…while many of those are low income Americans?  That is a question that has been bugging me for a couple of years—ever since I first became aware of the refugee issue when the Virginia Council of Churches (with funding from the federal government) came to our county and dropped off a few hundred refugees.    Why do groups like VCC hold some moral high ground when they bring refugees to a town?  What about local people (many very low income!) and their jobs and their schools and their social comfort level and their taxes?  Don’t our own poor count for anything?  Don’t we all have rights worth respecting?

I’ve been giving this a lot of thought over the last week or so as I prepare to speak to a group in Washington DC this weekend.   And, certainly the ACORN scandal and what it revealed about a group ostensibly set up to help poor people has revealed Far Left political power players for what I believe they really are—power hungry people with politcal goals where working to ‘help the poor’ is really just a cover.   They (the elitist leaders anyway) don’t give a damn about the people—not the poor and middle class even.

Take the revelations over the last couple of days about Obama’s “brain,”  Valerie Jarrett. It seems under the cover of helping the less fortunate she has benefited financially with these real estate investments she held in Chicago and if reports are accurate she will benefit further as the “slums” she allegedly helped create become a glistening Olympic Park.  Power and personal financial goals are hidden under a patina of doing good for the poor.

So, last night as I reread Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals,”  I came across a section which gives me an answer and confirms my theory that the poor immigrants are pawns.   I believe the push for open borders and more and more immigration is driven by a desire by the Far Left to accomplish its political agenda—in the short term, immigrants supply the votes for Far Left goals (Bill Clinton confirmed that the other day with his remark about changed demographics since the Republicans took over Congress in 1994).  I think they figure they already have the American poor in their political pockets, nevermind that study after study demonstrates that American minorities, especially blacks, are hurt by the immigrant tide. 

As for the longterm goal,  increasing “diversity” by moving people around the world will result in a borderless utopian world (or so they think).   Imagine just for a moment, if it were understood that the millions of immigrants pouring into America were going to be conservatives voting Republican, would these same people (the Obama/ACORN/SEIU crowd) be encouraging more immigration?  Not a chance!

This is getting too long, back to Alinsky (Obama’s community organizing role model).  You know Alinsky is all about strategy—how to bring about “change” and get political power.  As I have said before, it strikes me that the game was more important for Alinsky then the goal; so a crucial and cynical part of the Left’s strategy says in order to win one must cover whatever one does in a patina of morality.  Incidentally, I believe Obama was a good student, learned the strategy well, but doesn’t know how to follow-up the power he has achieved and govern.  Alinsky never taught governing!   Alinsky said this about a key element in achieving power:

“All effective actions require the passport of morality.”

This is at the end of a paragraph that begins with this:

Moral rationalization is indispensable at all times of action whether to justify the selection or the use of ends or means.   Machiavelli’s blindness to the necessity for moral clothing to all acts and motives—he said “politics has no relation to morals”—was his major weakness.

What I am trying to say is that Leftwing political groups like the Virginia Council of Churches hide under a patina of morality as they push their political goals behind a facade of “caring” for the immigrants.  If they were truly Christians and truly cared, they would care about all people—-including those local less fortunate they step all over when willy-nilly dropping refugees into communities!

They do not hold a morally superior position at all!  They have just told us they do!  It is only a cover for their ‘ends justify the means’  political goals and they have learned to hide under their ‘helping the poor image’ to silence the rest of us.

This post is filed in our ‘community destabilization’ category where it belongs!

Endnote:  Big Government has an Alinsky article posted here, that is worth looking at.  It infuriated me on one point, the Alinsky biographer being interviewed said Alinsky wouldn’t approve of the O’Keefe/Giles ‘dirty trick’ of taping the ACORN workers (actually who cares if he would or wouldn’t!).  I think the biographer is flat-out wrong—Alinsky promoted the concept of the ‘ends justify the means’ ANY MEANS!  

I’ve read a lot of Alinsky and to make my point one story jumps to mind—he went to Rochester to “organize” and pulled a dirty trick.   He hired a bunch of blacks, fed them cans of beans and sent them to a theater (symphony or opera, I can’t remember) and they all passed gas to disrupt the other theater-goers simply to stir up a hornets nest in the city.

Alinsky did, however, disapprove of Bill Ayers and the WeatherUnderground tactics,  not because they were despicable tactics that involved bombing innocent people, but because they weren’t the correct tactics for the situation.  What Bill Ayers accomplished was driving many people who were really ambivalent into the camp of the political Rightwing.  That is what Alinsky objected to!

I doubt that O’Keefe and Giles have driven a single conservative into the arms of the political Leftwing.