About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Dobbs claimed as "fact" baseless assertion that half of Culinary Workers Union "are illegal aliens"; CNN's Crowley did not challenge

January 17, 2008 4:36 pm ET
image

69 Comments

On the January 16 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, host Lou Dobbs noted that that the Culinary Workers Union Local 226, based in Nevada, "is encouraging its members to caucus on behalf of Senator [Barack] Obama [D-IL]" and then claimed: "[I]n point of fact, as many as half of the union's members are illegal aliens" [emphasis added]. Near the end of the segment, Dobbs referred to the "Culinary Workers Union, with just about half of its membership assumed to be illegal aliens" [emphasis added]. CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley, appearing on-air from Las Vegas, did not challenge either assertion. On-screen text during the segment read: "Many of Culinary Workers in Nevada are Illegal Aliens" and "Fears Illegal Aliens Could Influence Outcome of Vote."

Dobbs did not provide any support to back up his assertion regarding the makeup of the Culinary Workers Union. On March 23, 2007, the Associated Press reported that, according to the Union's then-political director, "about half" of the union's members are "immigrants":

An army of union cocktail waitresses, housekeepers and line cooks stands ready to throw its numbers and organizational abilities behind a presidential candidate.

But Democrats who hope to enlist the state's largest labor union to try to win Nevada's new early caucus must address issues important to the service workers who make Las Vegas glitter.

[...]

So it's no surprise that one of the candidates' first stops was at the Culinary offices.

Union leaders invited all eight Democratic candidates to address their members. Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel and former vice presidential nominee John Edwards declined the invitation, citing scheduling conflicts, union Political Director Pilar Weiss said.

Weiss said the members, about half of whom are immigrants, have said they're most interested in candidates' positions on immigration and health care reform.

"We expect that the candidates will recognize that we have a service economy and they're talking to service workers," Weiss said.

So Dobbs' claim amounts to the assertion that all of the members of the Culinary Workers Union who are immigrants are, in Dobbs' words, "illegal aliens."

From the January 16 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:

DOBBS: Democratic presidential candidates tonight are stepping up their battle to win the Hispanic vote before Saturday's caucuses in Nevada. The powerful Culinary Workers Union is to play a critical role in that effort. The union is encouraging its members to caucus on behalf of Senator Obama -- but in point of fact, as many as half of the union's members are illegal aliens.

Candy Crowley reports now from Las Vegas. Candy, just how concerned is the Democratic Party, if at all, about possible irregularities -- shall we call them -- in those caucuses?

CROWLEY: Well, look, let me tell you what they say -- and this is a couple of officials -- about why they think is this not a problem, OK? They say, first of all, the idea that illegal immigrants who are trying to hide from the law are going to show up, sign an affidavit that they're a U.S. citizen and caucus, seems to, in the words of one, to be ridiculous.

They also say that given that, that they really don't see how a massive outpouring of illegals could change a caucus. They said there just won't be this massive outpouring, so there won't be a way to kind of change whatever the caucus decides. I will tell you that also we spoke to a PR guy for a couple of these hotels here, who didn't want to be named, but who said, "Look, these are multinational corporations here, these hotels. We don't hire illegals." I know I say that at my own peril, but I'm just telling you what they're saying at this point, Lou.

DOBBS: That is delightful. That is one of the better bald-face lies to emanate from any corner of this campaign so far; luckily it doesn't come from one of the candidates. But the very idea that, you know, that makes perfect sense what you're -- the Democratic folks -- Democratic Party folks said, because we know that these illegal aliens, for example, would never deign or dare to march in the streets of the United States, demanding rights of citizenship when they're here illegally.

We know they would never, for example, in any way, violate law with fraudulent documents or identity theft or take jobs with improper documentation. So, you're right. The nation's mind should be at ease on the issue of the integrity of these caucuses.

CROWLEY: Well, let me tell you another thing that really is interesting along the campaign trail. Our [senior political] producer, Sasha Johnson, points out that at one of these events with Hillary Clinton, somebody shouted out: "Do you have to be a U.S. citizen to caucus?" So these campaigns understand that there is in fact a language barrier and some confusion about how these Nevada caucuses actually work, so it's going to be a really interesting Saturday, let's just say that.

DOBBS: It should be an interesting Saturday. We're laughing about it here. But the reality is, this is serious business. We're talking about the integrity of our Democratic process, and it's an integrity that is not being preserved through the efforts and the concerns of many state governments or the electoral boards across the country.

It's a very difficult issue. So the Democratic Party, with all of the assuaging comments, what that really adds up to is they're taking no additional steps to assure that everyone who caucuses is legal and properly there within the caucus.

CROWLEY: Well, one of the things they want to -- they say they're going to do here, and particularly along the strip where they have these at-large caucuses where the culinary workers and others by the way will get a chance to go ahead and caucus -- they say, "Listen, they're going to have to show, first of all, an employee ID and they are going to have to sign that affidavit that says: 'Listen I'm a U.S. citizen. I am eligible to vote.' "

The Democratic Party says it will then check that against voter registration rolls, and then, if there's any discrepancies, they will refer it to the state. It's a felony to say that, but you do have to sort of step back and think, "OK, after this is all over and done, what's the incentive to actually take those names and match them up against the registration?" So, you know, they're the ones, you know, obviously, enforcing it, so we'll see how it comes out.

DOBBS: Indeed we will. The Culinary Workers Union, with just about half of its membership assumed to be illegal aliens there to begin with, supporting Senator Obama. That ought to be just -- I don't know why anyone would be concerned at all about this situation.

Candy, thank you, as always, for your excellent report. Candy Crowley, we appreciate it.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by dexteritas0071418 (January 17, 2008 4:41 pm ET)
         

      Hmm. Is Dobbs right? Sure, he shouldn't assume without proof, but the only question here is the "illegal" status, since the union's president acknowledges half are "immigrants."

      And nobody say "racist" because Dobbs didn't say of what country the immigrants come from, and there are just as many eastern European workers in the casinos as latino.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by deeznuts (January 17, 2008 7:47 pm ET)
           

        If Dobbs didn't have a well-documented history of explicitly racist language, I'd say you have a point there.

        But since he does...you don't.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by arebeeo (January 17, 2008 4:41 pm ET)
         
      This proves my contention the true impetus behind the "illegal immigrant" movement is really an anti immigrant movement period.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dexteritas0071418 (January 17, 2008 4:46 pm ET)
           
        Tell how that proves it, please.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by tommy (January 17, 2008 5:07 pm ET)
           
        Yes, please show me your proof that anyone who is calling for strict enforcement of our immigration laws is in any way anti-legal immigration?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 17, 2008 5:21 pm ET)
             
          watch it Tommy, if you have the temerity to think that America has the right to preserve its sovereignty by actually making our borders mean something, and oppose the "open borders" crowd, then you'll not only be anti-immigrant, but racist too. (kidding of course)
          Report Abuse
          • Author by magnolialover (January 17, 2008 5:48 pm ET)
               
            It's laughable that you think the soveireignty of an entire nation hangs on whether or not some folks from South of the Border come here legally or not.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by tommy (January 17, 2008 5:52 pm ET)
                 

              Yeah, what's 10-20 million people, nada, no big deal.

              If we don't control our borders and know who is coming across, our soverignty is indeed in question. 

              Report Abuse
            • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 17, 2008 5:52 pm ET)
                 

              Did I say that the sovereignty of our entire nation hangs on whether some folks south of the border come here legally or not? I don't see how you get that from what I wrote.

              Notwithstanding, are you telling me having clearly defined borders, through which people should travel legally, is not an essential element to preserving a nation's sovereignty?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by magnolialover (January 17, 2008 6:28 pm ET)
                   

                What I think is yes, we do need to have clearly defined borders, and I do think that people coming here need to do so legally. I also think that saying that those people who are coming here, the millions of them, are going to affect the soveireignty of our country is wrong. These are the people who then become part of our country, and they actually do integrate into our society, and become more or less, Americans (if they stay here). Most are hard working, family oriented, pay taxes (on fake social security numbers), and live good peaceful lives.

                Sovereignty is defined as: Sovereignty is the exclusive right to exercise supreme political (e.g. legislative, judicial, and/or executive) authority over a geographic region, group of people, or oneself.

                If these folks are illegal, can't vote, can't affect the outcome of elections, can't elect people to speak for them or fight for what they want, how are they going to affect the sovereignty of the United States again?

                A smaller example would be Europe. There are open borders between most, if not ALL of the EU countries, and amazingly enough, each country still is its own sovereign. I know, slightly different, but still slightly similar. Bear in mind also that most of the illegals coming here are from a lower socio-economic class and that just adds into the lack of power that they have, since in the US, money is power. Being on the lower rung, there aren't too many folks who will speak for you, and not having power, or money, it's hard to do it for yourself.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by mefirst (January 17, 2008 8:28 pm ET)
                     
                  the question of borders in europe is essentially concerning freedom of travel, not the right to settle in another country without restriction.  and members of the european union turn away others not eligible to enter.  one case being italy returning north africans who attempt to enter illegally by sea. 
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mefirst (January 18, 2008 6:55 am ET)
                       

                    this report discusses efforts to deter illegal entry to europe.   "spain is buying boats, helicopters, night vision scopes, and heat seeking cameras to detect migrants crossing the nine mile strait of gibraltar..".  the idea that it's only the united states that is attempting to enforce it's borders is wrong.

                    http://migration.ucdavis.edu/mn/more.php?id=3051_0_4_0

                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by jawill11 (January 18, 2008 11:03 am ET)
                         
                      I've been to Spain and the overt racism against North Africans is striking.  So, their actions are similar to ours in more ways than one. 
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by mefirst (January 18, 2008 6:27 pm ET)
                           
                        obviously you are never going to accept that any nation can actually decide who can and cannot enter, without it being racism.  mexico does the same thing with people from the countries on their southern border, so it's hard to charge racism there.  if you read the link, it is hardly spain alone that has the same policies. 
                        Report Abuse
              • Author by tecpatl (January 18, 2008 12:52 am ET)
                   
                Speaking of legality, when EXACTLY did Euro-Americans begin to obey the law? The vast majority of the land they live on is stolen. Hundreds of treaties with Native Americans were broken as soon as Euro-Americans had half a reason. If they had actually obeyed the law, many states would be completely Native American today. Unfortunately, gold, silver, coal, or some other commodity was found to justify the endless genocide. Many of these immigration laws that Euro-Americans supposedly obeyed were completely racist. An example would be the law that prevented Chinese men from bringing their families to the U.S. Euro-Americans only obey the laws that benefit themselves. If that law benefits others, they try to change it. One example would be to effort to make English the official language. Another example would be the movement to eliminate Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. I wonder if we could apply that retroactively and yank the citizenship that was given to the children of Europeans born in this country. My main point is that I do not believe this myth of the legal Euro-American immigrant. The current immigration laws are racist and there needs to be a compromise. I was raised in this country in a family that has been here nearly one hundred years, so I know that Euro-Americans hate us (Mexicans) completely and that is the motivation behind this anti-illegal immigration movement.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by mefirst (January 18, 2008 6:40 pm ET)
                     

                  of the top ten countries last year who had the largest numbers of  lawful permanent residents, all were either asian, latin american or caribbean.  not one was european.  number one was mexico, then china.

                   

                  http://migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?id=651

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by tecpatl (January 18, 2008 7:05 pm ET)
                       
                    That is the reason the anti-immigrant movement wants to change the 14th Amendment. The majority of immigrants are not from Europe, therefore they want to change the Constitution so that the native-born children of these immigrants would NOT be citizens. It is interesting to me how this was not applied to the children of European immigrants. The anti-immigrant movement, the English-only movement, and the movement to change the 14th Amendment are closely allied and all of them are based in racism and fear of the other.
                    Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (January 17, 2008 5:41 pm ET)
             

          Well Tommy, when he says things like this to legal citizens, he doesn't really disprove that notion. Considering he's married to a hispanic wife you'd think he could be just a little more respectful. I'm married to a hispanic wife, mine makes sure I know what's considered proper and not when dealing with my hispanic elders, I'm pretty sure Dobbs wife does the same.

          In an interview with Lesley Stahl, Dobbs spoke about his meeting with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus saying they implied that he was anti-Hispanic by asking him, "if I'd ever eaten a taco before, for God's sake".[17]

          Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 5:58 pm ET)
             

          Pat Buchanan

          Michele Malkin

          Bill O'Reilly

          John Gibson 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by tommy (January 17, 2008 6:04 pm ET)
               
            So Pete, your contention is that the four people you highlight are on record stating they are opposed to legal immigration?  Is that what you are saying?
            Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (January 17, 2008 6:08 pm ET)
                 

              Well hold on to your horsies, tommy! Didn't Buchannon and Gibson both say we need more white babies? ;)

              Maybe not on record as against, but sure does suggest they want a color test!

              Report Abuse
            • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 6:12 pm ET)
                 
              Yes.  It is their contention that Mexican immigration is exacerbating the inevitable and ultra-scary scenario of Mexicans retaking the southwest, and, eventually, seizing power from the white Christians.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 17, 2008 6:21 pm ET)
                   
                Except for the white christians part, you may have a point.  Buchanan and like-minded folk, (I consider myself in this category), are concerned that with the erosion of our borders America will cease to be America, but instead will be part of some sort of north american union.  There's nothing racist in this concern. That unwelcome eventuality would cause decreases in wages for american workers, a weakened national security, and an increase in the "welfare state." Considering the abysmal effect that NAFTA has had on this country, Buchanan, the visionary that he is, again is prescient in his concerns. Quit resorting to the race card to rebut the substance of someone's position. 
                Report Abuse
                • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 6:27 pm ET)
                     
                  It's not my race card, it's O'Reilly's.  See the link.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 17, 2008 6:37 pm ET)
                       
                    My bad, but I don't care to read much about BO.  And he and Buchanan hold dramatically different views on most things
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by Lynn (January 18, 2008 4:11 pm ET)
                     
                  I don't know you Steve, but Patty B and Johnny G seem to be just as concerned with the ratio of brown babies to White babies in America and in Europe as they are with illegal immigration. What does making more White babies have to do with controlling illegal immigration? Now I believe that both illegal immigration and legal immigration must be tightly monitored and controlled because a nation has  to carefully plan for  population growth since  it impacts everything the school systems, health care, system, infrastructure, etc. But I believe that Pat B and John Gibson are eugenicists like the crazy poster that pops in and out of here. I believe if they thought it was an option they would place a moratorium on brown babies and naturalizing of any brown people and give tax incentives to produce more babies born to American Whites who like them believe that the European cultures that they claim as their own are superior to all others and consequently  must be protected against the threat of inferior brown hordes. In other words I believe they're both Xenophobic Ethnicsist. Now do you mean you’re like that?
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 6:23 pm ET)
                   

                Here's the one I was really looking for.

                Buchanan "on record":

                KING: If the border were secured and, through legal immigration, California became majority Hispanic, majority Latino. Texas became majority -- you've got a problem with that? If they came in through legal immigration?

                BUCHANAN: Yes, I do. Yes, I do. If their -- because of the Mexican situation, Mexico has a claim on this country.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 6:26 pm ET)
                     

                  ARRGH!  The text gremlins are back.

                  hopefully this shows up legible:

                  BUCHANAN: Yes, I do. Yes, I do. If their -- because of the Mexican situation, Mexico has a claim on this country.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by tommy (January 17, 2008 6:32 pm ET)
                       
                    So Buchanan is opposed to it given the scenario presented to him, I don't believe however that means he is opposed to legal immigration or the organized management of such in a reasonable and far more likely scenario - anybody could present a set of circumstances where anything looks unattractive....example; "Do you believe in lowering taxes for citizens, IF that means we eliminate the fire department?"  Of course, nobody would answer yes to that........but Buchanan's opinion is his own.
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 17, 2008 6:30 pm ET)
                     
                  Buchanan's concern is that there is a large group of Mexican "separatists" residing in SWestern U.S., who believe that the southwestern part of this country still belongs to Mexico.  Thus with the increasingly large influx of Mexican immigrants who hold dearly to this notion, Buchanan believes that in the future the southwestern United States will be indistinguishable from Mexico. In other words, the United States will cease to be one nation.  Given Pat's track record of being correct on things, he's worth listening too. 
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 6:34 pm ET)
                       

                    Tommy requested "proof that anyone who is calling for strict enforcement of our immigration laws is in any way anti-legal immigration"

                    All I'm doing is fulfilling his request, nothing more. 

                    Report Abuse
                  • Author by funnymanpants (January 17, 2008 7:26 pm ET)
                       

                    >>Buchanan's concern is that there is a large group of Mexican "separatists" residing in SWestern U.S., who believe that the southwestern part of this country still belongs to Mexico.  Thus with the increasingly large influx of Mexican immigrants who hold dearly to this notion, Buchanan believes that in the future the southwestern United States will be indistinguishable from Mexico.

                     His thinking here is pure xenophobia paranoia, and I am diassapointed you would quote it as if it were somehow correct. Exactly how many "separatists" live in the Southwest US? I would be surprised if it were even 1/10 of the number of people who support the confederate cause. 

                     I'm sure Buchananan been right on some issues, but you quote him as if he were an oracle, ignoring that he has been wrong on even more. 

                    http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2553 

                    Report Abuse
          • Author by pete592 (January 17, 2008 6:07 pm ET)
               

            Virgil Goode

            Mike Huckabee 

             

            Report Abuse
        • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (January 17, 2008 6:10 pm ET)
             
          When the Culinary Workers Union Political Director says half the union membership is immigrants and Dobbs interprets this as " as many as half of the union's members are illegal aliens" it sounds like he can't tell or simply doesn't care whether immigrants are legal or not.

          He lumps them all together.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by jeter2 (January 17, 2008 5:43 pm ET)
           

        This proves my contention the true impetus behind the "illegal immigrant" movement is really an anti immigrant movement period.

        arebeeo,

        Aren't you just as guilty as Dobbs in making THAT assumption?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by BLR (January 18, 2008 1:01 pm ET)
           
        I believe you are correct in this assertion. It becomes readily apparent with many of the arguments from the anti-(illegal)immigration people that they consider immigration largely an influx of undesireables. While I can understand wanting to have the cream of the crop only being admitted into your borders, it's elitist and sometimes does have a core element of racism in it. Frankly, it's unAmerican.

        Those that complain about health risks? Make immigration easier, and put medical centers along the borders and at the ports - require medical certification for temporary residency, much like the checks from Ellis Island.

        Those that complain about a drain on our system? Make immigration and legal documentation easier. Require migrant workers to pay into the tax system, or charge them employment fees for being non-residents/non-citizens during their employment here.

        Those that complain about the declining birth rate of white people vs. non-white people? GTF over yourselves!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by jim359 (January 17, 2008 4:42 pm ET)
         
      Ah yes, Lou Dobbs, another useless idiot.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by arebeeo (January 17, 2008 4:51 pm ET)
         
      He and others who have jumped this wagon seem to think all immigrants are illegal evidently.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by The Stranger (January 17, 2008 4:55 pm ET)
         

      Dobbs could possibly be right. I been to Vegas several times a year for the past dozen years or so, and I don't think I've come across a hotel maid that spoke English.

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by dbeden4153 (January 17, 2008 4:59 pm ET)
           
        He could be, but does he know? no.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by MHK (January 17, 2008 5:17 pm ET)
           

        What does speaking English have to do with ones legal status?  I grew up around people that didn't speak English on a day to day basis and they were all US citizens.  Neither of my grandparents can say more then a few phrases. 

         

        Report Abuse
      • Author by friedbergboy1422 (January 17, 2008 5:30 pm ET)
           

        Stranger,

        He could be right, but he could be wrong as well.  I would hope that any pundit who makes such a strong and forceful statement would at least take the time and back up his statement with statistics.  Union membership rolls would seem to be something that he could easily research (maybe not, I could be wrong), but for him to make that statement is irresponsible without the facts.

        I am not saying he is wrong, but he could have done more to back up his assertion.

         

        Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (January 17, 2008 5:42 pm ET)
           
        Once again, wisdom from the patron saint of racial resentment weighing in...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (January 17, 2008 5:47 pm ET)
             

          Not to mention, I believe to work in Vegas, you have to get fingerprinted, and register with the city and get a worker's card, or ID, or something like that. Someone tell me if I'm wrong.

          And, if they are illegal immigrants; how are they going to vote and affect the outcome of the election, or the caucus? Last time I knew, you had to be registered to vote and or caucus. Seems as though, if they were illegal, Dobbs has nothing to worry about.

          To Stranger, because people don't speak English around you, doesn't mean they don't know how the speak English. For example, I'm a typical white male. I know how to speak Japanese. I have been to Japan on several occasions, and when people around me are insulting me in Japanese, thinking I don't know how to speak it, I can surprise them with something in their own language that makes them embaressed for what they said. Just because there are people around you speaking a different language doesn't mean they don't know how to speak English, to even think so would be ignorant. Oh wait, look who I'm addressing.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (January 17, 2008 5:55 pm ET)
               
            I think you just hit the nail on the head. I can't tell you how many times I've heard some of my more "right wing" friends complaining about people on the manufacturing floor speaking spanish or chinese. When you drill down, you always find out they resent the fact that they don't know what is being said, and then being naturally suspicious, automatically assume they are somehow speaking poorly about my "friends".
            Report Abuse
          • Author by achrispage6992 (January 17, 2008 7:06 pm ET)
               
            Good point Magnolia. It should be noted that one cannot become a citizen of the United States unless they can read, write, and speak English.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (January 17, 2008 7:40 pm ET)
                 
              and a damned good thing this rule isn't applied retroactively in 2008.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (January 17, 2008 10:59 pm ET)
           
        As a retired senior who lives in Vegas and frequently visits the Casinos I have yet to find a maid, change person, car valet or anyone else who works with the public who does not speak English. Guest contact requires you to speak English, not perfect English but English.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by jjamele2880 (January 17, 2008 11:07 pm ET)
           
        Just because they refuse your advances doesn't mean they don't speak English.  Maybe they just have taste.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by jenn7529 (January 17, 2008 5:47 pm ET)
         

      Look, the facts are that those who claim to be motivated by some desire to help illegal immigrants, and rationalize attacking any discussion about the problems caused by illegal immigration, the open borders lobby, and the corporate elites, like the US Chamber of Commerce, the Business Round Table, are being dishonest. The corporate and business interests who are forking over untold millions of dollars to La Raza, MALDEF and LULAC do so because they hope to destroy American wage standards and workplace and environmental protections. The US Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable are historical enemies of workers.

       They are seeking to exploit poverty in the third world to increase corporate profits. Illegal immigrants should be in their home countries working with others there to demand higher wages and opportunities. Instead they are being courted to come and stay here, and some in the government rationalize subsidizing the low wages they receive when they undermine American citizen workers, who are black, brown and white. Mr. Brock might have had an ephinany when it came to his own rights and freedoms, but it seems that he is as willing to be indifferent to American citizens suffering with long term un and underemployment because of outsourcing and the importation of illegal immigrant workers. In this he is as tied to the right wing corporate elite as he was when he worked for the other side.

       The fact is that the SEIU and the CUlinary Workers Union (which is tied to the SEIU) is corrupt, they are a top down union, that sides with corporate interests. The union in Nevada has been brow beating and intimidating workers to force them to vote their way, or not have the right to vote at all.

      Lou Dobbs has spoken the truth, of course the union won't admit that their workers include a high number of illegals, it's illegal for them to do so. But the truth is that 50% or higher of their workers are illegal immigrants. To state that does not mean one is anti-immigrant, Dobbs' wife is Mexican American, as are his children. Harvard participated in a study that was released in December that proved we never had a worker shortage, it was a lie to discriminate against American citizen workers.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jacob (January 17, 2008 10:46 pm ET)
         

      Whaaaaaaaaaat??? HALF? HALF? 

       Ummmmm, I think he meant to say close to 1/3....Theres a lot of beaners in that Union and if you think theyre all Legal, youd just about believe anything

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jjamele2880 (January 17, 2008 11:05 pm ET)
         
      I have here in my hand a list of 205 Known Illegal Aliens who are being harbored by the Culinary Union and are known to their leadership.  I want every single one member of that Union with a last name that ends in "a" or "o" or "z" to appear before the Lou Dobbs Committee and answer this very simple question- "are you now, or have you ever been, an Illegal Alien?"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eniobob2631 (January 18, 2008 8:56 am ET)
         
      One thing about Dobbs,He is consistent.If there was a way to hear a show of his from last year he would talking about the same thing.Enough Already.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by roundhouse (January 18, 2008 10:27 am ET)
         
      Lou can kiss my lily white a**. There isn't one undocumented or falsified immigrant who took a job that wasn't given him/her by an unethical employer. There's no national wage suppression that wasn't forced upon hard working people by employers whose only selfish concern is profit over people.

      Dobbs is phony populist. He blaims economic refugees for the sins of corporate elites who deny workers their right to share in the wealth they create.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by roundhouse (January 18, 2008 10:31 am ET)
         
      Lou can kiss my lily white a**. There isn't one undocumented or falsified immigrant who took a job that wasn't given him/her by an unethical employer. There's no national wage suppression that wasn't forced upon hard working people by employers whose only selfish concern is profit over people.

      Dobbs is phony populist. He blaims economic refugees for the sins of corporate elites who deny workers their right to share in the wealth they create.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 18, 2008 10:57 am ET)
           
        You grossy mischaracterize Dobbs with empty rhetoric.  Almost every night, and in every book he writes, he criticizes corporate America for facilitating illegal immigration.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by roundhouse (January 18, 2008 11:24 am ET)
             
          Gimme a break. Dobbs is himself is a serial distorter. This thread is a prime example.

          Maybe I am wrong about him, but crap like this thread is good enough reason to doubt his bs.

          In his extended interview on Democracy Now he did not comport himself well. It was shown in that interview over and over again that he has sourced outright falsehoods from white power websites. Ultimtely he simply dismissed the evidence by saying his interviewer was essentially a partisan hack.

          Dobbs can kiss my a**.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 18, 2008 11:41 am ET)
               
            Can you provide some examples of his outright falsehoods sourced from racist websites?  I agree that Dobbs too often speaks in generalities that are too broad, but I'd be interested in reading any racist remarks you have in mind. Moreover, just because LD and racists both want clearly defined borders, and an end to illegal immigration, does not mean that LD is likewise a racist. I'm sure there are positions which you share with fellow progressives (assuming you're a progressive), but not for the same reasons.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by roundhouse (January 18, 2008 12:01 pm ET)
                 
              Heck, you can listen for yourself.

              http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2007/12/4
              Report Abuse
              • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 18, 2008 12:08 pm ET)
                   
                for the record, I can't listen because I'm at work and too many people . . ., but I'm sure the issue will come up again in the future
                Report Abuse
    • Author by congero6189599 (January 18, 2008 12:54 pm ET)
         
      ThompSteve, you were provided with a website that answered your request for proff and you just brush it off,thats why its hard to have a discussion with closeted bigots that won't see their bigotrey no matter how many times its pushed in their faces.  LD is an opportunist of the worst kind.  Playing on national antagionisms concerning the "immigration" issue inorder to boost his own standing with the resulting fame and money.  Instead of delving into this complex issue that has many historical aspects to it , he spreads lies and half-truths that distort and inflame and do nothing to help clarify the issue.  LD you say may agree wiith racist but that doesn't make him one.  How ridiculous is that in reality?  You lie with dogs and you get fleas.  At different times in our history the immigration  issue has been used to divide workers and keep them seeing who the real cause of their misery was.   Whether it was the Chinese in the late 19th century, the Irish and italians in the early 20th century immigrants have been scapegoated in times of economic distress and blamed for everything from low-wages to common cold.  Afro-Americans were used in the early days of the labor movement to brake strikes for better working conditions and the right to union representation and when the strike was broken because the unions did not let these workers into them Each time the corporatocracy escaped laughing all the way to the bank as unions were destroyed,healthcare denied and living wages eroded.  They pit old against young, part-time against full time, women vs. men, white against black, documented against undocumented, they throw a bone to one section ,denying it to the other and sit back and watch the fight for the scraps,  and LD's and others in the punditry help them do it.  The question is when are we going to wake up to the game and stop playing by their rules?  America is not just one homogenous whole but made up many different parts.  The Southwest has a different history and make-up than the South, the South different than the North you get my point.  So lets move away from this one America BS,cause I'am still waiting for my mule  and my forty f#$%ing acres. The problem and solution of immigration has to take into account the historical connection of many Latinos to the Southwest and Mexico simply building a fence will not stop the historical connection or floww no better than the "Berlin Wall" stop the struggle for freedom and better lives for all Germans.  How ironic we celebrate the destruction of that wall while championning a similar wall across our Southern border.  Make your excuses and rational but it is no different and just as nationalistic and ugly.  We torture, invade nations that don't threaten us, spy without warrants on our own citizens, jail people and hold them without charges,and label as treasonous anyone who disagrees with these policies and now we want to build a stupid wall to highlight our desent into darkness. Wake-up people before it too late.  When they come for YOU who will be there to speak up?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by thomp.steve9098 (January 18, 2008 1:08 pm ET)
           

        Truly you are an ignorant fool.  I didnt' dismiss the website provided by Roundhouse. Read what I wrote.  I looked up the site but want to listen to the interview before typing any response. Don't misrepresent me.

        Much of your asinine rant has nothing to do with the problem of ILLEGAL immigration, and is barely comprehensible in any event.  And as for your bullsh*t racism assertions, if you're too dumb to realize that people can seek the same goal but for dramatically different reasons, that's your ignorance, not mine. 

        Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (January 19, 2008 1:56 am ET)
           
        Good post, congero.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by congero6189599 (January 19, 2008 11:59 am ET)
         
      Thankyou Roundhouse your comments are greatly appreciated here and other post, LD's provided no facts to back up his assertion which only played on the lies and inflamed antagonisms.  He knew what he was doing and who it would play to,LD may not be a racist but he plays a good one on TV! 
      Report Abuse
    • Author by congero6189599 (January 19, 2008 11:59 am ET)
         
      Thankyou Roundhouse your comments are greatly appreciated here and other post, LD's provided no facts to back up his assertion which only played on the lies and inflamed antagonisms.  He knew what he was doing and who it would play to,LD may not be a racist but he plays a good one on TV! 
      Report Abuse
    • Author by foxx (January 19, 2008 1:48 pm ET)
         

      Dobbs claim is not "baseless." And is almost certainly substantially true.

      I do not see the point of challenging likely true statements, just because we don't like them or think they are harmful. It makes MM look silly and non-objective.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.

Most Popular Tags

Feed IconRSS Feeds

Get personalized rss or email alerts

Connect & Share

Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube MySpace