DOBBS: "WE'VE NEVER OPPOSED LEGAL IMMIGRATION"

Are you kidding me?

Dobbs was airing an incredible report last night actually insinuating that the people complaining about hate speech emanating from his show are actually the real bigots when he made this little doosy of a statement. I knew this was a lie, but how to convince readers that I'm not just being mean to old Lou? Then I remembered that CNN makes transcripts of all of its shows available online. So after two nights of pouring through transcripts (with some help from Google Advanced Search), I found the following:

Total number of stories discussing legal immigration topics (non-immigrant visas, immigrant visas, asylum): 98

Total stories with a positive statement about legal immigration: 2

Total stories with negative statements about legal immigration by Dobbs or one of his show's "reporters": 96

You can judge for yourself. I've prepared a memorandum linking to each one of these stories so people can make there own determination. Does the coverage look pro-legal-immigration to you?

[UPDATE: I've reorganized the list in alphabetical order. Originally, I grouped the stories by visa category, but some people were not reading past the first few sheets and assumed all the stories were about H-1Bs. Now you can more easily see that Mr. Dobbs is equal opportunity when it comes to bashing legal immigration programs]

[UPDATE: I've found several more stories where Dobbs attacks family "chain migration" saying, among other things, that the amount of family immigration has been "explosive"]

Download Dobbs.pdf

Comments

[Michael Vargas]

Greg,

I want to thank you for exposing Lou Dobbs for what he is.
A bigot, Anti Immigrant, Mexican xenophobic, Anti Journalist, and anti Journalist ignorant point of view.
Shame on CNN for their arrogance and Anti News Network.

And shame on Lou Dobbs for his biased, ignorance, Anti Immigrant and bigotry.

His programme needs to changed from news to a Lou Dobbs opinion.

Lou Dobbs is coming up with his radio show now so be prepared for more anti-immigrations rantings

Just to clarify I mean lawsuits from other companies, not from employees.

Have there been any lawsuits against companies who break H-1b laws, thus gaining an unfair advantage?

[AD]

hmmm,

Dobbs states his viewpoint on current immigration law in this opinion piece. To summarize, in this piece, Dobbs criticizes the 1965 changes to the INA for -

1. Abolishing the race based national origin quotas of 1924 and

2. Leading to "explosive" chain migration

I do not see how his views on this are any different from the wider anti-immigration movement.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/22/Dobbs.May23/index.html

[George Chell]

As I said Lou Dobbs is against any form of immigration where people of non-European origin or involved. Hence, you wont hear much from him about foreigners in Hollywood taking jobs away from aspiring American actors. Let more Indian actors come in, he will start railing. But, then again, as I have said earlier, too many of the Indian actors look near white and Dobbs may be too dumb to tell the difference. The biggest racist of the weak may be Corey Stewart of Prince William County, VA who is hell bent on getting rid of all illegal immigrants from the community, that he is willing to destroy the county's economy to do it. He has proposed a 28% property tax increase to fund his enforcement initiative along with cuts in education and other spending. With the foreclosures at record high in Prince William, more and more families will have to walk away from their homes over the next few months. I am afraid some of these racists will move in to our area in northern virginia such as Arlington, and cause trouble...and we have to be on the alert..as long as Corey Stewart does not ask me money to fund his initiative or bail his county out, he can go to hell..if he does, there will be hell to pay!

[hmm]

Greg, I searched your pdf for the word "chain" and only found two stories around the time when 2007 CIR was debated in May of 2007. The term "chain migration" was as I recall mentioned in the TEXT of the proposed CIR, and Dobbs was just discussing it. If I remember correctly, 2007 CIR was going to limit parents immigration to 90K/year (when the year before 112K entered), and also get rid of brothers/sisters/adult children quotas, and all this was in the chaper entiteled "ending chain migration". Also CIR had 10% country limits on parents that is no more than 10% of 90K could go to one country. This would surely cause retrogession for parents Mexico, China, India.

Dobbs was supporting this part of CIR like many people in the Senate. So I do not really see this a big deal because this was an important issue which was ignored by the media who mostly focused on Z-visas. A lot of people I know went completely crazy with worry thinking that now they will not be able to bring in their parents when they get real old and need constant care.

In summary Dobbs is indeed against immigration of non-immediate family members, but spouses and children are okay for him I think. But certainly Dobbs does not dwell on the issue and only discussed it in the context of CIR which was quite appropriate.

[R. Lawson]

"the Roys of the country are not painting an accurate picture. "

You're hardly a neutral voice on this issue yourself - and I think my portrait is much more accurate than yours. You portray an H-1b program that fills shortages that can't possibly be met by American workers and you never mention any of the reported abuses. You look at the program through rose colored glasses.

"Journalists need to be reporting on the news, whether the news is positive or negative, and it is not propaganda or puff journalism to report on successful policy."

I don't disagree with that. As it stands now, we aren't getting much in terms of news. We get 15 second sound bytes and entertainment disguised as journalism.

However, the WSJ is an example of a publication that has a very biased viewpoint on these issues. They are not reporting both sides - and instead reporting the corporate line. I would say the same applies towards Dobbs, except he is reporting his own oppinion.

I would be just fine if news organizations reported both your stance and mine - while taking a neutral position. Unfortunately that just doesn't happen. I get my biased story from Dobbs and you get your biased story from the WSJ. Meanwhile the public has no idea what to think.

[Greg Siskind]

Roy - I have to wholeheartedly disagree that the role of the journalist is only to report on problems. Journalists need to be reporting on the news, whether the news is positive or negative, and it is not propaganda or puff journalism to report on successful policy. To take your logic, we would never hear about scientific discoveries that are good news. Instead, we would only hear when scientists have failures. Or perhaps we would only hear about the space program when a space shuttle explodes? When a reporter writes about how foreign physicians are delivering vital health care services to medically underserved areas, that is an important story the public needs to hear or they will not be able to make an informed decision about visas for MDs. When a reporter writes about a major study showing immigrants commit crime at a much lower rate than the general population, that is not a puff piece but important in helping the public analyze whether immigrants create a burden that outweighs the benefits we receive. When a reporter writes about studies showing that 25% of all the new IT jobs in the country were at companies started by immigrants, that's important information in showing why the Roys of the country are not painting an accurate picture.

Reporters are biased to reporting bad news because they think that such stories are more interesting. But don't forget that Dobbs has decided to give more air time - by multiple times - to the subject of immigration than any television host in America and he cannot use the excuse of a lack of airtime to presenting negative stories 98% of the time. To say he is being fair is simply not credible.

And that's why it bothers me that CNN presents the show in a format that makes it appear as news. It should be labeled as commentary and news reporters should not be presenting stories on the show. Dobbs interviewing guests is fair enough as long as the show is clearly labeled as an opinion show and not news.

[paskal]

Roy,

Taking your logic forward, is it not also the responsibility of investigative journalists to present all sides of the story and explore different opinions etc? That would hardly make it a "fluff story". The problem with Lou Dobbs is not that he criticizes immigration policies- we all do from our perspectives- but that he as a public figure refuses to present a balanced picture at all. Rush Limbaugh has admitted that he is an entertainer first and foremost and what's most important is show ratings and money for sponsors. When will Lou Dobbs stop pretending to be a great defender of the "middle class"?

[AD]

It's said a man is known by the company he keeps. One of the early guests on MoneyLine was Pat Buchanan who is an unabashed critic of legal immigration including the family based immediate relative variety.

The fact that FB "chain" immigration is just beginning to be mentioned on Dobbs' show in 2007 is due to what is known as the art of slicing the salami. Predictably, softer targets like illegal immigration and work visa programs have found a place on the show for years in advance of harder emotive targets.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0111/05/mlld.00.html

http://www.amazon.com/Death-West-Populations-Immigrant-Civilization/dp/0312285485

[R. Lawson]

"But there are positive immigration stories written all the time so this is, of course, nonsense. "

And one must view these stories with skepticism - they are usually written by people with an agenda. It isn't the job of investigative journalists to present fluff pieces. Investigative journalism by its very nature is negative.

I'm not defending just Lou Dobbs - I'm defending investigative journalism as a whole, or at least the ones asking the tough questions.

We need journalists to ask critical questions. The problem isn't that Lou Dobbs is asking tough questions and being negative. The problem is that many of the other news programs are not.

If anything, my comments are an indictment on most journalists for not asking the tough questions until we have a crises. Including Lou Dobbs - why wasn't he reporting on this issue in the 80s? What types of problems do you think are brewing while we spend our time worried about the latest Britney Spears or Paris Hilton scandal?

There is another word for "feel good journalism": marketing.

[Greg Siskind]

I've uploaded the new version of the document with the additional stories covering "chain migration."

[Greg Siskind]

hmm - You caused me to do some additional searching just on the term "chain migration" and I found several more stories. Previously, I just searched the term "green card". All the additional stories were, of course, negative, generally labeling family immigration's numbers as being "explosive".

[hmm]

I did not see many instances of "chain migration" on your list of what Dobbs reported.

I must confess I do not see "chain migration" as a real phenomenon. The lines are so long. Say someone from Mexico was given a green card in 2000. He gets naturalized by 2008. Brings his parents by 2012. They get naturalized by 2020. Try to bring their other children. This schedule is actually optimistic, in reality the parents may never be able to pass the language test, or the original immigrant may never get naturalized for various reason. Bringing brothers/systers takes even longer. What "chain migration"?

[Greg Siskind]

Hmm - Don't kid yourself. He rails against "chain migration" - code for reducing family immigration.

[hmm]

BTW, since Dobbs is an idiot, he is an easy target. I understand why you take on him: being on CNN, Dobbs reaches a fair number of people, and so he does considerable harm, but really there are much more sofisticated people who are anti-immigration, and their position is way harder to defeat.

[hmm]

"If he thinks they're stealing American jobs (a common theme) it shouldn't matter whether they're coming permanently or temporarily."

A great majority of immigrant visas are spouses, adoptions, and parents. Dobbs says almost nothing against them, because apparently most of his supporters consider it a fundamental right of a US citizen to be able to bring a spouse/child, and maybe a parent from abroad: the government should not interfere with whom people marry. In this case rights have a priority over economy.

[Greg Siskind]

hmm - If he thinks they're stealing American jobs (a common theme) it shouldn't matter whether they're coming permanently or temporarily. So the typical distinction Roy makes wouldn't apply. Of course Roy was the first to come on to defend Dobbs saying that of course the coverage is negative - that's what reporters report. But there are positive immigration stories written all the time so this is, of course, nonsense.

[hmm]

Thanks for a collecting all this info!

Now there is a clear logic behind Dobbs's statements: he does not consider H/L/O visa holders as immigrants. After all those are NON-immigrant visas. They could become immigrants, true, but only if they are lucky and Dobbs clearly resents that most of them do become immigrants. He much prefers that most of them work here 6 years (contributing to economy, social security etc), and then go home. Well, if you do cancer research you may stay.

Dobbs's reports against asylee or family immigration are extremely rare, and after all there are indeed abuses in this area (even though most likely not where he is trying to find them).

It is important to understand this position because it is quite common, and there is indeed some truth behind it. I have to say there is truth behind almost every point of view, and almost every law hurts someone. In this case legal immigration certainly hurts SOME US citizens. What the Government should be concerned about though is the benefit of the society as a whole, and here Dobbs loses.

[R. Lawson]

This is what people on television do. They explore the negative aspects of issues. Be real - how many journalists frequently talk about what is right with things?

Anyways, trying to find something positive to say about the H-1b and L-1 visa programs is like trying to find something positive to say about indentured servitude or slavery.

Thanks for aggregating all of this. Great reference materials.

[George Chell]

I meant Dobbs will be raising hell!

[George Chell]

The only immigration Dobbs has no problems with or at least does not complain about is foreign actors in Hollywood...and with good reason...mostly they happen to be white. Bring in more Lucy Lius Dobbs will be raising health.

[Kayla]

Mr.Greg ,Its a nice hard work.Geting all these details.I stopped watching his low rated programme last year ...hate his programme.

America is a land of law and immigrants-A statement given by democrate party during Presidential speech...

and a liar in this country-Shame!!!

[alterego]

Well done Greg.
Lou is exposed for what he truly is. A Self righteous, hypocritical bigot.
Each time he speaks about his professed love for legal immigrant, you can see that part of him. When those like you and the Southern Poverty center expose him, he gets defensive.
He is Anti all immigrant, it is just that if he would openly say it, he would lose his populist rant, do he distorts the debate.

[Sobers]

Greg,

Dobbs is an anti-immigration (not just illegal immigration) demagogue and everyone knows it. But here's some real data that supports that fact. I think this should be sent to CNN, so they know really how "fair and balanaced" this show is.

[Legal and no longer waiting]

Key, well, Louny linked them himself when he complained that too many H1Bs are staying in the US beyond 6 years.

[Greg Siskind]

Kay - I'm going to change my little report. It does appear that it's just about the H-1B. In reality, I grouped the 93 stories by topic covered. If you read on, you'll see negative stories about the H-2B, the H-2A, the labor certification process, family immigration and our asylum laws. I think I'm going to order them chronologically instead. Greg

[Kay]

I don't think H1B program has anything to do with immigration. With some fairness to Lou, criticizing H1B program cannot be placed under same category as Not Supporting LEGAL IMMIGRATION.

[George Chell]

"I don't think I've heard Lou say anything nice about immigrants in any group."

But has he raised the issue of too many foreign actors in Hollywood unemploying aspiring American actors? I have not seen it. If so, a link would be useful.

[MP]

SLAM DUNK!!!

[G2]

Amazing job Greg!! Now whenever Lou Dobbs trumpets his "WE'VE NEVER OPPOSED LEGAL IMMIGRATION" defense line when he talks about ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION someone can throw this pdf on his face.

[Peter]

CNN is most untrusted name in media company. I have stopped watching CNN channel and website for more than 2 years

[Another voice]

UNRELATED:

House OKs seizing vehicles from illegal immigrants

By MARY LOU PICKEL
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 02/28/08

A bill that would allow police to seize cars from illegal immigrants was approved by the House Thursday.

Bill sponsor Rep. James Mills (R-Gainesville) repeatedly told House members Thursday the measure would protect Georgia citizens from the "epidemic" of illegal immigration. "The state of Georgia's door is being kicked down," Mills said. Immigrants are coming from "Iraq, Iran, Irania, Jordan. We don't know where they're from," Mills said.

The measure passed 104 to 51, and will move to the Senate for consideration.

The bill would allow police to seize any vehicle involved in a traffic violation or accident if it's driven by an illegal immigrant. That includes rented and leased vehicles if the owner knew, or should have known, the driver was an illegal immigrant. It also includes bank-owned cars if the interest-holder actually knew the driver was an illegal immigrant.

The bill prompted a healthy floor debate. Some legislators asked how police would be able to determine whether a driver was an illegal immigrant during a traffic stop. Some wondered if it would create an atmosphere for racial profiling of drivers who police think might be illegal immigrants. Rep. Bob Lane (R-Statesboro), who represents rural south Georgia, worried farmers would lose their vehicles if they lent them to workers who might be illegal.

"Would you have to go down to the police station and say, 'I didn't know this person was an illegal immigrant, and I lent him the car to go down to the store to get some grass seed?'" Lane asked.

The vehicle seizure would work much the same way as property seizures in drug cases. But under the bill, if the owner of the vehicle presents a sworn affidavit that he or she did not know the driver was an illegal immigrant, they would get their car back, Mills said.

The legislation is part of a package of about 10 Republican proposals introduced this legislative session aimed at discouraging illegal immigration in Georgia.

[Greg Siskind]

George - I don't think I've heard Lou say anything nice about immigrants in any group.

[George Chell]

DOBBS: "WE'VE NEVER OPPOSED LEGAL IMMIGRATION"

Absolutely right. Dobbs never opposed legal immigration...as long as they happen to be white, including white actors in Hollywood. Jay Leno made a joke that Dobbs plans to build a wall around Hollywood..he would if more and more Indian or other non-white actors showed up. Of course, many of the Indian actors look damn near white and Dobbs is perhaps too stupid to tell the difference!

I can't stand that guys contorted program, have never been interested in talks which center only on immigration & middle class!!!

[Vivek]

Wow !! Greg you are the guy...who took a stab at his spews on legal immigration. Did you send a copy of this to CNN?

[b]

Lou's viewers must be stupid to believe what he spews. One can't remain ignorant for so long. I stopped watching him from 2005 after hearing the lies about H1B foreign workers.