Thread: Dobbs Reaches Out to Latinos, With Politics in Mind

Originally Posted by Apen

The object of immigration today should be to bring the immigration control in line with the needs of the nation as stated above not the needs of would be inhabitants seeking a better life.

That's it. Right there.

Outstanding Apen and Welcome to ALIPAC!

Originally Posted by sunlandbob

Perhaps we should all wait for that clarification from Lou before making any decisions.

The whole interview of Lou was designed to trap him into making himself look foolish.

Anyway, still looking for that clarification.

The very last place Lou Dobbs should be giving an interview with is an Hispanic station. Unless he wants to capture the Hispanic vote only.
I watched the entire interview and Lou was flubbering all over his answers. If Lou Dobbs is going to forget that most of his audience are patriotic Americans that want stop illegal immigration, then good riddance to him.
Lou alrady spoke so there is nothing to clarify.

Originally Posted by Apen

Those here illegally should voluntarily leave unless they can show cause to conform to OUR needs and wishes NOT theirs.

That is amnesty for illegal aliens.

I do not speak for ALIPAC, but I do know ALIPAC does not support amnesty for illegals.

The people who are here illegally should go back to their home country and come back legally. No amnesty. No special treatment. They go to the back of the line and do it the proper way.

They are not above the law and they definitely should not be able to sneak in, "show cause," and jump ahead of those people trying to come to the USA legally.

Originally Posted by butterbean

Originally Posted by sunlandbob

Perhaps we should all wait for that clarification from Lou before making any decisions.

The whole interview of Lou was designed to trap him into making himself look foolish.

Anyway, still looking for that clarification.

. . . If Lou Dobbs is going to forget that most of his audience are patriotic Americans that want stop illegal immigration, then good riddance to him.
Lou alrady spoke so there is nothing to clarify.

I think you're right, butterbean. That's why there has been no clarification. He said what he believes and no clarification is necessary. He's for amnesty.

LOU shows a certain wishy-washy that LOOKS BOTH PARTIES.

I could support Sheriff Joe Arpaio. What do ya'll think?

ALPEAUX

Lou Dobbs just did the same sheepish interview he did a year or so ago when he had the head of La Raza on his show. He cowed down to her and let her run the interview, get in his face, shout and demand his resignation. Seems that worked out for La Raza then and now.

He seems to be terrified of women or something because he let's them run all over him, yet, he can assert himself, and his ideas against a male. I think he's too weak for gov't office. JM.02W

If Dobbs supports amnesty I won't support him and I don't think anyone else should either.

I watched the video about 30 minutes ago so that I could take the survey. I read the comments on Thursday and Friday and didn't post a reply here until I had seen the video myself. I have learned the hard way that it is better to see/hear myself rather than depend on others for my own views. No offense to anyone - it is just me! First, why in the heck was he there? I agree with Maria that he sounds like a politician and that is NOT a good thing. He watched every word that came out of his mouth. We already have enough politicians, folks! They lie, cheat and steal to get votes! The second thing he did that rankled me was his constant reference to the "far left" as being the group most responsible for the "extreme rhetoric". Huh? I think it is a combination of progressives (if we grant amnesty, look at all those votes!), businessmen/women who like cheap labor (both sides of the political coin there), etc. But far left? No and he said it several times - looks like he is kissing up to Repubs or libertarians or ? but certainly not to the left. He is definitely saying there should be amnesty of some sort but doesn't say how. I DO agree that we need to secure our borders before anything else but that is about all I agree with him about. He is backing off from his firm stand on his TV show and trying to play both sides. He should know better! I am very upset about this turnabout he has made (or maybe he has always been that way and we are now seeing it?) and I definitely would NOT support him in any way politically. He is on my NOT list. I was totally irritated with Maria and her portrayal of the Sheriff - she didn't want to be told that all his inmates are treated the same, did she? Inhumane, my foot! Oh, I'll shut up now but I needed to vent and I thank you for the place to do so.

Originally Posted by nemastef

I watched the video about 30 minutes ago so that I could take the survey. I read the comments on Thursday and Friday and didn't post a reply here until I had seen the video myself. I have learned the hard way that it is better to see/hear myself rather than depend on others for my own views. No offense to anyone - it is just me! First, why in the heck was he there? I agree with Maria that he sounds like a politician and that is NOT a good thing. He watched every word that came out of his mouth. We already have enough politicians, folks! They lie, cheat and steal to get votes! The second thing he did that rankled me was his constant reference to the "far left" as being the group most responsible for the "extreme rhetoric". Huh? I think it is a combination of progressives (if we grant amnesty, look at all those votes!), businessmen/women who like cheap labor (both sides of the political coin there), etc. But far left? No and he said it several times - looks like he is kissing up to Repubs or libertarians or ? but certainly not to the left. He is definitely saying there should be amnesty of some sort but doesn't say how. I DO agree that we need to secure our borders before anything else but that is about all I agree with him about. He is backing off from his firm stand on his TV show and trying to play both sides. He should know better! I am very upset about this turnabout he has made (or maybe he has always been that way and we are now seeing it?) and I definitely would NOT support him in any way politically. He is on my NOT list. I was totally irritated with Maria and her portrayal of the Sheriff - she didn't want to be told that all his inmates are treated the same, did she? Inhumane, my foot! Oh, I'll shut up now but I needed to vent and I thank you for the place to do so.

Yes, vent. It was a very disappointing interview. I too have no clue why he went on it, other than he wanted to reach out to the Legal Latino vote but of course was dragged through the murk of race cards because he opposes illegal immigration. We need to see what he says in reply to the uproar, and least I do, because I like his position on illegal immigration which is to stop it, I like his position on border and port security which is to secure them, I like his protectionist view on trade which is to protect ours, and as to the other ... "after borders are secured and US authorities have control of the borders to stop the flow, legalization of illegal aliens under conditions" ... well, we need a clarification because it will be years before we secure the borders and ports and stop the flow of illegal aliens .. so it's a futuristic general statement if and when based on the outcome and results we seek. Is that a "compromise"? Is it even a reality? Don't know, and we won't know for years based on his own actual statements.

But still, we need a clarification as to his intentions, if he even really has any regarding "legalization of illegal aliens" after the borders are secured and the flow of illegal aliens has stopped.

There are better candidates available.

Compare their actions for yourself.


http://www.ontheissues.org/Mike_Huckabee.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Tom_Tancredo.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Brian_Bilbray.htm