I don’t claim to understand all the implications of the Lou Dobbs interview with Telemundo. So let me begin with what I do know.

For over five years Lou Dobbs has become the voice of the “anti-amnesty” “Let’s pack ’em all up and get the out of here once and for all” crowd.  At no time do I recall Lou using the words like “humanitarian, comprehensive, immigration reform” or “path toward legalization under certain conditions”.  Yet according to the interview shortly after announcing his departure from CNN, Dobbs insists that this has always been his view.

I’m willing to give Dobbs the benefit of the doubt.  Maybe because I used to watch him, first when he did his Moneyline program in the early days of CNN, and later in 2003 when it became Lou Dobbs Tonight.  I appreciated his attempt at centrist politics.  Yet during the last years, he became the voice of those that he now claims are more conservatively ideological.

There are actually two aspects to immigration.  One deals with secure vs open borders.  The other deals with the problem of the millions of people who immigrated illegally, but who are here raising families, including many children who are USAmerican citizens.  Senator John McCain has consistently argued for secure borders and a path to legal residency.  During the presidential campaign, he never renounced his earlier position but chose to speak only of secure borders.

Perhaps Lou Dobbs was attempting to do the same, as nightly he fought it out with open border advocates.  This brought us a nightly serving of border stories of drug smuggling, kidnapping, along with his attacks on the various presidential administrations, more recently Obama, for not doing more to secure the border.  Seemingly never did he acknowledge the contributions of the millions of immigrants, legal and illegal, during a strong economy.

I recall one night when he invited  Paul Waldman of MediaMatters, which had released a report critical of Dobbs’ negative representation of Hispanic people.  For the entire interview, Dobbs fired off questions only to then interrupt his “guest” dismissively calling him “an ideologue, and a left-wing hack”,  who ignores reality.  It was pretty ugly, and it disappointed me greatly.

Lou never addressed the concern which Waldman raised which was:

Lou, if I had my own television show, and I knew that there were extremist groups like the John Birch Society and white supremacist groups like the Council of Conservative Citizens that were cheering me on on their Web site, it would make me want to step back and say, “OK, what am I doing? How can I change to make sure that this debate is responsible in the way it could be?”

So in my continued attempt to give Lou the benefit of the doubt, let me suggest the following: Lou’s main problem is his arrogance, not a dislike for the Hispanic people. After all he is married to a Mexican-American.

Lou’s dismissive tone was also evident in the Telemundo interview, as Maria Celeste was unwilling to give an opportunity for Lou’s proposals until he responded to a series of concerns which she knew her Hispanic viewers would expect her to raise. These included implications about incorrect reporting, illegal immigrants (quickly becoming a codeword for latinos in this country) bringing in 3000 cases of leprosy, and implications of his overstatement concerning  illegal alians in the prison system.

For twenty uncomfortable and testy minutes Dobbs could not invoke his “bullying host” sanctuary, and attempted to answer the questions posed by Celeste. Then citing the fruitlessness of the current immigration debate, Dobbs asked to present something constructive on solving the immigration problem. Celeste agreed, and gave Lou the remainder of the time:

1. “We need a rational, effective and humane immigration policy in this country.”
2. “We need the ability to legalize illegal immigrants on certain conditions.”
3. “We need to be able to influence the direction of the conversation toward securing the border because until we can control immigration, we cannot meaningfully, substantively alter immigration law because it would have no point if we cannot establish the basis for the control of the flow of people across that border.”

Since the Telemundo appearance, Dobbs has been challenged again. This time, however from the right, as ALIPAC’s Willilam Gheen withdrew all support for Dobbs, once the darling of his organization.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC is withdrawing support for Lou Dobbs after years, including the suspension of websites calling on Dobbs to run for President due to the perceived change in Mr. Dobbs’s stances on immigration issues.

“While Mr. Dobbs claims his positions have not changed, however, that is not the perception of many of our mutual supporters,” said William Gheen of ALIPAC. “His recent comments on Telemundo and his national radio show supporting some kind of path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is inconsistent with positions of ALIPAC and the views of most American citizens.”.

While I agree with Dobbs’ current assessment of the debate as well as the tone of his proposals, these come a little too late. For years Lou  cultivated a viewership from the extreme right, losing all credibility with those to the left. Now those on the right feel betrayed.

In his Telemundo interview Dobbs chided Maria Celeste for saying that she was speaking for her Latino viewers when raising some long-unanswered questions. Ironically, Lou Dobbs now may speak for no one, even though he actually has something worthwhile to say.