Left Rolls Out Alinsky Offensive
Unhinged response to border law enforcement follows a familiar playbook.
“It’s very sad that Nancy Pelosi and her sidekick, Cryin’ Chuck Schumer, want to protect illegal immigrants far more than the citizens of our country,” President Trump tweeted on June 23rd. President Trump is correct. Pelosi, let’s not forget, went so far as to defend the “dignity” of MS-13 gang members. She did not like it when President Trump called them “animals.” Instead of working with the president in a bipartisan fashion to stem the continuing flood of illegal immigrants into the United States with effective security measures and the closing of gaping loopholes in this country’s current immigration laws, Pelosi, Schumer, most other Democrats and some craven Republicans, along with the fake news media, are encouraging an open borders policy. It’s not enough for this pro-illegal immigration crowd to insist on sanctuaries, amnesty and a path to citizenship for virtually all of some 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country. They oppose every effort to close the immigration law’s loopholes and they oppose any effective law enforcement, so that millions more illegal immigrants can invade the country and be rewarded ultimately for their lawlessness with U.S. citizenship.
President Trump’s enemies successfully exploited misleading images of children separated from their parents or other adults who had crossed the border illegally with the children. Due to legal restrictions resulting from a combination of legislation and judicial decisions on the ability to keep children under custody with their purported parents who are being prosecuted for illegally entering the United States, President Trump faced a dilemma. He could either continue the “catch and release” policies of the Obama administration, or incarcerate the adults for illegally entering the country pending their court hearing, while providing government care for the children in the interim. The president chose the latter course. However, after days of rising outrage in the country fueled by an irresponsible press and demagogues, he decided he had no choice but to issue an executive order putting an end to family separation. Nevertheless, he is proceeding with his zero-tolerance law enforcement policy even if it means keeping adults and the children who accompanied them together in a detention facility while the adults’ cases proceed. This decision is already encountering legal problems because of judicial limitations on the duration of detention of children that was imposed by what is known as ‘the Flores settlement,’ which a federal judge later applied to intact families.
The pro-illegal immigration advocates demand that the adults and children be immediately released, adding them to the millions of illegal immigrants already here. They are utilizing Saul-Alinsky-style tactics to press their demands.
Saul Alinsky, Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s idol and an inspiration for 1960’s student radicals and for radical protesters ever since, developed and popularized the political tactics of social action confrontation and “community organizing.” His two best known works were Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals. Alinsky’s most famous tactic involved portraying one’s political opponent as the essence of evil. “A war is not an intellectual debate, and in the war against social evils there are no rules of fair play,” said Alinsky. “In our war against the social menaces of mankind there can be no compromise.” He added, “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it…. [T]here is no point to tactics unless one has a target upon which to center the attacks.”
The pro-illegal immigration advocates have followed the Alinsky playbook by portraying the detention facilities used by the Trump administration to temporarily house children as akin to Nazi concentration camps. President Trump is compared to Hitler and the president’s supporters are demonized as Nazi sympathizers. MSNBC’s Donny Deutsch last Friday, for example, made this insane comment: “If you vote for Trump, you are ripping children from parents’ arms. If you vote for Trump then you, the voter, you, not Donald Trump, are standing at the border, like Nazis, going ‘you here, you here.‘”
Moving easily from rhetorical warfare to direct confrontational tactics, ‘Occupy ICE’ protesters last week shut down the ICE building in Portland, Oregon. They replaced the American flag with a ‘Refugees Welcome’ flag. The Nebraska branch of the so-called anti-fascist group Antifa has exposed ICE employees to a potential threat of physical violence by spreading identity information on social media of some 1600 ICE employees.
“Moral rationalization,” Alinsky said, “is indispensable to all kinds of action, whether to justify the selection or the use of ends or means. All effective actions require the passport of morality.”
A co-owner of a restaurant that refused to serve White House press secretary Sarah Sanders on Friday reportedly cited morality and living up to “certain standards” as justification for discriminating against Ms. Sanders because of her political association with Trump administration immigration policies the co-owner disagreed with. This incident took place after President Trump had signed his executive order ending family separations.
“This feels like the moment in our democracy when people have to make uncomfortable actions and decisions to uphold their morals,” the restaurant co-owner said. The same people so quick to condemn the devout Christian bakers who refused to bake a customized cake for a same-sex wedding for religious reasons are no doubt rallying behind the restaurant co-owner’s self-proclaimed moral right to refuse to serve someone she despised for political reasons at a business that is supposed to be open to the public at large.
Referring to the belligerent harassment of Department of Homeland Security chief Kristjen Nielson at a D.C. restaurant, and then outside her home, California Congresswoman Maxine Waters called for more of the same Alinsky-style confrontations against Trump officials. “Already, you have members of your Cabinet that are being booed out of restaurants,” she said to an enthusiastic crowd, “who have protesters taking up at their house, who say, ‘No peace, no sleep. No peace, no sleep.‘”
“God is on OUR side!” Congresswoman Waters bellowed, invoking Alinsky’s mode of moral rationalization. “On the side of the children. On the side of what’s right. On the side of what’s honorable.”
Apparently, the immorality of detaining children in the country illegally depends on the president responsible for the detention. Unaccompanied child migrants from Central America back in 2014, during the Obama administration, were photographed caged in holding cells, sleeping under foil bed sheets inside a warehouse-style building. Obama’s supporters have ignored or continued to make excuses for his inhumane detention of children, while demonizing President Trump, his supporters, and law enforcement agents trying to protect the nation’s borders. For example, according to a report in the Daily Caller, protesters from the League of United Latin American Citizens, who “attempted to stop a bus that was transporting illegal immigrants to another detention center” in Texas, had no comment when asked whether they had protested the same conditions in many of the same facilities during the Obama administration. A U.S. Border Patrol agent reportedly broke his ankle as he tried to protect an elderly woman during the protest.
Finally, the pro-illegal immigration advocates have adopted the Alinsky tenet of clubbing the enemy “to death with their ‘book’ of rules and regulations.” They are counting on congressional inaction, leaving the loophole laden current legislation in place without effective border security. Efforts by Republican leaders in the House of Representatives to craft a compromise immigration bill, seeking to combine protections for Dreamers and children with more border security, are foundering, thus playing into the hands of the pro-illegal immigration advocates. They are relying on judicial intervention to force their open borders agenda upon the country incrementally through victories for the so-called “Dreamers,” court orders protecting children and their parents from deportation and possibly requiring their release into American communities, and upholding of broad undeserved claims of asylum. So far, the pro-illegal immigration advocates have been succeeding.
Congress, with the help of the courts, has created the current mess by allowing loopholes in the law that illegal immigrants have been exploiting for too long, with the help of clever immigration attorneys. Asylum is being abused by migrants who are not escaping government persecution, but rather leaving their home countries to improve their economic situation or to escape gang or domestic violence. Adults trying to enter the United States illegally who use children (whether theirs or not) as their admission tickets are subjecting the children to the harmful consequences of their own knowing malfeasance.
Every country has the sovereign right to protect its borders. The only way to prevent many millions more illegal immigrants from achieving permanent sanctuary in this country is to immediately deport those illegally crossing our border who cannot demonstrate the basis for a legitimate fear of government persecution against them in their home countries. The burden of proof should be on the claimants. President Trump was correct when he tweeted on Sunday: “We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came.”