Posted on 04/11/2010 12:14:46 PM PDT by Altura Ct.
he announcement last week that Archbishop Jose Gomez of San Antonio will replace Cardinal Roger Mahony as head of the local Catholic diocese capped an assertion of power on the part of Latinos in Los Angeles that is remarkable in its seeming speed.
For decades, only one Latino held unquestioned public power: Edward R. Roybal, the first Latino to win a seat on the Los Angeles City Council. He spent 13 years there, then moved to Congress to serve 30 years, most of that time as the region's only Latino representative.
Now the power positions held by Latinos in the Los Angeles area are multiple and manifest. Besides the Mexico-born archbishop, who is in line to become the first U.S. prelate of Latino heritage to become a cardinal, there is the mayor. The speaker of the Assembly. The sheriff. A county supervisor. Several members of the City Council, of Congress, of the Legislature, of the Los Angeles school board. The head of the most influential civic entity, organized labor.
"It is coming full circle," said UC Berkeley associate professor Lisa García Bedolla, the author of two books on Latino politics. "That's what Los Angeles looked like before becoming part of the United States."
It is hardly accidental, however. The moves to the top in politics and other endeavors have required equal parts population shifts, hard-fought legal pursuit and political strategizing.
Population numbers are only the most obvious propellant for the ambitions of both the community and its leaders.
In 1960, according to a USC demographic study, fewer than 10% of the people in the Los Angeles County area were Latino. By 2008, according to federal census estimates, almost half were Latino. Roughly the same was true in the city of Los Angeles.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
What a racist article.
Not everything is political for goodness sakes. It could be that this Archbishop was the next to transfer. Simple as that. Regardless hopefully he will do some good for Los Angeles.
Believe it or not that so true
I hear 70% of LA Cathoics are Hispanic
Yeah, like a third world hell hole like mexico city north, it's well on the way to be that way once again.
MARKIST LIBERATION THEOLOGY Courtesy of the Catholic Church
I head to a parish here in Hellywood and you could say that. Then again, you go to a church deep into “white” territory like West L.A//Hollywood, it’s the reverse.
But people outside of mexifornia dont believe me when I told them that the white people of L.A. turned to scientology. Every blond, redhead hottie are into it here but they wont sleep with you unless they are married..;)
these guys are all but promising to destroy the country.
Utter nonsense. The colonia Los Angeles had a few hundred people, nothing more. They were vastly outnumbered by the Indians in the area who they enslaved, killed or merely dispossessed.
As this little anti-American gloatfest admits, L.A. was less then 10% "latino" - Mexican - in 1960. And that was the high point: L.A. was overwhelmingly White Anglo-Saxon since the 1850's - Mexico never had control of California, that's why the U.S. took it with a tiny number of casualties.
California was built by the Americans. Mexico, a parasite culture and failed society, merely walked in and feed off of what was built, and exploit guilt about "racism" spread by anti-American like the SPLC.
Or they are into Peontcosal movement right now that I hear
Or another religion Kabbalah Jewish mysticim relgiion that Madonna favors
Correct. The entire area seceded to the United States after the U.S. Mexican War (Texas to California and states in between) contained, at most, 75,000 Mexican nationals. There were several multiples of Indians tribes that couldn’t be controlled by Mexico therefore it was only a matter of time before they lost everything North. Mexico was still infighting over control of the country after they kicked the Spanish out; they never stopped squabbling while the Europeans continued their trek across the West to the coast of California. When you lose control (or never really had control) of your borders, anything can happen. Sound familiar? Whenever I get into an argument with a Mexican about the loss of the Southwest to the U.S., I ask them sincerely, ok, well you lost it, and what would’ve been the difference if you held onto it? Mexico would’ve still been a mess politically and economically and nothing seriously would’ve changed, would it? They think about it but can’t give me a good answer, because it is more a cultural issue than a land issue, always is, always will be, and admitting to the truth hurts. Sorry, facts is facts.
Los Angeles is finished. I left there for good more than thirty years ago because it had got so bad. It is light years worse today. It is no longer part of the United States.
“Mexico, a parasite culture and failed society, merely walked in and feed off of what was built, and exploit guilt about ‘racism’ spread by anti-American like the SPLC.”
It was ever thus.
Good grief! What does the man’s national heritage have to do with anything?! The left is obsessed with race and sex.
Los Angeles is so blessed to get Gomez...and it is such a loss for us....tho I am not Catholic he is much beloved here. I wish him the best.
Most were also very good people too.. East L.A. had most of the mexican dreg's.. Even the beaners didnt like the nasties.. I had many good mexican friends.. at least mexican-american.. They wanted to be or become americans not remain Mexicans.. They KNEW mexico was and still is a toilet.. even tho they liked the mexican "'culture"..
So Mexicans want to takeover Southern California? Why, so they can repeat the overwhelming success they had in Mexico? (sarc)
Governor Palin is Pentecostal, or at least was until fairly recent.
Is there a problem with Pentecostals?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.