May 6, 2007
Lou Dobbs, "Advocacy" Journalist?
Lesley Stahl Interviews The Outspoken CNN Anchor On "60 Minutes"
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Dobbs On Illegal Immigrants
In this "60 Minutes" excerpt, CNN anchor Lou Dobbs tells Leslie Stahl that the U.S. could track down and deport millions of illegal immigrants if it makes the commitment to do so.
-
-
Photo
Lou Dobbs and his wife Debi, in the kitchen of their New Jersey farmhouse. (CBS)
-
Photo
Lou Dobbs. (CBS)
-
-
Interactive
Immigration And Naturalization
Who's coming to America? Find out what's being done to screen for terrorists and take a citizenship quiz.
-
Photo Essay
Immigration Rallies
Demonstrators demand path to citizenship for estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.
-
News Tools
Immigration Reform Plan
President Bush lays out his vision for comprehensive immigration reform.
"Let me ask you about repeating the same topics over and over. Do you does your audience ever get tired of it?" Stahl asks.
"It's interesting you say repeating it," Dobbs remarks.
"Yeah. Over and over," Stahl says.
"I consider it thorough and on-going," Dobbs replies.
It does appear he is hitting a nerve. Dobbs gets 2,000 e-mails a day. He’s a new kind of anchorman, less Walter Cronkite than Bill O'Reilly.
Dobbs has described himself as a populist. Asked what he means by that, he says, "An anti-elitist."
Dobbs grew up as far from the centers of power as you can get: in rural Texas and Idaho. He says the family was poor; he picked beans alongside migrant workers in the summers. But he did well in school and ended up going to Harvard University.
"That must've been culture shock, to say the very least. Did the kids make fun of your accent?" Stahl asks.
"I wore cowboy boots, I wore my jeans, I was going to be who the hell I was and as a result, some folks made fun of me," Dobbs recalls.
One day in class a professor asked him where he was from. "And the professor said, 'Idaho?' And he lifted his eyebrows and said, 'Mr. Dobbs, that's the cultural wasteland of America,'" Dobbs remembers. "And the truth of the matter is, he had me pretty well pegged, but he didn't have to say it out loud. You know."
One thing's for sure: Dobbs never left that farm-boy behind. He lives on a 300 acre farm in New Jersey and commutes three hours a day—every day—to and from CNN in New York.
"Are you a gentleman farmer? Is that the right expression?" Stahl asks Dobbs, during a walk on his farm.
"Well, the word would be half-ass farmer," Dobbs says.
The farm is sort of a compound. He lives there with 25 horses, four dogs, a cat, his wife, his 97-year-old mother, and his wife’s parents, the in-laws.
Dobbs met his wife Debi at CNN when she was a sportscaster; they've been married 25 years. "He’s a small-town boy, country boy. He used to say he was a country boy who's been to the big city," she says.
Dobbs' wife acknowledges her husband is an incredibly tough debater. Asked if she ever wins arguments with her husband, she tells Stahl, "Do I ever win? Of course, Lesley. … Most of ‘em."
But she says she tends to agree with what Lou says on his show.
"You never watch him and call him on the phone or wait till he gets home and say, 'Now Lou, tonight you just went too far?'" Stahl asks.
"We do discuss the show. But in terms of going too far, no. Usually, I'll say, 'You didn't go far enough,'" Debi Dobbs says.
There are many who do think Dobbs goes too far. He has become such a scold on the subject of illegal immigration, comedians like Stephen Colbert have teased him about it.
"How do you like our fence?" Colbert asked Dobbs during an appearance on "The Colbert Report," while showing off a prop fence.
"It's very impressive. And better than some of the fence along our border now," Dobbs replied.
"I'm a border fence fan," Colbert said. "I just think we haven’t done enough. …Flaming trenches filled with fire-proof... No. No. No. Lou."
But there's little humor on Dobbs' show, with his assaults on the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, who he says are endangering the American way of life.
"Several states are trying to restrict illegal immigration by curtailing access to social services," Stahl remarks.
"I happen to think that it is necessary, given the fact that the federal government won’t control immigration and won’t control our borders," Dobbs says.
"But if you cut off the social, health services, things like that, education … for the kids, do you create a whole other crisis if you do that?" Stahl asks.
"Medical services, no one wants to end," Dobbs says. "But going to food stamps, should taxpayers be paying for food stamps? Should taxpayers be burdened with schools that are overcrowded? Their children therefore are being denied education. Those are very serious issues."
Produced By Denise Cetta
© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recent Segments
Scroll Left
Scroll Right
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 7
- next
See all 303 CommentsNo, a reporter should be disqualified when he has shown a willful desire to misinform his viewers as he did during the Pelosi plane kerfuffle. Lou Dobbs reported that Nancy Pelosi %u201Cwants the U.S. Air Force for personal accommodation.%u201D and "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi apparently wants regular access to military aircraft for flights, not only for herself, but also members of her family and the Californian delegation.", during a week in which he focused on this made up story. The House Sergeant of Arms had confirmed that he was the one who asked the Pentagon for a larger plane for Pelosi on tuesday of that week, yet Lou Dobbs never mentioned it and continued to misinform his viewers for the remainder of the week. To this date, Dobbs has not offered a retraction. I used to respect Dobbs even though I often disagreed w/ him, I no longer do.
I don't always agree with the direction they go in but I'm glad they actually do and at least try to be some what object. With Dobbs it's clear what his opinion is and what is fact. One shouldn't take his word as 100%, look at other points of view other then his. He at least is willing to bring certain issues into the light.
I have to ask though. What is wrong with putting America and it's legal citizens first in all things? What is wrong with actually upholding actual laws and making people follow them?
I think Mr. Dobbs is attempting to wake the large segment of our population that feel illegal aliens are a detriment to society as we know it now. The majority of people are not happy with President Bush and his approach to the illegal alien problem but cannot for what ever reason bring them self to speak out about this growing cancer that will someday destroy this country.
Journalist, that%u2019s a very subjective title that is used by both good and bad reporters. I personally hear, read and watch very poor journalists almost every day. Mr. Dobbs reports on important issues and his views are closely inline with my views which makes him to me a very reliable source.
Perhaps if we had more journalists willing to go public with their own views on illegal aliens, the war in Iraq, and many other issues than we the target of their programs could decide for ourselves if that person was a journalist. We could tune in or out and even write letters to the programming department to make a helpful suggesting about how to improve the journalist.
C. Mealer
Alexandria, LA.
I think Mr. Dobbs is attempting to wake the large segment of our population that feel illegal aliens are a detriment to society as we know it now. The majority of people are not happy with President Bush and his approach to the illegal alien problem but cannot for what ever reason bring them self to speak out about this growing cancer that will someday destroy this country.
Journalist, that%u2019s a very subjective title that is used by both good and bad reporters. I personally hear, read and watch very poor journalists almost every day. Mr. Dobbs reports on important issues and his views are closely inline with my views which makes him to me a very reliable source.
Perhaps if we had more journalists willing to go public with their own views on illegal aliens, the war in Iraq, and many other issues than we the target of their programs could decide for ourselves if that person was a journalist. We could tune in or out and even write letters to the programming department to make a helpful suggesting about how to improve the journalist.
C. Mealer
Alexandria, LA.
Posted by gatogus at 03:29 PM : May 03, 2007
AMEN and WELL SAID...what a loser...
Posted by gatogus at 03:29 PM : May 03, 2007
AMEN and WELL SAID...what a loser...
Posted by gatogus at 03:29 PM : May 03, 2007
AMEN and WELL SAID...what a loser...
Posted by gatogus at 03:29 PM : May 03, 2007
AMEN and WELL SAID...what a loser...
I've never watched Lou Dobbs but there are a few things you should know before you call someone an idiot:
tectics = tactics
intloreant = intolerant
missinformed= misinformed
He gives himself away as a closet fascist when he states "you bet" the USA can round up and deport millions of fpeople.
Papers Pleeeece!
War on terrorism.
War on drugs.
...chill out, government.
War on racism.
War on poverty and homelessness.
War on ignorance and ethnocentrism.
Just as difficult of a plan, but the U.S. would be a better place if victorious on those fronts.
The National Research Council (NRC) estimated that immigrant households create a net fiscal burden (taxes paid minus services used) on all levels of government of $20.2 billion annually.
The NRC estimated that an immigrant without a high school diploma will create a net lifetime burden of $89,000, an immigrant with only a high school education it is negative $31,000. However, an immigrant with education beyond high school is a fiscal benefit of $105,000.
Estimating the impact of immigrants and their descendants, the NRC found that if today%u2019s newcomers do as well as past generations, the average immigrant will be a fiscal drain for his first 22 years after arrival. It takes his children another 18 years to pay back this burden.
The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) estimates that in 2002 illegal alien households imposed costs of $26 billion on the federal government and paid $16 billion in federal taxes, creating an annual net fiscal deficit of $10.4 billion at the federal level, or $2,700 per household.
Among the largest costs, were Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches ($1.9 billion); the federal prison/court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).
If illegal aliens were legalized and began to pay taxes and use services like households headed by legal immigrants with the same education levels, CIS estimates the annual net fiscal deficit would increase to $29 billion, or $7,700, per household.
The primary reason illegal aliens create a fiscal deficit is that an estimated 60 percent lack a high school degree and another 20 percent have no education beyond high school. The fiscal drain is not due to their legal status or unwillingness to work.
The 18 March 2007 Los Angeles Times reported that California hospitals spent about $700 million on healthcare for illegal immigrants in 2006 and received $73 million from the federal program.
Because illegal immigrants tend to be disproportionately concentrated in certain segments of the nation%u2019s labor market, their direct impact is quite specific. The 2000 Census reported that 58 percent of the adult foreign-born population had only a high school diploma or less. Undoubtedly the educational attainment level of illegal immigrants is even worse than this bleak Census finding that is the product of our entire immigration system. Consequently, there is no doubt that most illegal immigrants are poorly educated, unskilled and often do not speak English. Of necessity, therefore, they seek employment in the low skilled occupations in a variety of industries. In the process, they artificially swell the labor supply in those occupations and industries and depress the wages of the low skilled American workers who also work in these sectors.
If permitted to compete for these jobs with American workers, the illegal immigrants will always win. This is because they will do anything to get the jobs -- accept lower than prevailing wages; work longer hours; work under dangerous and hazardous working conditions; and live in crowded and sub-standard housing. They will accept conditions as they are and are less likely to report violations of prevailing laws pertaining to work standards, anti-discrimination and sexual harassment -- even if they know these laws exist (which many do not). No American worker can successfully compete against them -- nor should they --when the rules of the game are who will work the hardest, for the longest, and under the worst conditions.
As a consequence, the illegal immigrant worker becomes the preferred worker for employers. It is not that American workers will not do certain jobs; it is that they will not do the jobs under the same terms that illegal immigrants often will -- nor should they. As for the illegal immigrants, they willingly work under these adverse conditions, because their orbit of comparison is with the conditions of work in their homelands. Literally, it does not matter how bad the working conditions are in the United States as they are invariably far better than they were where they come from.
Corporations, both large and small, have implicitly encouraged illegal immigration as evidenced by the lobbying campaigns of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the large agriculture businesses. These campaigns at first focused on the non-enforcement of the immigration laws. More recently, the lobbying has been aimed at the legalization of these workers under the guise of immigration reform. Obviously, the single-minded motivation of these corporations is the increased profits obtained from lower wage, nonunion workers.
In addition to ethnic special interest groups such as La Raza, the Democratic and Republican parties have also sought to harness and utilize the potential political power of the illegal aliens by virtue of their legalization. This potential is by no means insignificant since there are an estimated 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in this country. Pure and simple, the aim here is political power and nothing less.
I do not fault the illegal immigrants for coming to the United States in search of a better way of life. Indeed, I am certain that many of us would do the same if we could not adequately provide for our families. However, I oppose any form of so-called immigration reform that involves any form of amnesty for two primary reasons:
First, there cannot be a reward for those who have broken the law in order to enter this country. If we do otherwise, then we will repeat the mistakes of the 1986 legislation with its amnesty provisions that only encouraged an even greater wave of illegal immigration in subsequent years. In addition, if we are to remain a nation of laws, then we must respect the rights of those who have been attempting to legally immigrate, some waiting as long as ten years for just such a right.
Second, I strongly oppose any form of immigration reform that effectively causes the tax payers to subsidize the profits of those corporations that employ these low-wage immigrants. As provided in the quoted congressional testimony, a majority of the illegal immigrants that are currently here impose a major liability on the federal government, a liability that will significantly increase if they are legalized through some form of amnesty. This liability amounts to a government subsidy for those corporations.
Some argue that we have no choice but to offer some form of amnesty because it is impractical do anything else. In contrast, I believe that the only lasting solution must be predicated on severe penalties for employers who hire illegal aliens.
The true magnet that drives illegal immigration is jobs. If there are no jobs to be had for those who are illegal, then America will cease to be an attraction for illegal immigrants. This can be accomplished by imposing severe penalties on all who employ illegal immigrants. The employer penalties will also provide the necessary impetus for those illegal workers who are already here to voluntarily ask for deportation back to their home countries because there will be no jobs to sustain them.
People talk about unintended consequences. And Lou Dobbs isn't a politician! He works for a company! Now I can see politicians messing things up.. and getting mad at them. But not teevee companies! Thats unacceptable to me.
There is no mandate with a journalist for unintended consequences. And this is even more so with Iraq! I mean, it is a literal all out attack! On something, yer talking about thousands and thousands of people who do this stuff for a living! Who look at the intelligence.. Who analyze it. And have been analyzing it for years and years! And then all of a sudden.. Because some camera man wants to make policy.. Iraq is this big, liberal legal lobby, right wing extremist conspiracy! That Pear farmer should sue CNN!
I'm the amnesty. And if you work in this country? In my opinion. You should be a citizen of this country. You're not talking about no "burden on society" when you're talking about workers. There's no burden on society for people who work. Thats the whole point of working! You're not a burden on society. Unbelievable..
This is unacceptable, cable news. You've become one big giant Washington tabloid.
So why is nothing being done?
I've seen a rather interesting increase in Spanish-only-speaking people lately; it is not immoral or illegal to ask somebody who seems foreign for relevant paperwork. When I visited Europe some 20 years ago, I had to have my passport on me for identification. So there is NOTHING wrong with America doing the same thing!
Who's supposed to look out and report these things? It's very odd to see a large landscaping company truck drive to "Old People Buffet" restaurant (name changed to protect the innocent) and to see the white guy unlock and lift up the door on back of the truck, to see three brown skinned people who have that "basic Latino look" get out of it. Prove to me that guy wasn't using illegal workers. The front cab of the truck could have housed all 3 passengers. Yet all three were treated like tools housed as cargo! You bet something's not right. And nobody on the news told me I'm supposed to call 1-800-ILLEGALS.
Pity I don't remember the truck's information. Next time I see something, I'll bring along my camera; take some pictures. Trouble is, who'd get dealt with? The 3 illegals? The driver? The company that's hired all of them?
It'd be nice TO know what to do at times like this because I'd do what I can as a loyal American.
This isn't being anti-Hispanic. If a Mexican, Canadian, white male American, you bloody well name it, went to another country illegally, you'd be dealt with.
N.B. There were 54 Americans killed in the LA Riots in 1992.
They were average Americans, on the way home dragged from their cars, car windows smashed with crow bars as the TV crews hovered above, recording - then killed with crowbars, knives or guns. Some had their heads bashed in, as their children watched. Some were killed protecting their homes from rapists and thugs. Even on the liberal West Side.
The PC LA Times have erased that part of history from their search engines, as I guess does not fit their story line. You can not find even their names. Those issues have been blocked out of the data base.
Just l ast week the 15 year update was published, but did not mention these people, rather it was a story about how economically deprived the people of LA continue to be in some ethnic groups, and that "nothing has changed." Again Whitee guilt is the story line most comfortable to publish.
QUESTION TO ALL MEDIA---
Is there a rememberance to these poor 54 ? Or a memorial ? Or a CNN retrospective on their lives and how the familes have coped since this massacre ? No way. Why not ?
This is why I and many of you , do not trust the mass media press. Erasing their names , erasing history ... Shame on you.
Play by the rule of law? Who eggzactly has been play'n by the rule of law? Huh? George Bush? Bill Clinton? Oh I know.. Tom Delay! Nope..
Who?
Is Fox News fair and unbiased in their reporting?
I don't always agree with Mr. Dobbs, but I'm glad he has enough integrity to lay it on the table as he sees it.
I firmly believe that journalists who report on politics and international news have been biased in what they want the public at large to believe.
Mr. Dobbs: please keep on speaking your mind and thank you.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 7
- next
See all 303 Comments