David Brooks and Lou Dobbs Are Both Losing

David Brooks, Lou Dobbs, and their massive egos may not realize this, but we do not have to choose between their flawed economic visions for American and the world.

But their little Pinstripe Catfight this week does help illustrate the weaknesses in both of their arguments.

Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist, kicked things off Tuesday, declaring and lamenting that "Lou Dobbs is winning."

...his message is winning. Month by month the ideas that once prevailed on the angry fringe enter the mainstream and turn into conventional wisdom.

Once there was a majority in favor of liberal immigration policies, but apparently that's not true anymore, at least if you judge by campaign rhetoric.

Once there was a bipartisan consensus behind free trade, but that's not true anymore, either...Once upon a time, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are rising out of poverty would have been a source of pride and optimism. But if you listen to the presidential candidates, improvements in the developing world are menacing. Their speeches constitute a symphony of woe about lead-painted toys, manipulated currencies and stolen jobs.

And if Dobbsianism is winning when times are good, you can imagine how attractive it's going to seem if we enter [a] serious recession ... the political climate could shift in ugly ways.

Wednesday night on CNN, Dobbs eagerly exploited the opening:

Those elites appear terrified of truth and me ... None other than the house organ of the country's liberal establishment, The New York Times, allowing one of the columnists to declare that "Lou Dobbs is Winning."

...Brooks and his fellow elitists can't quite admit reality when it's abundantly clear to everyone that their bankrupt ideas have failed, that the orthodoxy is not getting it done, and in fact, are contributing to the destruction of what's left of our middle class and the promise of this great nation for millions of Americans.

Corporatists, free traders, illegal aliens, open borders, amnesty advocates simply don't care about the quality of life for millions and millions of working men and women, our middle class in this country and those who aspire to it.

Those elites have bribed, intimidated political leaders into silence, spending $2 million on lobbying, even outright betrayal of working men and women and their families, and of course, rejecting the rule of the majority in favor of the elites who have, through some endowment of DNA, a superior view to all of the people of this country and all of it in the name of faith-based economics, so called free trade policies and of course amnesty, no matter what the will of the people.

However, Brooks and Dobbs are both wrong. The Dobbs message is losing.

Economic populism is certainly winning. As Campaign for America's Future Co-Director Robert Borosage observed after the 2006 elections, Democrats won with "populist campaigns, indicting Republicans for being in the pocket of the drug and oil lobbies ... The costs of Republican corruption fed into the economic pressures on working families. And this trumped the threat of higher taxes...."

The Campaign for America's Future news release announcing the results of an election night poll detailed the national direction: "By a margin of 17 percent, they consider government regulation more helpful than harmful ... And by two to one, they want government to protect jobs with fair trade policies and to take the lead in moving us towards alternative energy, rather than relying on private investors to make the choices."

Dobbs calls himself an "independent populist." But he did not lead the country in this populist direction. He's just seeking to ride the populist wave and link it to his long-standing anti-immigrant campaign.

He brazenly lumped in "illegal aliens" with "corporatists" who "don't care about the quality of life for millions and millions of working men and women, our middle class in this country and those who aspire to it."

Of course, those "illegals" who committed misdemeanors to come here are working men and women -- risking their lives, often suffering exploitation from those corporatists, just to make ends meet.

While Brooks thinks Dobbs is succeeding based on "campaign rhetoric," the fact is years of loud anti-immigrant rants, equating the exploiters and the exploited, has done nothing to reverse public opinion. The American people supported pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants last year, and still do.

Further, Republican attempts to blunt the Democrats' populist campaign in 2006 with anti-immigrant ads backfired, driving away Latino votes without gaining any white votes.

While Dobbs sought to imply that Brooks' attack hailed from the "liberal establishment," the conservative Brooks was in fact trying to use Dobbs' ugly hatred to sully growing liberal populist sentiment.

In particular he insinuated that "free" trade is working it's magic to reduce global poverty.

Brooks doesn't mention that the United Nations (the folks leading the effort to eradicate poverty) is concerned that we won't meet the goal of cutting extreme poverty in half by 2015. What improvement we've seen is largely concentrated in China and India. We're not seeing much improvement in Africa and Latin America. (Sorry NAFTA.)

The UN supports the lowering of trade barriers for developing countries, but not blindly.

A UN review (PDF file) of the first 10 years of its poverty effort noted that, "many low-income countries that had pursued primarily growth-oriented development strategies found themselves facing rising inequality and worsening poverty" and "[t]he higher the level of income inequality, the less impact economic growth has in reducing poverty at any given rate of growth." In turn, it concluded:

...policy decisions aimed at poverty reduction and eradication should also be targeted, rather than simply relying on the trickle-down effects of broad economic and social policies to promote economic growth and development.

Meanwhile the Bush Administration and other developed nations have not followed through on pledges to the UN to provide sufficient aid to reach anti-poverty goals.

Brooks, unsurprisingly, has tried to spin Bush's stinginess as visionary, just as he spins the failures of current trade policies.

He pooh-poohs the massive influx of toxic toys, instead of offering alternative trade policies that lift up labor, environmental and safety standards and make the global economy work for everyone.

Which, along with stronger aid, would cut down on illegal immigration -- good jobs in home countries negate the need to risk lives in the desert crossing the border.

Brooks seeks to puncture populism by assuring that America's economic "fundamentals" are solid, never bothering to mention our own rising inequality and poverty (not even a mention of the mortgage crisis).

While Dobbs seeks to exploit populism to bolster his anti-immigrant campaign.

Neither offers a comprehensive populist economic vision, where our government stands for working families and the impoverished and against irresponsible, detrimental corporate behavior -- both in America and abroad.

Which is why neither Dobbs nor Brooks is winning.

Originally posted at the Campaign for America's Future blog.

Follow Bill Scher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/billscher

Comments

[Rule Of Law]

Dobbs and Brooks have all the power of the MSM behind them and we have only our own voices. To hear the voice of the people listen to what the students of Cornell said last night to Ashcroft.

We start by resisting this Regime and the enablers of the controlled dialogue by demonstrating against their policies and very presence, as the students at Cornell did just yesterday. You won't find it in the corporate MSM, but watch it here, then act!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxTcPM9HxBQ
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-siegel/creative-rebellion-corne_b_74892.html

[tgood]

Notice how Lou Dobbs is now being attacked by those who are leading the parade for open borders? Way to go, Lou. When they start demonizing you, it shows they know people are waking up to the sleeping giant of the illegal alien crisis.

Attacks on you prove one thing, Lou--you're winning. Keep pushing back, it's long overdue.

[hollyo]

David Brooks is a leaver-outer-of facts and reality to make his right wing point. He's got entirely too much exposure on the media in the interest of so called 'fair and balanced.' Isn't there someone brighter and less polarizing? I turn any program with him OFF.

[PeterM]

"The American people supported pathways to citizenship for illegal immigrants last year, and still do."

Complete and utter hogwash. Why would anyone in their right mind support citizenship for illegal immigrants. Did you not see the reaction in NY about drivers licenses? Let alone citizenship?

I do not agree with Dobbs on everything but I agree with his criticisms and his quote in the article above. Dobbs message is not losing, quite the opposite and you ain't seen nothing yet when the $#!& hits the fan in the US economy and collapsing standard of living.

[Joeseo]

Boy oh Boy, you are so wrong on Lou Dobbs. He leads and others follow. He is not, as you errantly put it, a foe of immigration. Thats pure nonsense and entirely fraudulent.

Lou sure has muddied the waters politically, but he is correct in using the legality fact. Corporate America is the lawbreaker funding the lawmakers to keep labor cost down. It is so much easier to steal productivity savings from workers who havnt any chance to be legal.
These Corporations should be fined and their Management jailed.

As for David Brooks, Lou shows his political astuteness railing against the Liberal Times, knowing full-well Brooks is a conservative lackey of Bush and Corporate America.

I say keep the pot stirring Lou.

[milo9]

Dobbs has quite often been the sole voice of the average Dems. Why don't we have, in our party, somebody who speaks for us.

Why is it that Americans who want to pass on their way of life to their children without being disturbed by outsiders are vilified as rascist, yet if they were Indians in the Amazon basin who had the same desire to preserve their culture, they would be celebrated.

Why is it that we have no one who understands that people who have put down deep roots in the U.S. must regularized. But now, we have had enough illegal immigration and now it must be stopped. And above all we're not going to have open borders and if the Corporate Dem leadership don't face that fact they will be defeated at the polls.

[clr2]

Dobbs is anti ILLEGAL ALIEN not anti immigrant. But I guess you really don't care about facts. Like the fact that we spend BILLIONS to educate a provide an education to people who don't belong here. We need to use these BILLIONS on our own citizens. We need to deport all ILLEGAL aliens, heavily fine those who hire ILLEGALS, and return to the original intent of the 14th amendment and do away with anchor babies. I will support any candidate who will do this!

[dgscol]

Dobbs is Beale.

[Binckeslaw]

After years of reading David Brooks I've concluded that his work demonstrates inaccuracy when referring to historical events and misattributions when referring to political deeds - whether success or failure. It is always a safe assumption that Brooks will misattribute any positive development or its roots to Ronald Reagan and any negative development or its roots to Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton. Democrats are responsible for all failures and omissions. Republicans always offer visionary solutions which are impeded by Democrats. Brooks uses nostalgia - the Leave It To Beaver era that didn't happen like television portrayed it - to sell the radicalism of the neocon movement that he serves.

[scooperss]

What are you getting from supporting illegal immigration? Your gardener, nanny, housekeeper free for a year? Money?

[MARTYB]

I wonder if DUDE E and IM4UFUR2 are on the economic edge of this supposed shift proposed by this blog? Those of us in the 30-80k range are getting hit pretty good/bad by these illegal aliens. They ARE depressing wages and all you have to do is ask anybody in the construction and landscaping trades, oh right they are not American anymore and i don't seem to have the right to ask the authority's to check on their status because it is racist. You see they have displaced Americans at the low end of the scale, the jobs that Americans used to do, housekeeping at motels/hotels janitorial etc are now being done by people who have no right to be here. I have friends who have lost their rug cleaning/janitorial business's because they were low balled by people who don't belong here. Landscaping was a solid American blue collar type job, done by those who liked it and/ or were not going to college. Same with construction, i knew plenty of guys who worked it during the summer to pay for college in the fall. Can you do this now? No you can't because you won't be hired because there is a group of people here illegally who will do it for less and not cause any "problems"
I tell you what, from where i'm sitting at on tthe economic ladder we can't stop hiring and sstart deporting them fast enough.

[researcher]

the haves and have mores in mexico have found a way to dump their cast offs to our greed for cheap wages.

mexico wants to relieve the pressure of having too many poor.

corporations want the cheap labor.

small businesses want the cheap service labor.

repubs lobbyists want cheap labor for thier corporations.

demos want illegals for their future votes.

who pays for all of this? the middle class taxpayer. the middle class just keep on giving even if they have to work two jobs.

the haves and have mores in mexico and america smile all the way to the bank.

they only want a job. jesus would be proud of us except we only take the poor to use for cheap labor as greed not out of compassion.

[texastrixie]

I have news for you Bill. If the Democrats do not get a handle on containing immigration and border control, they might well lose this next election even with Iraq in their pocket. I have never voted for a Republican for President and I am a retired Texan with half-Hispanic grandchildren. However, I would like for these grandchildren to make more than minimum wage for the rest of their lives, and that looks more and more illusive. If we had to draw from the native-born population in this country, all of us (voters, politicans and corporations) would value each life here a lot more. There would be no young black men out on street corners, wasting their lives. With only so many sets of hands available, no young person could be wasted because of drugs or depression. It is only the infinite pool of every poor person in the world that allows business everywhere to treat people as disposable. If the Democrats think they can win without the votes of the middle class in this country, they will get an unpleasant surprise next November.

[ManningtonPhil]

Illegal Immigration
Or
Native Americans Just Coming Home
In the early settling of the Americans, Europeans just came. They didn’t ask for permission. The Native Americans finally said “Go home”. But diseases decimated the Natives, and armed with superior weaponry and organization, the Europeans kept coming. They brought slaves, indentured servants and convicts, and declared “All is Well”. Anyone could come. No permission required.
Thereafter, the new Americans, became afraid of too many immigrants, the wrong nationalities and religious backgrounds, and those of unfit character. So they enacted immigration laws. Also, those with diseases weren’t welcome anymore.
Of course many came to other American countries, but the USA became the biggest melting pot. This American Soup led the world into the modern era, the catalyst for World Progress in the 20th Century.
And now we declare “These illegal immigrants, what a problem!” They’re different from many United States citizens, who think the Latino immigrants threaten our way of life. They don’t speak our language, and it’s claimed many aren’t making the effort to learn. Have we forgotten that many earlier immigrants didn’t learn English, but they resolved, that their children would. Is it much different now?
Putting aside the great need for these Latin America workers across our Country, and that they have helped make many neighborhoods and cities safer; the questions would still be there: “Why shouldn’t they be here?” “Aren’t most descendants of Native Americans? “
We probably need order to this influx, but the influxes of the past have been healthy. Would a terrorist group be slowed by a Southern Wall?
In whatever system devised, and quotas revised; Native Americans and their descendants, should be allotted increased numbers and status, if not priority, in entering our still great country. Such a legal ratification to their immigration would be in keeping with the Native American Spirituality, and the principles of love and fairness of all great religions and philosophies. This immigration, defined as illegal by our rules, could be a New Chapter in the Advancement of Humanity in the Western Hemisphere.
Mannington Phil

[Delaware22]

Lou's show covers topics that are not even mentioned on other programs. He supports fair trade policies, secure borders, open and responsive government for the people....what's not to like?