I did not watch Lou Dobbs. I don’t watch CNN. Having said that, I’ve watched him a few times, and I’ve heard a number of reports about the man and his CNN show. He seems like a man who is genuinely interested in reaching a truth. But that search has been demonized. He has spoken out against a number of issues that he holds dear. The positions that he has taken have been declared partisan by his opponents. Among these issues are: “health care, jobs, immigration, and climate change.”
He says: “Unfortunately, these issues are now defined in the public arena by partisanship and ideology rather than rigorous empirical thought and forthright analysis and discussion,” he said. “I will be working diligently to change that as best I can.”
I write this post not to defend Lou Dobbs, but to talk about his detractors. On Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/lou_dobbs_quit_cnn/2009/11/11/285104.html?s=al&promo_code=90C1-1, there are a couple quotes from his detractors.
“Our contention all along was that Lou Dobbs — who has a long history of spreading lies and conspiracy theories about immigrants and Latinos — does not belong on the most trusted name in news,” said Roberto Lovato, co-founder of Presente.org. “We are thrilled that Dobbs no longer has the legitimate platform from which to incite fear and hate.”
Tom Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the leading Latino legal organization, said, “I think the Latino community can and should celebrate that Lou Dobbs is no longer on CNN.”
Notice that neither of these individuals refuted the claims that Lou Dobbs has made. The Lovato individual resorted to name-calling. This is the usual vice of detractors of individuals like Dobbs, who defend the traditional side of America. Dobbs is a voice, he’s a commentator. He should have a seat alongside an Anderson Cooper to provide a different side of the story. Lovato and Saenz should appreciate the fact that Americans can disagree on some issues and reach a point where we can agree. Either that, or we can disagree on all issues and never compromise. These two do not want this. They want dissent to dissolve and go away. They don’t want to hear it. They want “the most respected name in news” to do away with anyone who disagrees with them.
I’m sure that Dobbs saw the writing on the wall when CNN did nothing to defend him on his strong opinions. I’m sure that in the backrooms of CNN, the powers that be loved his ad revenue but hated his ideas. I’m sure that they did little to back him up even in private. I’m sure that they asked him to, at least, tone down what they considered inflammatory opinion. It’s a sad day in the news world when the “the most respected name in news” doesn’t have room in their news rooms for dissenting opinions. Congratualtions one worlders, you have another victim.