WSJ: Lou Dobbs Supports Amnesty For Undocumented Aliens

WSJ: Lou Dobbs Supports Amnesty For Undocumented Aliens

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 08:55:59 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I guess he really is running:

Mr. Dobbs, who left the network last week, has said in recent days that he is considering a third-party run for a New Jersey Senate seat in 2012 [. . .] First, though, Mr. Dobbs is working to repair what a spokesman conceded is a glaring flaw: His reputation for antipathy toward Latino immigrants. In a little-noticed interview Friday, Mr. Dobbs told Spanish-language network Telemundo he now supports a plan to legalize millions of undocumented workers, a stance he long lambasted as an unfair "amnesty." [. . .] Mr. Dobbs twice mentioned a possible legalization plan for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., saying at one point that "we need the ability to legalize illegal immigrants under certain conditions."

< A Pre-9/11 Mentality | Redistribution >

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Home | About | RSS
E-Mail | Comment Policy |
Search
Login

Make a new account

Existing Users

Username:
Password:
Creator and Principal Author
- Jeralyn E. Merritt
TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections
Site Credits
- TalkLeft Graphics by C.L., Our Man in Hollywood (2006 - 2008)
- TalkLeft Header Graphic by Monk
- Powered by Scoop
Legal
- All Content Copyright ©2002-2024. Reprints only by permission from TalkLeft.com
- Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.
- TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.
"The pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles"
© 1965 Bob Dylan

WSJ: Lou Dobbs Supports Amnesty For Undocumented Aliens | 68 comments (68 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

heh (none / 0) (#1)
by andgarden on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:09:25 AM EST

What a cruddy politician. I don't believe that he can win in New Jersey, but if he's going to have any shot, he needs to not piss off his racist base. And so now he has a worst of both worlds, because he can't very well unsay what he's said repeatedly in the past.

I Wouldn't Underestimate Him (none / 0) (#3)
by BDB on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:26:21 AM EST

He does economic populism very well. Given that we may be going into 2012 with not one, but two parties who have completely failed American workers, I wouldn't dismiss any third party candidate who is willing to run against the corporate overlords running both main parties. For all of my issues with Dobbs (and there are many, many of them), he has a long history of economic populism and I think that's a message that, whatever his other problems, could resonate in 2012.

Parent

If Dobbs is winning in NJ in 2012, (none / 0) (#4)
by andgarden on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:27:35 AM EST

it will have absolutely nothing to do with him.

Parent

Take a look at his opponent in NJ (none / 0) (#7)
by WS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:35:18 AM EST

if he does run: Sen. Bob Menendez. If Lou Dobbs runs in Jersey, expect record Latino turnout. Sen. Menendez is probably hoping Dobbs would run.

Parent

Take a look at his opponent in NJ (none / 0) (#8)
by WS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:35:24 AM EST

if he does run: Sen. Bob Menendez. If Lou Dobbs runs in Jersey, expect record Latino turnout. Sen. Menendez is probably hoping Dobbs would run.

Parent

2012 is a Presidential election year (none / 0) (#9)
by andgarden on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:37:29 AM EST

If Dobbs has a chance in NJ, it's because the Republican Presidential candidate also has a chance. And that won't have anything to do with Dobbs.

Parent

Republican or Independent, (none / 0) (#10)
by WS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:42:42 AM EST

Latinos will still turn out if Dobbs runs. The combination of a Presidential year and attack ads on Dobbs will make voter registration drives doubly effective.

Parent

Should be (none / 0) (#11)
by WS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:43:38 AM EST

Especially if Dobbs runs. You're right that Latinos will still turn out on an election year but there'll be that extra motivation.

Parent

Not really (none / 0) (#12)
by andgarden on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 10:12:48 AM EST

I have never ever heard of a situation where people were drawn out in a Presidential election year for some other reason than to vote for President. NJ Latino voters would likely care very much about the Senate race, but there won't be any who would otherwise have not voted.

Parent

I think you're (none / 0) (#13)
by WS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 10:36:58 AM EST

underestimating the level of antipathy the Latino community has for Lou Dobbs. Univision and Telemundo has covered Dobbs for years. Dobbs and the Presidential race can be a powerful combination for record Latino turnout in New Jersey.

Parent

: You are overestimating (none / 0) (#36)
by andgarden on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:50:24 PM EST

the number of eligible voters who don't show up in a Presidential election.

Parent

Too late to repair the damage (none / 0) (#2)
by Saul on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:23:20 AM EST

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this is just a political ploy to try to repair the damage he did with Latinos while at CNN. No one will believe that he is sincere.

When I use to see him rant and rave about illegals I felt he was a frustrated want to be border patrol man.

I think he was to much of extremist so CNN told him to resign or be fired. He belongs more on FOX than CNN

So latinos are (none / 0) (#6)
by Wile ECoyote on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:35:09 AM EST

for illegal immigration?

Parent

Latinos (5.00 / 3) (#14)
by Steve M on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 10:43:33 AM EST

are against demonization of Latinos.

Parent

We're also big fans of (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 10:49:55 AM EST

illegal immigration. We want illegal immigrants to take those plum fruit picking, cleaning, restaurant worker jobs that white men are dying to get.

Snark aside, since the anti-immigrant zealots would NEVER support curtailing illegal immigration by stricter enforcement against employers, we all know what it really is - bigotry.

Parent

The Republicans figured out a PERFECT way (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by steviez314 on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 10:54:36 AM EST

to restrict illegal immigration.

They destroyed the U.S. economy.

Parent

: Now the family members living in (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by oculus on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:03:47 AM EST

Mexico are sending money to their kin in the U.S.

Parent

Or the cynical exploitation of racism/bigotry... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by Salo on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:05:13 AM EST

...by those who should know better.

When do they round up the big land owners who employ all the fruit pickers and laborers?

Parent

: Gawd...I just heard a (none / 0) (#24)
by coigue on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:34:34 AM EST

detailed report on the tomato pickers of FLA. I knew it was bad, but hearing the details is excruciating.

Parent

Did you ever think that labor (none / 0) (#32)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:46:14 PM EST

is a commodity? And that if you removed the illegal aliens then the reduction in the number of laborers would mean that the wages paid to the worker would go up, as well as an improvement in working conditions?

Parent

You'd think (none / 0) (#43)
by Steve M on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:08:25 PM EST

but every reputable study has shown that immigration has a minimal effect on wages. There's a difference between an economic model and the real world, as it turns out.

Parent

From wiki (none / 0) (#47)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:29:19 PM EST

Research by George Borjas (Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University) found that the influx of immigrants (both legal and illegal) from Mexico and Central American from 1980 to 2000 accounted for a 3.7% wage loss for American workers (4.5% for black Americans and 5% for Hispanic Americans).
Borjas found that wage depression was greatest for workers without a high school diploma (a 7.4% reduction) because these workers face the most direct competition with immigrants, legal and illegal.[24]

Clearly, if a construction company or a landscaper or whoever hires an illegal immigrant instead of a legal worker, that legal worker's wages are depressed 100%.

Parent

And yet, no (none / 0) (#49)
by Steve M on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:43:33 PM EST

because it's not like that worker can't go out and find another job. The overall result is as you cited, a few percentage points, not 100%.

Parent

What is the unemployment rate? (none / 0) (#51)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:49:59 PM EST

Parent

We can either talk evidence and data (none / 0) (#53)
by Steve M on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:55:50 PM EST

or we can be like Lou Dobbs.

Parent

Well, when you said (none / 0) (#54)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 03:16:58 PM EST

they can just go and get another job (sounding eerily similar to M. Antoinette, if I may), I responded with evidence and data, you know, the unemployment rate.

iow, it seems like there are always some, and, lately, more and more, workers who can't just go and get another job.

But anyway, fair point overall, stick to the data. Except that data is used to make conclusions and stuff, it's not the conclusion itself.

For example, your conclusion is that the data shows that the loss of jobs and diminished wages of legal workers due to illegal immigration is "minimal," ie, not significant.

I assume you can accept that others may reasonably disagree?

Parent

What is the exact (none / 0) (#63)
by lilburro on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 05:37:11 PM EST

relationship between wages and employment you are referring to here? Because the only figure I have seen re: employment in your comments is if an illegal alien takes a citizen's job, the citizen loses 100% of their employment. That, and the current unemployment rate, which again, has what relationship to overall wage reduction?

Also it's not like the CIS has a particularly unbiased reputation.

Parent

Research by George Borjas (none / 0) (#64)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 05:42:21 PM EST

Research by George Borjas (Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University) found that the influx of immigrants (both legal and illegal) from Mexico and Central American from 1980 to 2000 accounted for a 3.7% wage loss for American workers (4.5% for black Americans and 5% for Hispanic Americans).
Borjas found that wage depression was greatest for workers without a high school diploma (a 7.4% reduction) because these workers face the most direct competition with immigrants, legal and illegal.[24]

Parent

again, (none / 0) (#65)
by lilburro on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 06:34:49 PM EST

and the current unemployment rate, which again, has what relationship to overall wage reduction?

the study:

Statistical analysis shows that when immigration increases the supply of workers in a skill category, the earnings of native-born workers in that same category fall. The negative effect will occur regardless of whether the immigrant workers are legal or illegal, temporary or permanent. Any sizable increase in the number of immigrants will inevitably lower wages for some American workers. Conversely, reducing the supply of labor by strict immigration enforcement and reduced legal immigration would increase the earnings of native workers.

So if we close our borders to everyone, then wages will increase (still don't know how that is going to affect the unemployment rate, exactly, pretty sure it's not going to be great for Social Security).

Wage reduction % does not equal unemployment rate.

Parent

: Are you picking nits? (none / 0) (#67)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 07:43:32 PM EST

Illegal immigration reduces wages. I assume that means it reduces overall wages, iow, it reduces some combination of both hourly wage as well as hours worked (if you're looking for a job, your wages are, of course, reduced).
Regardless, illegal immigration results in lower income.

Parent

Oh, really? (none / 0) (#58)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 04:35:27 PM EST

Shut down the borders and watch wages go up.

Parent

Can you (none / 0) (#61)
by Wile ECoyote on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 05:14:03 PM EST

link to a few?

Parent

Steve M, you don't agree (none / 0) (#66)
by Cream City on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 06:56:19 PM EST

with the law of supply and demand?

Parent

That I will agree (none / 0) (#60)
by Wile ECoyote on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 05:13:05 PM EST

with. The employers need hammered.

Parent

So now you understand the Democrats (none / 0) (#31)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:43:44 PM EST

problems in the South.

Parent

Demonization of illegals is (none / 0) (#62)
by Wile ECoyote on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 05:17:13 PM EST

the same as demonization of Latinos?

Parent

Are you willing to produce citizenship papers (none / 0) (#17)
by Molly Bloom on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 10:56:57 AM EST

Every time you go to the doctor, hospital, get car tags, insurance, get connected to a municipal water service, get a library card, rent an apartment or house, or get pulled over for speeding, etc?

Cause that is the road Lou Dobbs and his ilk are on.

(I assume you are a citizen for this question).

Parent

We badically do that now (none / 0) (#26)
by jbindc on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:04:46 PM EST

Got have state issued ID to do all that stuff.

Parent

We do that now (none / 0) (#33)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:47:02 PM EST

Parent

You definitely see a different doctor than I do (none / 0) (#48)
by Molly Bloom on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:31:26 PM EST

And I gather your hosptial works differently than mine

Parent

Every time (none / 0) (#50)
by jbindc on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:48:06 PM EST

I've gone to a new doctor (and then again once a year) they ask for my license and my insurance card to make copies for their files. Happened in Michigan and ever since I moved to Northern Virginia. Went to the emergency room at INOVA hospital - a very good hospital nationwide - 2 years ago and they also made a copy of my driver's license.

This is nothing new.

Parent

: Insurance card is not proof of citizenship (none / 0) (#55)
by Molly Bloom on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 03:20:12 PM EST

and mine has never asked me for my driver's liscense.
BTW FPL hooked me up over the phone. As did the phone company. No driver's liscense.
As I recall, what city hall wanted was a copy of my deed to hook me up to water. I don't recall giving them my license. Its possible I suppose, it was several years ago.

Parent

And (none / 0) (#52)
by jbindc on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:50:04 PM EST

When I rented my apartment and got my library card - yes, they asked for my license too. (I got my car tags when I switched my license, so not only did I have to show my license from Michigan, they wanted my birth certificate, my Social Security card, and one or two more pieces of identification).

Parent

: My city library only wanted a copy of (none / 0) (#56)
by Molly Bloom on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 03:27:08 PM EST

a utility bill to show I was getting utlitles at the address I claimed I was at. No DL. The utility bill was the same FPL bill that I signed up for over the phone.
I belong to the county library in the county immediatly south of me. There rules said you had to either live or work in the county. They took a business card with my business address showing I indeed worked in the county. They did get my home address from my driver's license, but that is all they wanted off it. The front of my driver's license says nothing about citizenship. Only my address.

Parent

I went to mine in August and the new (none / 0) (#59)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 04:39:30 PM EST

rules was show a valid government issued picture ID... Seems as if people have been sharing Medicaid, Medicare and other insurance...

;-) Ya gotta love it.

And when I moved 4 years ago it took a certified birth certificate, plus the old license plus a utility bill...

"Hey," I said, "I aint running for President!"

Parent

No I'm not willing... (none / 0) (#46)
by kdog on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:23:03 PM EST

but that don't stop the man from demanding them papers...I agree, we're already there...but that doesn't mean a Dobbs-esque lunatic can't make it even worse.

Parent

The LAtinos I know (none / 0) (#23)
by coigue on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:32:42 AM EST

are for fair immigration laws.

America has a long tradition of breaking unjust laws.

It's patriotic.

Parent

PR smoke screen (none / 0) (#5)
by mmc9431 on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 09:28:02 AM EST

His ability to talk out of both sides of his mouth makes him an ideal candidate!

I think the talk of his running is about as credible as when Tweety was going to run in PA. He's probably using this ploy to keep his name in the news until he lands a big contract with another network.

Well, Lou Dobbs has been very (none / 0) (#20)
by KeysDan on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:16:25 AM EST

critical of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, citing, in the latter case, that even after all these years, there is no definition of victory or success. In one discussion of troop increase, a guest, Jeremy Scahill, noted that we already have 68,000 troops in Afghanistan as well as 74,000 mercenaries and contractors in the employ of for profit corporations. Lou has called to bring the troops home. Now he may change his mind on this issue as well, but my guess is that his opinion will only become more popular, and populist is what he thinks he does.

Does Birtherism (none / 0) (#21)
by WS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:18:55 AM EST

count as economic populism too? How about suggesting the President is an illegal immigrant?

Parent

Of course Lou is wacko, (5.00 / 2) (#25)
by KeysDan on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:37:54 AM EST

but the war issue may override all the other issues. Indeed, it has happened before. One famous speech by a candidate much less well known than Lou Dobbs, propelled him into the White House, batting down more experienced and prominent candidates in the primary because they voted for, or did not apologize adequately for, the Iraqi war resolution. Yes, you guessed it, it was Barack Obama. And, many voters did not really know much about his other positions.

Parent

So interesting, too (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by Cream City on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:14:47 PM EST

that there is no solid provenance, no fully verifiable record, of that famous speech. Another point that will be fascinating to watch as it is discussed by historians.

(But do expect that, in history textbooks to come, and especially at the K-12 level, the speech will be reported as if there is an actual record of it!)

Parent

Yes, the archives were lacking the original (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by KeysDan on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:32:08 PM EST

speech, and, according to David Axelrod, he greatly regretted that only fourteen seconds of grainy video were available. Mr. Obama later re-recorded the speech. The original speech was given at an anti-war rally in front of the Federal Building in downtown Chicago. It was organized by Chicagoans Against the War, and as a state senator at the time (representing Hyde Park/Kenwood) he was one of the speakers. But, as you say, this now a matter for historians.

Parent

Also interesting (none / 0) (#39)
by Cream City on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:57:06 PM EST

that there has been no media coverage found of it, last I looked into the historical debate on this.

As you are up on it, though, are you aware of media coverage of it found more recently?

Parent

I am not aware of any recent media coverage, (none / 0) (#41)
by KeysDan on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 01:57:17 PM EST

save for the brouhaha during the primaries when Bill Clinton made his "fairy tale" comment regarding Obama's stance that he was always against the war, citing the Obama statement during his 2004 senate campaign that there was no difference between his and Bush's policy (Obama claimed that he only said that so as not to be at odds with the Kerry/Edwards ticket). It was a brouhaha because it was charged that Mr. Clinton said that the Obama campaign was a "fairy tale", only to be rebutted by Clinton on an Al Sharpton radio show in accord with the above clarification. As for media coverage of the speech in fall of 2002, there does not seem to be any good records, but then, Obama was just a state senator at the time and may not have warranted coverage, especially at an anti-war rally where all the speakers were, more or less, of one mind. Although, a qualifier to that last statement is that in the famous speech, Obama does say, as reported in its reconstruction, that he was not against all wars, just dumb wars. Sounds like a good thesis project for a history student.

Parent

Yep, but not a good project, really (none / 0) (#42)
by Cream City on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:05:09 PM EST

without reliable and verifiable evidence, which many already have sought and not found.

Fiction is the purview of our friends in English departments -- and some journalism departments these days.:-)

Parent

An interview with David Axelrod (none / 0) (#45)
by KeysDan on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:20:39 PM EST

would be an interesting start along with details of the reconstruction and re-recording, complete with audience reactions. Rev. Jesse Jackson, the other main speaker, may be able to recollect aspects to be pieced together. Also, the Chicago Tribune reporter who did cover the event and mentioned Jackson's speech (Bill Glauber) may give some leads, particularly to others such as the event organizers. Do not know what would be found, but you never know.

Parent

As I said, it thus is a problematic project (none / 0) (#57)
by Cream City on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 04:12:32 PM EST

if based on such sources. :-)

Parent

: As an historian you (none / 0) (#69)
by KeysDan on Thu Nov 26, 2009 at 02:32:35 PM EST

know the difficulties under the best of circumstances. My thoughts were just that, some amateur thinking. Another tough idea, would be an FOIA. In 2002, with a Bush White House, and the investment they made to "roll out the war", as Andrew Card said at the time, it would not be surprising if the Chicago Police special spy units and/or FBI were there to monitor Jesse Jackson. And, maybe, they recorded that other guy, too.

Parent

Wow. I really doubt that the (none / 0) (#22)
by coigue on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 11:28:27 AM EST

Latino community has that short of a memory. Especially if their relatives have been affected by our cruel policies.

Meanwhile, Pres. Obama nominated (none / 0) (#27)
by oculus on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:06:54 PM EST

Alan Bersin to be "border czar." link Bersin advocated the fence to funnel people crossing w/o documentation to where U.S. law enforcement could more easily apprehend them. Resulting in coyotes taking their clients further East, into the desert.

The WSJ is behind (none / 0) (#29)
by jbindc on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:21:43 PM EST

He;s also considering running for President in 2012(sorry - can't do links - see Politico re: CNN interview)

So, Dobbs does a 180 on his signature (none / 0) (#34)
by MKS on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:48:01 PM EST

issue? What does he run on?

Very weird.

I'm Guessing (none / 0) (#40)
by dissenter on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 01:10:44 PM EST

more fertile ground. It is called jobs and I am all for him running. This is not because I like him or agree with him on a lot of things but if his presence does anything to get the attention of Repubs and Dems on this issue (along with the free trade agreements that are destroying the middle class and the US tax base) than I am all for it.

Ross Perot did it for the deficit. If Dobbs can do it for jobs than it will in fact be a good thing.

Parent

: Oh, Republicans like cheap labor (5.00 / 1) (#44)
by Fabian on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 02:17:58 PM EST

cheap, cheap, cheap labor. I'd lay money on him asking for a special status for immigrants which allows employers to waive things like health insurance mandates.
I'd also like immigration proponents to stop wailing and whining when things like this happen.

Parent

Wonder what his wife (none / 0) (#35)
by jbindc on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:49:23 PM EST

Debra Segura (born in Mexico) thinks about this?

What did Lou Dobbs have to say about (none / 0) (#37)
by oculus on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:52:45 PM EST

the "wise Latino woman"?

: "a" (none / 0) (#38)
by oculus on Wed Nov 25, 2009 at 12:53:04 PM EST

Parent

WSJ: Lou Dobbs Supports Amnesty For Undocumented Aliens | 68 comments (68 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment