Thread: Lou Dobbs, Soft on Immigration!

Mark Krikorian from the CIS writing in the National Review Online about Lou Dobbs' recent comments. (Dobbs' comments italicized.)

********************

Friday, November 30, 2007

Lou Dobbs, Soft on Immigration! [Mark Krikorian]

Well, OK, not exactly, but his comments on last night's show after the report on my Center's new profile of the immigrant population suggest there are still parts of the immigration issue he's not getting. This from the transcript:


Well I have to say that what I resent here on the part of the Census Bureau and the center is this conflation again of immigrants and illegal immigrants. Frankly, as we bring in people lawfully into this country, as a matter of public policy, I don't think any of us should care one way or the other about their education level, any of that, or the number of programs, social programs that are being employed.

The issue here is illegal immigration. This government, this federal government, and each of its agencies refuses to deal with the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants and we should never be a part of that conflation and that purposeful obfuscation on the part of those who are pro-amnesty, pro-open borders and pro-massive illegal immigration at any cost to the United States.


We actually did break out some of the characteristics of the illegal population, using widely accepted means for estimating who the illegal aliens are in Census Bureau surveys. But the larger point is that legal status is only one part of the problem we face. Obviously, without credible enforcement, the specifics of policy don't mean much; also, we shouldn't criticize lawful immigrants for making lawful use of whatever welfare programs we've made available to them.

But if legal status were the only problem, why not just amnesty everybody and be done with it? Heck, why not just have open borders? The problem, of course, is that giving an uneducated illegal alien legal status just turns him into an uneducated legal alien — he's still not equipped with the skills to support himself in a modern society and will actually make greater use of taxpayer-funded services than before, because now he's legal. And we also must make choices about the shape of future legal immigration, and low education levels and the resulting poverty and welfare use are clearly things we need to take into account. As Ramesh wrote last year, "Almost all of the things that cause people to complain about illegal immigration are true of much legal immigration as well."

11/30 01:10 PM

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/? ... hjNTk0MGE=

"I don't think any of us should care one way or the other about their education level, any of that, or the number of programs, social programs that are being employed."

ABSOLUTELY WE SHOULD CARE!!!!!

Why do we want MORE uneducated gobbling up taxpayer dollars? I think we have enough of those now. And that includes all the SOCIAL PROGRAMS the ILLEGAL ALIENS ARE AND WOULD BE using, be it welfare, food stamps, housing assistance, medical care, educating their kids, etc., ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF CITIZENS AND LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

If Lou Dobbs said this, HE IS WRONG.

Yeah, I read this on NRO when it was first posted.

I look at this two ways,

1. Dobbs is right in the sense that you can't have any sort of viable, rational immigration policy when you have virtually open, unmilitarized borders and ports of entry. Even if you want to reduce immigration totals the first thing you need to do is get control of your borders. Otherwise, you'll still have the millions who overstay their visas, who sneak into the country illegally. To me, this should be the #1 priority, if for no other reason than the fact that our porous borders leave us wide open for a massive terrorist attack(s).

2. On the other hand, everything Krikorian's stated is correct. Most of the problems that you ascribe to illegal entry into this country, e.g. high rates of illegitmacy, economically crippling dependence upon social welfare programs, unconscionably lengthy criminal records, etc., etc., ad nauseam, can also be found-to varying degrees-in the massive legal immigration we allow, which is drawn overwhelmingly from third world countries. Legal immigration has been just as deleterious-and in some cases, even more harmful-than illegal immigration in this respect. Case in point, the "diversity lottery," which allows thousands of immigrants to come here from nations that sponsor terrorism and are our mortal enemies, or the State Department's Visa Express program, which is responsible for facilitating the 9/11 massacres through the approval of visas for the 15 Saudi hijackers.

Legal immigration in the past had standards. The following is from actual questions asked each immigrant on the ship's manifest of alien passengers for the U.S. Immigration Officer in 1906.
Questions on List or Manifest of Alien Passengers for the U.S.Immigration Officer at Port of Arrival: Sailing from Hamburg 26 Feb. 1906 arriving at Port of New York March 16, 1906.
Name in full:
Age:
Sex:
Calling or occupation:
Able to read and write:
Nationality (Country of which citizen or subject):
Race or people:
Last Residence (Last permanent, Country and City or Town.):
Sea port for landing in U.S.:
Final Destination in the United States:
Wether having a ticket to such final destination:
By whom was passage paid?
Whether in possession of $50, and if less, how much?
Whether ever before in the United States: and if so when and where?
Whether going to join a relative or friend: and if so what relative or friend, and his name and complete address:
Ever in prison or almshouse, or institution for care and treatment of the insane or supported by charity?
Whether a Polygamist?
Whether an Anarchist:
Whether coming by reason of any offer, solicitation, promise or agreement, express or implied to labor in the United States?
Condition of Health, Mental and Physical:
Deformed or Crippled, Nature, length of time, and cause:

The immigrants were also screened at Ellis Island by doctors.

Not bad for 1906!

Those 'undocumented' are actually 'highly documented' with fraudulent documents our government readily accepts.

Thanks for the 1906 list MyAmerica. We must secure the border, end illegal immigration and reduce through attrition the number of illegal aliens here. For many reasons, this is basic 101 stuff that GWB is a lost cause on.

But while I support legal immigration as a concept, we still need high standards, lower numbers, and look at the overall impact that high levels of legal (and illegal) immigration has on our quality of life, the environment, govt resources etc. In all fairness, I don't know Dobbs' full position on this, but Krikorian's analysis is spot on.

Most welcome Populist.

By today's "politically correct" government and democrats, many of the questions from 1906 would be stricken as discrimatory. Their sole purpose was to protect America and her citizens--something we need more of today.

Illegal immigration needs to be halted now. I feel we need a "time-out" of several years on legal immigration to acertain where we are currently with high standards and low quotas set for future immigration.

I can't comment on whether Lou Dobbs is soft on legal immigration or not since I only became involved with illegal immigration in Oct. -- I don't know.

Not long ago on here was a letter from Senator Clinton to, I believe, President Bush requesting he speed up the naturalization process so they can vote in 2008! Talk about self-serving!

Pro-amnesty politicians are using U.S. citizenship as the currency to buy votes.

Tuberculosis. Otherwise known as "consumption."

Any potential immigrant who suffered from that disease would be turned back-without question-a century ago.

Today you can not deny people with lethal communicable diseases access to the U.S. Chagas Disease, HIV, bubonic plague, we have the full panoply these days.

Remember what happened when we (wisely) tried to return Haitian refugees who had AIDS from our shores?

RACISM!!!!

Our immigration policy is the height of insanity.