oh that sneaky leftist news station
May 1st, 2006 by Joei hate hate HATE lou dobbs
at one point he actually complains that CNN, MSNBC, and FOX NEWS!!! are being too liberal in their coverage of the immigration issue. right. Fox is allied with the evil anarchocommunist leftists.
so, trolls, CNN is a liberal media outlet? what’s it doing giving this hateful, xenophobic, horrible little man a platform?
May 1st, 2006 at 8:05 pm
A Self-imposed “Fairness Doctrine”?
)
May 1st, 2006 at 8:17 pm
You hate Lou Dobbs for what, telling the truth?
Mr Dobbs wrote:
One could quibble that Mr Dobbs is guessing when he attributes motive, but he is factually correct: the demonstrations and boycotts are “about illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens.”
I’ve argued, several times, that we have illegal immigration because we want illegal immigration, as is demonstrated by our willingness to pay for illegals to come here. But that doesn’t change the fact that they are here illegally.
Yes, CNN is a liberal media outlet, just like Fox is conservative; that doesn’t mean that both don’t afford the opposition some exposure.
May 1st, 2006 at 9:13 pm
oh PLEASE dana. which liberals are on fox?
and what makes this a leftist only position which is concerned only with illegal immigrants?
odd that he lumps in socialism and communism with *anarchism,* wouldn’t you say? do political systems *get* more disparate than communism and anarchism?
odd that he constantly labels everyone as leftist “radicals.” odd that he intentionally skews meaning, misrepresents reporting, is intentionally blind to the fact that this is not ONLY about illegal immigrants, and it’s particularly odd that he rips FOX NEWS for being in bed with the radical leftists.
no dana, i don’t hate lou dobbs for “telling the truth,” i hate him for being a “hateful, xenophobic, horrible little man.”
you know what he’s doing? he’s playing to feelings of jingoism and racism, he’s using fear and hatred to drive home his point (not that i can actually *find* a point in that little rant of his, unless you consider “keep them spics the fuck out and close the fucking border and stop having free trade and gimme mah whiskey” to be a “point”).
May 1st, 2006 at 9:58 pm
but he is factually correct: the demonstrations and boycotts are “about illegal immigration and amnesty for illegal aliens.”
no. the demonstrations are against the house bill. that’s their primary purpose and the one unifying factor that unites all the diverse groups who have come together for the demonstrations. some demonstrators are for amnesty and some are not.
personally, i think “amnesty” is not a very helpful term anymore. the lou dobbs’ of the world tend to stick it to any proposal that isn’t super-draconian. but if we’re talking about a real amnesty, the one that even its proponents call an “amnesty”, like the one we had in the 1980s, then none of the proposals dobbs has labeled an “amnesty” really is one. by saying it’s about “amnesty” when none of the proposals in congress include an amnesty as the term is normally construed, just reveals what dobbs really is, a propogandist.
Yes, CNN is a liberal media outlet, just like Fox is conservative
here’s a big difference, dana: while some conservatives like fox news, there are few, if any, liberals like cnn. i don’t know a single liberal who thinks cnn is a good source of news, but all my conservative friends like fox. cnn has no regular liberal commentator to parallel the likes of bill o’reilly, and as the media watchdog group, media matters has demonstrated rather comprehensively, the guests on cnn disproportionately skew conservative. sure, cnn is not crazy wacko drooling conservative, like fox. but being slightly left of attila the hun doesn’t make someone hippy.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:29 pm
no, he’s using fear to drive up his ratings, pure and simple. he was interviewed on headline news network (how much of a stretch was that, for headline news to get a cnn personality for their interview?) and said that illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes.
this has been refuted so eloquently elsewhere (la times), but the vapid headline news girl just sat there and let it slide.
May 2nd, 2006 at 12:49 am
And let’s remember Lou Dobbs wants to ban St Patrick’s Day.
May 2nd, 2006 at 1:12 am
I always laugh when my conservative friends claim to be getting “both sides” because they watch Fox *and* CNN. Like having both kinds of music, country and western.
May 2nd, 2006 at 3:27 am
To Dobbs, Joe McCarthy and the John Birch Society were Commie sympathizers and the KKK was a love-in commune.
And they control the airwaves. No one’s been able to figure out how to do a denial of service hack attack on the CorporateWhore broadcast towers.
Can you imagine if someone could dub in videos created by regular Americans? It’d be like a Robin Hood meets Network moment if that could be done across the country, with Truth Sniper Pirate Videographers making America laugh at the nekkid king georgie.
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:30 am
What is particularly annoying is that Dobbs talks out of
both sides of his mouth as well. On his own show, he
rants on and on about illegal immigration, yet when I’ve
seen him as a guest on other shows, he is more moderate,
actually stating that he is against the punitive house bill.
You’d never know it.
He also makes claims on his show about how Americans
are against amnesty, when the latest polls actually showed
that the majority polled were for some sort of gradual
amnesty for those who had been here for 5 years or longer.
As for CNN being liberal…spare me!
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:42 am
He’s a dirty slut, like most of these fuckers.
May 2nd, 2006 at 11:20 am
Lou Dobbs gets it right: Who is really behind the immigration protests?
I am not a huge fan of his, but regardless of how I may or may not agree with him on other issues, on this one he makes sense.
Read it for yourself. I have very little to add.
Dobbs: Radical groups taking control of immigrant movement
We all awok…
May 2nd, 2006 at 12:53 pm
By making sense you mean that he reflects your racist fantasies perfectly?
May 2nd, 2006 at 1:56 pm
No I mean he removes the sugar coating and exposes the issue for what it is.
The rallies and the protests are all about making the illegals legal. They can use the House bill as their focus, but the reality is that the House Bill does nothing substantive to the legal immigrants already here, so you have to look at who benefits and has something to lose.
The simple truth is that the bill affects illegal immigrants, so it’s no shock that they want to see the bill die.
The legal immigrants have no dog in that fight, and to suggest otherwise is disengenuous.
By making the reporting politically bland, it offers a false sense of who the players are.
As for my racist fantasies, I have none. I and the product of immigrants, why would I decry them? I work in an industry that relies heavily on immigrants and or guest workers.
I have no problem revamping immigration policies, and I have said so before. A sensible guest worker program that encourages the incoming workers to participate in it would do wonders.
We also need to go after the employers who encourage the illegals by hiring them. Those two items would do more to secure the borders then a wall. Give them a way to come here honestly, and remove the the opportunities to come here unlawfully.
As for Amnesty, I have no good answers here, there will have to be some form of it. But if that happens, we need to try and fix the system to make sure we don’d have this happen again in 20 years. Like last time.
May 2nd, 2006 at 4:02 pm
Then what the hell are you scared of?
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Joe politely inquires:
Alan Colmes has half of a show, Hannity and Colmes. Mara Liaisson and Juan Williams are two of the regularly scheduled panelists on Fox News Sunday. Of course, they’re not far-left socialists, but that isn’t what you asked.
In addition, it is a common practice on Fox (as it is on CNN and MSNBC) to have both a conservative and a liberal (fairly loosely defined at times) making their points on particular items under discussion.
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:19 pm
Up yours wrote:
When I photographs of signs being waved which call for amnesty, it’s difficult to accept your opinion that the demonstration is restricted to protest of the House bill. After all, the House bill is going nowhere, and we all know it.
If one wished to make technical points that any program which allows illegals to become legal, through some process, rather than just a blanket grant of amnesty, is not really amnesty, as normally defined, he’d be right — and it wouldn’t matter one bit. The technical points aren’t going to matter much; people who oppose allowing the illegals to become legal without paying some sort of penalty are going to perceive it as an amnesty, and perception is reality.
Yes, CNN is a liberal media outlet, just like Fox is conservative
Well, I’ll agree that a lot of libs don’t care for CNN — given that Fox has kicked their butts in the ratings.
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Yes, and it’s retarded. There’s absolutly no point to it. It creates a false sense of objectivity. It presents all opinion has being valuable, when in fact they are not.
It’s also very lazy journalism because all they have to do is let the pundits fill the airtime with bullshit instead of doing some research.
May 2nd, 2006 at 5:47 pm
I second Sirk, here. It is just window dressing to have two people blather opinions that differ when there are no facts being presented and no one is going to be called on their lies. Worse, this is being presented as news, implying that you might learn something from this format.
Also, I think they often load these commentaries by getting someone who is grating and looney to present the “other” side so the conservative commentator can appear to be reasonable no matter what junk he spouts.
May 2nd, 2006 at 6:36 pm
i am so glad sirk and cassie responded… those are basically the points i would have used to respond to dana, only i would have used a lot more name calling and name calling–yours is more effective
May 2nd, 2006 at 11:15 pm
Dana–
When Fox can find a sufficiently vapid liberal, they’ll throw him into a debate. If it’s a liberal who generally has her facts in order, she’ll debate a right-winger while some like O’Reilly “moderates.”
If the wingnut position is completely indefensible, you get panels like this one, featuring Peter King, James Sensenbrenner, and Bill O’Reilly on how the “unChristian” (Sensenbrenner’s word) Cardinal Mahoney is trying to be “fashionable” (King) on the issue of immigration.
I can’t think of a single occasion when either CNN or Fox featured a discussion by three liberals about any controversial issue.
And don’t tell me that Dobbs “tells it like it is.” He lies. He and the Moonie Times have tried mightily to connect ANSWER to the immigration rallies, but he’s come up with nothing. The closest thing he has to a connection is Juan Jose Gutierrez:
I’d never heard of Latino Movement USA, so I did some checking. They don’t even have their own website. Almost every time they’re mentioned, it’s either by ANSWER or one of their front groups, Dobbs, or the Moonies.
How much do you want to bet that Gutierrez is the only Latino member of Latino Movement USA? How much do you want to bet that he’s the ONLY member? Remember, Dobbs has had this guy on “a number of times.” How many times has he had on the leader of a real Immigrant Rights group?
Strangely, neither Dobbs nor the good folks at the Washington Times ever asks about the number of members this “group” has. And neither ANSWER, Latino Movement USA, the Moonies, or Dobbs can tell us what, exactly, is this group’s contribution to organizing the rallies. It’s not very surprising that the wingnuts try to link ANSWER to the demonstrations, or that ANSWER would try to take credit. But what have they actually done?
Here in Salem, the May 1 rally was organized primarily by the PCUN, the farm and timber worker’s union. They had volunteers in plainly marked yellow raincoats directing the marchers, in coordination with the police. I saw no evidence at all of ANSWER or Latino Movement USA.
Malkin linked to some “shocking” pictures that included tables for distributing socialist literature in LA. Manned by white people, of course.
So the attempts to link the immigration rallies to the professional radicals at ANSWER are just an exercise in dishonesty.
May 3rd, 2006 at 11:27 am
Exactly what IS the the liberal position? I am not sure myself, does HE know? Or is it disagree with me and you must be a radical liberal? jeesh
May 3rd, 2006 at 3:29 pm
Exactly what IS the the liberal position? I am not sure myself, does HE know? Or is it disagree with me and you must be a radical liberal? jeesh
Bingo.
In a lot of ways it may be a complicated situation, and liberals may disagree on the best course of action or “liberal position.” Lou Dobbs, however, is insane and apparently foaming at the mouth in his hatred of the radical left.
May 9th, 2006 at 7:38 pm
Lou Dobbs and illegal immigration
It seems that Mr Dobbs’ position on illegal immigration is driving up his ratings: he’s up 46% over a year ago.
…
May 9th, 2006 at 9:32 pm
Lou dobbs is the only TRUTHFUL reporter out there! I say Hooray for Lou Dobbs. LOU DOBBS FOR PREZ!
May 11th, 2006 at 9:49 pm
This post has attracted over 20 spam comments that I’ve deleted.
What’s with it?
Why this one?
~
May 11th, 2006 at 10:12 pm
I don’t know. I’ve marked I think 4 or 5 as spam in this thread today. The “O’Reilly needs a xanax enema” post I understood, but this one… there’s no obvious reason.
I’m going to just lock it.