Thread: The Immigration Debate -- Is Lou Dobbs For Real?

http://warrenreports.tpmcafe.com

So It Goes
The Immigration Debate -- Is Lou Dobbs For Real?
By Jeff Weintraub | bio
THERE WAS A POINT DURING a panel discussion at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists convention last week when CNN anchor Lou Dobbs became, at once, completely clear and completely incomprehensible. That's what his show is like. It's obvious to everyone that he thinks immigrants are a scourge to the U.S. But his rationale is muddled and doesn't really add up.

The moment came not in the context of the issue of immigration policy per se but regarding Dobbs's tendency to spout his opinions as he pretends to be an evenhanded news reporter. Panel moderator Ray Suarez, reading a question from the audience of 1,600, asked Dobbs about this.

"I don’t really believe in something called 'fair and balanced,' Dobbs said. "That’s another news network. I’m not too interested in what some call, with a wink and a nod, objective journalism… I don’t put my thumb on the scale. I stop the damn thing. I want people to know exactly where I’m coming from. I want them to understand the rational basis, the analysis, the fact…."

But, Suarez pressed, "It’s unusual to have a news program where the host is one of the drivers of the discussion on one side of a critical issue…."

"...I happen to believe there is such as thing as an independent non-partisan reality," said Dobbs. "...I have no interest in political office. My interest is in the Americann people, the well being of our middle class and those who aspire toward it. It’s that straightforward. That’s where I come from. That is my mission. And I think we do a pretty good job of it."

Dobbs's completely unclear response made it completely clear that he does not pretend to be an unbiased journalist, even though he believes that, like Moses receiving the word of God from Mt. Sinai, he holds the absolute truth in his hands. It's everyone else who ignores it or lies about knowing it.

Dobbs would have us believe that immigration, particularly from Mexico, is responsible for many of America's ills. Illicit drugs, the depression of wages in the U.S., U.S. manufacturers outsourcing operations to other countries (another of his whipping boys), low-performing public education systems in the U.S. and so on. Our own leaders in Congress and the Administration, Dobbs says, do not want to listen to him and to the truth he reports. They are in the thrall of corporate interests and have been lying to Americans about the bitter reality of immigration. In filibuster-like pronouncements that leave no room for anyone to challenge him, he throws around a lot of economic statistics that, which even if they are accurate, do not seem to clarify his argument and often confuse it. More often than not, I have to strain to figure out what these statistics have to do with the argument he's making.

The issue, Dobbs says, is about the "exportation of poverty" and the failure the government of Mexico to keep impoverish Mexicans from coming to the U.S. "Vicente Fox is in charge of U.S. immigration policy, de facto" Dobbs says as if he is stating a well-recognized fact, and the U.S. government is unwilling and unable to do anything about it.

He accused his fellow panelists, notably former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda, of being elitist and out of touch with the people truly hurt by immigration from Mexico. "I come from a working class family, and I care about the men and women in the country who work for a living," Dobbs said haughtily.

Gov. Bill Richardson, also on the panel, made what I think is the proper case for a sensible immigration reform policy, one that may not be perfect because this is too complex a problem for a perfect fix. But it is our best hope.

"Yes, have border security," said Richardson, who earlier this year controversially called for a state of emergency in New Mexico to bring order to a border that was allowing violent criminals (not illegal border crossers) to run amok. Richardson also, after some negotiation with the Bush Administration, approved the temporary deployment of National Guard troops to his border with Mexico. "But what you want to do is stop right there," he told Dobbs. "But what do you do with the $12 million? Do you deport them?"

As the McCain-Kennedy bill provides (not the Reid-Kennedy bill, as House Republicans call it), Richardson approves of initiatives to "set up benchmarks and say there is a path to citizenship and legalization. You pay back taxes, fines, learn English, get involved in civic life."

Richardson added. "You protect your border, because that is important... Secondly, you do what is sensible and what is compassionate."

"This issue is divisive, it brings the worst out of a lot of people," said Richardson. "It needs to be settled, not in the context of whether the Republican or Democratic parties are going to benefit. But what's best for this country. I worry that it not being settled is going to hurt our relationship with Mexico and hurt us as a society and really drag this country into an ugly debate."

Because Americans often debate this issue by beating up on Mexicans, even when they are not present to defend themselves, Castañeda's comments were as refreshing to hear as they were eloquent.

"Vicente Fox doesn't export people from Mexico to the United States," the one-time candidate for Mexican President countered Dobbs. "He would rather keep them there with good jobs. Why don't they have jobs in Mexico? For a number of reasons. It's party mistaken economic policy, which I have struggled against, beginning with NAFTA.... The worst part is that those corporate interests which you correctly identified here -- you know what the main corporate interests in Mexico are? American corporations. They're not even Mexican corporations... This is a much more complicated issue than just simplifying it and saying, 'Vicente Fox wants to send people to the United States. [If I had become President of Mexico], do you think I'd want to send people to the United States? And do you think I could have stopped it overnight? Of course not."

Castañeda acknowledged, in response to a question from Suarez, that having Mexicans in the U.S. (legally or illegally) is certainly an opportunity to Mexico because of remittances, money sent home to families from those working in the U.S. "But it's also a huge cost, too," Castañeda said. "Why? For the same reason it's a cost for all emmigration countries. It's our best young people who leave. The most adventuresome, the most entrepreneurial, the most daring. They're the ones who leave. We need them in Mexico. We don't want them here [in the U.S.]. And as the educational level [in Mexico] slowly rises... they come and work here. We don't want that to happen. That is not by any stretch of the imagination an opportunity for Mexico. But it is a fact of life. So how do we address it? The way Governor Richardson said. We come up with sensible immigration reform in the United States that the Mexican government can cooperate with... [doing more to make it more attractive for Mexicans to stay in Mexico.]"

This event was surely not the last word on how the U.S. should reform its immigration policy, but it was one of the better discussions I've seen lately on the issue, even with the presence of Dobbs, who deserves some credit for appearing in front of what was, to say the least, a hostile audience.

Many have wondered out loud whether Dobbs has adopted his positions on immigration just to improve his ratings, which have gone up since he became so nativist. The more I listen to him, the more I suspect he might actually believe what he's saying, even if he can't make a coherent, intelligent argument.

The trouble is that, whatever his motives, Dobbs will continue to distort the national debate and make it all the more difficult for us to resolve this issue civility and constructively.

Jeff

P.S. If you'd like to hear this debate in full, click here a for a full audio stream of the event, which was held on June 16 in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. The discussion doesn't get going until about 45 minutes into the audio stream.

So It Goes | login or register to post comments
Jun 26, 2006 -- 11:55:31 AM EST

More often than not, I have to strain to figure out what these statistics have to do with the argument he's making.

Geez, maybe you should actually pay attention rather then finding a way to put down Lou, who as far as I'm concerned is Moses in this struggle. He is trying to lead us out of this quagmire.

THERE WAS A POINT DURING a panel discussion at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists

the above fact seems to be lost on this writer. Dobbs went onto hostile territory which show his true character, determination and unapologetic stance.

This writer would only consider it "fair & balanced" if we had story after story of the plight of the poor immigrants. Apparently other factors like Laws, Sovereignty and way of life mean little to Mr Weintraub.

The trouble is that, whatever his motives, Dobbs will continue to distort the national debate and make it all the more difficult for us to resolve this issue civility and constructively.

The only thing that needs to be resolved is for foreign to get out and STAY OUT!

Many have wondered out loud whether Dobbs has adopted his positions on immigration just to improve his ratings, which have gone up since he became so nativist. The more I listen to him, the more I suspect he might actually believe what he's saying, even if he can't make a coherent, intelligent argument.

These people are delusional!

Of course President Fox wants his people to immigrate illegally as he has little books telling them how to get here, what to do if caught when crossing, and enjoys all of the money they send to Mexico! In fact. he made a trip to America to ensure the people were espousing his views to keep illegals here when he should have stayed home to fix his countrys' problems. Which will never happen as Mexicos' rich get richer and the rest of his country stay peons! Of course, we are heading that way aren't we? Keep up the good fight folks!

It's understandable why these people are jealous of Lou Dobbs.

Name one other journalist in America who is so loved and respected by so many.

The trouble is that, whatever his motives, Dobbs will continue to distort the national debate and make it all the more difficult for us to resolve this issue civility and constructively.

Exactly how is he distorting the national debate. I've yet to see anything on his show that wasn't factual. If the truth distorts the national debate, than so be it. Most of us are smart enough to make our own decisions based on the facts presented. Lou Dobbs has been offering the facts many in the media tend to ignore or downplay.

"...I happen to believe there is such as thing as an independent non-partisan reality," said Dobbs. "...I have no interest in political office. My interest is in the Americann people, the well being of our middle class and those who aspire toward it. It’s that straightforward. That’s where I come from. That is my mission. And I think we do a pretty good job of it."

Dobbs's completely unclear response made it completely clear that he does not pretend to be an unbiased journalist,

How is this a completely unclear response. Just because he is standing up for the middle class? Maybe you, Jeff, are deaf and dumb to this issue!!!

Dobbs would have us believe that immigration, particularly from Mexico, is responsible for many of America's ills. Illicit drugs, the depression of wages in the U.S., U.S. manufacturers outsourcing operations to other countries (another of his whipping boys), low-performing public education systems in the U.S. and so on.

Well, since the greatest numbers are from Mexico the greater number of problems are coming from there. Plus, because we are getting Mexico's poorer and under educated class, we are also getting the crimes they are bringing (i.e. illicit drugs, gangs such as MS-13, murders, driving under the influence, etc.). Of course they are bringing down the wages here. If you as a company are only out for yourself, you're going to hire the illegal alien and pay lower wages; he can't complain about it in fear of being deported. Don't get me started on the educational system. American children are being held back by the poorly educated non-english speaking newcomers. On top of that, their children are being moved so much that it affects their learning ability.

Our own leaders in Congress and the Administration, Dobbs says, do not want to listen to him and to the truth he reports. They are in the thrall of corporate interests and have been lying to Americans about the bitter reality of immigration.

Well, duh. The corporations would not be able to use the illegal immigrants for cheap labor and therefor their profits would be cut into - we wouldn't want that would we They might actually have to pay a decent wage for the hard work that is being done. The corporations have a big stake in this issue they have a lot to lose - cheap labor. So therefore, they are going to through a lot of money in the direction of the Congress to get there way. The corporation have bought and paid for those lies that are being spewed from the mouths of some of our "leaders".

In filibuster-like pronouncements that leave no room for anyone to challenge him, he throws around a lot of economic statistics that, which even if they are accurate, do not seem to clarify his argument and often confuse it. More often than not, I have to strain to figure out what these statistics have to do with the argument he's making.

Only the blinded and ignorant to the issues are confused. Jeff- maybe you should not comment on issues you obviously know nothing about if it is that much of a strain for you. The majority of the USA know exactly what he is talking about. Maybe if you paid attention to more than yourself, you might have a clue as to what is going on in America!!!

The issue, Dobbs says, is about the "exportation of poverty" and the failure the government of Mexico to keep impoverish Mexicans from coming to the U.S. "Vicente Fox is in charge of U.S. immigration policy, de facto" Dobbs says as if he is stating a well-recognized fact, and the U.S. government is unwilling and unable to do anything about it.

Again, DUH When Fox comes to the US and goes and speaks personally with the governors of individual states, what do you think he is doing. He wants to make sure that the governors are on board with what he wants done for his poor people here that he has incourage to come here. They are one of the major money makers for the Mexican economy. You don't see the wealthy Mexicans crossing the borders illegally. If Fox would clean up the corruption in his country and take care of his poor, then maybe - just maybe- they would not be forced to play russian roulett with the deserts. He doesn't try to stop them, he shows them how to do it and how to get away with it by pointing out loopholes in our system or laws that we just are not willing to enforce. Our government could do something about it but, it might cost us access to Mexico's oil. We wouldn't want that would we? We might have to develop other alternatives to oil.

He accused his fellow panelists, notably former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda, of being elitist and out of touch with the people truly hurt by immigration from Mexico. "I come from a working class family, and I care about the men and women in the country who work for a living," Dobbs said haughtily.

I would accuse him of this also. He does not care who it hurts as long as it is not him. He is not out for what is best for America; he wants what is best for his country!!! As long as the American people are footing the bill for his poor, then his country does not have too. We are providing the services that his country refuses to provide his own people. Mexico is so hippocritical, they would not allow this to be happening in their country if they theirselves were being invaded from the south. They have put their own military on the southern Mexican border!!! This proves they don't care about the everyday American; we his DOORMAT!!!

Gov. Bill Richardson, also on the panel, made what I think is the proper case for a sensible immigration reform policy, one that may not be perfect because this is too complex a problem for a perfect fix. But it is our best hope.

"Yes, have border security," said Richardson, who earlier this year controversially called for a state of emergency in New Mexico to bring order to a border that was allowing violent criminals (not illegal border crossers) to run amok. Richardson also, after some negotiation with the Bush Administration, approved the temporary deployment of National Guard troops to his border with Mexico. "But what you want to do is stop right there," he told Dobbs. "But what do you do with the $12 million? Do you deport them?"

Well, I think that we tried that already - lets say ummmmm 20 years ago!!! Do you think that plan will work? Did it? I think not, look where we are now. Deporting would be a nice start, they are here illegally which does mean prohibited by law. There are other things that we could do that would make it very hard for them to stay comfortablly and maybe they would leave on their own with out us having to locate and deport. Let's just start with complete border shutdown so that the flood stops!!!

There again Jeff is uninformed. Richardson declared a state of emergency because not only was there illegal immigrants coming in but also illegal drug smuggling (from guess who - Mexicans!). He was also haveing a lot of violence, with cattle being killed. You know just because you print what you want to be true, doesn't make it so!!! It only makes the writer appear ignorant to the truth.

As the McCain-Kennedy bill provides (not the Reid-Kennedy bill, as House Republicans call it), Richardson approves of initiatives to "set up benchmarks and say there is a path to citizenship and legalization. You pay back taxes, fines, learn English, get involved in civic life."

Been there, done it, doesn't work. We need real resolutions not just to "say there is a path to citizenship and legalization" that is just amnesty. If they were going to learn English, they would have already done so. The majority of them do not want to speak America's language they want America to speak their language. I refuse to become a Mexican by the way of take over, I do not desire to call myself a Mexican - they have to leave.

Richardson added. "You protect your border, because that is important... Secondly, you do what is sensible and what is compassionate."

Okay, compassionatly take them back across the border. Come on, where were their compassions for our laws and way of life I do not understand why we are suppose to be compassionate, we did not put them in this situation. They came across the border on purpose knowing full well this might happen. They put their own needs above their children and future children. If families are broken up by this, oh-well. We put legal citizen in jail for breaking our laws don't we? Doesn't this break up families? Then, why in the world should we be concerned about breaking up their families when they broke the laws. You know, if you take your anchor babies with you when you leave, then your family would all be together in Mexico. I do not consider those children as legal citizens and if the federal courts actually cared about our constitution they would not be seen as "legal" by our government either. It would be sensible to send them packing!!! What other laws are we going to pick to obey and other ignore??

"This issue is divisive, it brings the worst out of a lot of people," said Richardson. "It needs to be settled, not in the context of whether the Republican or Democratic parties are going to benefit. But what's best for this country. I worry that it not being settled is going to hurt our relationship with Mexico and hurt us as a society and really drag this country into an ugly debate."

I guess the ones that want the laws to be upheld are seen as the "worst". What is best for this country would be for them to enforce the laws, deportation, and make it very difficult for them to live here illegally. If we don't our country will be hurt and our culture that draws so many to America will be distroyed. Who cares if it hurts our relationship with Mexico, they are not being a good neighbor. They are walking all over our nation. Our officials could never go their and try to influence their government as they do us. Our leaders are blinded or they just do not care!!! Probably the ladder.

Because Americans often debate this issue by beating up on Mexicans, even when they are not present to defend themselves, Castañeda's comments were as refreshing to hear as they were eloquent.

I do not find lies refreshing and eloquent. Jeff, are you sure you were not born in Mexico and came here illegally and currently using a stolen social security # in the name of Jeff Weintraub. You appear to be expressing Mexican citizen sentiments.
Kick out our US corporations; the majority of the citizens here don't want them there either. You are, yet again, taking jobs that LEGAL citizens WILL DO!!!!!

Castañeda acknowledged, in response to a question from Suarez, that having Mexicans in the U.S. (legally or illegally) is certainly an opportunity to Mexico because of remittances, money sent home to families from those working in the U.S. "But it's also a huge cost, too," Castañeda said. "Why? For the same reason it's a cost for all emmigration countries. It's our best young people who leave. The most adventuresome, the most entrepreneurial, the most daring. They're the ones who leave. We need them in Mexico. We don't want them here [in the U.S.]. And as the educational level [in Mexico] slowly rises... they come and work here. We don't want that to happen. That is not by any stretch of the imagination an opportunity for Mexico. But it is a fact of life. So how do we address it? The way Governor Richardson said. We come up with sensible immigration reform in the United States that the Mexican government can cooperate with... [doing more to make it more attractive for Mexicans to stay in Mexico.]"

If the ones that are coming here "legally or illegally" are your best, adventuresome, most entrepreneurial, and most daring then I would hate to see what the worst are. They are adventuresome and daring, they went for an adventure in the US deserts and dared to cross our border. As far as being entrepreneurial, they made it a real business out of abusing the taxpaying Americans and taking our system for everything its worth. Real crooked business they have there. If you really want to keep your best citizens, then do not encourage them to come here!! You can join us in putting up the walls; hey, we'll even hire your NEWLY LAWABIDING citizens to build our side!!!

The more I listen to him, the more I suspect he might actually believe what he's saying, even if he can't make a coherent, intelligent argument.

Sounds like Jeff is jealous because Dobbs is so intelligence. If you're not, you should be because you are coming off as IGNORANT to real world situations!!!

The trouble is that, whatever his motives, Dobbs will continue to distort the national debate and make it all the more difficult for us to resolve this issue civility and constructively.

There again, just because you put it into words Jeff, it doesn't make it so. The only distortions here are yours and your Mexican counterparts. You sir, are making it more difficult to have this issue resolved. By writing articles like this you confuss some Americans that do not take the time to understand what is going on. I should know, I was once one of these people I am talking about - ignorant to the bigger picture!! Thank God I opened my eyes and as more of our fellow AMERICAN CITIZENS do, the more our voices will become LOUDER.

Dobbs must be making someone nervous because they are sure trying to tear him down the last few weeks. Here's another hit piece on him.

http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/846/

Lou Dobbs: Unfair and Unbalanced at CNN
Written by Adam Elkus
Tuesday, 27 June 2006
On the May 23rd edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, correspondent Casey Wian characterized Mexican President Vicente Fox’s visit to The United States as the “Vicente Fox Aztlan tour.” In doing so, Wian dredged up an old conspiracy theory: reconquista, or the belief that Mexicans seek to retake the Southwest by mass immigration.

Wian presented an onscreen image of what “Aztlan” would encompass geographically on a United States map. Incredibly, the source of the map was the Council of Conservative Citizens, a White Supremacist group that, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, has described blacks as a “retrograde species of humanity,” compared pop singer Michael Jackson to an ape, and hawked neo-Nazi and Holocaust denial material. In a few breathtaking seconds of live television, a top-rated news program on, arguably, the most “trusted” broadcast news station in the country gave the imprint of legitimacy to a white supremacist group. Although some might dismiss this as an unfortunate aberration, it is actually the logical endpoint for Dobbs, a hysterical O’Reilly-esque figure who has used his CNN bully pulpit to advance wild, disingenuous, and sometimes racist opinions over the last few years.

Dobbs’ career began with the launch of CNN in 1980, as the host of finance program Lou Dobbs Moneyline. Since 2001, he has used his program as a platform for his opinions on labor outsourcing and illegal immigration. His once respectable coverage of economics was dropped in favor of a more shallow, pseudo-populist approach, blaming Mexico’s economic problems on “the manana syndrome[—] putting off work until tomorrow.” As Dobbs garnered more and more attention for his rants, Lou Dobbs Moneyline became Lou Dobbs Tonight, and took on the trappings of a talk radio show along the lines of Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage. Once confined to the business news ghetto, Dobbs became one of the brightest stars on CNN.

Although Dobbs portrays himself as an economic populist, he consistently regurgitates right-wing talking points, regardless of their accuracy. For example, Dobbs falsely alleged on the April 5 edition of his program that a Colorado middle school banned the American flag, when in fact the school had banned all flags and national symbols to defuse ethnic and political tensions between students. He also joined Bill O’Reilly in jumping on the “War on Christmas” bandwagon, alleging that Macy’s religion-neutral “Happy Holidays” greeting cards “exclude[s] everyone who [celebrates] Christmas.” The implied message that Macy’s is discriminating against Christians flies in the face of such events as Macy’s extravagant Thanksgiving Day celebration parade, which features a very prominent Santa Claus float. However, Dobbs is not only a culture warrior: he is also a Republican shill. He falsely stated that Democrats were responsible for the controversial felony provision of the Sensenbrenner immigration bill, which would have criminalized illegal immigrants as felons. He alleged that Democrats vetoed a Republican attempt to downgrade the harsh penalty, but he left out the inconvenient fact that Democrats did so because they were opposed to any criminal penalty. One might wonder, given Dobbs’s hard-line immigration stance, why he would be so eager to shift the blame for the harshest part of the bill to the Democrats. If Dobbs was truly as impartial as he makes himself out to be, he would have ensured that Sensenbrenner and his colleagues were properly credited for the bill they both wrote and advertised, and castigated the Democrats for their opposition to punishment. Yet because of the bill’s unpopularity, Dobbs attempted to shield the Republicans from the fallout.

There are similar instances in which Dobbs spread misinformation to cover for Republicans. For example, Dobbs attempted to smear Tom DeLay’s prosecutor, Ronnie Earle, as a partisan zealot despite his record of prosecuting Democrats. Yet in this Dobbs is not exceptional. If all he did was raise the occasional hackle over Christmas greeting cards and spread political disinformation about Democrats, Dobbs would simply be another Chris Matthews—vituperative but relatively harmless. However, Dobbs’ punditry has an especially disturbing racial dimension.

The first suggestion of this could be seen in Dobbs’ Hurricane Katrina coverage. It was bad enough that CNN producer Ben Blake, on Lou Dobbs Tonight, declared that “bedlam” had broken out in New Orleans with widespread “looting” of such items as dry clothes and clean shoes without considering that the poor, mostly African-American residents required such necessities to survive in a city under up to 20 feet of heavily contaminated water. But Dobbs was intent on effectively blaming the city and its leaders for its problems:

“It is also important, because Reverend Jesse Jackson, the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP have injected a straightforward and dramatic and perhaps even truthful charge that much of the failure here is because of race. 

But we should put in context, it seems to me also, that the city of New Orleans is 70 percent black. Its mayor is black. Its principal power structure is black. And if there is a failure to the black Americans who live in poverty and in the city of New Orleans, those officials have to bear much of the responsibility…

“Why has there not been, from the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, other certainly well-meaning groups, focusing on the racial issues here, no mention of the fact that the mayor of New Orleans, who has to bear first responsibility in this, Ray Nagin, is himself black? That the power structure of the city of New Orleans is primarily black? The police department, the majority of which is black? Why has there been no focus on those facts and those responsibilities?”

Although Dobbs littered his speech with qualifications, his real message is apparent: Bush is not to blame; instead, the black mayor, black police force, and other elements of the “black power structure” of a city that is “70% black” deserves the ultimate blame for the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. The disdain in Dobbs’ voice as he repeated the word “black” over and over again was evident. With his characterization of poor people trying to survive as looters, and his blaming of the largely black populace of New Orleans for the city’s poor response, Dobbs is using coded language to communicate a timeless racist message: Black people can’t do anything right, least of all run a city.

Dobbs’ new pet issue, illegal immigration, on which he seems to have staked his claim to fame, is also clear evidence of his alarmism and xenophobia. He warns that an “army of invaders” is descending upon the Southwest. According to Dobbs, these illegal aliens are also threatening the health of Americans through the “deadly imports” of diseases such as malaria and leprosy and through committing sex crimes. If one was not paying careful attention, Dobbs could easily be mistaken for Dr. Strangelove’s General Jack Ripper, who warned about Communists out to “sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.”

Imitating his ideological cousins at Fox News, Dobbs twists statistics and sometimes comes up with numbers off the top of his head. In a 2003 report on illegal immigration, Dobbs and correspondent Lisa Sylvester claimed that a National Academy of Science report on illegal immigration found that “while gains to the U.S. economy due to immigration could be as high as $10 billion, the cost is higher—as much as $20 billion”. However, the actual study stated that immigration provided a GDP net gain of $1-$10 billion, and did not mention a higher loss. The $20 billion that Dobbs cited came from a separate report by an anti-immigration think tank.

Dobbs has also cited disingenuous poll data to claim overwhelming public support for the anti-immigration agenda. The poll misleadingly stated that the Sensenbrenner bill, with its felony provisions, would “[try] to make illegal immigrations go home.” In addition, the poll did not explain the measure’s funding for a 700-mile fence, instead explaining it as “fortifying the border.” Completely certain that he is the only one in the mainstream media who has not been “co-opted by open borders and illegal immigration advocates.” Dobbs injects fear and misinformation into the illegal immigration debate.

Most damning, Dobbs has a history of providing a platform for figures involved in the White Supremacist movement. “Experts” from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) have appeared several times with Dobbs, yet he apparently does not realize, or care, that both groups were founded with the help of John Tanton, the godfather of the anti-immigration movement who is the founder of U.S. Inc, an organization that provided millions of dollars to the CIS and FAIR. Tanton is also the author of the “WITAN” memos, which charged that, among other things, Hispanics would outbreed Europeans: “Those with their pants up are going to get caught by those with their pants down.” Tanton’s “WITAN” memos also alleged that Latino immigrants would bring “the tradition of the mordita (bribe)” to Southern California. In addition, Tanton published The Social Contract, a pseudo-racist journal that alleges that the natural end result of immigration would be the downfall of “successful Euro-American culture.”

FAIR’s links to the White Supremacist movement go beyond association with Tanton. FAIR has worked with or employed many CCC members, including John Vinson, a CCC advisor; Jared Taylor, a CCC board member; and Dan Stein, the editor of The Social Contract. Again, it is hard to believe that Dobbs was unaware of these links. Even if he was, it is still simply irresponsible journalism. But he does not only cite these think tanks for facts; he actually features guests who are members of CCC-affiliated White Supremacist organizations.

Dobbs has twice interviewed Glenn Spencer of the American Patrol without mentioning that his group is considered a hate group by both the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. He did not mention that Spencer has spoken twice at conventions organized by the Council of Conservative Citizens, or that Spencer has stated that “thousands will die” in what Spencer sees as an inevitable Mexican invasion. And Dobbs has also interviewed Barbara Coe of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform (CCIR). The Southern Poverty Law center has listed the CCIR as a hate group, and Coe, a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, has been quoted as referring to Mexicans as “savages”. Not surprisingly, John Tanton’s U.S. INC also gave money to the CCIR.

This kind of trash is not journalism. Lou Dobbs is using CNN to provide a worldwide audience for racists and quacks. This very process legitimizes and mainstreams their rhetoric. It is comparable to the New York Times running a story with choice quotes taken from The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. This is, in effect, exactly what Lou Dobbs did when he used the Council of Conservative Citizens as a source for his story on the supposed “Aztlan” conspiracy. It is hard to believe that Dobbs is ignorant enough not to have even the slightest inkling of the histories, statements, and affiliations of his guests. Taken into context with his comments, Dobbs’s very public association with these fringe figures raises the question of whether he approves of their racist off-camera statements.

It certainly seems possible because Dobbs has also advocated strongly for the Minutemen Project, a notorious vigilante group. “I support the Minutemen Project and the fine Americans who make it up,” Dobbs has declared. Dobbs has quoted Joe McCutchen during a feature on the project, extolling him as an example of the “fine Americans” of that organization. Again, he failed to mention that McCutchen has ties to the CCC and another hate group, American Renaissance. The Council of Conservative Citizens listed McCutchen as a member in a 2001 publication, and McCutchen has spoken at a CCC-sponsored event in North Carolina. McCutchen also wrote a letter to American Renaissance asking readers for money to finance an electoral campaign. McCutchen also has a history of writing anti-Semitic letters to newspapers. In one letter, McCutchen stated that “the central government, banking, media, and entertainment are controlled by Jews.”

Similarly, Dobbs has interviewed Minutemen Project founder Chris Simcox without disclosing some of the more unsavory facts about him. He did not mention, for example, that Simcox’s wife had gotten a court order for custody of his teenage son because she feared that he had suffered a mental breakdown and was dangerous. Simcox ranted to anyone who would listen about what he believed would be imminent nuclear attacks on Los Angeles. He left frightening voicemail messages to his wife and son about war and destruction, including one in which Simcox stated that he would teach his son how to use guns:

I have purchased another gun. I have more than a few weapons. … I intend to teach my son how to use them. ... I will no longer trust anyone in this country. ... My life has changed forever, and if you don’t get that, you’re brainwashed like everyone else. … I’m going to go down to the Mexican border…and protect the borders of the country I love. You hear how serious I am.

Another choice answering machine excerpt: “I am dead serious…I will not speak to my son or anyone again unless you can recite at least the preamble of the Constitution.” Like many other anti-immigrant spokespeople Dobbs has interviewed, Simcox has connections with hate groups. He spoke at a convention affiliated with Barbara Coe’s CCIR and stated that illegal immigrants were “jeering at little girls walking on their way to school.” At least there is some comic relief here: when Simcox was arrested for carrying a weapon in a national park, he was also carrying a Wyatt Earp action figure.

Simcox is clearly paranoid and delusional, but instead of directing him to a psychiatric ward, Dobbs gave him a legitimate platform to spread his message. It’s hard not to conclude that Dobbs shares Simcox’s paranoia. However, this paranoia has struck a chord in America precisely because of the times we live in. We are in the midst of a war on terror fought mainly in the shadows by a government whose corruption, lawlessness, and incompetence defy reasonable explanation. Corporations wield unparalleled influence in Washington, and all of this is abetted by a press that at best could be called docile, at worst an unofficial branch of the government. Along with Dobbs and the Barbara Coes of this country, we focus the sum of our anger, fear, and powerlessness on the “illegals” without confronting the ultimately more disturbing truths about our part in refusing to hold the powerful responsible. Rage is an appropriate reaction to the dire problems of our time. But this rage should be focused against those who bear real responsibility for our problems: the members of both parties on Capitol Hill who have sold us to the highest bidder.

Lou Dobbs is one more figure in a long line of pseudo-populists demagogues, beginning with the depression-era Father Coughlin, who used times of economic hardship to focus anger on convenient scapegoats. Dobbs’ message has seeped into the political discourse, mainstreaming the hate and paranoia spread by his guests. However influential Coughlin was, he only had a radio show. With CNN, Dobbs’ disinformation and fear mongering has a worldwide audience. If the network cares about its status, it should rid itself of Dobbs.

Lou Dobbs: Unfair and Unbalanced at CNN

They have every other MSM doing their bidding. We have 1 man speaking on the behalf of Americans 5 nights a week and they are threatened.

The first article tries to make him just look stupid and the second claims he is racist. Those are the only 2 arguements they can come up with.