She might not remember it, but I do. I recall my mother warning me not to go into history because I would get mad. Dedicating my life to another type of career may have been a wiser decision in her opinion--and in many of my friends too. Do Social Work, Science, computer, Business, or Law, I heard often.

The context of this mother-son dialogue was my interest in Puerto Rico and its colonial history, and why she thought we should forget about it. Schools gloss over it purposely. Every time people tried to remember it there were problems; demonstrations were staged, people got killed, and the U.S.A. punished the island's economy.

There is a lot of talking about how Republicans will eat each other because their excessive power will inevitably leads to further excess and open corruption, and because their moderate wing is weary of its neglect and some will be bolting towards our ship.

This idea may sound logical because after all, it usually happens that when predators do not have fresh meat, their own kind start looking quite tasty, and thus cannibalism initiates among them. What's more, Republicans are not as united as they seem; they are assorted patches joined mostly by misinformation or unashamed exploitation.

Furthermore, moderates that used to be the strongest political segment of the Republican Party have been purposely shoved to the side. The Bush administration has consistently ignored them publicly to the point of compelling one of them to overtly accept he was not going to vote Bush this election cycle (Read Lincoln Chafee).

I have been stunned by the irreligiosity of many religions in the U.S. lately. I am not talking about the usual attacks on immorality (i.e., sexual depravation, corruption, and ungodliness) that mainstream denominations are known for.

What I am referring is to the connections that the religious right has built to the supremely immoral side of the Republican Party who give away riches to the rich, forget about the poor and the needy, and sleep content while bombing into extermination the villages of other countries in the name of civilization and Christianity.

More than ever before the U.S. looks at those outside its borders with an uneasy paternalism and a deep distrust. Our new common sense encourages a triumphal yet acidic nationalism. All of this thanks to a cultivated public semi-religious worship we nurtured surrounding the remembrance of 911.

Right after the terror attack against the towers, Ground Zero became a hallowed ground that rivaled for devotion against Civil War and American Revolution's sites. Nationalism fomented super-patriotism at the expense of fairness, diversity, and rationality.

The popular discourse became congested with rhetoric about freedom at a time when we practiced it the least. This language of national self-love belied an impulse for vengeance to placate our thirst for fleeting justice.

After so much attention given to the Latino population after this presidential election I think we should discuss a little of the history, nature and political implications of this important and growing segment of the US population.

Let's make it clear from the beginning, this community, to which I belong, brings cultural and economic vigor to this nation. Our increasing numbers challenge all to forge new social contracts as we cooperate to build a strong society.

The Latino work ethic drives parts of the service, manufacture and agriculture sectors of our economy. Our varied participation in the marketplace and cultural life has become integral part of the U.S. life. Yet, for the most part our contribution is still behind the scenes.

The Democratic Party is a party with a big umbrella. With exceptions, ethnic groups fill our numbers because they feel more comfortable with us (I am one of them). Marginalized groups that strive to move society a notch higher like gays, environmentalists, and others do not run to the Republican Party for accommodation.  They go to the Democratic Party instead because there is the only chance for a reasonable hearing.

The working class and the poor, the teachers and the civil servants, the students and the elderly poor, the freethinker and the progressive Christian they all belong to the Democratic Party. The Democrats, in other words, represent the broadest spectrum of the U.S. society. (Of course, there are these diminutive parties focused on some of these groups' interests.  But in a non-parliamentary democracy they count little if they cannot garner more than 20% of the national vote).

It has been very difficult for me to sit down and write about this after our dreams of a revolution, of real change for the good were shattered last Tuesday night. Look for yourself what could have happened:
http://www.needlenose.com/win04/vote2.htm
But, it did not. And that is a reality we need to face now.

I draw from history to gain strength for the future. I think about Bartholomew de Las Casas who fought his entire long live to give rights to the poor indigenous. He did not achieve all what he wanted, but owned their lives to him. I think about the French Commune and its dreams of egalitarianism that were also shattered. But its memory has helped create a slightly better society in some European countries. I think about Allende in Chile and his work to bring a fair society crushed by Pinochet's military coup (supported by the CIA). But his memory is helping reestablish justice in his country now. So, this means that our work in the last two weeks may not be in vain.