Thread: Lou Dobbs is a weak debater

We have been fighting this invasion for years now . Personally I have ben at it about 10 years . ALIPAC has been atit for about 5 years at least .

So where has all these media people been ? They just got on the band wagon this year .

Am I suppose to believe that they just found out about this invasion ? When people on the border have been screaming for help for almost half century .

We have to stick together and ask questions or we will end up un-knowingly on the other side .

Every gift horse needs to have a thorough check because he could be a trojan horse .

Originally Posted by AmericansNeverQuit

Lou Dobbs disappeared from CNN supposedly because of having to have a tonsillectomy performed. Well, that doesn't usually put a person out of commission for more than two weeks. He was missing for over a month, perhaps two months.

When he did return, he wasn't there full-time. And since his return, he's been a different person. He's been told what he can and cannot do, in my opinion, and he's following orders.

It's not reasonable that he would be such a loser in debate situations. It's all by design. He's been subverted. Welcome to America!

ANQ

I do believe that he is firmly on our side, but he somehow fancies himself as a debater..... raising our expectations when he announces that he will "debate Janet Murguia, right here, right now"..... then he fails to respond effectively, even sporting a sheepish smile when the opponent lashes out.... and then appearing to change the subject. I have to think that he "wings it" and is not briefed or not prepared with likely "talking points".

I remember one debate with Jorge Ramos (Univision) who told Lou on stage that Lou just benefited from Mexican labor at the hotel that they were all staying at.... instead of merely smiling he should have said: Jorge, I did not see a discount on my bill for the cheap illegal labor.... does YOUR bill reflect a discount?

Once again, mdillon is correct. The problem is a combination of Lou's employers influencing him, as well as Lou still being unevolved on the nuances of debating our enemy, and those two things actually play off eachother. Lou is still very good friends with Ted Turner, and is probably friends with the current management at CNN. He still wants to come off as the nice guy, who respects the people coming here to better themselves, and simply wants rule of law. Didn't many of you once think this way? Was it because of people close to you who had influenced you and you wanted to appear compassionate? He is behind the game unfortunately, and socially, Lou is not very good for what we need as a spokesman. SOCIALLY. Economically Lou is EXCELLENT. He has an econ degree from Harvard, and has a lot of experience in business journalism -- even winning an award for his reporting. Our movement NEEDS someone like that, so the WSJ doesn't have an intellectual monopoly on the subject. Pat Buchanan is the man we need socially for our movement, because in my mind he is a genius on social/cultural matters, and very well versed in the nuance of debate with the enemy. In the end we need them both to effectively fight this fight on both the social and economic fronts.

I just wanted to say we are fortunate to have Lou Dobbs on our side . I have not found anyone even close to Lou in helping out our cause in the media and I have Direct TV.

Two nights ago on Lou's Show he mentioned what Ted Turner said about him on tv .He said Lou was flipping out on illegals and if he was in charge he would not be able to say anything. I will put the quote and link also. Ted Turner or as he better known as "the mouth of the South.'


.Transcript from 2 days ago LOU DOBBS TONIGHT-And my old boss, Ted Turner, he's still a buddy, but he was asked on the "CHARLIE ROSE SHOW" about me and he said, "I think he's kind of flipped out...I wouldn't let him do this when he was working at CNN...fill it up with his opinions about who he hates. He doesn't like the Mexicans and immigration."
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ ... dt.01.html

Ted Turner is a sociopath. Just ask Montanans...

I think it is Turner who flipped.... all those stupid comments about global warming, that we all end up being "cannibals".... a nut case; perhaps for the first time I approve of Jane Fonda for leaving that sociopath.

RE: Trade Rep Susan Schwab Interview
I found this interview to be informative. Mr. Dobbs introduced the subject by stating his opinion. This was unnecessary as he has verbalized thousands of times ,in addition to writing a book ,about the subject. I know his views. I do not know the rational for Government actions. Ms. Schwab was given the opportunity to present this view uninterrupted. I appreciated this approach.

Mr. Dobbs is not a good debater because he frequently introduces passion which is a poor base for intellectual discussion. Facts get lost. Passion appeals to people who have non-negotiable positions and the interviewer agrees with that position. It meets an emotional need. I prefer my intellectual needs to be met.

Ms. Schwab gave interesting information. I was sorry that time did not permit her to enlarge on the differences in this agreement as compared to past agreements. Unfortunately, I am too cynical to accept any Governmental statements without further investigation.

I personally will not listen or watch emotional blathering idiots shouting at guests. This now appears to be the norm.

I did have a little giggle at Mr. Dobbs’ remark that it takes courage to put forth the Government view.

shelvapreston wrote:

Mr. Dobbs is not a good debater because he frequently introduces passion which is a poor base for intellectual discussion.

I think more research and investigation into the topic prior to interview would greatly enhance his ability to debate the issues. He was definitely lacking in knowledge where the proposed Colombian trade agreement was concerned. He allowed Ms. Schwab on the show without having detailed knowledge of the trade agreement. IMO, he should have looked over the agreement before hand and had some prepared talking points to argue against it. Basically, it looks as if Mr. Dobbs is going into some of these interviews blind, which is never a good idea. In his defense, perhaps his busy schedule doesn't allow him the time necessary to research the topic to be discussed.

I suspect Lou knows the details that we wish him to put forth, but without an outline in front of him during the interview, passion as the previous poster correctly points out, takes over and makes the other side look much more reasonable...

he never seems to anticipate statements and therefore is not properly prepared... this is like a neophyte debating an experienced firebrand debater...