Thread: The Evangelical Crusade Against Immigration

The Evangelical Crusade Against Immigration


A demonstrator holds an American flag at a protest near the entrance to the US Border Patrol facility in Murrieta, California, on July 7, 2014.
Image: ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images
By Gina Piccalo15 hours ago

The protesters were fuming mad. They had come out in droves to block the buses carrying children fleeing poverty and violence in Central America from reaching a Border Patrol processing center in the sleepy Southern California town of Murrieta.

Carrying gigantic American flags and oversized placards decrying "illegals," they jeered at the children behind the windows. Fearing further escalation, federal officials rerouted the buses to San Diego.

It was just the beginning.

clash

Demonstrators shove each other, Friday, July 4, 2014, outside a U.S. Border Patrol station in Murrieta, Calif.

Image: Mark J. Terrill/Associated Press

In the days since the July 1 demonstration, the arrival of tens of thousands immigrants from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras — mostly children and women — has dominated headlines, with several tumultuous protests taking place in Murrieta. On Wednesday, President Barack Obama travels to Texas to meet with faith leaders to talk about the border crisis.

For one faction of evangelic Christians, fighting immigration has been a long-time crusade, their sometimes vitriolic views communicated via placards in Murrieta, radio shows on American Family Radio, well-trafficked Facebook pages such as Christians Against Illegal Immigration and fundamentalist Christian news sites such as One America News Network.


[IMG][IMG][/IMG][/IMG]


Facebook screen shot

Christians Against illegal Immigration Facebook page

This faction, known as “Teavangelicals” for their connection to the Tea Party movement, cites the Ten Commandments and the Book of Genesis as proof that anything less than deportation of illegal immigrants violates God’s will.

Crossing the border illegally, “coveting” the American lifestyle, “stealing” U.S. jobs and healthcare, immigrants break all kinds of divinely inspired codes, they say. Though God commands them to “care for the strangers and aliens among us,” they say this edict doesn’t apply when the strangers and aliens are “lawless invaders.”

“Illegal immigration is the antithesis of Christianity,”

“Illegal immigration is the antithesis of Christianity,” says William Gheen, Raleigh, N.C.-based president of Americans For Legal Immigration. “It’s a gross mischaracterization of Christianity to apply it to tolerating the mass lawlessness, death and damages involved in illegal immigration.”

Christ-like compassion for those in need? “Where is the compassion for the victims of illegal immigration? Those who have had loved ones murdered by illegal aliens?" American Family Assn. spokesman Bryan Fischer wrote in an April column on his group’s news site. "Those whose hospitals have been closed because they have been overwhelmed providing medical care to those who have no right to be in this country and cannot pay?”

When asked about those children crossing the border in search of refuge from gang-related violence and death, Americans for Legal Immigration president Gheen said immigrant children are coached by money-hungry smugglers who give them “cheat sheets” with fabricated stories of woe, crafted to ensure their amnesty. “There’s no mass slaughter of children in any of the host countries,” Gheen said. “There’s no documentation of any mass slaughter...The children are reciting lines. This is being orchestrated.”

While the role of so-called coyote smugglers in this latest wave of immigration is unclear, in March, the U.N. Refugee Agency announced that interviews with more than 400 children from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras found more than half were “forcibly displaced because they suffered or faced harms that indicated a potential or actual need for international protection.”

A poll released in March by the Brookings Institution and the Public Religion Research Institute found that white evangelical Protestants were the least likely of the religious groups surveyed to support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

cop-cars

Border Patrol officers guard the US Border Patrol facility in Murrieta, California on July 3, 2014, where tension is rising over the arrival of undocumented immigrants.

Image: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP/Getty Images

But since many immigrant children and their parents fill the pews of evangelical churches, it's a thorny issue for church leaders.

In 2012, a number of high-ranking, more mainstream evangelical leaders formed the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) to lobby Congress to reform immigration law. More than 100 evangelical leaders signed a letter to Congress urging members to address the crisis.

Since Congress still hasn’t taken up the issue, EIT began a massive media campaign last year grounded in the Bible, specifically the passage from Matthew 25:35 in which Jesus says: “I was a stranger and you welcomed me in.”

Who-Would-Jesus-Save

From left, Murray Hawkins, of Cedar Plains Park, Calif.; the Rev. David Farley, of Los Angeles; and the Rev. Joel Menchaca, of Las Vegas, gather at the gates of a naval base in Port Hueneme, Calif., Tuesday, July 8, 2014.

Image: Ventura County Star, Karen Quincy Loberg/Associated Press

“That’s a sobering passage for a lot Christians,” says EIT field director Matthew Soerens. “There is certainly an element of the American population – evangelical Christians included there – whose response [to immigration] is driven by fear. As a Christian, my response would be that perfect love casts out fear.”

EIT also released The Stranger, a 40-minute documentary featuring the stories of three immigrants and interviews with Biblical scholars and economists. More than 1,200 screenings have been scheduled at churches nationally and more than 400 prayer groups have formed on the issue. In April, EIT landed a favorable profile in the New York Times with a headline that read: “For Evangelicals, A Shift in Views on Immigration.”

The Teavangelicals weren't pleased.

The founder of Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration, Kelly Kullford, says the EIT campaign ignored the views held by most evangelicals. “It didn’t reflect reality at all,” Kullford said.

Kullberg says she organized her Ohio-based group in spring 2013 after discovering that progressive liberal philanthropist George Soros was linked to EIT, which she and many others believe proved the group was a front for liberal ideals. (Soerens says no Soros’ money has been used directly or indirectly to fund EIT and EIT’s board is non-partisan.)

Kullberg rallied more than 1,500 pastors, priests and evangelical leaders who signed a letter to Congress sent in October, that was updated and re-sent last month stating “in Scripture we see both welcome and walls. We do not find blanket amnesty and asylum, nor debt escalation. It is a book of wisdom, not of folly.”

http://mashable.com/2014/07/09/the-e...S+%26+World%29

In 2012, a number of high-ranking, more mainstream evangelical leaders formed the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) to lobby Congress to reform immigration law. More than 100 evangelical leaders signed a letter to Congress urging members to address the crisis.

Since Congress still hasn’t taken up the issue, EIT began a massive media campaign last year grounded in the Bible, specifically the passage from Matthew 25:35 in which Jesus says: “I was a stranger and you welcomed me in.”

One of the goals of the Open Society group has been to weaken the "Religious Right" by funding progressive "religious" groups.

The Evangelical Immigration Table Exposed As Another Soros Front

(Photo credit: Lexpress.fr)

By Marjorie Jeffrey (@MarjorieJeffrey)

Politics makes for strange bedfellows goes the old saying. The marriage between a group of Evangelical Christian organizers and George Soros has birthed a new organization called theEvangelical Immigration Table (EIT).

EIT reportedly does not legally exist and is an arm of the George Soros funded National Immigration Forum, which as a “neutral third-party institution” facilitated EIT’s $250,000 radio ad campaign urging Evangelicals to back mass legalization of illegal immigrants.
So if the EIT is just a front, then what exactly is the National Immigration Forum? NIF received over three million dollarsfrom Soros’ Open Society Institute (OSI) in 2009-2010 alone, as well as one million dollars from the left-wing Ford Foundation. Furthermore, Sojourners is also a recipient of Soros’ money, and their President and CEO, Jim Wallis, is prominent within EIT.

All roads seem to lead to Soros, as a cursory glance into the funding of many religious organizations that have publicly advocated for the recent amnesty legislation find their way back to the Hungarian-American’s bountiful leftist check book. Take, for example, the so-called Nuns on the Bus.

This situation of course does not mean that a believer cannot personally advocate for legalizing illegal immigrants without having been bought by George Soros. But the facts point towards a concerted public relations campaign on the part of the progressive religious left funded heavily by one individual who is himself a leftist and an atheist.

The Evangelical Immigration Table is composed of a surprisingly large list of notables from evangelical organizations, presidents of universities, and officials of denominations, and including organizations such as World Relief, Bread for the World, and the National Association of Evangelicals. Very likely most of them were unaware how their endorsement would be exploited to back specific legislation, much less realize that the political venture was the fruit of Soros philanthropy.

Since their public launch in January of this year, timed to overlap with the launch of President Obama’s second term, EIT organized events on religious college campuses, primarily focusing on their “I Was A Stranger” campaign (which, if you haven’t seen it, is a truly masterful piece of emotional blackmail).

When EIT broke onto the public scene at the beginning of the year, they described themselves as a “grassroots organization.” American evangelicalism is a highly fractious movement, and it is highly suspect for any group to claim to represent it as a whole. Most polling suggests that Evangelicals still tend to be more supportive of stricter regulations on immigration than other religious groups. Jim Wallis has recently suggested there has been a “sea change” among the average Evangelical in favor of legalizing illegal immigrants. And yet Evangelicals poll significantly higher in favor of better border security over or at least before creating a “path to citizenship” than does the typical voter. Evangelical elites are defying members of their flock who generally oppose amnesty.

So what led these elites to break ranks with their congregations in favor of amnesty? Various reasons might be offered: some may truly believe that the Gospel calls for more open borders. Some are already part of the institutional Religious Left, such as Jim Wallis. Some may agree with Samuel Rodriguez, President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, that Hispanics “have a more complete vision of the gospel.” The revelation of EIT’s funding source as George Soros ads another puzzle piece to the mix.
What are Soros, the open borders lobby, and the progressive left really trying to accomplish? The Left sees a prime opportunity to exploit Evangelical leaders by crafting a media campaign designed to convince the GOP leadership that one of their main constituencies, Bible Belt Christians, favors comprehensive reform.

Some may argue legitimately that some Evangelical elites genuinely see passing amnesty as their Christian duty. Mega funding by leftist philanthropies and high level, publicized political partnerships are added inducements.

But there remains the nauseating fact that some Evangelicals are peddling a new sort of liberation theology to American Christians, aided by a man who has actively supported and financed organizations that directly go against Evangelical beliefs about marriage, abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research.

As Mark Tooley has previously pointed out, the average Evangelical is at a disadvantage when faced with such an overwhelming number of notables pushing a politically revised version of the Gospel: “Catholic teaching typically explains a hierarchy of public issues, prioritizing marriage and sanctity of life, for example, which are intrinsic to Christian faith, over important but less theologically binding issues of prudential judgment, such as federal entitlement programs or immigration. Evangelicals lack this clear tradition because, in part, they lack much of a tradition overall, being mostly a modern American movement that emerged out of several Protestant traditions.”
This lack of tradition and lack of accountability for some leaders sets up a situation where many Evangelicals might be prone to political manipulation. If that is the purpose of the Evangelical Immigration Table, then it is a sad betrayal of a flock by its shepherds.

http://juicyecumenism.com/2013/06/05/the-evangelical-immigration-table-exposed-as-another-soros-front/

Soros-funded Fake “Catholic” Groups in Retreat; Catholic Church Rejects Surrender Terms from Obama

By Cliff Kincaid – January 30, 2012

My Catholic priest, Father Larry Swink, delivered a homily on Sunday that I told him would make headlines. In the toughest sermon I have ever heard from a pulpit, he attacked the Obama Administration as evil, even demonic, and warned of religious persecution ahead. What was also newsworthy about the sermon was that he cited The Washington Post in agreement—not on the subject of the Obama Administration being evil, but on the matter of its abridgment of the constitutional right to freedom of religion.

What is happening is extraordinary and unprecedented. The Catholic Church is in open revolt against the Obama Administration, with Fr. Swink noting from the pulpit that priests across the archdiocese were joining the call on Sunday to rally Catholics to resistance against the U.S. Government. He said we are entering a time of religious persecution and that Catholics and others will have to make a final decision about which side they are on.

The issue is what the Catholic Bishops have called a “literally unconscionable” edict by the Obama Administration demanding that sterilization, abortifacients and contraception be included in virtually all health plans.

At a time when the media are full of reports about who is ahead and behind in the polls, and who will win the next Republican presidential primary, this incredible uprising in the Catholic Church is something that could not only overshadow the political campaign season, but also may have a major impact on the ultimate outcome – if Republicans know how to handle it. This matter goes beyond partisan politics to the growing perception of an unconstitutional Obama Administration assault on religious freedom. To hear the Catholic Bishops and Priests describe it, our constitutional republic and our freedoms hang in the balance.

The administration claims there is a religious exemption in the mandate, but the bishops say it is so narrow that it fails to cover the vast majority of faith-based organizations, including Catholic hospitals, universities and service organizations that help millions every year. “Ironically,” they say, “not even Jesus & his disciples would have qualified.”

The bishops go on, “Now that the Administration has refused to recognize the Constitutional conscience rights of organizations and individuals who oppose the mandate, the bishops are now urging Catholics and others of good will to fight this unprecedented attack on conscience rights and religious liberty.”

Obama is at war with the Catholic Church

Interestingly, The Washington Post, as Father Swink indicated, agrees with the bishops. The paper said, “In this circumstance, requiring a religiously affiliated employer to spend its own money in a way that violates its religious principles does not make an adequate accommodation for those deeply held views. Having recognized the principle of a religious exemption, the administration should have expanded it.”

So why would the administration pick a major fight with the Catholic Church? There are two main reasons. (1) The administration wants to please its progressive and feminist, secular pro-abortion base. (2) The administration believes Catholics are divided on the issue and will ignore their leaders and follow Obama.

Support for the latter explanation comes in the form of the Obama Administration’s efforts to co-opt the Catholic Church, primarily through appointing nominal Catholics to high-level positions in government and keeping funding going to the church for “social justice” causes. Another player in this effort is the hedge-fund billionaire George Soros, an atheist who nevertheless has found groups that are “Catholic in name only” to accept his financial largesse. These groups, including Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, are designed to give the impression that Catholics are less concerned about issues like stopping abortion and protecting the sanctity of traditional marriage than passing government health care. The Obama/Soros gamble may be backfiring.

It’s true that the bishops went along with Obama’s health care scheme, even lobbying on its behalf. But now they seem to be realizing that the plan was a Trojan Horse designed to force population control measures on the people of the United States. It will be difficult for the bishops to continue working with the administration on other issues, like immigration. They have drawn a line in the sand. They cannot back down.

Father Larry Swink of Jesus The Divine Word Catholic Church in Huntingtown, Maryland, is not alone in his tough language. Pittsburgh Bishop David A. Zubik posted a letter on the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh’s website that said, “It is really hard to believe that it happened. It comes like a slap in the face. The Obama administration has just told the Catholics of the United States, ‘To Hell with you!’ There is no other way to put it.” He added, “This whole process of mandating these guidelines undermines the democratic process itself. In this instance, the mandate declares pregnancy a disease, forces a culture of contraception and abortion on society, all while completely bypassing the legislative process.”

You know it’s serious when the bishops are talking about heaven and hell.

Indeed, Fr. Swink opened his discussion of what he described as the evil nature of the Obama Administration by reading from scripture about Jesus casting out demons. He saw the order on health care coverage as the start of religious persecution. The congregation joined him in calls of “Amen” when he challenged them to stand tall with the church.

You cannot expect the secular Washington Post to go along with such rhetoric. But even its liberal editorial writer saw the ramifications of the health care order, perhaps anticipating the confrontation that we now see developing. From the point of view of this liberal paper, the Obama Administration is not only undermining religious freedom but risking a major backlash to its overall “progressive” agenda and even a second term in office.

Some may see this battle as just another church-state dust-up that will be resolved through litigation. But when apocalyptic imagery is used, such as what I heard at my church on Sunday, one must wonder if there is an awakening on the part of the Catholic community and if there is something else going on here besides politics as usual. In short, is the Catholic Church beginning to finally recognize the real nature of the Obama Administration?

http://religiousleftexposed.com/home/2012/02/an-evil-law-against-freedom-of-religion.html

How George Soros and immigrant form Hungary, that had been banned and run out of 2 countries for financial and social disruption, was even given citizenship here never ceases to amaze me. But, he has been funding Democrats and bending that party to the the left's agenda since he arrived. Moderate and Blue dog Democrats have been driven from the party and replaced with lock step Socialists. I have to assume that he had some influential backers on the issue of his citizenship.

Lately, I am have begun to suspect that his attention has been turned to the Republican Party since that party now appears to be undermining and driving out Conservatives.

Going back to 2003.

George Soros' Atheism Fuels Conservative Rage




Robert B. Bluey, Staff Writer

Thursday, December 18, 2003



(CNSNews.com) - Conservatives are fuming over the $15.5 million that billionaire financier and philanthropist George Soros has pledged to defeat President Bush. But they're also anxious to fight back and expose what they consider to be Soros' "immoral" beliefs and atheist leanings.

Several prominent conservatives told CNSNews.com that Soros' "moral bankruptcy" would prove disastrous for the Democratic Party. The liberal groups that have benefited from Soros' gifts - America Coming Together, MoveOn.org and the Center for American Progress - are run by Democrats and have a close allegiance to the party's candidates.

Soros, who emigrated from Hungary in 1956 and later became a naturalized U.S. citizen, has expressed outrage at the Bush administration's foreign policy, especially its decision to invade Iraq. Soros and his foundation, the Open Society Institute (OSI), follow a strict philosophy that runs counter to Bush's objectives.


The ideas behind Soros' "open society" have fueled the anger among conservatives. The OSI's website states innocently enough that its objectives include "the strengthening of civil society; economic reform; education at all levels; human rights; legal reform and public administration; media and communications; public health; and arts and culture."

Soros has given away nearly $5 billion in his lifetime, but while a significant portion of that money has been spent on pro-democracy movements overseas, some of it has gone to liberal causes in the United States.

From abortion rights groups to drug reform initiatives, Soros' domestic funding generally ends up in the hands of liberals. The self-proclaimed atheist also created the Project on Death in America to generate debate about the dying process and "alleviate unnecessary suffering."

Among the beneficiaries of Soros' largesse is the Center for Reproductive Rights, the pro-abortion group that recently saw its internal strategy plotting memos publicized by a pro-family group, and at the request of U.S. Rep. Christopher Smith (R-N.J.), included in the Congressional Record.

Conservative commentator Armstrong Williams, an authority on Christian values, said Soros wants to destroy the values on which the United States was founded. Williams called Soros "morally bankrupt" and he wants the U.S. Justice Department to investigate his contributions.

"He hates God and his biblical principles. He hates everything that's godly," Williams said. "He's jumping up and down at the thought that same-sex marriages could happen in this country. It's a direct assault on the church, the institutions that restrain and restrict our behavior and remind us of the standard of morality and moral absolutes."

Other conservatives were just as harsh. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, founder and chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said Soros had to be taken seriously because, "He's the Daddy Warbucks of everything we do not believe in."

"No one knows what demons drive Mr. Soros to consistently fund anti-family agendas," said Robert H. Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute at Concerned Women for America. "But he seems determined to turn the world upside down and replace morality with immorality."


Surviving Nazi-occupied Hungary


For much of his life, Soros shied away from public attention. It wasn't until after his Quantum Fund became a huge success on Wall Street that he began to dabble in philanthropy around the age of 50.

As a child and teenager, Soros was profoundly shaped as a Jew living in Nazi-occupied Hungary. His father, Tivadar, protected George, his mother Erzebet and brother Paul by obtaining false identities for them. At 14, George assumed the identity of a Christian and was separated from his parents.

"I would say that that's when my character was made," Soros said in a 60 Minutes interview in 1998.

A biography of Soros by former New York Times reporter Michael T. Kaufman detailed the experience. When George was 6 year old, his father changed the family name from Schwartz to Soros to protect the family from the threat of Nazi policies targeting Jews.

After surviving the threat of Nazism, Soros' parents later had to endure a Soviet-led communist takeover of Hungary. They eventually fled the country and united with George and his brother in America.

While these experiences shaped Soros as an individual, he grew fond of the open society philosophy while studying at the London School of Economics. There, a scholar named Karl Popper would become Soros' mentor and influence his thinking of open societies.

According to Kaufman's biography, Soros was born a Jew but only began to take an interest in religion when he was about 12 years old. He had a bar mitzvah a year later. Several of Soros' relatives became Christians, but as time wore on Soros' own faith in a higher being faded. In the 60 Minutes interview, Soros admitted he was not religious and didn't believe in God.

Eliciting controversy and conservative ire

His feelings about Israel generally run counter to traditional Jewish thought. In his new book, The Bubble of American Supremacy, Soros takes a swipe at Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who he blames as much as Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for the violence in the Middle East.

"Perpetrators are now in charge on both sides," Soros wrote.

At a Jewish Funders' Network appearance in November, Soros' remarks on Israel and anti-Semitism drew an angry response from the Anti-Defamation League. But that controversy died down after critics looked at the full context of his comments, said Michael Vachon, Soros' aide.

Sheldon, head of the Traditional Values Coalition, remained critical of his views on Israel. He said Bush's strong alliance with Israel could partly explain Soros' desire to see the president defeated next year.

Vachon disagreed and noted that Soros is proud of his Jewish heritage. He said the attacks from conservatives are unwarranted, adding that Soros has done more good for people in the world than most critics realize.

"The notion that somehow George Soros is an immoral character is so preposterous," Vachon said. "One doesn't even know how to begin to answer such a ludicrous charge. It's an outrageous claim when you look at the record of the man's life and what he's done."

A former consultant to Soros' foundation, David Rieff, said conservatives appear to be holding Soros to a double standard. Rieff compared Soros to Richard Mellon Scaife, a wealthy conservative who has funded projects frequently criticized by liberals.

"He's putting his money where his mouth is. And as far as the conservative disquiet," Rieff said, "apparently they can dish it out but they can't take it. Like good capitalists, they thought it was the right of rich people to fund the activities that they believed in."

Americans need to be fully informed about Soros, said Robert McGinnis, a former vice president of the Family Research Council who researched Soros' philanthropy while working there.

"Soros has put his money where his beliefs are, and that's the American way," McGinnis said. "They're radical in my estimation, but he certainly has made a valiant effort across the globe. U.S. citizens need to be wary of the fact that he is embracing a pro-drug, anti-life agenda."

The Capital Research Center, which tracks philanthropists like Soros, found that the Open Society Institute has a pattern of giving to liberal groups that support drug legalization, euthanasia, immigrant entitlements and feminism.

"There is a consistent thread through everything he does," said John Carlisle, editor of the center's Organization Trends and Foundation Watch. "He's a devout secular ideologue."

Vachon acknowledged that Soros is a secularist. He also said the billionaire could handle the attacks from conservatives. But Vachon said Soros' concerns extend beyond Bush; he believes the concept of an open society in the United States is threatened.

"He's giving money to a group that wants to see the incumbent Republican president defeated in the next election," Vachon said. "A lot of people are going to attack him. He's hardly surprised by it."

http://www.crosswalk.com/1236027/

Soros Groups Dodged Scrutiny, Pushed Tea Party Profiling



Posted 06/05/2013

Scandal: IRS profiling of Tea Party groups was endorsed by Democrats who ignored tax-exempt groups funded by billionaire backer George Soros and others who encouraged this assault on democracy and the Constitution.

Rep. Jim McDermott has made it official that Democrats who don't support efforts to enhance border security on the grounds it means ethnic profiling do support federally backed, taxpayer-funded profiling of Tea Party groups based on their political and religious beliefs.

To make it worse, like the rape victim who is told she wore suggestive clothing, McDermott, D-Wash., pointed his finger at representatives of targeted groups at Tuesday's hearing and told them in essence that they had it coming and brought it on themselves by exercising their First Amendment rights.

The next time the IRS asks what we read, the response should be "the United States Constitution."

Interestingly, the finger-pointing Democrats who were given the opportunity to call representatives of liberal or progressive groups that were similarly targeted did not because they could not. No group with "hope," "change," "forward" or "progressive" was targeted.

On the contrary, some groups, like those funded by Soros, enjoy tax-exempt status as they work to aid in the fundamental transformation of America.

Both the Human Rights Campaign ($2,716,328 and ProPublica ($300,000) are Soros-funded.

The IRS released the confidential donor lists of the National Organization for Marriage to the liberal Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization. This is a felony punishable by five years in a federal prison.

At that time, Joe Solmonese, a left-wing activist and Huffington Post contributor, was the president of the HRC. Solmonese was also a 2012 Obama campaign co-chairman. The Huffington Post used the confidential documents to publish a story questioning Mitt Romney's support for traditional marriage.

ProPublica, a liberal nonprofit news investigative website, received copies of applications from 31 conservative nonprofits from the IRS in November 2012, including nine that had not yet been approved and thus were not supposed to be made public.
Americans United for Change (AUFC) enjoys 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. The group exists, its own website says, "to amplify the progressive message — to contribute to a grass-roots groundswell for progressive policies." It directly engaged Republican senators facing reelection in 2008, running TV ads against them.

Soros-connected MoveOn PAC reported contributions of $305,171 in 2006 to AUFC, another $150,000 in 2008 and back up to $300,000 in 2010, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Yet it was never targeted for trying to change the political landscape.

The Soros-funded Ruckus Society is a 501(c)3 organization that is part of the Occupy Movement.

Its mission statement is to provide the tools, training and support needed to achieve its goals through the strategic use of "creative, nonviolent" direct action.

What it supports is criminal trespass and was heavily involved in attempts to shut down the Port of Oakland.

The IRS targeting of Tea Party groups can be traced in part back to a series of letters that the liberal groups Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and Democracy 21 sent to the IRS back in 2010 and 2011.

Both groups were funded by Soros' Open Society Foundations. The CLC received $677,000 and Democracy 21 $365,000 from the Soros-backed foundation, according to the Foundation's 990 tax forms.

Alabama Tea Party leader Becky Gerritson is not a Hungarian-born billionaire whose network of tax-favored organizations routinely funds political activity including attempts to put grass-roots organizations such as hers out of business.

"I want to protect and preserve the America that I grew up in, the America that people cross oceans and risk their lives to become part of, and I am terrified that it is slipping away," Gerritson, who described herself as a "born-free American woman," told Congress and the American people.

Sometimes, so are we.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...#ixzz3755PuRbb
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook