The militantly pro-illegal immigrant media, donating lavish coverage to the marches in Chicago and elsewhere, have failed to examine whether or not the marches will produce a sharp backlash to be felt in the November election. While the marches were non-violent and orderly, marches of illegals that stress the need to ignore the current law, could produce an opposite reaction in the state and nation. At least thats what happened with civil rights marches in 1968, recognizing that the earlier demonstrations veered from advocacy to the ugly.
Im inclined to take the Senate Judiciary committee approach to immigration, believing that a fence or wall should be constructed but that Hispanics who are here should be able to work their way to citizenship by standing in the rear of the line rather than the front. But as a Catholic, Im not impressed with the likes of Cardinal Roger Mahony as demagogue, urging people to break the law. Mahony is never around when there is a pro-life march nor is he particularly eloquent against same-sex marriage. Nor am I overwhelmed that Cardinal Francis George felt compelled to address the Chicago march: however these days with few exceptions, prelates view themselves as politicians, appearing before groups to satisfy and placate the battalions of liberal priests who were ill-taught in the seminaries. George is more defiant to the general culture on abortion and homosexuality but on every difficult issue he parses clauses so adroitly that he waters down any effectiveness he has. Also on the issue of pedophile priests the Chicago archdiocese under his direction has been ambiguous and at times outright duplicitous.
The very tiny support from Illinois Catholic parishes for the Marriage Amendment with only cursory encouragement from George and other state prelates is contrasted with their frenetic performance here. Not impressive.