Per a Congress.org PSA link to me today, it is represented Senatord Durbin (D-IL) wants a cap on H1-b visas until employers fill jobs with nationals and immigrants already here.

The problem is, Senator Durbin in all other legislation opposes ENFORCEMENT, enforcement funding, or both, to ensure that can happen; also, here within his own Illinois, it appears the politically orthodox economy is full speed ahead on new urban immigrant and handpicked "needy nationals", just as strong as ever with not much else on the current drawing board including preserving or adding to NUMBER of existant commercial and ethanol/agricultural edifices, in fact shrinking them ...which of course requires the same old same olds, and last I looked neither Bush nor the GOP were in charge of Illinois State-distributed funds; also, where will all the credito come from for these ever-growing folks you "can't compassionately turn away from housing or healthcare"...even if that's all you expect any nationals or immigrants will need, despite chances of repaying "kindnesses".

The United States recently was reported as now having the highest number of inmates in its entire history; that certainly is not a prideful boast, and occurs amid not a whit of HOW anybody already here can turn that around, nor do some officials think asking them to be allowed to "is healthy" or otherwise their responsibility...for example, in Chicago and many other towns, how binding, if even allowed, is any nature of citicen's advisory re TIFD's and such? Too often, the variances between advisories, sometimes even houses of faith, and officials is settled via eminent domain.

Wherefore, the Durbin proposal seems aimed more at garnering racist votes in that all it does is say "no more immigrants!" period...yet with all funding for enforcement opposed by Durbin, and his Illinois orthodoxy set on more a nature of expanding its status quos, in burning candles to the middle from both ends Durbin offers immigrants little as "accomplishments" in their regard.

I respectfully submit that slowing the pace of immigration for the purposes it effects despite vocalizations of intents seems necessary, and that Congress consider what other nations looking at the USA as a "dump for surplus folks" are doing in their own lands and if that will build export potential for any goods we might ideate; also, would acting like those nations be likely to increase USA dreams and help it keep other democracies and peaceable peoples inching ever upward?

My local parish is a Roman Catholic parish situated within the archdiocese of Chicago, which takes in ALL Cook and Lake Counties of Illinois; Illinois has a completely Democrat legislature and Executive branch, and is represented in the U.S. Senate by Democrat Senators Durbin and Obama.
 
Earlier this year, January 23, 2008 to be precise, it appears my parish mailed my wife and to me a single "welcome" note, with chastisement represented that although married civilly by a Judge 20 years ago to preserve my Roman Catholic faith and my wife's Lutheran faith, rules apply which will keep us out of actual "membership" until such time as my wife converts to Catholicism, although we would be free to otherwise attend and volunteer; that same time, my parish requested Insta-Sets in Ohio to send us temporary donation envelopes, although ordering only half the envelopes they could have for the same one dollar cost; we've never received any since of any nature, nor has my parish ever reached to us in any way(s) since; shortly thereafter, I discovered that some in politics appeared to be jockeying to say that if you did not attend ANY faith's Church clergy at which reject the tenets of the Vatican catechism, and also add homosexual conduct to acceptable social units, you may be "of interest" under looming Democrat HR 1955 say-so homegrown terrorist fundamentalism. So even if you went, as long as say my parish says "no, you don't", well...and it's only coincidental the archdiocese clergy, Cardinal objections or not, teach, give up interest in education to allow teaching, and otherwise do this amid Illinois giving them public funds for administering parish activities in communities.
 
Now, at that time I was also informed that no matter how other parishioners appeared or talked, I was THE only one interested in Vatican catechism on social justice...see, as reports for each week's collections show in each bulletin, every week the Church meets or exceeds its weekly budget in collections from parishioners...most are just "slumming". Well, if that were the case, again, why would they NEED State funds at all? Yet, through St. Vincent DePaul, Catholic Charities, and such parishioners "don't need", immigrants are collectivized apart from others and ministered to as if dealing with State welfare and immigration contracted officers, and all the parish asks is for its staff to have luncheons and anything else paid for.
 
Immediately following Easter, I notified my parish and others of my impression Vatican catechism items 1550, 2089, 2120, and 2357 were therein being discarded, that more than once I had noted it to the Church, and thus per New Testament 16 Romans 17, II Timothy 3:4-5, and Titus 3:10 I would no longer provide my presence or funds to my parish or any part of its archdiocese; I have not since nor has my Lutheran wife, and we thought that was the end of it until one day I can attend another archdiocese; I have EWTN in meantime, as well as Vatican and Bishopric faith study materials.
 
Yesterday someone showed me online that my parish, for the April 13, 2008, bulletin, printed "Mr. and Mrs. (my name)" as new members; CLTV on local cable today represented Obama as recently having said anyone going to Church clings to faith as they're bitter over direction of the domestic USA...so now if a Church says I AM a member I'm some little "bum" unlike other parishioners who "hates immigrants", something like that? Does that extend, say, to those in public office, even those in the United Church Of Christ?
 
So the archdiocese, ipse dixit, needs NO State funding of any kind, as their parishoners' contributions without it will prove where they stand on gay activity and all other things, and avoid looking like they politic for Obama and related whether or not parishioners agree or even know. Oh, and my parish remains in lockstep with the rest in the archdiocese in not mentioning that EWTN or the Papal Visit exist.
 
I would suggest that beyond my own self, the bigger idea HAS to be that per Carter inter alia foreign Islamic terror is unbeatable and thus must be negotiated with...worked for Carter and the world in and since 1979, eh? Then, Democrats through Obama types can set up that only scum likes the Vatican catechism, and by leaving the Mid East to terrorists of course they'll act up, they being fundamentalists or unemployed, so by parallel inference to "prevent homegrown" you just pick up anyone in the USA who simply is unemployed or even waves at some Pope or similar clergy. Progress, dignity, security...yeeeaaarrrrrgggghhhh!!! Hmm...still seems to need work on the rough edges prior to Conventions, readers on the Left.
 
Speaking for myself on faith, I was baptised at birth as a Roman Catholic in 1960; I was therein confirmed 1973; I follow with all my heart The Vatican's version of everything. One of a number of them, my RC faith was started 2,008 years ago, and has transcended oh so many good and bad times, this and that ideologies...all with the same sort of devotion to God as now expressed by Pope Benedict XVI; I have so conducted my life no matter what era, what age, what economics...national or personal. And I shall continue to pray for each and every one of us on this planet, as I continue to live by the Vatican Catechism of the Catholic Church on behalf of all our goods together.
 

I use the title in its sarcastic sense, since annually our Boy Governor Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) and folks like Durbin and Obama and like-minded cronies around the USA always have the same old levees, floodplains, couple of purposely unshoveled snows, yadda, yadda, yadda, to create the "new" fill-in-the-blank weathermergency, from which...yes, AGAIN...they're going to slam Bush and demand mucho bucks to "recover".
 
Today, believe it or not, the Des Plaines River in Illinois is again nearing flood stage (less dramatically than when it just receded after flooding slightly after snowmelt); this means it could go a foot or so over by the weekend. Seizing the dramatic opportunity of say the Weather Channel reporting on ANYTHING other than dull rote forecasts, it appears the Warren Township High School and grade school have let their students out early to save "the chillllllddddddrrrrreeeennnnnn!!!!!!!!!!!!!" from a watery scourge of God, likely of POSSIBLE proportions it would drive Noah to drink.
 
Mercy stars, sure is a brave, pro-active he-manly anti-Bush-like defender of Illinois there, and he loves children struggling, fretting parents, blocked roadways...oh lawdy, massa Bush, kin yo' bwah Blago have some floodmergency megabucks which he can use to recover and prevent recurrances in this election year?
 
Aw, wait a minute! Those kids are sashaying, not running, in the "magnum rain", and most are piling into the half-block away Warren-Newport library; most have no parents in a rush to come get them, nothing new; roads aren't closed or traffic distressed; no mass or ANY sandbagging going on; nothing but dramatics and "pro-active non-Bush-like closures" as moods take...and no calls to once and for all or AT ALL evacuate those allowed to constantly live right by this constant flooder of usually never more than 9 feet at crest.
 
Oh, Blago and say Louisiana Democrats are non-Bush-like, to be sure; Bush gets that moolah to 'em every time, and every time it disappears, more new urban immigrant housing goes up, and all that's taken away are jobs and agriculture...and yep, not one singleton seems to be spent on say levees or diversion of the Des Plaines River or relocating floodplain dwellers...guess SOME nationals have to stay, 'cause they pull in big easy Federal dollars in lieu of say tax uncollected due to lack of anyone else with income sufficient.
 
Same old same old, no matter how many eons and Presidents come and go; blame infinite strawmen as "the voices" you hear "making" you do or not do something popular; the usual non-responsible attitude, never having a single idea or care to have such ideas, for those who believe the USA is more an abstract form sending State lawyers to tend its abstract health, as if voters were therein just clients to control, discipline, and have someone get a settlement for them, of course lawyer-legislator-social physicians deserving of lofty pay to assure "only the best will be called for office".
 
This is why I continue to support President Bush re Iraq and national security and diplomacy; and why I will support Conservative candidates for 2008 generals. Perhaps Democrats and Independents and some GOP will evolve a post-Convention display of a program for at least stopping things ongoing, unpopular, but "sigh...infinite strawmen are responsible, so why fix the tools used to effectuate the words of any...after all, that's only done for government-backed religions, where the job IS to change the Word employed by God to include that political representation isn't direct, thus you're judgmental if talk up or back simple".
 

 

Disregarding Ex Corde Ecclesiae, many Catholic institutions of higher learning, including your own, allow and in some cases even recognize "pro-homosexual" clubs and/or activities.

 

In varying degrees of intensity, such groups and activities participate in the homosexual movement's open and radical challenge to 2,000 years of Catholic moral teaching. The movement's subversive agenda endangers the souls of students who have a right to study on a Catholic campus without being subjected to organized efforts to promote unnatural vice.

 

I therefore join TFP Student Action in respectfully urging you to discontinue authorizing or recognizing any pro-homosexual group and/or activities on your campus. Your clear and forceful steps in this matter are necessary to avert further scandal.  I strongly believe this agenda must be denounced and opposed, not assisted.

 

Having the government take over the houses defaulted upon is just expansion of long-existant FHA ownership...how often has THAT been successful per se, and why would expanding its housing stock amount to other of more of the same?

Worse, restructuring debt sounds so sweet in an election, but notice it substitutes a "pill" or "bandaid" for say "improved income or job salaries or education toward same", which if expanding government housing stock and "green" dismantling of jobs, commerce, and agriculture occurs on further "need" of housing say Chavez' "surplus people" as his kind expand hemispheric control becomes permanent, what good would mere restructuring of debt be...when you eventually and predictably MUST hit inability to pay, either you toss out the debtors in the end or you take over their housing too and dictate how they'll "continue to earn through need of societal health".

For these reasons, I respectfully submit my opposition to ANY such measure(s) which through or by their terms would give effect to such conditions or scenarios...such measure(s) only artfully make permanent and expand the very status quo voters seek to minimize or remove from their futures.

 

I would never have thought that as a Roman Catholic, I would be deemed some nature of heretic or "quasi-excommunicate" for merely being supportive of a Vatican Pope, but I've come to see that's what many USA Catholic clergy must have thought of me not only in all those years I stayed faithful to Papal doctrines as same were given through John Paul II but stayed out of Church, but even now since I returned to a Parish back in January after almost a year of watching EWTN.
 
In effect, you hear a Pope say or write one thing, and the global Catholic network EWTN reinforces the Papacy on faith matters, yet when you walk into a USA Roman Catholic Church it's most often a completely different scenario. Yes, the liturgy and Verbum Domini are just like the Pope says, yet that's where it usually ends. RCIA classes teach newcomers and converts that we must hold hands while praying to effect Communion, teach the forward Crucifix could care less if we show respect to it, teach as if the Eucharist were no more than a cookie with mouthwash, teach Reconciliation (Confession) is unnecessary at all for absolution as is any Pontifical plenary alternative, and teach it's wrong to be for social charity and justice as the Popes define. Then, if as adherent to the Papacy of faith matters, if you do go to Reconciliation and admit faith quiver due to a dichotomy of relevant Church intentions over practice, you're told you need to be less judgmental because some are closer to God than others and need time to come around, including yourself; you're usually given some single prayer as penance, and given absolution for a sin against God you didn't even know you were committing...Papal obedience. And then you find yourself allowed to attend Church on days of obligation, but darn it, nobody "can remember" you for fellowship, official inclusion on Parish member rolls, and the like...a quasi-excommunication wherein you are practicing persona non grata.
 
All Catholic Churches of course include in their liturgy intentions a prayer for whoever the current Pope is together with his own intentions, but again this only further puzzles say EWTN viewers who see practice and talk separated by a wide abyss. Then one finds dichotomy on this is "resolved" through new Catholics being trained the Pope supports a dual ordained will and passive will of God, you see, so even though a Pope wishes folks in the USA or elsewhere did things more his way he has no gripes himself with those who particpate in or train re contrary positions, there being no Divine Mercy Chaplet or Fatima style signs to the contrary, and no Papal utterance the Holy Spirit moves him to do anything about things the Holy Spirit otherwise moves him to say in his own opposition. This includes using faith funds from secular governments as if Churches now held contract to run welfare, immigration, and public housing instead of such agencies.   
 
If anyone would like to watch EWTN for a while or go to its website at www.etwn.com, they can learn just how they and the Popes feel on any religious or social issue; then, one could just visit any weekend Catholic service(s), watch the exact opposite occur, and go to Reconciliation (all you need do is say "Bless me father for I have sinned, it's been X-amount of time since my last Confession; I feel conflicted in spirit over how the Pope says we should do things one way and the parishoners here are exhorted to do the complete opposite") and watch what their Confessor tells them.
 
I offer these observations for two reasons: first, how could ANY Pope be leading ANY Crusade on behalf of the USA, when Roman Catholic clergy largely think the Pope is totally heretical and ignore him completely; secondly, if Roman Catholic clergy encourage making Papal adherents creeped out as persona non grata and supporters of heresy and judgment therein, why would some everyday Parishoner be "of any interest" whatsoever just because they stopped attending a place having constructively evicted them?
 
At least we Catholics have ways given by John Paul II which allow us to pray and receive plenary indulgence akin to Reconciliation absolution, and prayers to open our hearts to Jesus in lieu of Communion, and thus really have no need to attend an articulated Church building; I here freely admit that I am again stopping Church attendance completely as again I don't want somebody cooking me up trouble if I keep returning to where I was constructively evicted, and really, I find I lived well enough or at least equally in all those prior years of non-attendance anyway and don't need trouble where none exists. This necessarily includes my respectful resignation from the EWTN video missionary program so that I am not "of interest" for that either.
 
For these reasons, I continue to support de-funding of USA faith groups by any level(s) of USA government, in that I respectfully submit on the secular level that I can find no proof such funding is enhancing USA respect abroad, nor promoting USA border and national security enhancements, nor promoting faith as the top leaders thereof define; nor do I think anyone should become "of interest" under any HR 1955 type scheme just because some official likes the "permissive will" attitude of a Church and can't understand what type of people would oppose such public useages of money.