“Triple” Legal Immigration? Say It Ain`t So, Lou Dobbs!

Regular viewers of

Lou Dobbs Tonight
(LDT) who have a critical eye
(like me) have long noticed certain

glaring omissions
in the weekday news hour show`s
almost daily coverage of the immigration issue. While

admirably strong
on Washington`s malfeasance

law and borders
, LDT`s reports about the


environmental effects
of an unrelenting tide of
foreigners are rare indeed.

A brand new book (The Uprising

David Sirota
) quotes Lou Dobbs as saying that

the number of legal
would be a fine thing. Dobbs has stated
more than once that he supports increased legal
immigration, so the quote is entirely believable.

Here`s the quote, from page 196:

" `If we are to have a

national debate
and a

national dialogue
and a decision about national
policy and we make a judgment that we`re

going to raise immigration levels
—let`s say that we
double them, let`s say that we triple them—sign me up,`
he says. `There`s nothing in me that is a restrictionist
whatsoever, and I realize that separates me from others
who are against illegal immigration on the basis that there
is too much immigration.
I don`t believe that. I do
believe that we`re not in control of our immigration
policies or what`s happening in this country. And that
leaves me in despair.`

Dobbs has made similar statements on his show. But
the "triple" is specific and new.

Curiously for an alleged populist, Dobb`s idea is

out of touch
with the

American people`s desire
that immigration not be
increased. His own show reported that sentiment

May 29, 2007


CBS-New York Times poll
released Friday shows
only 20 percent of U.S. residents believe legal
immigration should be increased; 74 percent say it
should be decreased or stay the same.”

Does Dobbs believe that professing support for vastly
increased numbers would take some of the heat off? If
so, he severely underestimates the

of his critics. His repeated efforts to
reasonably debate the issue with

boss Janet Murguia merely gave her a lot of

air time
on LDT before she


dreaded hate speech accusation
that finally killed
attempts at friendliness.

Lou Dobbs has avoided discussing cultural issues.
Other than warning of the

social consequences
resulting from

half of Hispanic males dropping out

high school
, he has not explored the

cultural dissonance
of Mexico as a major immigrant

The southerly narco-state is one of the least
attractive contributors of new immigrants one can
imagine—with its

social norms

toward education,

for crime,


various levels
of society, crude

and strong

tendencies. But Dobbs won`t go there.

As usual, ordinary Americans understand the largely
negative effect of immigration better than the media
elite. Most of the problems incurred with chaotic
illegal immigration would continue and worsen if
Washington were to vastly increase legal immigration,
even if

illegal entry were completely ended
. Some of the
worst criminals and public health risks might be kept
out….or maybe not. Given the backlog, inefficiency and

that exist now in  processing legal
immigrants, the bureaucratic overload alone should be
seen as prohibitive.

More importantly, how many and which immigrants are

should not be determined by the would-be immigrants
—a common assumption among

open-borders liberals.
Nor should it be decided by
the business owners, for whom workers can never be too
cheap or too exploitable.

The decision of who and how many belongs in the

hands of the American people

And Americans don`t want to live in


anything like it
, as they have tried to make clear
to Washington.

Assimilation is under attack as never before. And
that process has to do with two factors: the number of
immigrants and the political will that immigrants should
become part of the national community.

Polls show that Americans still have traditional
expectations of newcomers. A 2005

Rasmussen poll
found 67 percent believed immigrants
should "adopt America`s culture, language, and

Fox News poll
from last winter reported that 61
percent of voters surveyed would choose a President who
represents the "shared values of Americans"
rather than one who "celebrates the wide diversity"
(32 percent).

What`s different is the escalating number of
immigrants. And when, for example, the

majority of kids in a classroom

Spanish-speaking Mexicans
with a Hispanic teacher,
how do the children learn to become Americans?

As the Center for Immigration Studies` Steve Camarota
observed, "Traditionally you had in the US an
immigrant child learning to swim in a sea of native
children, but increasingly it is the children of natives
lost in a sea of children of immigrants."
Well Are Muslims Fitting In
, By Howard LaFranch,
Christian Science Monitor, July 19, 2005]

For a description of how kids learned American
history and culture in an earlier time, see Victor Davis
Hanson`s excellent remembrance of his own education in
California`s Central Valley:

The Civic Education America Needs
Summer 2002].

A bad development: the central place of

as a cultural glue is fast being eroded.
Democrat Presidential candidate Barack

Obama recently declared his support for a
bilingual America:

" `When it comes to second-language learners, the
most important thing is not to get bogged down in
ideology, but figure out what works,` Obama says. `Everybody
should be bilingual
, or everybody should be
trilingual.` The comments drew loud applause. […]

“He says he thinks
everyone should get a bilingual education
in the
United States, not just English as a first language
blog: `Everybody should be bilingual`
Boulder Daily Camera,
May 28, 2008]

Sen Obama claims to speak

"Indonesian and a little Spanish."
website has a page for Spanish-speaking teachers to
profess their admiration and well-founded hope for job
security under a BHO presidency:

Bilingual Educators for Obama

It looks like utopian bilingualism—the

requirement that every American will speak Spanish

part of the blurry "change" Obama
peddling. But the candidate is responding to a
demographic transformation

accumulating since 1965.

Most of the

30 million Mexicans
who reside here did not come to

become Americans
and join our national community:

came for

money only
, and harbor resentment against this
country for imagined theft of territory.

The expanded numbers Lou Dobbs recommends will have
cultural and political consequences. Toxic levels of
diversity are tearing the cultural fabric of this nation
apart. Yet Dobbs wants more of same. So why then does he
think immigration is as an important issue at all?

If the tens of millions of unassimilated foreigners
using America as their ATM come under a misguided scheme
of lawful immigration on steroids, how is that an

Isn`t the idea of

immigration restriction
to preserve a
recognizable America
now and for future generations?

Can Dobbs not see the problem here?

Say it ain`t so, Lou!

Walker (

in Northern California and
publishes two websites,



She assures readers that
thoughts of Mexico are foremost in her mind every time
she turns on the tap under the

mandatory water restrictions
of Alameda County.