LatinaLista — As Latina Lista noted before Obama’s State of the Union address, it had been leaked that Obama would mention immigration reform in his speech. “Mention” was the right word since he said nothing new, nothing hopeful, pretty much nada.
The message from Obama was perfectly clear in what he didn’t say — that immigration reform is still on his and his party’s radar.
That was confirmed today during a morning press conference when both Sen. Reid and Sen. Schumer responded to a question about whether or not Sen. Schumer was going to introduce an immigration reform bill before March.
Sen. Reid jumped in and reiterated the Democratic Party’s commitment to the issue but that he’s learned his lesson about setting deadlines and that his party will pass when they can.
Sen. Schumer and former CNN host Lou Dobbs.
Sen. Schumer was more forthcoming in his answer, maybe a little too much. In addition to echoing Reid’s statement and saying that they really want this immigration bill to be a bipartisan effort and so are still looking for two Republicans to sponsor the bill with two Democrats, he dropped a bombshell:
We’re meeting with all different kinds of groups trying to get everybody together to come out for one bill.
In fact, yesterday I met with Lou Dobbs, who, as many of you know, is changing his views on immigration.
The idea that Democrats think Dobbs can help them get an immigration reform bill passed just boggles the mind and shatters the hope that Democrats actually get the issue.
Dobbs is a high-profile person, of that there is no doubt. When he resigned from CNN, he was at his height in popularity among his many supporters. To say he had the ear of Conservatives, and politicians among them, would not be wrong.
There were many times I wrote about how some politicians delivering anti-immigration reform rhetoric sounded like they had memorized Dobbs’ on-air tirades — complete with distorted information and questionable sources.
For those Conservatives who equate Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) with amnesty, Dobbs was their hero. He reached almost legendary status among his supporters by the time Presente.org succeeded in organizing a massive campaign to remove him from CNN airwaves.
But something happened.
After Dobbs left CNN and his lofty perch of daily preaching to the masses face-to-small screen, he suddenly had a change of heart.
Where once he vilified undocumented immigrants by accusing them of being carriers of diseases, he now “respects” them for wanting to achieve the American Dream.
Because of Dobbs’ 180 degree turn, it’s left many immigrant advocates who had to battle his daily fear-mongering, more than a little skeptical of his intentions.
On the surface, it seems it has less to do with a change of heart and more with a self-serving strategy in his pursuit of possible political office. Also, because of his change in attitude, Dobbs is not the sweetheart of the Conservatives he used to champion.
A quick scan of the comments section on The Hill’s article about Dobbs talking to Schumer left a very clear impression as to what his former followers think of him now:
Like hussein, who has reneged on every promise made during the campaign, flip-flopping, two-faced dobbs HAS NO CREDIBILITY. His “support” for anything, discredits that thing.
BY TEAPARTYPATRIOT
I am so disappointed in Lou Dobbs flipping on his stance against illegals. For years he rallied against this and now (I think he wants to run for office eventually) he is going to change his tune? BS. He is a traitor to those Americans who supported him when everyone else was against him. You blew it Lou.
BY AMERICA
From a political perspective, if Lou Dobbs supports any form of amnesty (especially with Schumer), any political career he (Dobbs) thought he would have is over. The Tea Party activists and the vast majority of Americans who oppose amnesty will daily point out Dobbs’ hypocrisy and attack on the middle class — the same middle class that Dobbs used to pretend to support.
BY MARVIN
For Schumer to reach out to Lou Dobbs shows just how much Washington has been paying attention to the illegal immigration issue and exactly how much influence Dobbs still wields — very little.
If the Democrats are hoping that Dobbs can use his pulpit again to reach Conservatives and sell them on coming on board with immigration reform, it’s a story that’s not going to end well.
No, Schumer is better off working with the organizations that ousted Dobbs from his CNN perch, and learning just how deep the branches of grassroots influence extend in mobilizing the masses to impress upon, even Republicans, that political influence is no longer relegated to only former cable news show hosts.
Comment(23)
Aaron
Your invective against Lou Dobbs and getting him fired was one of those gratuitous acts that had little affect on the masses objections to illegal immigration. It made you feel good yet accomplished absolutely nothing. The fact that the Democrats and the president are treating it like the third rail of politics, with the ultimate outcome their ouster in future is telling. The only people who believe otherwise are clueless people like Gutierrez, some socialist religious groups and a some ivory tower immigration lawyer academics. Face it, CIR is dead. Keep trying, but your efforts will only serve to annoy the citizens.
Karen
You probaby won’t publish this, but just letting you know that the owner of Univision, Haim Saban, just gave big money to Meg Whitman, the right wing candidate for Governor in CA, who favors a return of Prop 187.
So Univision will probably be full of pro-Whitman coverage.
J Rhodes
“…ensure that everyone who plays by the rules…” Unless our fine president is lying, that explicitly eliminates amnesty for those here illegally. One cannot be in the United States illegally; working with fraudulent or stolen social security numbers and at the same time be “playing by the rules.” Those are mutually exclusive concepts. Thank you Mr. President for ruling out amnesty.
maryelizabeth
Dobbs does whatever he can do for ratings. He might not appeal to tea party folks but he could appeal to some of those blue dog Democrats and Independents and if they follow him then he could make an impact on them. Maybe this is Shummers strategy. Obama just might remain quiet until a combination of the pro-immigration movement pushes hard in conjunction with a vast majority of Americans leaning on the pro-side of Immigration Reform. The anti-immigration people might not find as much press in their favor as they had in the past. Too many people know that the system is broken and is way overdue to be fixed. Dobbs did alot to hurt people and it is time for him to redeam himself. I can’t imagine that this man didn’t wake up many times not likeing what he has done in the past. Is it political for Dobbs? Probably? but I’d rather have him working for us then them!
laura
Marisa, I agree that the Democrats remain completely clueless and, worse, amoral on the issue of immigration. We should not misplace any hope either in Senator Schumer or in President Obama that they understand what is at stake, or that they have a functioning moral compass on this issue.
What is at stake is that the destruction of families and the severe traumatization of children (many of whom are US citizens) must stop. That extralegal jailing of people in secret locations to which their families have no access must stop. That the diversion of resources of law enforcement from actual predators, criminals and terrorists to hard-working, upstanding people who came to the US without a visa must stop. That the reasons people are forced to come here without visas to support their families – “free trade” policies and giveaways to the largest corporations – must stop. That the scapegoating of immigrants for problems caused by American politicians and American corporations must stop.
Instead, Senator Schumer and President Obama are continuing the Bush administration’s policies.
Immigration is not the only issue on which Obama and the Democrats are continuing Bush administration policies.
But Democrats are not learning anything from the last 2 weeks. Progressive voters in Massachusetts did have somewhere else to go – other than to the Republicans – before and on January 18th. They went home. Instead of canvassing door-to-door, and instead of going to the polls, they went home. That is why Scott Brown won. You will have a lot of trouble finding a progressive Massachusetts Democrat, among whom thousands worked to get Obama elected, who would be willing to make a phone call for a Democratic candidate these days.
Why?
Obama morphing into Bush 3 is the short answer.
So will Latina/os have somewhere else to go – other than to Democrats? They will. They will just stay home.
Given the present state of the Republican party, this is terrible and dangerous. But it is a fact. And it is a fact that “strategists” like White House Chief of Staff Emanuel have not a clue about.
I believe the only thing to do is to be very clear that we will have to oppose Senator Schumer’s proposals because they will be horrendous, and that we have to demand what is needed independently of the Democratic party.
This is what under water homeowners have to do as well. It is what victims of predatory credit card companies and banks have to do. It is what the long-term unemployed have to do. It is what people who want an end to the wars have to do. It is what environmentalists have to do. Stand up for ourselves and forget about Obama.
cookie
Laura, you are either totally clueless, an ethnocentric or both. Every country has the right to have immigration laws and to enforce them even if it means separating families because they snubbed our laws and thought they were above them.
When American citizens who have families break the law they pay the price and sometimes that means they get separated from their families. You think that illegal foreingers should be treated better than our own citizens?
cookie
ME, there is no such thing as a anti-immigration Americans so why the lies? Are you blurring the line between legal and illegal?
There is nothing broken in our immigration laws that would justify allowing millions of illegal aliens to remain in our country. Lax enforcement on our government’s part does not justify it either. They snuck through our borders or overstayed their visas and must go home as our laws demand.
Your side can have the turncoat, lying Dobbs with our compliments. Don’t be surprised if he stabs you in the back just like he did us. He is just pandering to Latinos for votes for a possible political career. Anyone with half a brain on either side would never trust him again.
Evelyn
You think that illegal foreingers should be treated better than our own citizens?
~~
You see cookie Eurocentrists just dont get it. The Mexicans are not foreigners.
Europeans invaded this land and murdered 95% of the indigenous people.
Europeans made themselves US citizens by force and the true owners of this land and all it’s resources foreigners.
The descendants of Europeans enjoy the privileges belonging to the indigenous people of this Continent.
Mexicans didnt cross the border built by foreign Europeans, the border crossed them.
Many Nativists refuse to accept these facts because they think denouncing racism and the flawed ideology of white privilege is just awful.
maryelizabeth
Cookie, You are Anti-CIR? I have a big question for you? What is your SOLUTION to the problem?
Do you want to deport 12 to 30 million undocumented people out of the US?
How do you intend to get your so called beloved politicians that support your agenda to get your delustional idea of this mass deportation orhestrated?
Are you going to bus them out? Trains? Hot Air Balloons? HOW?? The Economist just made a statement that: It would cost us more than the Iraqi and Aftgan war combined to deport all of the undocumented out. That’s around a trillion and a half. Cookie don’t you think that’s a real band for our buck on our taxdollars!
Also at the rate of our so, so efficient Immigrant detention system it would take about 400 years to deport all undocumented workers. Do you think it might make sense for ICE to focus on removing violent criminals, rather than gardeners, nanny’s, mom’s and dad’s….you know that separation of family’s that make’s absolutely no sense.
Also Cookie, Americans are out of jobs! Do you think it might make sense to documented everyone so that we remove the CHEAP LABOR workforce from criminal employers that make calls to bring them through our borders so that they can profit from there CHEAP LABOR.
People like you Cookie are really PRO-ILLEGAL immigration because you do not want our goverment to remove the underground workforce. You are for procrastinating REAL SOLUTIONS.
cookie
My solution to illegal immigration:
1. E-verify across the board (no need for mass deportations, detentions or the costs of removing them…most will leave on their own without jobs)
2. Enhanced border security
3. Continued internal enforcement
4. Take away other incentives for coming here or remaining here illegally, for example any taxpayer benefits such as education and healthcare (except for emergencies) and repealing the birthright citizenship amendment
No, ICE’s job is to remove ALL illegal aliens and they should.
The vacated jobs will be returned to Americans at a fair wage and for those jobs that supposedly an American won’t do we can import legal immigrants who will get health and background checks as our policies demand. That will put and end to the cheap, illegal labor force for the employeers with e-verify and discourage more from entering for jobs. Huge fines and loss of business licences including prison time for employers who try to cheat the system again.
No, it won’t remove 100% of the illegals in this country but it will put a huge dent in it and that should be our goal as loyal Americans.
Bryan J.
Two comments, one directed at Mary Elizabeth and one at Evelyn.
Mary Elizabeth:
Cookie’s intent is clearly not “pro-illegal” but the practical effect of her position ends up being pro status quo–i.e. intermittent, ineffective raids and patchwork border security. You are right. Unfortunately, there are many that genuinely believe deportation of 12 million plus individuals is a real possibility. It clearly is not, no matter what anyone says.
Evelyn:
I disagree with the manner in which you portray “Europeans” in the U.S. While it is true to some extent that:
“Europeans made themselves US citizens by force and the true owners of this land and all it’s resources foreigners”
The latter is not true for many, maybe the majority, of the current U.S. citizenry. My ancestors(from Europe), for example, came here by boat and did not forcefully displace anyone.
Secondly you wrote:
“Mexicans didnt cross the border built by foreign Europeans, the border crossed them”.
I disagree with this, because, to the best of my knowledge, the Mexicans that had the border enclosed around them(after the war) then became U.S. citizens. Mexicans that currently come to the U.S. reside in Mexico, then cross to the U.S.
So I am not sure how a nativist can refuse to accept something that is not an indisputable “fact”.
I fear that the argument: “but indigenous people were here first, etc” does nothing but fan the flames of individuals like Cookie, which subsequently then can hinder further chances of passing CIR.
Bryan J.
Cookie:
E-verify would not cover a significant, if not a majority, of undocumented workers. For example, in NY, many of the undocumented work in cash businesses that require no type of identification. i.e. landscaping, restaurants, and construction.
I also don’t like the “dent” theory because when solutions to problems are made, they should solve it wholly, not partially. To truly eradicated the “illegal” workers, it is necessary to first determine how far we can raise the limit on legal immigrants from Latin America so that further “illegal” immigration is deterred and second, craft a means to legalize those currently here.
Although I admit the proposal just listed is not easy or necessarily possible, it is the only way to truly “fix” the immigration system i.e. avoid an underground group of undocumented individuals.
Your solution, to me, is just another variation of the status quo.
cookie
Bryan, most employers would not hire illegals for cash to avoid e-verify. The fines would be too high. There is no way to solve a problem “wholly” all we can do is make the costs for disobeying the law so high that most people wouldn’t risk it.
We have never made e-verify mandated across the board so no, it isn’t the status quo. We need to eliminate any other incentives to come here besides jobs also and really secure our borders for a change.
There is not way that we should just give a blanket amnesty to those illegals already here. First we need to determine what our true labor needs are and allow in those legal immigrants who are waiting to do it the right way first if we have jobs that can’t be filled by Americans.
E-verify will make most illegals here self-deport. It would be a lot easier to seek out the rest who decide to stay anyway and deport them. We need to get back to a enforcing our immmigration laws and starting from scratch by only taking in immigrants who do it the legal way.
Beverly
“Although I admit the proposal just listed is not easy or necessarily possible, it is the only way to truly “fix” the immigration system i.e. avoid an underground group of undocumented individuals.”
And maybe the only way to reduce the murder crime rate is to make murder legal. Giving amnesty to illegal aliens only generates more citizens who will work to undermine the will of the nation to enforce immigration laws. Who will take our laws seriously after we cave to their will? Answer me, if you were a Mexican would you await your turn in the que? Or if you were denied, after all we can’t take everyone who applies, would you have an respect for the law, or would you come anyway and wait out another amnesty while your friends already present here keep working against law enforcement agencies? Who do you think are presently working frantically to prevent enforcement of our immigration laws? Take an educated guess, Bryan. I find no reason to believe that another amnesty would actually prevent illegal immigration, so why should Americans take another chance that it will? This current cry for amnesty is proof that so-called immigration reform is only a red-herring for an open borders agenda of the radical left who have no respect for this country.
Bryan J.
Beverly,
Although there are many people on the “radical left” that genuinely advocate for an open border policy, I do not believe that the majority of people pushing for immigration reform are part of it.
I firmly believe that a significant factor in causing illegal immigration is not a desire to “flaunt” the law–it is done because their is no legal alternative of arriving in the United States.
Unfortunately, I think there will always be some level of unauthorized immigration. Geography and demographics dictate it(expansive border and rich/poor divide.) Yet, if people look at the issue outside of the lens of emotion, I believe a reform can markedly improve the status quo. Cutting the underground population of 12 million to, perhaps, 1 million, is an improvement.
The so-called non-amnesty advocates propose nothing but guesses on what is to be done. Just look at how cookie conclusorily declares that immigrants will self-deport. Not going to happen.
Evelyn
Brian
I have tried several times to post a response to your post directed to me. For some reason (i have been known to be blunt and have had to tweak some of my posts to pass Marisa’s test) Marisa refuses to post it. I think she is partial to you and thinks you will be dibilitated by my post. I dont think so, I think you are man enough to handle it. I on the other hand am an old member of LL and she is probably tired of me. (JUST KIDDING MARISA) If she wont post it again I am going to send it to your blog.
Evelyn
Brian you say your “ancestors(from Europe), for example, came here by boat and did not forcefully displace anyone. ”
All Europeans and their descendents enjoy the privileges and have taken the place of an indigenous person who has been displaced. If you truly believe that people of European ancestry havent done this– then you also believe it is OK for me to come to your home, kill some of your family members, throw you out of your home, let all the people where I live come to live where you do and take possession of all of your possessions including your land and enjoy all the privlages you do.
You say you disagree that the border didnt cross Mexicans because Mexicans that had the border enclosed around them(after the war) then became U.S. citizens. Mexicans that currently come to the U.S. reside in Mexico, then cross to the U.S.
What you fail to understand is that if Europeans hadn’t invaded this land there would be no border. Another thing you probably dont know is that most of those Mexicans that were American citizens were deported to Mexico during the depression so white people could take their homes, land, possessions, and jobs. Many other Mexican Americans and many Mexicans here legally were also deported to Mexico in 1954 by “Operation We+back” a program put forth by the US gov under Eisenhower.
You say you’re “not sure how a nativist can refuse to accept something that is not an indisputable “fact”.
Here are more facts about the The Treaty of G.H. that you are probably unaware of.
“The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ”
Among the notable aspects of the treaty, it set the Texas border at the Rio Grande; it provided for the protection of the property and civil rights of Mexican nationals who would now be living on U.S. soil; the United States agreed to police its side of the border; and both countries agreed to compulsory arbitration of future disputes. However, when the United States Senate ratified the treaty, it erased Article 10, which guaranteed the protection of Mexican land grants; Article 9, which deals with citizenship rights, was also weakened. This in turn created an anti-Mexican atmosphere that spurred the violation of their civil rights. In Texas, Mexicans were restricted from voting. In New Mexico, Mexicans were the victims of violence, while in California, laws against them were passed, some of which were known as the Greaser Laws.
At the time of the treaty, approximately 80,000 Mexicans lived in the ceded territory, which comprised only about 4 percent of Mexico’s population. Only a few people chose to remain Mexican citizens compared to the many that became United States citizens. Most of the 80,000 residents continued to live in the Southwest, believing in the guarantee that their property and civil rights would be protected. Sadly, this would not always be the case. By the end of the 19th century, most Mexicans had lost their land, either through force or fraud.
You say you ” fear that the argument: “but indigenous people were here first, etc” does nothing but fan the flames of individuals like Cookie, which subsequently then can hinder further chances of passing CIR.”
Exposing the truth to cookie or anyone else makes her arguement even more week. The arguments of Know Nothings, has never stopped immigrants from being welcomed and included by the majority of us anyway. I think she feels the way she does because she doesent know History.
cookie
You are wrong, Bryan. E-verify would indeed make most illegals self-deport. As I said, most employers would not risk the fines and prison time to continue to cheat the system. The claim is that they are only here to work well with e-verify the jobs would dry up so let’s see if that holds true.
As for the claim I don’t know history, that is wrong also. I do know history and I admit to EVERYTHING that happened in the past but that doesn’t change the fact that the U.S. is still a sovereign nation TODAY and considered to be by the entire world. Wars have been fought, lands invaded and taken throughout history all over this planet. Howling at the moon about the past serves no purpose and as you said Bryan when people on the pro-amnesty side call Americans who have been here for generations and whose ancestors like mine (the Poles) weren’t even involved in any native indian conflicts,it just causes more divide and resentment on this issue.
I suggest anyone who thinks that anyone of native indian blood including the Mestizo Mexicans that think they are entitled to this entire continent descend on both the White House steps and the Candadian government’s steps and take it up with them instead of demonizing all white Americans of European ancestry who were born here and whose ancestors nor they played any role in that past history other than coming here under U.S. law at the time.
Pretty amazing when one argues the past like that when their very own ancestors came from Ireland (a European country) themselves.
Bryan J.
Thanks for the update on Mexican History–I admit I didn’t conduct due diligence research when I posted that comment.
Therefore, I will cede that point.
Yet, I stand by the “my ancestors not displace anyone” argument. I will frame it a bit differently:
U.S. citizens(who are not indigenous) enjoy that privilege because of the eradication of the native population, regardless of whether they are white. Before you think, “but..”, of course there is white privilege compared to U.S. Citizens’ non-white members, but that doesn’t equate to actual responsibility for all the horrors that were done unto the indigenous.
I acknowledge that Cookie could probably never change her mind. But there are people unlike Cookie(basically good people) who, caught up in the travails of whatever life throws their way, will take the “this land belongs to the indigenous argument” and run with it against Immigration reform.
cookie
Bryan, you are a voice of reason on the pro-amnesty side. It is true what you said. Pro-amnesty people who throw that indigenous argument in and call Americans of white European ancestry, illegals in their own country are considered part of the radical Chicano reconquista movement and do nothing for the pro-amnesty side but turn off any Americans from any amnesty for those of that ethnic group. You are very insightful to point that out.
Another thing is that Hispanics are earning the label of ethnocentric and tribal rather than proud Americans who put this country first by advocating for illegal aliens as a group. Why would any non-Hispanic American want to legalize more of them with that tribal attitude?
Evelyn
Brian you say “U.S. citizens(who are not indigenous) enjoy that privilege because of the eradication of the native population, regardless of whether they are white. Before you think, “but..”, of course there is white privilege compared to U.S. Citizens’ non-white members, but that doesn’t equate to actual responsibility for all the horrors that were done unto the indigenous.”
I agree with you. It doesent equate to people like you. It does however equate to people who spew lies about Mexicans to demonize them to incite others to be against the Hispanics.
You also say there are people that “will take the “this land belongs to the indigenous argument” and run with it against Immigration reform.”
TRUE DAT! There are people that will take outright lies and run with them against immigration reform. History aka (facts I post) expose them as hypocrits. How can anyone justify the treatment their grandfather’s have given people of color as something to be copied.
Evelyn
instead of demonizing all white Americans of European ancestry who were born here and whose ancestors nor they played any role in that past history other than coming here under U.S. law at the time.
Pretty amazing when one argues the past like that when their very own ancestors came from Ireland (a European country) themselves.
~~
Cookie I know these words were aimed at me so I will answer.
Get your facts straight before posting. I have never demonized, “all white Americans of European ancestry.”
If I did, I would have to demonize half of my family. Nativists are demonizing themselves by brazenly flaunting racism so I expose their flaws, no matter what color or nationality they are.
There are some Nativists who are Hispanic and have gotten theirs so they don’t care that others are suffering.
Greedy as heck these people are! In my opinion the worst. I dont give them a pass just because they are Hispanics. When they brazenly flaunt racism I expose them also.
When I am in Mexico and I hear Mexicans start bad mouthing Americans without cause or unjustly I speak out and defend Americans. If they are racists jokes about how dumb the gringos are, I let them know that they are offensive to me and should be to everyone and if they continue I will leave.
If it is a gathering at my house I let them know that they are not funny to me and tell them if they continue they will have to leave.
Well, I have never had to leave and neither have they. Most Mexicans start learning respect at the age of 2 so by the time they are 10 they know what respect is.
Felix Tiggs
Whenever a politician starts talking about “the children,” keep one eye on your wallet and the other on your liberty.
Comments are closed.