it's still Illegal to break in to the Pharmacy, to get the Drugs you need. You can't Rob a Bank, because you desperately NEED Money.

I hope I'm not gong too fast. We are still a sovereign nation. I believe that will end, if this THING is re-elected. But, I will leave you with that THIRD WAY. And, here it is.

Why don't these people FIGHT for their Freedoms? Everybody else has had to. WE had to. The people of France had to. Look at The Arab Spring. The Left loves that one.

Fact is, we have lost MILLIONS of our people, FIGHTING for this Country. For our way of life. Freedom ain't Free. Maybe if they FOUGHT, instead of Running Away, they could change their situation. They could save their homelands, bring about a New Dawn of Freedom for themselves and their Children. They could go HOME.

South America is always under attack by Leftist Rebel Forces, willing to DIE, in the name of Totalitarianism. Sometimes, with the Blessing of these very same Catholic Bishops. They believe in enslaving you. They will risk their lives, for the opportunity of Reigning over you, with an Iron Fist. Yet, you will not do the same, to be FREE?

I'm just saying.

JimP| 12.15.11 @ 10:50AM

Hey, Tim,

I'm not sure why you posted your comment as a reply to mine. We seem to be in agreement.

Best regards,

JimP

buckeyeman| 12.15.11 @ 10:55AM

Luv ya, Tim, but "Seal the Border" is a canard. It won't work unless the internal illegal alien issue is addressed. Here's my idea, but it will never happen:

1. Make it a felony to knowingly enter or remain in the US illegally. Require brief but mandatory incarceration (three months, perhaps). Use the incarcerated to clean up the trash their confreres have left on our southern border.
2. Require all who are presently in the country illegally to register and receive a biometric photo ID card within 90 days. Disney World uses a thumbprint ID system for its ticketing which is fast, cheap, and very accurate(anyone without at least. Failure to register involves a higher degree felony with longer incarceration. Those who decide not to register for whatever reason have 90 days to vamoose.
3. Those who register according to the law will then be granted a period of time (perhaps one to three years) to self deport. This is highly compassionate and allows these folks to get their affairs in order.
4. Establish a GUEST worker program for BRIEF entry (six months) into the US with a mandatory three month return to their home country before applying for another guest worker permit. Only workers with pre-arranged employment will qualify and only the worker (no wives, children, cousins, etc) and permits can only be applied for in person and in the individuals home country.
Use the same type of biometric photo ID for guest workers and require employers to e-verify with penalties for those who don't. US citizens would not need any more ID than is currently required. Why should I carry a "national ID card" simply because aliens have chosen to enter my country illegally?
5. Legislate so that only children of permanent legal residents will be eligible for automatic US citizenship. This probably could be done without changing the 14th Amendment.
6. Require a portion of guest workers' pay to be used for health insurance for emergencies only (remitted by their employers, not the employees). They can return to their home countries for elective treatment and ER's here are required to treat all comers anyway. Guest workers would not be eligible for any other federal or state assistance programs.
Our experience in Arizona and now Georgia informs us that illegal aliens are quite aware of the US laws which they violate daily and are quite mobile. Self deportation is simple and cheap. Building a fence will never work as long as there is no serious enforcement of internal immigration laws.
Notice the absence of fencing in my plan. Why? Because it won't be necessary except in limited areas where it already exists. "Catch and Release" is our current problem. Put some teeth in our laws regarding illegal entry and enforce them and the problem is solved

BTW, I quit going to mass with my wife due to the constant drumbeat for "a living wage". The catholic church (not catholic parishoners, necessarily) has become a collectivist front.

Goldberg| 12.17.11 @ 3:26PM

I like your thoughtfulnesss on the topic. Nonetheless, I think spending trillions to incarcerate these criminals will cost even more than they already cost us. A stout post, a well-tied laniard, and a single small caliber round to the head would be much more effective. First time, every time. Pass the law, give them ten days to get out, begin the executions. (It would take only a handful of nationally televised executions before the south-bound lanes would become completely full of cars.) We could close I.C.E. and D.E.A. a couple weeks later and stop wasting money on a fence. With all the tax money saved on welfare, schools, and free medical care (with no drop in revenue, since illegals pay no taxes) we could pay compensation for the down side--oh, wait, there would be no down side.

It's a shame these authors and Archbishop Gomez are in favor of widespread, violent criminality.

Stephanie| 12.15.11 @ 12:59PM

I agree with you 100%. The people who wrote this article don't live in California, I am sure of that, and they most likely have the income to support all the taxes they have to pay for the illegals to live here. They also most likely send their kids to private schools, that are not impacted by the millions of illegals that are holding every other student back.

Deal Hudson has no credibility anyway. Why won't he just go away?

Quartermaster| 12.15.11 @ 8:28PM

JimP, you pretty much nailed it. For the RCC this really isn't about justice or anything similar. It's about bringing new members because they are declining as the white population hear's the leftist drumbeat from the hierarchy. They have good company in the United Methodist Church, United Church of Christ, and other lamestream denominations that have consumed the leftist Koolaid.

Close the border and go after the lawbreakers as they reveal themselves. Many will self deport. The rest will be boxed in and we can deal with them as time goes on. Any country that can not control its borders is not sovereign and will not survive.

Alecto| 12.18.11 @ 8:01AM

The Catholic Church only expects ethnic Europeans to obey the laws, and only when they agree with the socialist redistributive agenda of the Catholic church. Why on earth would anyone believe after all that has occured, that the Catholic clergy is in any way, shape or form, respectful to the rule of law?

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 12.15.11 @ 7:30AM

"We agree with Archbishop Gomez when he says, "We need to find the political will to make them our fellow citizens. If we can, I know that together we will build an America that is stronger, more religious, and more moral."

Yes, the path to morality as defined by the Catholic Church is to encourage lawbreaking, theft of governments services to which you are not entitled as an illegal alien and theft of other government programs designed for U.S. citizens.
This is the same Catholic Church which ignored the sexual assaults of hundreds of male children for decades.

And we need that for our moral compass?

Jacob R| 12.15.11 @ 9:11AM

Who would you suggest? Some inbred Evangelical minister who puts on rock worship and wears hip shoes?

Why don't you defend something you pathetic little bigot. I'm sure I'd have a field day on whatever organizations you belong too!

I know I know..I'm sorry. You're unemployed and you're like the Ku Klux Klan, you need someone to take it out on that you're an inbred uneducated hick!

WJW| 12.15.11 @ 10:25AM

Such name calling by Jacob R. What do you think that says about Jacob R's reasoning skills? Sad and pathetic, really.

Alecto| 12.19.11 @ 1:54PM

It says that he was educated by the Catholic church sometime recently. Instead of the tower of intellectual tradition inhabited by the Chesterton, Thomas Aquinas and Augustine, the Catholic educational tradition now substituted pandering to those who lack the brainpower to learn English or indoctrination in social justice, i.e., bellying up to the taxpayer trough.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 12.15.11 @ 3:18PM

Hey Jacob R what's worse, the hip shoes, or a 10 year old male rape victim? As a liberal I'm sure your choice is simple.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 4:08PM

What is saddest is that cult members will defend their cults no matter how wrong, how false or how perverted they are.

It takes an act of God to open the eyes of the unbelieving.. causing them to see spiritually, that the Scriptures are indeed Truth, and the teachings of their cult are in opposition to the Word of God Himself.

Steve| 12.15.11 @ 10:04AM

Anyone who uses the name Stalin, a mass murderer, is an idiot and not worthy of any reply. Idiots like this will keep Obama in power.

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 12.15.11 @ 10:33AM

What will keep Obama in power is the inability of the Republicans to articulate a consistent policy on illegal immigration while allowing the Democrats an open door policy with no penalty.

If illegal immigration is acceptable, then why not just stop paying your taxes? Why not disobey any law on a mass basis and if enough people do it why bother enforcing the law?

Perhaps mass tax protests will come next when the public sees that you need is to disobey the law in mass.

And the only reason history has had a repeat of mass murders is due to group thought, the same thought process behind many phony liberal schemes, including climate change and acceptance of illegal immigration.

rssg| 12.15.11 @ 7:50AM

Yes, the GOP must shoot itself in the foot over illegal aliens, except that it doesn't. The GOP establishment, nearly all of them, are in favor of open borders, Spanish language and the continued colonizing of the USA by Latino (and Muslim) "immigrants" - really colonists.

It's the great, vast middle class of America, mostly white but some blacks too who are against turning our country into the 3rd world, Spanish speaking country.

Mexicans have a home; it's called "Mexico". Muslims have a home; it's called the Middle East. Chinese have a home; it's called China. Does this need repeating?

Fred| 12.15.11 @ 9:52AM

Wow, your ancestors were Native Americans? Oh wait, they came over the Bearing land bridge from Asia. Guess we have to send them back too. Moron.

rssg| 12.15.11 @ 10:15AM

Ah Freddy boy, I am a native American .......that is, I'm a native born American, that gives me the right to comment on immigration policy, when is too much, when there are too few, suitability of immigrants, etc. You think we the people don't have a voice, Freddy boy? Do you think every Mexican, every Latino, everyone in the world has a "right" to "migrate" to the USA? Yeah, you're a bright one. Think dingbat, think. If Americans don't have a say in who and how many people come here, then we don't really have a sovereign country with borders and laws.

Besides, Einstein, so called "Native Americans" weren't Americans at all, they were members of various tribes. Duh.

rssg| 12.15.11 @ 10:15AM

Ah Freddy boy, I am a native American .......that is, I'm a native born American, that gives me the right to comment on immigration policy, when is too much, when there are too few, suitability of immigrants, etc. You think we the people don't have a voice, Freddy boy? Do you think every Mexican, every Latino, everyone in the world has a "right" to "migrate" to the USA? Yeah, you're a bright one. Think dingbat, think. If Americans don't have a say in who and how many people come here, then we don't really have a sovereign country with borders and laws.

Besides, Einstein, so called "Native Americans" weren't Americans at all, they were members of various tribes. Duh.

Al Adab| 12.15.11 @ 11:30AM

Gentlemen:
An American is one who, from whatever origin myself included, accepts and adheres to the precepts of this nations' founding. Representative government, Liberty over tyranny the rule of law, capitalist economics and so on. Many born Americans have sold their birthright for a bowl of government pottage, but we must remember that those who come here through legal process to join the hostorical csuse this nation represents should be welcomed. Those who invade for other reasons should be questioned. Assimilation, not "diversity" for its own sake has always been the goal.

When a new citizen takes the oath that person rejects alligience to any foreign prince, potentate or ruler. Adherence to the American ideal is a matter of the highest priority. It is sad indeed that so many born here do not realize what they have, while so many immigrants understand all to well the value of being "American".

Al Adab| 12.15.11 @ 11:37AM

Sorry, I'll run my spell check next time. It is a matter of passion that overcane my deliberation.

richard ryan| 12.15.11 @ 12:02PM

Unlike immigrants from Europe in the 1800s, most Mexicans come to this country illegally to send money back to Mexico. They remain fiercly loyal to Mexico. While the first generation immigrants often maintain their Catholic values, the second generation Mexican immigrants are not doing so well. Check the rate of gang/criminal involvement in the young males. Check the rate of illegitimacy in the young females. The "hard working" immigrants of a generation ago have become the terrorizing gang members and welfare Moms of this generation. So the "contributions" to this country have mostly become negative ones.

Al Adab| 12.15.11 @ 2:15PM

Additionally Richard the criminal courts of Texas, NM, AZ, and CA are filled with cases of child molestation wherein the 25 or 30 year old migrant takes up with a 15 yr old girl. The migrant culturally does not comprehend that such an age is off limits in the U. S. as it is not in most countries to the south.

However, we should note than many persons from countries like Yemen, Iran, Iraq, Libya and others enter illegally also. It is highly unlikely that any such are simply looking for "jobs Americans won't do". The problem of this invasion is not limited to Mexican migrants. It is a much larger security problem than that.

Merlin| 12.15.11 @ 7:53AM

Not all illegal immigrants are equal and the Republicans will make a big mistake if they do not see that.

One immigrant has been here for years, raised a family, kept his kids in school, held jobs that are frequently low paying. He has respected our culture, learned English, and not abused our social services. It would be a loss to us to insist that he be deported.

The other has been here just a year or two, sell drugs, is an uninsured motorist, abuses emergency rooms, etc. He needs to go.

In general, the local authorities would make a better determination of who should be deported than some one size fits all policy generated by our best and brightest in DC.

I would propose that anyone local law inforcement interacts with could be asked for proof in citizenship and if he is not here legally, he has one appearance before a judge who will determine what is in OUR BEST INTEREST. If he is deported, he will be informed that returning to the US illegally will land him in an outsourced jail in Guatamala.

Illegals that it is in OUR BEST INTEREST to allow to remain should be given some sort of documentation, required to pay back taxes, etc.

The more that we can make this issue one that is dealt with locally, the better OUR INTERESTS will be served. However, the Federal government should immedially require that any illegal who is registered to vote remove himself from the rolls or face immediate deportation.

rssg| 12.15.11 @ 7:58AM

All illegal "immigrants' are ILLEGAL and BREAKING SEVERAL LAWS - illegal entry, identity theft, working while being here illegally, income tax evasion, drving wthout a (valid) license, no insurance, etc.

Enforce the law, which means, they are NOT allowed to work and they will self-deport. All 20 million illegal amigos will go back where they came from. Adios.

Horace| 12.15.11 @ 5:00PM

And just why should we leave this up to the discretion of one man, and not the law? Judges are not substitute for law. Judges execute the laws defined by the people, not legislate. And why should the illegal immigrant who fails to pay taxes be given a pass, when the delinquent citizen not only gets to pay taxes due, with interest, is subject to imprisonment? Should there be two sets of justice, one for the citizen and one for the illegal alien? I think not.

Merlin| 12.16.11 @ 6:37AM

rssg and Horace,

All valid points. However,

Illegals are not allowed to work now, but they do. The relationship between a willing worker and a willing employer is the second most natural in the world, and getting in the way of that relationship rather than facilitating it, creates a new set of problems. You do not even want to think about food prices if you could magically return all illegals to Mexico tomorrow. Do you think that unemployed Americans would be willing to work in agricultural jobs rather than draw unemployment?

The illegals have broken laws? Yes, but is an unenforced law really a law. The federal government and both parties, for different reasons have chosen not to enforce these laws and they are the ones to blame (and punish), not the employers and employees.

Of course, the judges would operate under the law. Some cases would be no brainers. (drug dealers) and some would be less clearcut. Would you deprive an American woman and her child of a husband and father just because he was driving without insurance?

Certainly, the border should be defended by force. Anyone who tries to cross the border with a weapon in his hand is an invaider, not an undocumented worker, and should be shot with one foot in Mexico and one in the US.

Our government and our Best and Brightest have created this problem and now, just as with the 15 trillion in debt, there are no painless, easy solutions.

Alecto| 12.19.11 @ 2:00PM

Gee, I'm a citizen and have lived here my entire life. Based on your logic, I shouldn't have to pay taxes, or obey any laws. After all, I've spent more than 25 years here, right?

Flawed logic will only endanger the U.S. further. Deport all illegals - they need to be held accountable for the consequences of entering this country without permission. They have benefitted from law-breaking and I don't care how many kids they have or when the kids were born, and if you think I care about being called "mean" or "uncompassionate", you should know that I was named after the Greek Fury of retributive justice.

martin j smith| 12.15.11 @ 7:57AM

Hold it right there buddy--The issue is illegal immigration ( or Hudson and Smith ) do you not recognize the issue of law ? There are many many other issues beyond that such as: Demographics and the nation as a whole. The economic costs for ILLEGALS --thus the general economic effects on the nation as a whole which is B-R-O-K-E. You know there is a brain warp in thinking that is simply not acceptable. What do I believe. ? This nation has a right to decide who comes and who does not. This nation has a responsibility to protect our current citizens and thus the borders North and South. This nation and its brilliant leaders has a responsibility to assure its current citizens a way out of economic morass and to defend us against infiltraitors --some of which are not interested in anything but to kill Americans. The issue of immigration is far too complicated for those who spew the usual bumper sticker sob story slogans of Political Correctness. The propaganda that the pro- ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION CROWD offer instead of clarifying and allowing for a reasoned approach blocks that kind of thinking dead in its tracks. The two most important issue that must determine our approach are the intertwining of our economic and national security needs. PERIOD.. !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Horace| 12.15.11 @ 8:18AM

We cannot afford to permanently add to the 47 percent of the workers in this country who pay no federal income taxes, furthering adding to the tax burden who do. Our intruders, if amnestied would likely be eventually eligible for Earned Income Tax Credits, another form of welfare, where workers not only get all of their tax contributions back as refunds, but get additional money from the Treasury that actual taxpayers contribute to. No nation on this planet has the ambition to import poverty and ignorance, but that's what the authors of this article would do. And don't worry that these people won't go after their entitlements, as their ethnic sponsors like La Raza will put them on the bus to the welfare office to get those benefits that supplement pay from their minimum wage jobs.

People like the authors love to tout the idea that illegal aliens are content to take jobs only Americans will do, but you'd have to be a fool to believe this, or take the illegal aliens themselves for idiots to believe that they are content to stay at the bottom of the economic ladder. We have millions of unemployed citizens, yet the authors, perhaps lacking any loyalty to the rightful stewards of this country, the citizens, would advocate conveying the benefit of continued employment to these people? How vile.

And what kind of parents would these expatriate illegal immigrants be if they didn't take their children with them? How does the fact of a border prevent them from returning with their children. How does birthing their children here relieve them of the right to bring up their children, be it here or in Latin America? Mexico recognizes children of their nationals who are born in this country as their own, so they wouldn't be stateless. And so what if these children do not know Mexico, the illegal crosser didn't know the U.S. before they made the mistake of invading this country. Just as the illegal alien became familiar with this country, their children can become familiar with Mexico, learning Spanish, as some of their parents learned English.

With every amnesty there comes a decrease in will of this country to enforce its laws, as the amnestied become advocates of those that follow. Follow the advice of these gentlemen and we'll have no borders at all. Rule of law has diminished with every amnesty, yet these clowns would suggest more of the same.

Horace| 12.15.11 @ 9:01AM

Correction: How does birthing their children here relieve them of the OBLIGATION to bring up their children,.......

And just how many Americans would abandon their Mexican born children in Mexico if they were deported from that country?

WJW| 12.15.11 @ 10:27AM

Excellent point. NO ONE is forcing spouses or childrent to STAY in the US after a illegal alien lawbreaker relative is deported.

Horace| 12.15.11 @ 8:25AM

@Merlin: The idea that these people would have to pay back federal income taxes is ludicrous, and just shows me how disingenuous their advocates are, for most don't make enough money to fall into a tax bracket that pays federal income taxes. These are the kind of people who on average receive all of their taxes back as refunds, and as citizens, they'd receive supplemental income from the Treasury in the form of Earned Income Tax Credits. These people are parasites to the actual taxpayer who is subsidizing them. Again, they are uneducated and unskilled, the kind of people who eventually become subject to the public dole. If they were otherwise, the rest of the industrialized world would be scrambling for their services.

Merlin| 12.16.11 @ 6:52AM

Citizens can also be parasites and illegals would also become parasites if it were allowed.

What needs to be done is it separate those that contribute to our economy and those who are a drain and keep those who it is IN OUR BEST INTEREST to keep, and blanket deportation will not do this.

Again, the government created this problem, not the workers or employers.

Would you let your family starve rather than cross an invisible line in the sand?

Stormzeye| 12.15.11 @ 8:30AM

In the last ten years, 14 million LEGAL IMMIGRANTS came to the United States. Our method of letting a limited number in every year allows for cultural integration and prevents "ghettoization". The brain-dead politicians of the GOP and media of all kinds fail to mention this fact. They would rather sensationalize the issue on the right as well as on the left. Our legal immigration system needs streamlining and a renewed emphasis on capturing the world's most talented professionals as well as its honest and hard working blue collar and even unskilled laborers (in limited numbers). The Catholic Bishops' talk about "social justice" is a red herring which amounts only to an emotional rather than a rational appeal, the last refuge of the progressive.

TrueBlue| 12.15.11 @ 6:53PM

To add, every other country in the world has a strict immigration policy. Australia for instance only allows in people who have experience with jobs that Australia thinks they need filled. Better yet, you ever wonder why you don't hear of illegal immigrant problems in China?

Also, many illegal "immigrants" have no wish to become legal citizens, let alone assimilate with American culture. In the end though I really don't care whether they want to assimilate or become citizens at all (cold-hearted I know). They are here ILLEGALLY. When somebody's first act upon entering this nation is to break the law, why would anyone expect them to EVER follow it? Apply for a green card if you want to live here while trying to gain citizenship (yes I know it doesn't always work out that well). America has enough law-breaking citizens without adding people not from here to the list.

Horace| 12.15.11 @ 8:56AM

One more thing. The Democrats want these illegal aliens amnestied for unprincipled purposes, to add to a constituency that they would offer up all kinds of false promises to, just for votes. Republicans would just be cutting their own throats by adding to the Democratic base, in the false hope of convincing Latino voters to vote Republican. Republicans would be no better than Democrats as they would also be surrendering all principle in caving to this extortion, and attempting to buy votes themselves.

The Sage of Mount Airy| 12.15.11 @ 8:58AM

The problem with this piece is that it's authors are guilty, intentionally or not, of conflating immigration with , illegal immigration. The "illegal" part is the rub. If the authors won't see the distinction, then they're no different than the Left in simply using the issue to some imagined political advantage. If they can't see it, then they're sloppy thinkers the editors of the Spectator should have sent back to rewrite before publishing.

sjccoach| 12.15.11 @ 9:00AM

Archbishop Gomez is like 99% of the Catholic hierarchy in this country. He is a leftist. Leftists like this Archbishop are destroying the Catholic Church. The leftist Bishops are for the lawbreaker and could care less about their faith or the Church. CINOs like the authors of this article love lefties and want their approval. These so called victims are here illegally and should be treated as what they are lawbreakers.

TrueBlue| 12.15.11 @ 6:54PM

Honestly the Pope needs to smack all of them down. Jesus followed the law, why can't they?

Timothy L. Pennell| 12.15.11 @ 9:01AM

The BORDERS must be SEALED. It's just that simple. You don't sit around in Leaky Boat, arguing about a Destination, until you FIX the Leak. When the Leak has stopped? Bon Voyage.

I, at first, was completely against what Linda Chavez had to say about this Situation. She wants us all to have Compassion, as our Towns and Cities start looking more and more like TIQUANA, every day. I wonder how much "Compassion" she would show, if the ILLEGALS had HAITIAN names, instead of Hispanic ones, and where she lives, started taking on all of the Looks and Smells of Porte Au Prince?

Having said all that. I still believe that we have to find a THIRD WAY. For the most part, these are Honest, Hard Working People, who have traveled a long way, to Provide for their Families. But, they are not alone. Our JAILS are full of their Countrymen. They bring DISEASE across the Border. They OVERWHELM our Schools, our Emergency Rooms, our Courts and Prisons. And they Overwhelm our Social Safety Net. That is why the Border needs to be SEALED, first.

Does the BISHOP leave his front door open, when he goes to bed at night? Does he leave his Car Running, with the doors unlocked, when he goes inside a building? Of course not. That would be STUPID. That would be DANGEROUS.

I care little for what Catholic Bishops have to say, these days. Their complicitness with every Left Wing Revolution that came down the Pike, and the ANTI-AMERICAN crap that they spread, all through the 70's and 80's was bad enough, but their Hear No Evil, See No Evil, Speak No Evil, where the MOLESTATION of little boys was concerned, has made what they have to say, not so important, anymore. Their Credibility Quotient, has diminished to almost ZERO. Plus, they're a Business, and they desperately need New Customers. Make no mistake.

Imagine, if Obama, and his Attorney General, hadn't flooded Northern Mexico with THOUSANDS of High Powered Automatic Weapons. These people, who only want to work, could live right there, along the Border. Well, not ALL of them. Only the Mexicans. You see, Mexico doesn't play any games, when it comes to ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Oh,no. They STOP you. They CHECK YOUR PAPERS. Then they LOCK YOU UP, then DEPORT YOU. You know. The same things that they're SUEING Arizona, for doing. And with the Gun Running Twins - Obama and Holder - joining them in their Suit.

Illegal Immigration is ILLEGAL. If you are Hungry, it's still Illegal to STEAL food. If you need Medicine, and you can't afford it, it's still Illegal to break in to the Pharmacy, to get the Drugs you need. You can't Rob a Bank, because you desperately NEED Money.

I hope I'm not gong too fast. We are still a sovereign nation. I believe that will end, if this THING is re-elected. But, I will leave you with that THIRD WAY. And, here it is.

Why don't these people FIGHT for their Freedoms? Everybody else has had to. WE had to. The people of France had to. Look at The Arab Spring. The Left loves that one.

Fact is, we have lost MILLIONS of our people, FIGHTING for this Country. For our way of life. Freedom ain't Free. Maybe if they FOUGHT, instead of Running Away, they could change their situation. They could save their homelands, bring about a New Dawn of Freedom for themselves and their Children. They could go HOME.

South America is always under attack by Leftist Rebel Forces, willing to DIE, in the name of Totalitarianism. Sometimes, with the Blessing of these very same Catholic Bishops. They believe in enslaving you. They will risk their lives, for the opportunity of Reigning over you, with an Iron Fist. Yet, you will not do the same, to be FREE?

I'm just saying.

albert constantine jr.| 12.15.11 @ 9:03AM

The immigration debate has many sub arguments. Unfortunately, the tendency amongst people to conflate or remain ignorant of facts coupled with the manipulation of emotion by those who seek political advantage continues to muddy the waters. There are more dimensions to the problems of illegal immigration than can be dealt with adequately in a single blog post, but the above article compels me to offer the following observations and suggestions.
Most legal immigrants are required to obtain sponsorship prior to admission, and pledge not to become a public charge for at least five years after admission. If not, the sponsor is supposed to be liable for any welfare benefits paid on behalf of the sponsored immigrant. This needs to be enforced, and extended to any dependents created.
An advantage that illegals have is that due to their illegal status, they (and their “sponsors”) have signed no such pledge. Through means which often include identity theft and anchor babies, they have unlawfully accessed the welfare largesse of the American taxpayer. For those institutions (such as the Catholic Church) that wish to see the conversion of illegal immigrants to some legal status, they need to understand that the resentment of the illegal comes not just because they broke our laws, but also because many were a net drain of our resources, to which they have no entitlement. As a condition for any legalization, not only should there be fines and costs which significantly exceed the expensive fees assessed to legal immigrants, there must be a requirement for restitution to the taxpayer for any of the benefits unlawfully accessed by them during their illegal status, along with the pledge not to become a public charge. For those employers who wish to lower production costs or institutions that wish to increase their numbers by importation of people born outside our borders should have to put their money where their mouths are, and stop asking the taxpayers to foot the bill for their recruiting drives. Until they are willing to be accountable sponsors, they have no standing in the debate.

Derek Leaberry| 12.15.11 @ 9:07AM

Given Deal Hudson's past history as a lecher and an adulterer, I do not see how anything he writes has any merit. Hudson came to fame as Karl Rove's Novus Ordo lackey until the former's disgraceful behavior forced Rove and George W. Bush to jettison Hudson. Now that Rove and Bush are also disgraced, Hudson's opinion about anything is doubly worthless.

Ryan| 12.15.11 @ 9:11AM

Part of me always though since the GWB years when the problem grew heavily was that the issue was a lot about not letting the other side come up with a solution on immigration rather then really finding one.

Dems didn't want Bush to get any credit for changes in immigration, so they blocked him from any real reform.

DTOM| 12.15.11 @ 9:11AM

The point that Messrs. Hudson and Smith, as well as the statist Republicans completely miss, is that it is fallacious to attribute their 2004 loss of support amongst Hispanic VOTERS is because they did NOT support illegal immigrants.

Face it, Hispanic VOTERS are legal immigrants. They followed the legal process to become citizens. When the Republicans, those supposed conservative, nation-of-laws types, go pandering for votes by advocating for amnesty they insult, legal immigrants. Maybe that insult is what caused the loss of Hispanic voter support.

How do I know this? I ran for office in a distric evenly split between white, black, a Hispanic voters. During my campaign, one Hispanic voter took me aside to vet me on the topic-he wanted to make sure that I was AGAINST amnesty, not FOR it! Has anybody ever done any polling of Hispanic voters on the subject? I've never seen it- I'm thinking this so-called 'common sense' concept has never been polled among VOTERS.

Stupid GOP strategists - they fall for every stupid idea the main stream media floats! Sheesh. Wise up, will ya!

PS My election? I lost - and I thank God every morning that I did. I voted with my feet.

DTOM| 12.15.11 @ 9:19AM

And another thing - the office I ran for was pretty much uninvolved with immigration issues, which I did not make an issue in the race. In the district there were almost 6 Democrats for every Republican. As an unashamed conservative Republican I got all the Republican votes and an equal number of Democrats and still lost 2:1.

My favorite moment? It was during the runup to the Iraq war, the reporter covering the race asked me my position on the issue, I could hear him laughing under his breath at how this would corner me. I responded,
"As your mayor, I won't declare war on anybody!" That didn't make it into the paper, of course...

hardcard| 12.15.11 @ 9:26AM

100% on spot!!!! Timothy P.

Walking Horse | 12.15.11 @ 9:37AM

So why have immigration laws at all? This is nonsense on stilts. Name one other nation on earth that is continuously pilloried because it *might* start controlling ingress through its borders ... right, not one. Reconquista .....

bill| 12.15.11 @ 9:51AM

Bible talks about compassion and the rule of laws.

America is a country is a rule of laws. Giving free pass to illegals contradicts that principle.

Enforce the law. Deport all illegals, and seal the border forever.

Majority of immigrants are uneducated and unskilled. They contribute nothing to our nation. They seek privileges and service, and ultimately overburden the community.

Europeans came to America, majority were educated and skilled, and they envisioned a nation based on Christian values, freedom, and free enterprise.

we have people coming from countries they hate America and the western civilization.

They detest America and refuse to assimilate and embrace America's core values.

Those Arabs, they think America belongs to them, and that they have every rights to disrespect America time to time.

We must act now before it's too late.

Stormzeye| 12.15.11 @ 11:35PM

Bill, I can't leave your ignorance unchallenged. When you say "Majority of immigrants are uneducated and unskilled" I will cut you some slack and assume you mean Illegal Immigrants. If you don't know the difference you are dumber than a bag of doorknobs. If you are referring to Immigrants in general you have chosen to ignore such immigrants as Einstein, Andy Grove, Elia Kazan, the list goes on and on. That list doesn't even include those children of two uneducated immigrants such as myself who hold advanced degrees and spawned two kids who each have post-graduate degrees. And we're all as American as can be.

Bob K.| 12.15.11 @ 9:56AM

This article is a special pleading by two people who work with a business closely connected to the Catholic Church. They are well aware that the Catholic Church in the United States has a serious demographic problem in maintaining the number of members that worship with it. Many Catholic Churches have closed throughout the country. There is a shortage of Priests. Nuns are disappearing. Catholic schools have been closing. Catholic Hospitals have been closing. Tuition is rising in Catholic Colleges. The young have lost faith.

They see this as a way to fight the demographic decline and they know that they must cut a deal with Ceasar to slow this decline and hopefully the loss of faith of their Church members that is really causing this decline.

They have forgotten their Church's mission and now use "Social Gospel" arguments made famous by numerous 19th and early 20th century laymen of liberal and progressive bent to argue morality based on governmental laws rather than God's Law.

JimP| 12.15.11 @ 10:05AM

Bob, my impression is that it has been the "social gospel" aka Liberation Theology approach that has driven so many away from all the mainstream denominations. Especially the Episcopal Church which is more of an avante garde new age cult these days, IMHO. What are your thoughts?

Bob K.| 12.15.11 @ 12:30PM

Jim P.
I think that this is a problem inherent in the continued movement of the West over the last 100 years or so to more and more democracy. John Lukacs observed that Wilson's phrase of "making the world safe for democracy" should really be turned around to "making democracy safe for the world." He further defined Democracy as "not rule of the people or by the people, but, really and actually, rule in the name of the people." (paraphrased here) Combine that with the increase and efficiency in the methods of manufacturing publicity and the fascination we have with "celebrity" and it is more and more difficult to retain old values.

Religions like Episcopalianism whose believers are often close to the seats of political power in our democracy (Yes-I know the USA is a Republic but it has been getting more and more democratic over the years! Especially when you consider that all our laws and regulations promulgated by huge bureaucracies are made and enforced in the name of the people!) are most susceptible to these blandishments.

PolishKnight| 12.15.11 @ 11:28AM

One of the things that always struck me as strange was that when I drove though DC, I saw a number of blacks going to chuch. Yet, these residents of DC have the least traditional Christian values on the planet with unwed motherhood at a massive 70%.

Consider Obama who sat through church and knows little about Christianity beyond a welfare state and bashing whites and America. What's the point? Such churches are basically non-profit leftist political meeting houses (with the irony being that they bash Jerry Falwell for the crime of mixing church and state.)

bill| 12.15.11 @ 10:09AM

Catholicism preaches rule of laws, not anarchism or socialism.

Giving freebies to illegals is unconstitutional and immoral.

Obama is the mastermind behind the immigration fiasco and that the notion that those illegals will vote for him and so give them citizenship.

jim s| 12.15.11 @ 10:21AM

Yes Bishop Gomez, people who have broken immigration laws are treated like criminals because they are. What don't you understand about that?

Al Adab| 12.15.11 @ 10:37AM

Illegal migrants, from whatever country, and many hail from such wonderful places as Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, China, Phillipines, as well as central and South Americas, are simply migrants. We harm our position in the debate by allowing others to define it as an Immigration issue. It is not.

Simply put, it is an issue of defending the country from invasion. That is one of the powers delegated to the federal government by the states. Do the states retain the right to act on their own behalf in the face of federal refusal and blatant opposition to defense? Clearly yes. The debate needs to be defined as what it is, a matter of national security.

When Pancho Villa and his bandits invaded the US, Wilson sent the army into Mexico after him. Faced with invasion by armed bands today, the federal administration position is what?

The GOP needs to, and historicaly does, welcome immigrants from wherever they may hail, while making clear that the issue is not about immigration but illegal and dangerous migration. What might the fourth century Roman Gauls thought of the Germans moving across the Rhine into Roman territory? In 350 AD do you suppose they thought that by 410 those very people seeking opportunity would sack the city of Rome itself?

betwyan| 12.15.11 @ 11:44AM

Sorry but LEGAL immigrants far outnumber ILLEGAL ones. The constanct, never-ending line of LEGAL immigrans is a problem too and most Americasns favor reducing all forms of immigration. Why? Because we don't want to lose our country, our culture and our history to huge numbers of non-Western "foreigners".

Is that "racist"? Even if it is, I don't care.

Al Adab| 12.15.11 @ 4:39PM

betwyan:
No that is not racism as immigrants (legal ones) come in all shapes, sizes and colors. What the legal immigrant does is agree to abide by and obey the laws of the U. S. and to forego allegience to foreign governments. Those are things the illegal migrant does not do.

Whether legal immigration should be further restricted is a matter for public debate and legislative action. It is the scale of the invasion by illegal migrants, many bent on doing harm, that is of immediate concern for national security reasons. The Spanish speaking Libyans and Iraqis apprehended at the border should give us pause.

C Smith| 12.15.11 @ 10:46AM

Political affiliations have historically been key to Roman's agendas:

In May 1941, the Independent State of Croatia was established by a Nazi puppet regime, the Ustaša. Archbishop of Zagreb Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac immediately blessed the regime and offered prayers for Ante Pavelic its leader. Stepinac even arranged for Pavelic to be personally received by Pope Pius XII in Rome. As “Father Confessor” to the Ustashi, Stepinac declared, "God, who directs the destiny of nations and controls the hearts of Kings, has given us Ante Pavelic and moved the leader of a friendly and allied people, Adolf Hitler, to use his victorious troops to disperse our oppressors... Glory be to God, our gratitude to Adolf Hitler and loyalty to our Poglavnik, Ante Pavelic." And with Stepinac’s blessing the Independent State of Croatia immediately instigated a pogrom, a pogrom to exterminate Serbian Christians!

PolishKnight| 12.15.11 @ 11:22AM

This argument boils down to: If Republicans want to win elections, they need to become Democrats. The problem with this is that there already is a Democrat party and Hispanics will vote for it because the Democrats promise them race based entitlements. Amnesty would create a flood of Hispanics demanding benefits and quitting their no-future low-wage jobs (can't say I blame them.)

In the meantime, the Democrats are talking openly about dropping any pretense of caring about working class white males since they have been scapegoating us for the past 4 decades and promising benefits to everyone else at our expense.

John Amnesty McCain tried this route and look how it worked for him. His daughter shrieked that the evil "tea partiers" didn't show up to vote for him. How DARE they think that elections are about their personal interests rather than her father and his Democrat friends?

Looks like Obama will get elected again. Hopefully, they'll pass some massive tax increases to redistribute wealth from "rich" hotel owners, farmers, etc. hiring illegals and give them to Hispanic special interest groups. One thief deserves another. I'll be laughing on the sidelines.

Thomas Aquinas| 12.15.11 @ 11:25AM

And the gun that the GOP uses to shoot itself in the foot will be supplied by Fast and Furious.

BruceT| 12.15.11 @ 11:42AM

Enforce the law, period. Begin by deporting 1,0o0 then 10,000 then 100,00 ......... and tens of millions will go home on their own. They remain here because they know we lack the political will to enforce the law.

Liberalism (in both parties) is a mental disorder.

Derek Leaberry| 12.15.11 @ 11:54AM

Exactly.

Pat| 12.15.11 @ 2:20PM

BruceT: recently, the Wall Street Journal has reported a drastic fall-off in illegal immigration. Higher numbers of arrests are one reason but the WSJ also cited our severe economic recession, lower Mexican birth rates and more economic opportunities opening up in Mexico. So, it’s not about religion or compassion after all, it’s only about money, what a surprise. Helping the world’s poor isn’t our duty as citizens despite what the politicians say during the election spin cycles. As the out migration continues, we don’t tax the property of those who wish to leave and return to Mexico, even though they benefitted financially during their stay as immigrants, legal or illegal. That’s not our way, we Americans are the world’s designated mugging victims and our politicians are the cops who promise to protect us but prefer the safety of their donut shops.

BruceT| 12.15.11 @ 4:16PM

Pat - the WSJ has a looong history of supporting high immigration, even no borders, no laws - come one, come all so I don't believe much of what they say on the topic.

The numbers are still accurate: about one thousand people each day cross our southern border. About one third are caught by the Border Patrol and sent back but of course they simply try again the next day or week. Yes birth rates in Mexico are coming down some but they still would like to send another 20-30 million more of their peasants here. Are you good with that? What they are doing is relieving their welfare system by encouraging their poorest of the poor to "go north".

PolishKnight| 12.16.11 @ 9:16AM

Sounds like we need to show a Michael Moore documentary in Spanish to the illegals about how great the welfare state is up NORTH in Canada: FREE healthcare, FREE education, and FREE housing! It's such a great country! Oh, wait, let's see what it's like after 40 million Mexicans move up there...

Seek| 12.15.11 @ 12:09PM

Typical Catholic Church open-borders crapola. The truth is we CAN afford to "alienate" the Hispanic vote by advocating patriotic immigration reform. A high portion of Hispanics aren't even citizens and hence aren't eligible to vote. The bloc we can't afford to alienate is a far larger (for the time being anyway) entity: "the white vote." Most churchmen, being terrified of being "racist," won't admit as much.

PolishKnight| 12.16.11 @ 9:20AM

Let's examine this paradigm for a moment: If legal Hispanics are voting against the GOP due to their stance on illegal immigration, that implies that these Hispanics are racist and unlikely to vote for the GOP anyway. It's funny that many criticize the GOP as racist for being comprised mostly of whites voting against illegal immigration.

There was a leftist Simpsons episode where they portrayed a bunch of Scandanavians invading Springfield and then doing all the construction work and the townsfolk resenting them. Of course, the Simpsons didn't show the Scandanavians forming gangs, flooding hospitals with anchor babies, and shoplifting the stores dry.

betwyan| 12.15.11 @ 12:14PM

Question: With a bad economy and high unemployment forecasted for years to come, what exactly is the rationale for allowing more, more and more foreigners to immigrate to our country?

Answer: Libralism. More specifically, Big Government needs more and more and more peasants to devise new social spending programs on and thus allow politicians to run on and win elections promising more social entitlements.

axbucxdu| 12.15.11 @ 12:16PM

My father was a naturalized U.S. citizen. So is my wife. I would ask the good bishop what the hell is so hard about accepting and obeying the law of these United States?

betwyan| 12.15.11 @ 12:17PM

Who actually thinks poor, lowly educated Latino peasants are going to vote less government, lower taxes? Ha, ha, ha, ha........sounds like Beltway thinking to me!

Over the past 25 yrs or so, the average immigrant to the USA is a dirt poor, grade school educated Latino.

Good luck with rebuilding industry, NASA, going back to the moon or Mars. We are becoming a nation of leaf-blowers.

L. Ross| 12.15.11 @ 12:45PM

Quoting the authors, "It's a mistake (to accuse) the Catholic Church of seeing "immigration as a recruiting tool." This is the kind of comment that was flung around regularly in 2005 -- it's not only false but can be heard as containing a note of bigotry."

I find this reasoning to be risible.

The thrust of the article is that Latin Americans are good, hard working Catholics and that we need more of them in our population. Note that they don't address the wonders of our Asian immigrants, how well they are competing academically and in the work place. How law abiding they are and what valuable additions they have become to the U.S. population. No, they are merely singing the praises of a largely Catholic migration, a migration of the least educated and least successful of the Mexican/Latin American population. After all, if why would anyone risk a dangerous desert crossing into a semi-hostile land where the most likely outcome is overcrowded housing and a future that holds only days standing around Home Depot hoping for someone to hire them for a small sum for the afternoon. If you are sharp and a go getter, there are opportunities in Mexico. Sadly, we are not getting the go getters. However, we are getting faithful Catholics, which seems to be the only important point to these authors.

If the Catholic Church wants to improve its standing in the view of Protestant and secular America, they will have to abandon this kind of transparent doublespeak and either plainly say "we support completely unrestricted immigration for Catholics" or "we support the rule of law". The authors efforts to have it both ways are both disingenuous and insulting. I would like to say I expect better from the Catholic church, but who am I kidding.

The Big E| 12.15.11 @ 12:46PM

To everyone whose response to the immigration is, "Enforce the Law!" ask yourself this - what is the law?

In many States, adultery is illegal. When's the last time you heard of someone being prosecuted for adultery?

In many of those States, adultery includes fornication. Do you suppose those States are prosecuting all their unwed mothers? What about the fathers of those children born out of wedlock? If the law says fornication is a crime, shouldn't we be locking all those unwed mothers and fathers up in prison?

Speeding is illegal, so why is the average speed on many interstates and other roads higher than the posted speed limit? How many speeding drivers will an average traffic cop watch pass before deciding to pull one for speeding?

Regardless of how the law is written on the books, the law is actually what those tasked with enforcing it are willing to enforce. Laws against adultery and fornication go unenforced because those who would otherwise be tasked with enforcing them have the decision, conscious or otherwise, to not prosecute violations of those laws. Laws against speeding are not strictly enforced because, because while we want to maintain the illusion of control over the highways, the majority of people want to break that law, and thus do, with the result that there are more people violating the law than law enforcement can catch.

It is the same with the "law" of immigration. Those tasked with enforcing that law have, for generations, chosen for whatever reason, not to enforce the law. They have, from time to time when it becomes an issue, cracked down in a few highly publicized instances, just as your local police may for a time crack down on speeders in a given neighborhood where where there has been a lot of complaints or a high profile accident, but the reality is that there has been no actual, enforced law against immigration. It has been the actual policy of the USA for several administrations to allow anyone who can get across the border to remain in the country so long as they otherwise obey the law, despite laws on the books the contrary.

We may not like that, but that is the reality. Now we have millions of people here who have woven themselves into communities to one extent or another, who have children who can not fully integrate themselves into US society because of the "law" - or who must live in fear that at any moment, their mother and father will be taken from them and shipped to a foreign land - but who would never be able to integrate themselves into their "home" society either.

Personally, I will NOT support any policy which says we should deport a person who has lived here for years, has - except for the fact of their presence - obeyed the law, has a family here which may include American citizens, and who supports that family.

I will NOT support any policy that says to a child, "your father or mother must leave the country and leave you behind."

I will NOT support any policy which says to a teenager who crossed the border with his family at the age of 2, "you may have been fully raised as an American, you may have no memory of where you were born, no connections in that society, no means of support in that society, and you may not even speak the language of that society on a level above that of a 6 year old, but that doesn't matter, you have to leave and go back there anyway."

I will NOT support any policy which creates a permanent, legal underclass of people who can stay here and work, but who will forever as a matter of law be deemed legally inferior to others. We went down that road once in this country and the result was a civil war. It's foolish to repeat that mistake.

I WILL however, support a policy which says, "If you're going to stay here, you've got to integrate yourself into OUR society. You've got to register so we know you're here and can keep up with you. You've got to learn to speak English, work and pay taxes like everyone else, and obey the law. You have to support your American children if you have them, and you have to educate your children like everyone else, and they have to be educated to become AMERICANS. Or else you must leave."

I WILL support a policy that makes it a crime to harbor or employ an alien who does not comply with the policy above.

Now, call me whatever you wish, I personally do not care. But before you do, take a look in the mirror and ask yourself what laws you have broken, whether you were ever caught or not, and whether those are laws that are actually enforced or not. Then if you find you are without sin, cast all the stones you wish.

betwyan| 12.15.11 @ 2:14PM

Nice try but your endless verbiage amounts to nothing. We have an immigration system. Here's how it works: You apply for a visa in your own home country. If you get one, you have permission to come here; if you don't get one, you don't have permission to come here.

Gee, that's so hard to understand..........

The Big E| 12.15.11 @ 3:48PM

If that's how the system worked there wouldn't be millions of illegals in the country now. That's how the law is written on the books. That's how the system probably SHOULD have worked all along. But the facts on the ground prove beyond doubt that it has NOT worked that way, and no-one in authority has done anything of substance to make it work that way.

JimP| 12.15.11 @ 5:19PM

Come on Big E. Your argument is tantamount to a perpetrator arguing he shouldn't do time for robbing the 7-11 since the COPs weren't there to stop him. Hey, they didn't enforce the law, so it's OK that I broke it, got away with the money and only got caught after the fact because some Gringo turned me in. I don't buy your argument.

L. Ross| 12.15.11 @ 2:41PM

On the surface, your effort to compare enforcement of immigration law with laws regarding speeding and adultery/fornication seem reasonable at first blush, but I disagree for the following reasons.

Speeding is kept in check through enforcement. Yes, I often cruise down the highway at about 10 miles over, reasonably confident that I won't get a ticket. However, if I was doing 30 miles over, I would only be counting on luck regarding police placement, not leniency. If highway speeds increased to the point that accidents increased dramatically, you can bet your bottom dollar that enforcement would increase and speeds would come down. Similar action has not occurred vis-a-vis illegal immigration. It has become such a vast problem that the majority of the electorate is desperate to fix our broken system. Our elected officials have for years been thumbing their noses at those they represent, and now people are fed up and demanding change. Tragically, the problem has become so large that any fix will be very painful for our nation as a whole. That doesn't mean that nothing should be done.

Regarding adultery/fornication, the point of those practically unenforcable laws is not to imprison people for their private behavior, it is to publicly strengthen our commitment as a nation to a strong family. Aldutery and unwed motherhood do not strengthen families in America, they destroy them. I hope you are not in favor of broken families and fatherless children.

Your discussion of the children of immigrants shows a profound lack of contact with them. Trust me, an illegal immigrant child is raised in America by illegal immigrant parents grew up in a household speaking flawless Spanish. His English may be excellent, but frequently those kids function as interpreters for parents who are unable or refuse to learn English and integrate into American society.

Your comparison of our underclass illegal population to slavery is specious. Slaves had no choice regarding their lot in life. Illegal immigrants volunteer to join an underclass in America. If they wish to have full rights of citizenship, they are free at any time to return to their country of origin. Trust me, no one is keeping them here against their will. Additionally, their children will be full citizens of the United States. Hardly comparable to slavery if you ask me.

Your finishing tagline, quoting Christ regarding the woman caught in adultery, is disingenuous and unhelpful. After all the punishment for adultery in Mosaic law was death by stoning. No one is talking about stoning illegal immigrants. Using your standards, no laws should be enforced as no one is without sin. I hope you are not advocating descent into lawlessness, but that is the logical result of your reasoning

The Big E| 12.15.11 @ 4:47PM

L.Ross, I will address your points one by one:

1. "Speeding is kept in check through enforcement. Yes, I often cruise down the highway at about 10 miles over, reasonably confident that I won't get a ticket."

Exactly my point. You cruise down the highway at 10 over, not because you are some criminal or scofflaw who doesn't care about obeying the rules, but because you know the actual rules are different than they appear on the book. The speed limit sign may say 55, but you know in reality that it is actually 65 as it is enforced, and so you, a law-abiding citizen, feel no guilt about driving 63 in a 55 despite the fact that doing so is in violation of the law as it is written.

Immigration has been enforced in a similar manner. The written law says one thing, but the way in which the law is enforced leads otherwise law abiding people to break the law without feeling guilty. Just as you break the speed limit without feeling guilty.

2. "Regarding adultery/fornication, the point of those practically unenforcable laws is not to imprison people for their private behavior, it is to publicly strengthen our commitment as a nation to a strong family."

Bull. When those laws were passed their purpose was to prevent adultery and fornication. Just as when the immigration laws were passed, their purpose was to control immigration.

Laws against adultery and fornication COULD be enforced. (Not everyone who violates them could be caught, but not every drunk driver or drug dealer can be caught either, that doesn't mean those laws shouldn't be enforced, it just means that some people will get away with breaking the law.) The adultery and fornication laws could be enforced, but those tasked with enforcing them have CHOSEN - consciously or otherwise - not to enforce them, just as those tasked with enforcing the immigration laws have CHOSEN - consciously or otherwise - not to enforce them as well.

"I hope you are not in favor of broken families and fatherless children."

Of course not. But I'm also not in favor of prosecuting un-wed mothers for fornication based on valid, written laws which haven't been enforced for generations. Are you?

3. "Your discussion of the children of immigrants shows a profound lack of contact with them. Trust me, an illegal immigrant child is raised in America by illegal immigrant parents grew up in a household speaking flawless Spanish."

Actually, my experience in representing literally hundreds of illegal immigrant children in the juvenile and criminal courts, as well as their parents in criminal, domestic, and civil courts has taught me otherwise. If they came into the country at a very young age, their Spanish is not flawless, it is stunted, because from the age of 5 or 6, they are in a school situation where they learn English from their teachers and peers.

I will grant you that may be different in a school system where they are taught in Spanish and have only Spanish-speaking peers, and I am aware that such systems do exist. But where I live, they have to learn English in school because the only classes taught in Spanish are Spanish classes - which is fine with me. If they're going to be here, they need to be speaking English.

3. "Your comparison of our underclass illegal population to slavery is specious."

As things stand right now, maybe so. But many proposals for dealing the immigration issue propose creating a system where an illegal can remain, but can never gain citizenship. While not slaves, they would be in a similar position in that they would be in a society where they could never achieve the legal status of all those around them. They would be an true underclass.

But if I could backtrack a bit, there might be a better comparison from our own history. If I recall, one of the forces driving the founders to revolution was that, despite the fact they were subjects of the British Crown, they could never be considered equal to other subjects of the British Crown. They could not be represented in Parliament (remember "Taxation without representation?") let alone sit in Parliament, they could never rise above a certain rank the in British military - regardless of their ability. They were willing to die to escape such a system, and when they escaped it, they did so with a document which avowed that "All men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights." They didn't live up that ideal themselves, and we fought a civil war several decades later because they didn't. Now, what some propose would essentially create system similar to the one our founders were willing to die to escape. Such a system would create a class of people who are legally inferior to their neighbors. I believe that is wrong, I believe it is in direct contravention of the founding principles of this Country, and I am opposed to it.

4. My comment referencing the woman caught in adultery was directed to those who want the laws on the books strictly enforced - except for those laws which they themselves like to violate. That's hypocrisy, which I believe was Christ's point as well.

I am not in any way, "advocating dissent into lawlessness." What I am saying is that the actual law regarding immigration is not the same as the written immigration law, just as the actual law regarding speeding, adultery, and fornication, is not the same as the written law.

The reality is that for decades, the US government has welcomed "illegal" immigrants with open arms, providing them with most of the perks of citizenship. We let it be known through our inaction that there would be no legal consequence for coming here in violation of the written law, just as we let be known there would be no legal consequence for committing adultery, or engaging in fornication, or speeding less than 10 mph over the speed limit.

I'm not saying that what was done back then was right, it wasn't. But I see no reason to compound those errors by trying to go back in time (hich we cannot do) and undo what was done (or more accurately, to do now what was left undone). We cannot un-ring the bell.

Dan| 12.15.11 @ 12:54PM

Gomez cares more about increasing the number of catholics in the U.S., than he cares about the U.S.

Pat| 12.15.11 @ 1:12PM

OK, who put the psychotropic drugs in the Holy Water? After having been led down the garden path on abortion by the politicians, Catholic Bishops have turned their attention to immigration reform once again; coincidentally just before another presidential election cycle begins. During the late 60’s and early 70’s, American Catholic bishops were enraptured with LBJ’s Great Society promise to abolish poverty in America. The concept of helping the poor with other people’s money through government mandated charity was a siren call to Catholic clergy but the Democrats bundled involuntary taxpayer charity with abortion rights and made it a package deal – capturing the women’s vote was their political target.

At that time, American Catholics were convinced abortion was wrong in the eyes of God but apparently so was the gulf between rich and poor. Heck, in those days, even Ted Kennedy was firmly opposed to abortion on demand and said so publicly. So, Catholic bishops reluctantly threw their support behind the Dems in order to keep LBJ’s Great Society concept alive and well – who knew then what opening the door to abortion rights would bring about – certainly not the Catholic Bishops. Their position was that a little compromise on abortion rights was distasteful but politically necessary – whoa, that was a very stupid mistake which they now freely admit.

But helping the poor with other people’s money remained firmly within the Bishops’ game plan. In 2005, American and Mexican Bishops laid out their “principles” concerning immigration in a joint letter titled “Strangers, no longer”. The gist of their 5 principles was that people from poor countries have a God given right to migrate and people in supposedly “rich” countries must allow them in.

To avoid horrifying their wealthy contributors, the Bishops threw in Principle # 3: “Sovereign nations have the right to control their own borders”. They further elaborated on this principle by conceding that nations have a right to control their borders, although they neglected to specify whether this right was God given or just something they made up. But, they warned us, nations have no right to control their borders solely for the purpose of preserving their wealth. In less flowery and vague terms, America must allow any foreign national entry and assume the burden of caring for these self-nominated immigrants. And, no, the Bishops didn’t admonish these foreign nationals on what they owed to the legal citizens of their chosen country – presumably nothing is owed to American citizens by immigrants, it’s a one way street as we and the naïve Europeans have come to discover.

Should we doubt the sincerity and motives of these Bishops? Mexicans and their southern neighbors, 70% Catholic by conservative estimates, find migration to America easiest, they’re not able to migrate to Russia which has plenty of room for them and could certainly use many new citizens due to their precipitous population decline. Nor are these Bishops strenuously advocating the Mexicans should be “helped” financially by America in their migration to countries other than the United States, we are their destination of choice and therefore we must allow it. So, we can’t offer them a one way ticket to Russia or Australia, it’s “California or Bust” and presumably an unintended boon to California’s parishes. However, after the abortion fiasco, perhaps it would be wise to doubt the wisdom of these Bishops, their track record on embracing common sense solutions is deeply flawed.

L. Ross| 12.15.11 @ 2:05PM

Well said. However, I believe it is a fully "intended boon" to our border state parishes.

Another point, as I made a few posts above yours is that they are not supporting non-Catholic immigration. No support for the Asian community which is actually doing very well at integrating into America and enriching our national fabric. No, the only immigrants they care about are Catholic. They are on a recruiting drive because the Catholic church, like tired mainline liberal Protestant churches in America, is dying surprisingly rapidly while more consevative, evangelical churches are growing, vibrant, and young.

Pat| 12.15.11 @ 2:51PM

L. Ross: You’re correct of course, it was a clumsy attempt on my part at being facetious. The Bishops don’t mention the direct benefits to their Church within their open letters and lectures on the value of unrestricted migration. Blunt candor and moral superiority apparently do go well together. And you were right about our Asian immigrants as well, they amaze many native born Americans with their strong family values and commitment to economic self-reliance.

Catholics, due to past waves of immigration from Europe, were once strongly Democratic Party in outlook and that, in turn, encouraged them to confuse the Democratic Party platform with what God supposedly intends. But, like the Episcopalians, the Catholic leaders can’t overcome their theological confusion which is why the evangelical churches, who don’t confuse God with politics, are on the rise.

Bill| 12.15.11 @ 1:18PM

Gomez is playing politics, he does not care about American citizen at all.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 1:57PM

Catholicism is one huge cult and convenient hide-out for anyone who wants a comfortable Religion rather than Christ Himself. The Religion has never repented of its false teachings since its very beginning.

Those same false teachings that say that Bible believing Christians are frauds and heretics. The ones that they used to torture and kill thousands upon thousands of them, or anyone who refused to bow the knee or kiss the ring of the filthy Papists.

It is no surprise that the most corrupt, polluted Religion other than Islam on the face of the earth is pandering to their base.. the least among us, the poor believers, who Jesus loves indeed but He would not tell them to come here illegally, NO, He would not, nor would they lie to them or coddle them.

These false teachers and bearers of a different gospel already have their reward. It will be with the liars and hypocrites.

In truth, they are not loving these people, they are HATING them.

"You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:

"'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.'" Mt. 15:7-9.

Repent, false teachers, and believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ, beginning in Mk. 1:1.

Clint| 12.15.11 @ 2:19PM

Uh Oh !

American Spectator's Resident Anti-Catholic Joisey White Trash Bigot Broad, Margie Is In The Building.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 2:24PM

Prime example of what I said.

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 2:43PM

BIGOT ALERT!!!! BIGOT ALERT!!!!
The resident bigot, Margie, also known as the Village Idiot by some, has crawled from under her rock again. The mere mention of the word Catholic sets her mouth foaming.
Still upset with Ken and taking out your frustrations on this site with your lunatic rantings, Bigot Margie.
Go back under your rock.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 2:58PM

ENEMY OF THE CROSS ALERT!! ENEMY OF THE CROSS ALERT!!

The enemies of the Cross of Christ reject the written Words of God and are in rebellion towards Him by so doing.

They also despise Bible believing Christians and DEMAND they disappear from the blogosphere for speaking the biblical truth which reveals the lies of their cult.

They indeed wish they could kill us, if they could.
From the very beginning this is the spirit of the Roman Catholic cult~ shut them up~ do away with those pesky heretical Christians, for they refuse to bow the knee to the Popery but instead CLING to the Word of God.

And yet.. and yet the gates of Hades has not prevailed upon the church of God and of His Christ.

Jesus is LORD.
Repent or perish, liar!

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 3:19PM

Enemy of the Cross?? Wow, you are truly a dimwit. Is that the best your bigoted tiny mind can come up with?
I don't want you to disappear or kill you. You are way too much fun to laugh at as an example of a stupid bigot. Nobody could make up the lunatic comments you post.
Keep posting, moron. You are the best example of what is not a Christian.
Still can't accept that Jesus is God, right idiot?

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 3:38PM

See below Scripture, haughty Religious Idolator and hypocrite, for you are a prime example of what it speaks of: a mocker of His Words and a hater of those who speak them.

Repent, liar.

"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." Rev. 21:8.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 3:58PM

You are the best example of what is not a Christian.
Still can't accept that Jesus is God, right idiot?"

You are the fool amongst fools, the liar amongst liars, the Religious BIGOT against the Word of God amongst Religious BIGOTS.

For you are the one who needs to repent for you are a blatant liar and therefore in rebellion and who will need to explain to God how it is that you reject His Words.

You presume to say what I do not believe and yet you, the flaming hypocrite accept against the WORD of GOD that Mary was born without SIN placing her as God?
Ha!

The Bible which I am accused of being an Bible Idolator by your pal the Reprobate Ken here, tells Christians all we need to know about Who Jesus is.
Christians believe the Bible, as is the Will of God but this is not good enough for you Papist liars.

I take my stand with the millions of Bible believing Christians who were murdered by men like you~ liars whose consciences are seared~ whp put to death my brethren for six centuries because they, like me, took their stand on HIS WORDS and refused to bow the knee, or "GET LOST" by men like yourself, and indeed the gates of Hades has not succeeded or prevailed against His true church, which is His Body~ the body of believers in HIS WORDS!

I believe what His Own Words have to say as spoken by those who wrote them as in Colossians chapter one:

"He has delivered us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the Kingdom of His Beloved Son, in Whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

He is the Image of the Invisible God, the first-born of all Creation; for in Him all things were Created, in Heaven and on Earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities--all things were Created through Him and for Him.

He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

He is the Head of the Body, the church; He is the Beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in everything He might be pre-eminent. For in Him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether on Earth or in Heaven, making peace by the Blood of His Cross." Col. 1:13-20.

Now do not presume again to lie about what I believe, you flaming Religious Idolator of men~ for it is YOU who rejects the Words of God and DARES to try and replace them with the false teachings of your cult.

For Jesus Himself says who it is that loves Him, and you do not for you reject His Words.

"He who does not love Me does not keep My Words; and the Word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's Who sent Me." Jn. 14:22.

Jose| 12.15.11 @ 2:08PM

God bless Archbishop Gomez on what he's trying to do, but I think WAY MUCH MORE of their efforts should be on bringing/keeping Latinos to the Church instead of immigration. As a Catholic Latino, the salvation of one's soul is more paramount then the current immigration debate.

I always find it amusing the numbers they find for Latinos who identify themselves as Catholic since most are leaving for evangelical denominations and even more so not even churchgoing.

Its also becoming a fallacy, and a joke, that the Latino/Catholic vote are still very intertwined given that we're seeming to become secularized at a much more rapid pace than our other fellow Americans. The Left and Satan are both howling in delight...

Clint| 12.15.11 @ 2:15PM

While supporting Illegal Alien Amnesty is the wrong policy, it's interesting that once again, The Catholic Church gets cherry picked for criticism.

Some Religious Groups ,who also wrongheadedly support Amnesty.

- Southern Baptist Convention

- United Methodist Church

- Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

- Presbyterian Church U.S.A.

- American Baptist Churches U.S.A.

The Hebrew Immigrant Aid
Society (HIAS)

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 2:28PM

The problem is with not obeying the true gospel of Jesus Christ, no matter what the denomination.

Denomination means division, and therein lies the problem for centuries.

Why do you think God COMMANDS ALL PEOPLE the Repent and believe His Gospel?

Repent means change of mind~ it means choosing to believe Him and no one else.

Think about it~ or not. Your choice.

"I tell you, No; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish." Lk. 13:3.

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 2:44PM

Get lost BIGOT margie.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 2:52PM

big·ot   [big-uht] Show IPA
noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

And no, I will NOT get lost, papist liar.
I am indeed a bigot as I am a bigot for the written WORD of GOD.

Something you ought to be, but reject.

"For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths." 1 Tim. 4:3 & 4.

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 3:23PM

Bigot Margie,
We offered you to Mexico for one hundred immigrants and Mexico refused. Your addition would reduce the national IQ of Mexico but you leaving would increae the national IQ of the USA, not to mention your trailer park.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 3:34PM

Papist punk:

"For the Word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart."

Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.

For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,
but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

For consider your call, brethren; not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth; but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.

He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption;
therefore, as it is written, "Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord." 1 Cor. 1:18-31.

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 3:58PM

Idiot Bigot Margie,
I know you are stupid but are you at least able to write a declarative sentence instead of a cut and paste job that you do not even understand? You are afraid to write what you think so you do your copy and post routing.
Get a life, Idiot.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 4:03PM

The accuser of the brethren you serve your Father the Devil well, for it is Christians who take their stand on the Scriptures, but cowards such as yourself walk all over them and hate those who stand on them and you therefore prove just EXACTLY who you are, a liar and a fraud who has nothing but demeaning insults and absolutely NO substance as is typical of Religious Idolators of Men and not God~ who cannot possibly defend you false teachings because they are utterly indefensible!

PapistDan| 12.15.11 @ 4:28PM

Idiot Bigot Margie,
You are not a Christian, remember? You don't believe that Jesus is God. Whaever you believe is your business but don't pretend to lecture us on Christianity.
You have invented your own little cult.
Intolerant stupid bigot.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 7:48PM

"Idiot Bigot Margie,
You are not a Christian, remember? You don't believe that Jesus is God."

Yet again the rantings of an unbelieving Religious hypocrite who rejects the Scriptures for the Words of the Pope and yet presumes to claim I am not a Christian!

As I said I believe in what the Bible says, the very Words of God Himself, and written by men that had the Holy Spirit dwelling with them. The men whom God and Jesus, carrying out the Will of His Father appointed to write them.

I have posted what I believe, and I have stated NUMEROUS times what I believe and it is according to the Scriptures and the WORD OF GOD.

Now~ you have proven what you are here and it is a liar who continually lies and does not know the truth nor do you love it as there is NO truth in you and you have proven that this is indeed so for each time I post exactly what I believe according to the Bible you continue to lie.

You do not accept what I believe because it is not in agreement with your cult and like all "good" Papists you therefore judge me as "not a Christian."
This is laughable for Christians are those who believe the Words of God and of Jesus Christ and as He says His Words are not His, but Him that sent Him. Jn. 7:16 & 14:24.

Now please explain to me how it is that you choose to reject the Words of Christ and yet presume to call me names and "not a Christian" while rejecting His very Words?

According to the Scriptures you prove that you are nothing but an accuser of the brethren in Christ and a denouncer of the very Words of God which you choose to reject and instead believe false teachings of the cult that claims that Mary was born without sin and is the "Mother of God", making her not only on par with Jesus Christ the LORD of Glory, but places her ABOVE God.

And YET you presume to call names and try to trash me the one who DOES believe fully and by the Grace of God and the Will of God in every Word of His?

The arrogance and the pomposity of you Religious Idolator hypocrites is spoken well of by the Lord of Glory throughout the New Testament and you are the epitome of Religiosity and hypocrisy!

And as I said you have nothing but condescension and insults as you have no defense against your indefensible cult of false teachings, not even one word of defense about even ONE false teaching because there can be no defense of it and you are guilty of rejecting the Word of God yourself and will be found wanting before the Lord of Glory unless you repent of your sin.

Yours is the cult as well as I have no cult. The Bible is my defense and in His Word I take my refuge and on His Word I take my stand.

Hypocrite and liar you are blinded by your own hypocrisy so that seeing you do not see!

As I said you are laughable and you are also disgusting and just as the Papist murderers of old did speak with filth and lies to the character of Bible believing Christians, so do you continue in the same spirit and it is not at all surprising for these same false teachings have always been taught and never repented of and are the same teachings that cause the HATE that you breathe toward a Bible believing Christian.

Your cult cannot save you nor can the lies that you breathe here for your lies will not be able to deliver you on that Day when the Lord of Glory Judges the hypocrites and Religious liars.

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness.
So you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." Mt. 23:27 &28;.

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 11:09PM

Idiot Bigot Margie
The only proper response to a stupid bigot is
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Do you understand, dimwit. Go read you Ken emails.

JimP| 12.15.11 @ 5:03PM

Good point, Clint, but in this case didn't the Catholics single themselves out by writing and posting this column here? Overall though I do agree that the Catholic Church gets more than its fair share of criticism and the other denominations you mention are seldom heard about.

Margie| 12.15.11 @ 8:06PM

It is not a good point as Clint the liar says as it is how he justifies his cult of lies and liars.
He also tries to justify the perversion of the pedophile priests and the protection they take comfort in by the Papists with the same defense mechanism he uses here~ he brings up the pedophilia amongst other organizations.
This aids him in never having to face the reality that he is a defender of perversion and of false and unscriptural teachings of his false Religion.

Also~ it is not true that the other denoms are not spoken of, as they are indeed spoken of and it is here that they are spoken of, and often. Perhaps you do not read here everyday or have missed them but oh yes indeed they ARE spoken of.

And not only here but all over the web as well, for it is truly the Christians and not the Catholic church that gets to enjoy centuries of perversion and abuse and yet is still praised by its adherents.

When a Christian (a Bible believing soul) sins, it is spoken of, and the sinner is reproved and usually shamed and removed from office.

Not so with the Papists. Theirs is the cult from Hell that will never repent.

Papist Dan| 12.15.11 @ 11:10PM

Idiot Bigot Margie,
Go read your Ken emails.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

JimP| 12.16.11 @ 5:31AM

Oy vey, Margie! Can I say that without invoking your rath? ; ) Take a chill pill. I didn't say the other denoms were not spoken about. I said seldom, which is true generally. I admit, I don't search cyberspace for criticisms of all the other denoms. I don't focus on what's wrong with the way others practice their faith. I try to work on my shortcomings and live up to what JC told us to do. You know, remove the beam from my eye before noting the speck in my brothers etc. Mea maxima culpa.

Best regards and God bless.

JimP

Margie| 12.17.11 @ 3:56PM

There was no "wrath" towards you. I was speaking my mind as anyone else speaks theirs. If you take it personally it is not my problem.

I just meant to point out the truth concerning the matter, both of Clint and his mindset, which I did, and the truth as to the fact that other denoms are much more than seldom spoken of.. including here almost daily.

I do not care about what the denomination any pervert belongs to~ I DO care that they are exposed and I also find it disgusting that the most perverted, mist disgusting cult on the face of the earth besides Islam, the Catholic church~ is continually harboring perverts and is still defended somehow by it's cult followers because they are so deceived as to actually believe that they are "God's Church!"

The Bible says that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit and this cult has produced murderers (for six centuries) who killed Christians that refused to bow the knee to the Idolatrous Popes, and to this very day has not repented as it still hides them and protects them.

There is nothing at all good to be said about Clint's or any other cult follower of this Babylon justification of its SIN.

Best regards and God bless you too,

Margie

RCV| 12.17.11 @ 4:02PM

As I said in another post, Margie, I almost would like to see Santorum or Gingrich win, just so you would have to endure the President at Mass every Sunday at a Catholic Cathedral, and welcoming the Pope, Cardinals and Bishops into the White House for state dinners. It would be delicious indeed!

JimP| 12.17.11 @ 5:14PM

Respectfully Margie, you are so jacked up about Roman Catholicism that you can't read my posts accurately. I will not bother trying to explain because it would take to long.

I'll leave you with a question and a quote. First, what is your denomination? Second, recall what Billy Graham said: "Find the perfect church and attend, but know that as soon as YOU show up, it will no longer be perfect." Think about it.

God bless.
JimP

JimP| 12.17.11 @ 6:37PM

Obviously one of my many shortcomings is typographical spelling errors. How embarrassing. Mea culpa.

RCV| 12.18.11 @ 11:50AM

Margie doesn't belong to any denomination or attend any Church. She disdains organized religion. She seems to forget that Christ urged us to love our neighbors, and Saint Paul organized curches, appointed deacons and bishops because Christian worship was intended to be community worship of God. God sought to bring his creation together in love, not tear it asunder with hatred and venom.

Margie| 12.18.11 @ 10:13PM

Buzz off, hypocrite RCV.
You have work to do, don't you. sucking up to your idol, Obama?
And don't you dare presume to speak for me you filthy liar!
You already have your reward:

"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." Rev. 21:8.

You just MIGHT want to repent of your blatant lying before you bite the dust.
Huh, pervert?

Margie| 12.18.11 @ 10:11PM

I belong to NO denomination.
Satisfied?
Next.
Oh and too bad if you do not appreciate my strong Biblical stance against perverted Religion and the perverts and lisra here who defame the Word of God.
Too bad that instead of taking a stand on Scripture, you kiss up to the most VILE of them!

You can take your self-righteous Religious pomp and stuff it.

RCV| 12.19.11 @ 2:23PM

...and Merry Christmas to you, too, Margie!

JimP| 12.19.11 @ 8:59PM

LOL Wow! Talk about being defensive. Amazing. I wasn't looking to be "satisfied", I was just curious. If you reread my earlier post to you, you will see that I did take a stand on "Scripture". That you hear self righteousness in my comments seems to indicate a guilty conscience and projection on your part, IMHO. I wasn't thinking or feeling self righteous at all, I was in fact trying to gain some understanding of your hostility to the RCC, admonish you (like scripture instructs us to do) and remind you politely of Christ's teachings. It didn't work. C'est la vie.

Alecto| 12.19.11 @ 2:14PM

The Catholic Church is by far the largest demonination of any listed. I wouldn't read anything into the "criticism". Moreover, one man's criticism is another man's reality check. The Catholic bishops are doing this because of the mass exodus from that church beginning with the revelations about child rape and the ensuing cover ups which appear to be neverending. This is a blatant and illegal attempt to cram down Catholic authoritarian policies on the rest of the country. It ain't gonna work. And, it will do far more damage to the Catholic church in the long run since the vast majority of the American electorate is opposed to any amnesty for illegals. But, as a former Catholic, I can tell you that Catholic bishops aren't the brightest bulbs in the carton, ya know?

spindles| 12.15.11 @ 3:48PM

Decisions have consequences. Not enough have pressured those we put in office to see to the security of our borders, consequently, we have this mess. There is no other choice but to make ways for those here to remain. Now, we must address securing our borders. I feel so deeply sorry for those who yet wait in line, who want to obey the rules to be here legally.

betwyan| 12.15.11 @ 4:45PM

I feel so deeply sorry for those 15-20 million illegal aliens here, stealing American citizens's ID and social security numbers, workign without paying income tax, driving without a driver's license and insurance, availing themselves of numerous social-welfare programs that are only supposed to go to citizens.

Enforce the law.......they will self deport.

Horace| 12.15.11 @ 5:11PM

There is a choice. Make the illegal alien's position so untenable that it is in his best interests to return to his homeland: No Social Security, no job, no education for his children, no welfare and no citizenship for his children. Failure to do this will just result in more illegal immigration. Amnesties only beget more amnesties, as more will come, and as the weak willed will continue to cede the citizen's stewardship over their country to foreigners. If those who insist upon the hopelessness of the situation were in Winston Churchill's position during the Second World War, German would be the national language of Great Britain.

shipley130| 12.15.11 @ 5:19PM

If that is what it takes, then I guess so. We are a land of laws, and those laws have to be upheld.

Richard Baker| 12.15.11 @ 5:50PM

With all respect to Archbishop Gomez, he and many others seem to think that Latino voters will recoil at enforcement of our immigration laws. Wouldn't be surprised if the legal immigrant Latinos are not pleased with folks disrespecting the Law of the Land and those who express contempt for it by their illegal activities. The Mexican government is using this exodus to get rid of the peons who would lead a revolution against the corruptocracy which is the government of that and other Latin countries. For Mexico, as an example, the exodus is a relief valve to forestall said revolution.

Sincere Collagen| 12.15.11 @ 5:52PM

Archbishop. Gomez. Yeah, no vested interests there. And Bush and McCain turned out so well, those Latino Catholics really know what they're doing.

PJ| 12.15.11 @ 6:15PM

As a faithful Catholic & one who is aware of the politics going on in the Catholic Church esp the American one, I can only write that I am truly horrified that the bishops are communicating their naive immigration policy ideas as a basis for the common good. Encouraging people to disobey reasonable laws is contrary to Church teaching.

As a matter of fact, Pope Benedict XVI gave a speech earlier this yr explaining that every country has a right to protect its borders w/reasonable enforcement. He also said that the immigrant has a duty to assimilate & to obey the laws of his new country.

See http://www.pcf.va/holy_father/.....y_en.html. (esp paragraph 5).

John2| 12.17.11 @ 4:36PM

Cannot connect to the link, which AmerSpectator has abbreviated. Can you repost the whole link?

Sorry to be a pain.

POST American| 12.15.11 @ 10:22PM

--------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------

"The Vatican has been completely
infiltrated since the 1950's"
-MALACHI MARTIN

And these latest demogagoic ploys from the
bishops follow hot on the heels of
Pope Benedict's call for 'understanding'
of FREE MAY-SIN--Re, and world
govern-ANTS.

Just call him Pope Benedict Arnold.
(they DO love that -in your face- wordplay!)

The REAL church has NO business
getting involved with setting up, or directing
the power formations of the world.

NONE

The problem of occult societies and their
frankly Luciferian agenda for cultural
annihilation, world standardization and
EUGENICS is truly full-spectrum.

IN FACT, the Jesuits, the Catholic face
of 'MAY-SIN-Re' are credited with the
EUGENICS program which, in some respects,
remains a model to this day ----the 'Paraguayan
Reduction' from centuries ago.

CHECK IT OUT

AGAIN kiddies,

---------CLEAN OUT YOUR CHURCHES-----------

--------MORE IMPORTANT THAN BREAD--------

Leveut| 12.15.11 @ 10:48PM

These two guys must be the ones the lovely and gracious Nancy Pelosi consulted in determining that the Roman Catholic Church has been in favor of abortion since St. Augustine.

POST American| 12.16.11 @ 12:37AM

---------------------------BTW-----------------------------

UH, shouldn't the Church be into its
Christ designated role of speaking truth
to power viz a viz USURY, psychopathic
fractional reserve USURY ---and the
takeover of the entire planet ----with the
stated long term aims of cultural annihilation
(ie 'standardization') ---and GENOCIDE?

Dimitry Aleksandrovich| 12.16.11 @ 4:24AM

If I'm not mistaken the dismal state of our economy has resulted in many Mexican migrants (without papers) repatriate themselves back to Mexico. I'm all for securing our borders and enforcing the immigration laws on the books but I can't help but sense a strong anti-Latino and even an anti-Catholic sentiment amongst some of the posters here. Instead of channeling your anger against immigrants who are just trying to put bread on the table for their families you should first channel your anger toward the American businessmen who knowingly hire such people to save on labor costs. Somehow it has become culturally acceptable for an American citizen to hire such "illegal immigrant" labor but not culturally acceptable for the "illegal immigrant" to be here in the first place. If you really want to change things chastise and/or tar and feather the CEO's, restauranteurs and other American citizens who regularly hire such labor. If you can't bring yourself to do that then you're a coward because that's the root of the problem. It's economic as almost everything is. If there wasn't people willing to hire illegal immigrants than illegal immigrants wouldn't be here. Also you must consider if you could only make $300 a month working your ass off in Mexico but just over the border in California you could make $3000 a month working the same 12 hour a day 6 or 7 day a week shift then where would you go. I tell you where you would go. You'd go to the nearest "coyote" and pay the fare to be taken over the Rio Grande. I am not making excuses I'm just saying the truth lies in the economics and the power to stop illegal immigration lies more with the average American and their everyday decisions then amongst the politicos in Washington D.C.

Merlin| 12.16.11 @ 7:18AM

Horace,

I would make voting by an illegal grounds for immediate deportation and I would not let them become citizens, except by the normal, current, procedures. You are exactly right: Amnesties beget more amnesties. but we have had amnesty for years by political inaction. What you are proposing may be impossible politically and would have negative consequences that noone can forsee.

Would you demand that an illegal who had been here 20 years, has a family, maybe a business and almost always had job, pack up and leave? Remember, the DOL did not ask for proof of citizenship when he applied for a license. The grocer did not ask for proof of citizenship. The welfare department did not ask. His landlord did not ask. When the SS office started receiving deposit under a name and SS number that did not match, they did not send immigration agents or demand his appearance at their office.

The Best and Brightest created this problem.

Merlin| 12.16.11 @ 7:32AM

Opps. Pushed submit twice. Sorry

Dimitry A.

This problem has been a long time in the making.

I am one of the "businessmen" you are blaming. In a cherry orchard, lots of labor is needed for a short time. A willing worker comes to my door. He has documents. I need a cherry picker. I have to pay him more than minimum wage.

Do you want me to seek workers who are too lazy to look for work, sometimes to fat, old or out of shape, drawing unemployment instead of working and turn away a guy that comes to my door just because the ink on his SS card is still damp?

Close the border? Yes. Get rid of the criminals? Yes. Demand that taxes be paid, that illegals are not elligible for SS, unemployment, welfare, etc. Yes, but blanket deportation? No. It is to late for that solution by fifty years, maybe more.

rssg| 12.16.11 @ 8:29AM

Business and profit are good and important but not as important as our country. Period.

Once againn in case you missed it. Enforce the law, no mass deportations are needed. Enforce the law and millions will go home on their own. If you can't find employees, then you need to raise your wages. Period. If you can't earn enough profit to continue, then perhaps its time to give up your business. Enabling lawbreaking and the invasion of our country by tens of millions of like-minded, like-cultured Latino peasants isn't worth it.

axbucxdu| 12.16.11 @ 10:10AM

"...Business and profit are good and important but not as important as our country. Period."

This principle needs to be applied to every policy, not just immigration law. As you say, the market will take of the rest.

Alecto| 12.19.11 @ 2:01PM

You should run for office. I would vote for you!

John2| 12.16.11 @ 9:48AM

Any chance you can fix the comments page?

Joe D.| 12.16.11 @ 11:30AM

What a bunch of garbage. You guys and Mr. Gomez should be shipped out. Let's invite the whole Mexican community. Let mob rule, rule the US. The hell with laws. Let them steal more from America and prop up the Mexican corrupt Socialist economy.

Let's tell the good people (like my Latino wife) that all the work and money she and I went through was a waist. Her and her mother should have come through Mexico for free and wait a few years for amnesty. The ends justifies the means. Just ask God. He made a mistake and they were not born in the US.

You are wrong, we are tired of the worn out arguments from your side. Nothing you said in the article is anything new and does not solve the problem.

Mark30339| 12.16.11 @ 4:16PM

I whole-heartedly endorse the notions advanced by the authors. There will always be trolls looking for a contaminating element to eliminate and thereby "cure" all that ailes us. See the Salem witches, see the Nazi policy on Jews, see America's WW2 policy on Japanese Americans. There is no communicating with minds rationalized to mistreat another group of human beings. We are all here because of generous immigration policies afforded our predecessors -- we have to find a more generous way to deal with undocumented people who have established lives here because they love America.

Alecto| 12.19.11 @ 2:03PM

Your post is racist, hateful and bigoted. It should be removed. Pandering to Mexicans doesn't make you an American and no matter how long you remain in a country illegally, doesn't qualify one for citizenship or any legal status.

Where is your so-called compassion for your countrymen who are jobless, have run through their savings and are trying to support families? Ah, I thought so. Nowhere!

Loren Piller| 12.16.11 @ 8:34PM

The rule of law shall prevail in the U.S.
You have to understand, a good many
hardworking Americans do not want
America to adopt the Latino way of life.
That is a decadent feudal patrone system.
If you persist in advocating rewards for
misbehavior you will have to live in a home
surrounded by a wall topped with broken glass.
If you like such a place may I suggest you and
the Bishop please move south of the border
at your earliest convenience. The rest of us
honest hard working Americans will ensure
that the mistake made by Ronald Reagan and
continued to this day by successive administrations
will soon come to an end.

Brittanicus| 12.16.11 @ 9:54PM

Controversial subject of illegal immigration and the Iowa Debate

Birthright citizens, and naturalized citizens have the ability to vote to change America forever, but we must scrutinize voting registrations for the 2012 election cycle for a President. Over and over again Democrats with Liberal ties have been caught numerous times, using such radical groups such as Acorn to steal political races with illegal alien registrations. Voter fraud is here to stay, unless the federal government makes it impossible to defraud citizen voters of their inherent rights, by demanding the use of a National ID card that could be used for many other purposes. The old Social Security number has been badly compromised, as we have seen with a yearly tally of hundreds of thousands of Americans fighting to save their credit, as its been procured by foreign nationals to steal jobs, as well as peoples good credit, then using it for nefarious purposes.

The Department of Justice, Eric Holder has showed his noticeable mark by mirroring the NAACP that having to show official picture ID is racist. Holder has shown his true colors as a far left progressive, by propelling his judgment against the right of sovereign states to identify registered voters with government documents like an ID card, and his now relentless pursuit against Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Utah and in probability North Carolina for adopting policing laws within their borders against illegal aliens. I THINK MOST PATRIOTIC AMERICANS WAOULD LIKE TO SEE ERIC HOLDER IMPEACHED, for his unnecessary impact of suing states, trying to stop illegal aliens squatting there and the ‘Gun Walking’ storm. If holder joins the jobless lines, maybe he would have a better understanding of Americans looking for work, while company owners are still employing foreigners who should not even be here? Soon—these unconcerned businesses will be in the spotlight, when ICE raids uncover the scheming in unlawful employment and have to face harsh sanctions if caught. Not excluded is the irrational “witch Hunt” against steely Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio, that the Obama administration has using intimidation along with radical open border organizations.

In the Iowa nationally televised debate yesterday evening I did not see Rep. Michele Bachmann brought into the discussion on illegal immigration? Was it by chance I missed it, while digging in the refrigerator for Soy milk or was the TEA PARTY chairperson deliberately left out of this most controversial issue, that is vastly becoming manifest amongst the tens of millions of physical Conservatives? Newt Gingrich had his say relating to the 20 million illegal migrant and immigrant population already residing here and that it was unreasonable to deport foreign nationals who have lived in America for 25 years. Gingrich also added that the administration should get off the back of States that are being persecuted for their stand against illegal immigration; included he said that the fence would be completed between US-Mexico by 2014 (Is that the real 2006 Secure Double layer border fence) and that Sanctuary Cities (State such as California, Nevada, Colorado and New York) would be punished with loss of federal funds.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who has been Gingrich’s main political principal rival partner in recent debates, defended the U.S. Immigration and citizenship Services E-Verify program proposing identification cards for all "non-resident aliens" working here. Texas Gov. Then Rick Perry who was attacked by verbal flak last September for defending in-state university tuition to illegal immigrants, who were either smuggled into the US, as the unborn or who were brought into the country as children and attend public schools in Texas. Romney concluded on this heated subject, "I've sent Texas Ranger recon teams there. Our law enforcement men and women face fire from across the border, or in the U.S. side, from the drug cartels," Perry said. "It is not safe there.”


Both Gingrich, Romney has forgotten one important factor; that these words are the initiative that will draw even more illegal aliens if we don’t enforce our laws; finding a way to get to public welfare and entitlement America? As I have already mentioned, unless I was absent from the TV set at the time, that Michele Bachmann was left out of this part of the commentary. As the Major TEA PARTY leader her resume has proven her worth to stifle spending in Massachusetts, as well been an arbiter of reducing the $15 Trillion treasury deficit and has a commanding vote in opposition to superfluous issues in the House of Representatives. She is a strong opponent of the archaic tax code, which must be replaced with fair taxation for all; without any exemptions, subsidies for the wealth corporations and industries of special interests lobbyists.

POST American| 12.16.11 @ 10:26PM

---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------

AS 33rd degree FREE--MAY--SIN Pat Robertson
calls for EUGENICS X--speediancy over Christ's
uttered doctrine of one man, one woman, one life
---EVEN while refusing to call out the things
which are spurring Alzheimer's in the enviornment
(CHEM-trails, TV watching. injections)

AS Pope Benedict (---Arnold?)
voices 'uncderstanding' for FREE--MAY--SIN--Re, and now
calls for 'world govern-ANTS'

AS disgraced, Heart set up, 33rd degree
FREE--MAY--SIN front op and erstwhile
Arminian Heretic, Billy Graham, gets a pass

AS psychopathic, INTER-national USURY
now openly helms the planet ---as aggressive
and enforced EUGENICS
is UNDENIABLY revealed to be the their
modus operandi for mankind

------SOMEWHERE IN MANCHURIA------

A lone, cast off young woman is making
her way to some, any, wretched shelter
away from the bitter Siberian winds, and
away from the EUGENICS police

-------------------somewhere to render with all
her might -----a child. . .

BEHOLD! -----The TRUE spirit of Christ---mas!

DANSHANTEAL| 12.17.11 @ 1:55PM

WE NEED A SANE POLICY. IT STARTS WITH THE RULE OF LAW. THE ARGUMENT THAT WE NEED IMMIGRANTS IS TRUE TO A POINT. IN THE LAST CENTURY WE NEEDED STRONG BACKS AND WEAK MINDS TO DO THE HEAVY LIFTING. TODAY IT'S DIFFERENT. THE GOVERNMENT CAN NO LONGER SUPPORT THE POOR COMING INTO THE COUNTRY SO THE CHURCH IS ALMOST PASSE IN ITS SUPPORT OF SANCTUARIES AND LET-AND-LET-LIVE IDEAS. THERE IS HOPE. NEWT GRINCHRICH HAS OPENED THE DOOR, LET'S RUSH THROUGH IT AND GET A BILL PASSED THAT'S FAIR TO ALL AND TO THE NATION.

Deacon Jim Stagg| 12.18.11 @ 10:04PM

Without comment:
http://www.crisismagazine.com/.....tant-botch

POST American| 12.20.11 @ 12:25AM

-----------------------FURTHER-------------------------

Speaking of Latino issues and the NO SHOWs
of the infiltrated, 'on board' Globalist front
'Church'---

Putting aside the FACT that we've NEVER
heard much from 'the church' on the matter
of Globalism, and a RED Chinese slave labor
---or the injustice of shipping jobs abroad,
rather than across the Mexican border.

---EVEN CREEPIER---

-just learning that little Peru is being set up
as a colonial beach head for the
Globalist-RED China colonization of South America.

FACT IS --the PRIVATE, corporate EUGENICS
front U.N. was caught just a year or two ago
sterilizing some hundreds of thousands of
young women via weaponized 'vaccines'.

----This on the already dwindling, put upon
native population.

NEVER heard the church say a word about it
----------------------------which says it ALLLLLL.

More Articles by Deal W. Hudson

More Articles From Another Perspective

The United States of El Norte

May 24, 2013 | Larry Thornberry

What Are the Risks of Syria Involvement?

May 23, 2013 | Christopher Orlet

The Other Gosnells

May 22, 2013 | Jordan Gonzalez

The Book We Still Can’t Spare

May 21, 2013 | Lars Walker

Stifle This, Mr. President

May 16, 2013 | Ray V. Hartwell, III

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/15/heeding-archbishop-gomez

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets

Ross Kaminsky|79 comments

Enough With the Bipartisanship

Matt Purple|41 comments

The United States of El Norte

Larry Thornberry|58 comments

Vodka = Vodka = Vodka

Daniel J. Flynn|88 comments

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer

Tornado Chasers

Claire Healey|32 comments

We Will Remember

Roger Kaplan|25 comments

The Chinese Waltz

George H. Wittman|2 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Felonious Attorney General?

Kaylin Bugos | 5.24.13

Did the Boy Scouts Cave to Pressure?

Claire Healey | 5.24.13

BBC World Survey Ranks Israel Near Bottom in Global Popularity

Aaron Goldstein | 5.24.13

Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats

Ross Kaminsky | 5.24.13

Stein on IRS Scandal

Patrick Ryan | 5.24.13

The Restricted Engine

Yogi Love | 5.24.13

Muslim, Er, Youth Riots in Sweden

Aaron Goldstein | 5.24.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

H/T to National Review Online

Most Popular Articles

#FreeKate? Movement to Normalize Pedophilia Finds Its Poster Girl

Robert Stacy McCain | 5.23.13

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord | 5.23.13

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey | 5.23.13

Obama's Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.23.13

Lerner's Plea

Ray V. Hartwell | 5.23.13

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

Laying Down My Pen

Quin Hillyer | 5.23.13

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.