I feel compelled to reply in broad terms to both Roarke and Mike. Gentlemen, I appreciate your feedback. At the same time, I feel like my key points were missed. This may well be due to my own lack of clarity, so I’ll explain further.

By no means do I believe everyone who opposes or disagrees with Obama is a racist. By no means do I believe everyone who opposes immigration reform is a racist. And by no means do I think all White people are racist. That would be inconceivable to me. If you have an opportunity to read some of my other columns, I believe you will find that many of my role models and heroes of American history were not people of color. And my whole life is guided by a positive, optimistic view of human nature and a sincere desire to contribute to shared progress for people of all backgrounds.

My column does, however, point out what I believe to more than a coincidence of factors regarding Wilson’s behavior and positions, including his membership in an organization that has been widely designated as a hate group, which seem to indicate an undercurrent of race-motivated negativity. That said, it’s important to note that I concede the evidence is circumstantial. What I call for is not hatred of Joe Wilson, but rather vigilance and caution with regards to his possible motives and those of his supporters, who have contributed over $1 million to his campaign since the incident. What I call for is awareness of an undercurrent of racism which is fed — deliberately or not — by outbursts like Wilson’s.

Undercurrents by their nature are not always obvious on the surface. Racism can be like that. As I mention in the column, almost no one in their right mind these days would admit to being a racist. So only in the patterns of their actions can we perhaps detect what’s motivating them beneath the surface. What I’m calling for in the column is not to label everyone who is against healthcare and immigration reform a racist but rather for all of us responsible, fair-minded, non-racist Americans to be vigilant about the sinister potential for these destructive forces to rear their head, to bring violence and hate crimes upon people with the coming debate on immigration reform. In countering my column, you seem to act like racism is a forgotten footnote in history books. You also don’t respond to any of my specific points, just wax eloquently about how I missed the mark and claim I called you racist. Not so. From what I’ve read, I don’t think you guys are racist at all. I’ve read quite a bit of Roarke’s comments and I believe him to be a very thoughtful, responsible citizen with a desire to see America live up to its full potential as a beacon of equality and justice for all. And I specifically avoided name calling and race baiting in my column because I find that to be a counterproductive tactic for effective civil discourse.

With regards to Mike’s point about what I should tell illegal immigrants, that’s a hard one. The ones that are here are already here. The ones that are still in Mexico, I don’t have a platform to reach at this point. And if I did, it would be disingenuous to tell people to come legally when the legal system currently makes it nearly impossible for them to do so. What could I tell them? To stay in a country that provides them no economic opportunities except in the illegal drug trade? To stay in a country that’s at war with itself? I know some people would say that I should tell them to stay down there and fix their own country. But that won’t work. They’ve tried. It was called the Mexican Revolution. And by most accounts, it failed. I have called on the Mexican elite to create more economic opportunity and more economic mobility so there people don’t flee in search of it, but that will require a long-term process of cultural evolution. In the meantime, people are hungry.

In closing, whether you agree or disagree about health care reform, immigration reform or even Joe Wilson, it should be acknowledged that racism does still exist. Hate groups exist. Hate crimes exist and according to the FBI they are on the rise against Latinos specifically. I think to ignore the truth in these statements is to completely miss the point of my column, which is not to call all White people racists, but rather to call on all sensible, rational, well-intentioned Americans – liberal to conservative, Republican to Democrat – to unite against racism.

But since I have a moment.

How much of your life do you think has been touched by the hands of “illegals”?
Is the food you eat— illegal?

Are those illegal fruits you eat?

Do you consider much of the housing in the Southwest built by “illegals” (and the equity, tax revenues before the bust) to have been “ill gotten booty”?

Look around Texas– Much of what you see has been built by “illegals”, much of what we’ve eaten has been picked by “illegals”

So yes, Mike, until you call the past prosperity “illegal” , until you call a system which NEEDS cheap slave-wage labor an “illegal” system, then I suggest you rethink just who gets called “illegal”?

I’ve argued with enough anti-immigrant types to be able to recite your own tired arguments back to you.. and no amount of self-righteous yelling, “But they came over illegally!!!” can cover up the ugly truth.

The United States of America hypocritically exploits then demonizes the very people that build it up.

First the Irish.. whom you first welcomed, until they threatened to mongrelize your Anglo-Saxon culture with their Catholicism.

In the mid 1880s— the Chinese, until you put a STOP to those “yellow hordes”.

But so many of you love the notion of some pastoral Ellis Island wonderland– where people in need just made their way to the states in blissfully “legal” immigrant waves.

And yes Ellis Island is a great part of the American story but just one of many threads– not all nice, not all neat and sometimes just plain ugly.

Take a moment to reflect….

Why do you think the latest wave of undocumented Mexican workers came?
NAFTA my friend,, NAFTA which made so many people rich on the border (have you been to McCallen lately ? It’s a boom town) yet displaced so many workers throughout the Mexican countryside.

Now you can argue (and you should) that Mexico needs to take care of it’s own. But that does not take away from our own American complicity in the displacement of Mexican workers.

Nor does is assuage our own guilt in exploitation that DOUBLES when you think of just how much we gained in cheap labor on top of the economic benefits of NAFTA.

So who is illegal? The system that perpetuates economic exploitation.

Or the people that come to make a better life….. in spite of the hatred spewed by so many.

Because that IS why they come..To work and make a better life– even if it is for a pittance.

It ain’t for Welfare and food stamps… President Clinton made that illegal
It ain’t for health insurance… unless you consider Emergency room care to be insurance
It ain’t for higher Ed…. your buddies killed the Dream Act

So yes Mike…. I call them undocumented because their lives are not centered on some devious criminal undertaking. They, for the most part, do not come to BE criminals but to work, with a humility and diligence beyond the WASPiest “work ethics”.

You’ve obviously made your choice in this matter. You’ve chosen who you wish to demonize. I take the long view and know that my perspective will outlive your shortsightedness.

Feel free to quote all the statistics you want – the FAIR website and others are waiting for your blind obeisance to bad, biased research.

However, President Obama has caved.
Bigots rejoice. Lou Dobbs and his kind have won a battle.
Undocumented worker will not get coverage.
THAT is the real issue here. Not wether some uncouth representative showed a lack of respect for the president.

The White House should thank Joe Wilson.
He’s taken our sight off of the real issue.
A Democratic president has joined the ranks of the anti-immigrant groups.
He is denying them coverage AND calls them illegals to boot.

To those that deny this, think of the following.

During the Bush administration, I ,a liberal democrat, did not want to be lumped with the likes of Ralph Nader, Churchill Ward, or God spare us… Hugo Chavez. So I refrained from stupid bombastic statements that made me look small and disrespectful of the office. Why? Because I did not embrace the loonies on the left. Because these loonies on the left, use whatever means necessary to make their case. And ultimately they do so to call attention to themselves.

No. I refrained from adolescent impulses.

So, why did Rep. Joe Wilson stoop as low as a loonie leftist?
Is it out of righteous indignation? Hmm.. No. It’s been pointed out AGAIN and AGAIN that there is no free ride for the undocumented in this bill.

Simply, if you don’t want to be lumped with loons, don’t ACT like one.

I mean think of it. Why didn’t Joe Wilson call President Bush a liar, or worse, when it looked like he may support the “Dream Act”?

Did he do it out of ignorance? Maybe he didn’t know that the undocumented aren’t covered. Doubtful.

So what could it have been?

Clearly, he was appealing to base instincts. Let’s list some of those.

1. There are those out there who have lost respect for the office of the President. Tea party people etc. If this is the case why was Joe Wilson the only only one yell out (specially on the issue of immigrants)? There are many senators and representatives out there who are fanning the “Tea Party” anti-government waves.

2. Anti-immigrant sentiments riled by anti-immigrant groups. Yes, anti-immigrant groups… groups like FAIR have lost their credibility as “anti-illegal” since they have allowed their ranks to fill with white supremacists.

3. Racism. Clearly, Mr. Wilson, at some level, has shown that he thinks the office of the president has been stained by SOMETHING, and that something has to be race.. OR he knew that he had everything to gain in his home state, by appealing to out and out racists or those that hide their racism.

So which is it?

If it quacks like a duck… well…