Thread: Shocking Lou Dobbs Video! Opinions Needed ASAP

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by yankee0001

Welcome to the ALIPAC Forum, yankee0001!

And I agree with you 100%. Lou Dobbs, our only source of main stream media news about immigration, free trade and outsourcing, deserves time to clarify his statements.

Thank you Judy! I think our fellow members can be better than that in such a quick rush to judgment of a longtime ally. I too am concerned, but throwing all support out for Lou Dobbs just shows that we did not know who we were supporting in the first place. It's damaging to ALIPAC's reputation as well when such quick and sharp judgments are made without further explanation.

It doesn't matter what you think of those here who have already made up their minds, Dobbs is a dead horse nationally. Cynthia

Oh, it's way too early to call that shot, Cynthia. After all, Mr. Shamnesty Co-Sponsor McCain ended up with the Republican nomination for President last year ... and of course Mr. Amnesty who ended up with the Democratic nomination beat him.

When you turn on an ally too quickly or unfairly, you never know, they may turn around and turn on you. Rush to Judgments are very Risky Business.[/quote]

I don't think I am being unfair at all. I believe in thinking for myself and I have thought this over well. If he was a preacher and said he was turning Muslim, it stands to reason there's a big problem. And it seems to me most people would recognize it as a big problem.

Originally Posted by SwimMan

I didn't like his attitude toward the interviewer. She kept her cool, I thought, but he got impatient, and upset with her bringing up the past, which is understandable, but the way he handled it still bothered me. By the end, I was doubting his sincerity. I don't know--at least SHE conceded that he had made his points, but he would never seem to concede to ANYTHING she said. [b] Confused is my response. I was impressed with her more that him, really, yet I DEFINITELY SUPPORT A MUCH NEEDED PLAN TO HALT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. I feel more comfortable supporting YOUR efforts than him as a person or viable candidate.] Make any sense??????

It makes perfect sense. ALIPAC has managed without Dobbs before and can do it again.

I just spoke with a busy activist against illegal immigration about what she thought of Dobbs. She said he's history!

Finding a candidate for President who will secure our borders and enforce our laws to the letter is the big problem. And I still believe wholeheartedly that Lou Dobbs will do that. Will he also at some point in time down the road after the borders are secure and illegal immigration is stopped, ultimately agree to some type of legalization program for the illegal aliens who are still here, well, a) that depends on Congress first, not the President and b) that depends on the will of the American People which c) depends on organizations like ALIPAC.

In the Telemundo interview, Dobbs made it abundantly clear that any discussion of legalization can't even take place until AFTER the borders are secured and US authorities have control of the borders. Then, something or nothing? Who knows? It depends on the will of the people at that time which is years from now. There's no question in my mind that until the flow of illegal aliens has stopped cold over the borders and through our ports that Lou Dobbs would veto any and every "legalization for illegal aliens" legislation. But that's certainly 1 question, among many, that needs to be asked and answered before I withdraw my support from him.

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by yankee0001

Welcome to the ALIPAC Forum, yankee0001!

And I agree with you 100%. Lou Dobbs, our only source of main stream media news about immigration, free trade and outsourcing, deserves time to clarify his statements.

Thank you Judy! I think our fellow members can be better than that in such a quick rush to judgment of a longtime ally. I too am concerned, but throwing all support out for Lou Dobbs just shows that we did not know who we were supporting in the first place. It's damaging to ALIPAC's reputation as well when such quick and sharp judgments are made without further explanation.

It doesn't matter what you think of those here who have already made up their minds, Dobbs is a dead horse nationally. Cynthia

Oh, it's way too early to call that shot, Cynthia. After all, Mr. Shamnesty Co-Sponsor McCain ended up with the Republican nomination for President last year ... and of course Mr. Amnesty who ended up with the Democratic nomination beat him.

When you turn on an ally too quickly or unfairly, you never know, they may turn around and turn on you. Rush to Judgments are very Risky Business.

I don't think I am being unfair at all. I believe in thinking for myself and I have thought this over well. If he was a preacher and said he was turning Muslim, it stands to reason there's a big problem. And it seems to me most people would recognize it as a big problem.

Finding a candidate for President who will secure our borders and enforce our laws to the letter is the big problem. And I still believe wholeheartedly that Lou Dobbs will do that. Will he also at some point in time down the road after the borders are secure and illegal immigration is stopped, ultimately agree to some type of legalization program for the illegal aliens who are here, well, a) that depends on Congress first, not the President and b) that depends on the will of the American People which c) depends on organizations like ALIPAC. In the Telemundo interview, Dobbs make it abundantly clear that any discussion of legalization can't even take place until AFTER the borders are secured and US authorities have control of the borders. Then, something or nothing? Who knows? It depends on the will of the people at that time which is years from now. There's no question in my mind that until the flow of illegal aliens has stopped cold over the borders and through our ports that Lou Dobbs would veto any and every "legalization for illegal aliens" legislation. But that's certainly 1 question, among many, that needs to be asked and answered before I withdraw my support for him.

[/quote]

I don't have any confidence him anymore.

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

Originally Posted by SwimMan

I didn't like his attitude toward the interviewer. She kept her cool, I thought, but he got impatient, and upset with her bringing up the past, which is understandable, but the way he handled it still bothered me. By the end, I was doubting his sincerity. I don't know--at least SHE conceded that he had made his points, but he would never seem to concede to ANYTHING she said. [b] Confused is my response. I was impressed with her more that him, really, yet I DEFINITELY SUPPORT A MUCH NEEDED PLAN TO HALT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. I feel more comfortable supporting YOUR efforts than him as a person or viable candidate.] Make any sense??????

It makes perfect sense. ALIPAC has managed without Dobbs before and can do it again.

Well, Cynthia, that's really not true. So far, ALIPAC has managed without anyone in the White House in our camp and of course will continue to do so if that condition persists. But ALIPAC was created after Lou Dobbs was attacking illegal immigration on CNN and on his radio show, not before. So in actuality, ALIPAC has never functioned without Lou Dobbs on CNN and his radio show beating this issue to death every single day, with reruns, so we're entering a new era without Lou Dobbs on television any more.

Originally Posted by cynthiatweedle

I don't have any confidence him anymore.

And you're fully entitled to your view.

Well, there is Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin. Baldwin is very strong against amnesty and ran for president last time. Other than that it's way too soon to say because I'm sure others will show up.

I don't get that attached to politicians, they are not the same as other people.[/quote]



I like Ron Paul for his economic stance and agree with him on many national issues, but some of his foreign policy opinions are a little too far-fetched for me. Chuck Baldwin needs to make a name for himself first. Even I barely know what this guy is all about. I also liked Tom Tancredo and Fred Thompson for President. The problem with some of the best names we can come up with is the reality that they don't stand a snowballs chance in he** because they are relatively unknowns. I understand that they are relatively unknowns because the liberal media won't give them the time of day, but the inconvenient truth still remains that most of our nations voters are sadly lacking in enough education to vote for representatives based on their stances on the issues, and the paths they intend to take this nation on. Knowing this, we need someone who is well-known, likable by most people, and is unwavering in their commitment to our nation and the values most of us hold dear. Kind of like a Ronald Reagan type. As we can see, this is not easy to do.

Originally Posted by yankee0001

I like Ron Paul for his economic stance and agree with him on many national issues, but some of his foreign policy opinions are a little too far-fetched for me. Chuck Baldwin needs to make a name for himself first. Even I barely know what this guy is all about. I also liked Tom Tancredo and Fred Thompson for President. The problem with some of the best names we can come up with is the reality that they don't stand a snowballs chance in he** because they are relatively unknowns. I understand that they are relatively unknowns because the liberal media won't give them the time of day, but the inconvenient truth still remains that most of our nations voters are sadly lacking in enough education to vote for representatives based on their stances on the issues, and the paths they intend to take this nation on. Knowing this, we need someone who is well-known, likable by most people, and is unwavering in their commitment to our nation and the values most of us hold dear. Kind of like a Ronald Reagan type. As we can see, this is not easy to do.

Yet, Ronald Reagan signed the first amnesty for illegal aliens in our nation's history, and a lot of people don't know that he was a Democrat before he became a Republican or that Ron Paul voted against making E-Verify mandatory and that he and Chuck Baldwin both support unrestricted free trade treason that's sucked 40 million jobs out of the United States. We're deep into our Period of Ironies and Opposites and Rushes to Judgments are Very Risky Business.

Originally Posted by Judy

Originally Posted by yankee0001

I like Ron Paul for his economic stance and agree with him on many national issues, but some of his foreign policy opinions are a little too far-fetched for me. Chuck Baldwin needs to make a name for himself first. Even I barely know what this guy is all about. I also liked Tom Tancredo and Fred Thompson for President. The problem with some of the best names we can come up with is the reality that they don't stand a snowballs chance in he** because they are relatively unknowns. I understand that they are relatively unknowns because the liberal media won't give them the time of day, but the inconvenient truth still remains that most of our nations voters are sadly lacking in enough education to vote for representatives based on their stances on the issues, and the paths they intend to take this nation on. Knowing this, we need someone who is well-known, likable by most people, and is unwavering in their commitment to our nation and the values most of us hold dear. Kind of like a Ronald Reagan type. As we can see, this is not easy to do.

Yet, Ronald Reagan signed the first amnesty for illegal aliens in our nation's history, and a lot of people don't know that he was a Democrat before he became a Republican or that Ron Paul voted against making E-Verify mandatory and that he and Chuck Baldwin both support unrestricted free trade treason that's sucked 40 million jobs out of the United States. We're deep into our Period of Ironies and Opposites and Rushes to Judgments are Very Risky Business.

Very good Judy. Thank you for that. Yes, I am no expert either and I did not know many of the additional items you just stated. Although I trust your statements, I would have to verify them first (as any good researcher should). Unfortunately, I am out of energy at 12:30am my time. It does go to show that debate and gaining knowledge is the best medicine this country can ask for and that there are no perfect candidates to root for at this point in time. We do seem to see eye-to-eye on many of the issues though, which is great. Have a great weekend!