Geraldo Won't Shake "Shameful" "Hate-Monger" Lou Dobbs' Hand

I don't see why we can't ever have a reasonable debate about illegal immigration without being labeled by people who assume they know what is in the hearts of others. All opponents of illegal immigration aren't "racist;" most are good people, and a good many of us are LIBERALS.

Shame on those who come here and post "Lou Dobbs is a racist " or the like. All you are doing is making personal attacks on those you disagree with, and in the process you are hurting your own argument. There are many who may disagree with you about what to do about illegal aliens but are open to hearing your argument . But people stop hearing (and listening) to your point of view when all you say is that those who disagree are racist. If you want to make a coherent argument, attack the message, not the messenger.

That is the problem Geraldo Rivera has. Those who have seen him on tv in the past several decades might notice that he seems to see him self as a crusader. He is so self-righteous in his beliefs that he is frequently trying to be the 'macho' guy - yelling, name-calling...I recall he did a story, I think it was about gang-members selling drugs to kids or something - and Geraldo challenged the guy to a fight. Way to be a role model for kids, Geraldo - resolve your problems through violence.

I do think that Dobbs focuses too much (and too often ) on illegal immigration, and he always seems to be angry about it. But if people didn't watch it and wouldn't get ratings and continue as it does. I don't dispute that he may have gotten the facts wrong (and I have seen him admit to it and make corrections) at times. But I do agree with him that the rule of law should prevail and that the USA, lke any other country, has the right as a sovereign nation to regulate whether or not people come into the country. I have watched his show many times, including the one from the link provided earlier (at bravenewfilms.org) and have never heard him say anything the least bit racist. Part of the villification of Mr. Dobbs seems to be guilt by association - he has someone on as a guest whom the Southern Poverty Law Center (who I generally support and have given money to in the past) identifies as being part of a 'hate group' (or is in a group in which another member was associated with said hate group) and therefore he is a bigot for having them on or agreeing with anything they say. This is akin to saying Barack Obama is a racist because Louis Farrakahn endorsed him, or saying that he is responsible for what his pastor says, because he is a member of the church.

Watching the Dobbs clip on bravenewfilms.org org that was provided earlier, I saw no credible argument for him being racist or "hate-mongering." In fact if you watch the clip, he quite respectfully disagreed with the woman trying to make this 'guilt-by-association" connection, and listened to what she had to say. I came away from it finding him to be more reasonable and even-tempered than I gave him credit for earlier in this post. The thing is, we don't know what is in Lou Dobbs' heart. While I have not watched him long enough to have heard his positions on other issues, I find it odd that many people lump him into the same category as Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity - I just don't see it.

I do think it is relevant that Dobbs is married to a Mexican-American woman. While you may disagree with his views and think they are in opposition to what many Hispanic or Mexican-Americans think, it is hard to argue that he truly "hates" hispanics. If he didn't want them around, or have more of them in the US, why would he come home to one every night and have kids with her ? An earlier post tried to make the analogy along the lines that he is married to a Jewish woman, so would that make it ok for him to deny the Holocaust ? I would answer that it would seem to be a contradiction, but at the same time it would be hard to argue that he is truly against Jews if he comes home to one every night and has kids with her.

Another argument that got trotted out, as it often does, is the 'we're all immigrants somewhere in our famiies, unless we're Native American' or that one is somehow hypocritcal in arguing against illegal immigration unless we're willing to to go back to Europe (assuming one is a Euro-American or W.A.SP. in background) and give back North America to the Native Americans. That argument just doesn't hold water, and I think we all know that. I don't condone or approve of the past (or present ) treatment of Native Americans. I'm simply arguing that a nation, such as the USA, or Canada, or Mexico , has the right to make laws and regulate who comes into the United States right now. If Reagan gave you amnesty in 1986 (as the government did for millions at the time), I'm not advocating to kick you out, nor is anyone that I know of for that matter. So it doen't help to bring up the Native Americans several centuries ago. It's not a clever point, and it isn't a relevant or analogous one. Trying to equate illegal immigration with immigration in general doesn't convince anyone.

As many have already pointed out, you can't assume that it is "the right wing" or "the conservatives" (or even neocons) who agree with much of what Lou Dobbs says, however much he may go overboard with his enthusiasm. I count myself as a proud liberal and I voted for Obama (and previously liked Kucinich though obviously I didn't agree with him about illegal immigration). I have spent much of my life working against racism and helping the poor as a social worker.

So instead of screaming "racist," let's have a real debate and maybe we can even come up with some ideas that will make things better . ("Yes, we can ! ")

Lou just challenged a Wall Street honcho to a fight for some critical remark he made about Lou. And a couple weeks ago, Lou called Governor Spitzer of New York "dumb." Somone remind Lou that he just reads the news off a cue card.

I wouldn't shake hands with either one of them. I could never stand Geraldo, and I think political opporunism brough Dobbs out of the bigotry closet. Dobbs is Babbit with and education and a microphone. Huckabee is Elmer Gantry. Geraldo is too ridiculous to have an analog.

Anyone find it slightly ironic that Lou's wife is Mexican American?

Most people have thought for YEARS now that Geraldo is the one who is CRAZY.

Dobbs is a great american. He's the only tele-journalist that showed americans the nonsense of the Senate's attempt at so called "Comprehensive Immigration Reform"... If it weren't for Dobbs the following provisions of the Senate immigration reform bill would likely be law right now:

1. The bill would immediately legalize illegal aliens that are currently in the country.

2. The bill would make taxpayers pay the legal bills for illegal aliens seeking amnesty.

3. Under the bill, illegal aliens will immediately be eligible for a "Z Visa" which allows them to stay here for the rest of their lives if they so choose because there is no limit on the number of times it can be renewed. Supporters of the bill call the Z visa "temporary" - neglecting to mention that it can be renewed indefinitely until the visa holder dies.

4. The bill gives the government only one business day to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant is a criminal or a terrorist. It is impossible, of course, to determine in a single day whether someone is a terrorist or a criminal.

5. Under the provisions of the bill illegal-alien gang members would be eligible for amnesty merely by signing a "renunciation of gang affiliation."

6. The immigration reform bill allows convicted felons and child molesters to obtain legal status and to live, work in this country indefinitely.

7. If ICE officials apprehend an alien who appears eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), they can't detain him. Instead, ICE must help him/her apply for the Z visa.

8. The bill increases legal migration by at least 50 percent over the next decade by granting green cards to all the remote relatives who are in the chain migration categories, a number estimated at 750,000 to 900,000 a year.

9. The border security part of the bill calls for a 370-mile-long fence on
the U.S./Mexico border. That is about half as long as the fence ordered by the Secure Fence Act passed overwhelmingly by Congress in 2006.

10. Fiscal costs would go up dramatically after amnesty recipients reach retirement. Each elderly low-skill immigrant imposes a net cost - that is benefits minus taxes - on U.S. taxpayers of about $17,000 per year, according to the Heritage Foundation. These costs would hit Social Security and Medicare at the very time Social Security is expected to go into crisis.

11. Illegal Aliens will receive instate tuition. Illegal aliens would receive a taxpayer subsidy worth tens of thousands of dollars and would be treated better than U.S. citizens from out of state, who must pay three to four times as much to attend college. Why is this a good idea for Americans?

12. Health standards ignored - Unlike legal immigrants, no medical exam or immunizations are needed to get a Z visa.

Viva Dobbs! If it weren't for his work on the immigration issue 20 millions foreigners who broke the law to get into this country and to remain here (using some of your SSN's, by the way) would be legally living here now and driving down the wages and benefits of American citizens. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK LOU!

Dobbs only wants the Rule of Law to be respected and obeyed and he's being criticized for it. It's not the illegal immigrants who should be blamed - it's our government that is breaking its own laws by not enforcing them. Corrupt politicians have sold their souls to special interests and corporations who want to get their labor on the cheap and pay out no benefits. Greed, greed, greed.

...I despise Lou Dobbs and the immigrant alarmist bigot that he is...I understand 100% Geraldo's point of view regarding the insurmountable damage Lou Dobbs' racist rantings and raving against immigrants in this country has done, and how negatively it has impacted imigrants' very lives and safety...

...having said that...I am also aware of the fact that there are thousands of immigrants in this country who have been waiting in line for years and years for their legal immigration applications to be processed...do these people who are following the legal process count for nothing?...what is their motivation to pursue the legal channels for immigration when undocumented people are able to simply jump the line and get ahead?...

...I think that ALL immigration should be legal, PERIOD...is that too much to ask?

.

One more thing about the immigration issue-----down there along the border of the US and Mexico in states like Texas and Arizona----people who have to live with this every day--they are not in favor of having the walls go through their communities----most of those border towns have developed a close relationship with their counterparts north and south of the border.
Putting up the wall through them would not only be unsightly---but it wil tear up the fabric of those communities---
And to say that we don't have a racist component to putting up the wall---why is there no wall going up along the US-Canadian border??
No one hardly recalls, but in the days of the Clinton administration-----they arrested some Al Qaeda type terrorists who made their way into the US via Canada whose goal was to blow up LAX airport and do bombings at the millenium celebrations in various places.
Even though many rightwing talking heads have made the claim that terrorists come into the US via Mexico--no hard evidence exists that prove such claims---
If we are going to be consistent about "border security" we need to not only build walls on the southern border--but all along the northern frontier as well----

I have had this "like/dislike" divide on Geraldo over the years---on this issue--I like what he is doing---and he is right about the way so many people in our nation deal with the immigration issue--so much of the anti-immigrant sentiment we have in this nation has a racist, bigoted nativist element to it---but that is really not an unusual thing---as a person of Irish descent--it was not all that long ago that the Irish were the "ditry dogs" of the age----most of the latin immigrants we have in the country today are hard working, decent people who are merely here to better their lives and that of their families--as to them taking jobs---is anyone here---black, white, or any other group who have "moved up in the world" going to go out and pick apples, onions, lettuce, etc, in the fields 10 hours a day, six days a week??
I don't think so----they are not taking our jobs--they are doing the jobs that we won't do anymore but still need to get done--and it is crazy to think that we are going to kick out the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who are now here---we simply do not have enough resouces either in terms of not just money, but police officers and places to incarcerate them---to effectively get rid of them----we would have to basically become a police state and all of our rights would have to go---the rights of everyone--oh, but of course not those who can afford to live in walled off communities with their own private security forces--but that leaves most of us out!

Lou Dobbs is a race-baiter posing as a Populist. He plays on the insecurities of the middle class by painting Mexican immigrants as immoral and corporations as unethical. His narrow view of the immigration problem and his selective presentation of information is polarizing Americans and preventing a rational discussion about reform.

In Lou"s world, corporations are evil and are continually and willfully engaging in practices that violate labor laws in order to generate an excessive profit. Similarly, Mexican immigrants are a culture of criminals who knowingly violate US immigration laws, steal identities, defraud our welfare system, burden our health care system and tax our law enforcement resources. There are no "people" in Lou Dobbs" world.

Lou is being disingenuous to the people he claims to represent. He conveniently leaves out one economic component to this equation; demand. Middle America votes on a daily basis with its collective wallet. Demand for lower prices for food, household goods, consumer electronics, sporting goods, toys, and personal services helped create this problem. Time and again, consumers chose Walmart over Main Street. Mexican immigrants are here as a direct result of middle class demand.

NAFTA was designed to be a boon to US companies and Mexican workers. The premise was to take advantage of Mexico"s unskilled, uneducated, and inexpensive labor force. Its proximity to the US would allow domestic transportation firms, importers, distributors, and retailers to profit and keep consumer prices in line with what US consumers were willing to pay. But something happened on the way to NAFTA. That something was called China.

More US manufacturing jobs were lost to China than Mexico. Consequently, the supply of Mexican workers exceeded the demand from the very companies NAFTA was designed to benefit. Mexican workers were forced to migrate to the US in search of jobs. Companies of all sizes began hiring illegal immigrants to match consumer demand and remain competitive in a global market.

In nearly every instance the hiring rationale is the same; recruitment is cheaper, wages are lower, and productivity is higher. Small businesses hire them knowing that they are undocumented and pay them cash. Large companies insist on documentation, but they don"t verify its authenticity. At the end of the day, hiring immigrant workers allows US companies to provide products and services to US consumers at the price that the middle class wants to pay.

Illegal immigrants tax our resources and abuse our system because our system is outdated and ineffective. From the securing of our borders to the enforcement of immigration, labor, welfare, and criminal laws, there is one fundamental flaw that exacerbates this issue; lack of verifiable personal identification.

Instead of demanding the deportation of 12 " 30 million Mexican nationals, US citizens should be demanding verifiable identification for everyone, not just immigrants. Verifiable identification protects each of us from identity theft and fraud. Lack of verifiable identification enables every one of us to be a victim. We must demand verifiable identification for ourselves and every person that enters our country.

If we can"t require the same passports at our secured borders that other sovereign nations do, we set ourselves up for a myriad of problems. A system of "no passport, no entry" is universal and cannot be argued against. The passport system if not infallible, but it is a place to start. A better place to start would be with our own social security cards.

Given the fact that our social security numbers are the key to our identity as US citizens, why don"t we do a better job of securing this information? We neither protect nor secure our identity with this easily counterfeited piece of paper and 9-digit number that is practically public information. It is time that we revise this system and require all social security cards to become a photo identification card renewable every four years (similar to a driver"s license).

All citizens above the age of 16 should be required to visit the SS office with a birth certificate, original social security card or number, and official photo identification. A digital photo would be taken and stored electronically. Minors under the age of 16 would have their social security number "locked".

A secure database could then be created with a p.i.n. to restrict access to SS information only to each citizen. Any entity wishing to make an inquiry against an individual"s SS file would require authorization from that individual. This would include employers and credit reporting agencies, but not law enforcement.

Just as each American"s identification would be secured, all immigrants would be required to seek a Visa based on the same criteria. A "restricted" SS # would be issued, photo id generated and secure database created. Each year, the Visa would have to be updated. If the "Work Visa" holder cannot provide a valid W2 or proof of employment within a set period of time, the Visa is canceled and the individual is deported. If laws are broken or citizenship isn"t achieved in a specified number of years, Visas are revoked and abusers are deported.

An individual could not be hired without a valid Social Security id or Visa. This system could control the issuance of driver"s licenses, prevent unauthorized financial transactions, and verify eligibility for government benefits. It"s really a simple fix that requires ALL Americans to consent to verifiable identification.

As for the estimated 12 " 30 million illegal immigrants currently in our country? We need an identification amnesty, a period of time to allow all US residents to secure proper identification. Immigrants could first be issued passports and an opportunity to secure a Visa. Proof of employment or enrollment would be required to secure a Visa. A path to citizenship complete with fines, fees, and requirements could then be established.

Immigration would be a lot easier to enforce when identification is standardized. No passport, no Visa, no entry. It wouldn"t be discriminatory or in violation of any Constitutional rights or civil liberties. It would secure our borders. It would protect US citizens.

This is a reasonable solution to a problem that has gotten out of hand, but is not beyond repair. Proposing solutions that are reasonable brings people together. Keeping people polarized doesn"t solve anything.

Never thought I would say this. . .but I agree with Geraldo 100% on Lou Dobbs. Dobbs uses his bully pulpit to do that precisely: BULLY. He is a power-hungry, hate-mongering bigot hiding behind a facade of concern for the American middle class. However, if you listen to Dobbs long enough, his true colors begin to show.

Several months ago, Ed Rollins (who is now Huckabee's campaign manager) was commenting on the Democratic