There is indeed plenty of greed to go around, as there has been for centuries. This is neither new nor news, nor is it evidence that our country has lost its compassion; the U.S. still remains more charitable than any other nation [though Joe Biden's tax returns suggest otherwise].

So, rather than attack Robert, and since you are the person who initiated the discussion, perhaps you should be the one who takes the time to rebut his arguments. As an attorney, I am all in favor of being able to disagree without being disagreeable, but are you truly able to do so? Can you put aside your own bias and engage the man on his substantive points? Judging by your comment, it seems not.

P.S. I share your concern about the use of domestic abuse status as a pre-x condition exclusion, and I agree that our country is in moral decay and decline. But I am not quite on the same page with your preferred remedy, nor do I find much hope in Kucinich. As a former resident of Ohio, the appearance of “Kucinich” and “asylum” in the same article seems quite fitting.

P.P.S. I can think of plenty of good reasons not to leave one’s full name & email on a website that makes no promise to preserve their confidentiality. In my own case, I decline so supply my full last name but my email is real; hardly makes me anonymous.

Perhaps someone (else) might be a bit more forthcoming in enlightening an anonymous bully such as yourself if you had the moral courage to identify yourself. Just a thought.