I saw Lou Dobbs speak last week at the Free Library.
It used to be Lou concentrated on CNN, telling you how to invest your money, but these days he has bigger fish to fry. Lately, he is known as the most angry media voice against our immigration policies. His popularity has soared so much he can be seen seven nights a week on CNN. His new book, "War on the Middle Class," is a rant against both political parties. He is channeling the anger of a lot of folks and, consequently, the book is selling well.
The auditorium on this night was filled to capacity, mostly with seniors.
Dobbs defines the middle class as those neither very rich nor very poor. Too vague for you? By deliberately using such a broad definition, he expands his audience. According to Lou, almost all of us are victims. There is a kind of paradox in America these days: The more victimized you feel, the more you belong. Victims feel vulnerable. They buy books. They attend lectures. As I said, Lou Dobbs is doing well.
The author wears the ubiquitous flag pin, he says, to honor the 9/11 victims. He leans over the microphone, gives that Texas squint (he was born in Childress, Texas) and tells us, "Would you believe, I was criticized in some quarters for it." Lou never does mention who did the criticizing or why he, among the countless number wearing such pins, would be singled out. But he has set the tone for the evening.
Although much of Dobbs’ fame rests upon his strong stance against immigration law, he mentions Mexico and President Vicente Fox only briefly, with a suitable sneer. Tonight, Lou has saved most of his anger for Washington politicians — the current administration and those of the last 20 years. He says hardly anything we haven’t heard before or with which we can disagree: the evil influence of lobbyists on K Street, the drug companies, big oil. But Dobbs makes it sound as if he has uncovered some vast conspiracy of the Left and Right. He claims he asked some members of Congress to name one piece of legislation solely designed to help the middle class and they couldn’t respond with even one. Given Dobbs’ expansive definition of the middle class, one would think the student loan program, Clean Air Act, or at least tax deduction for mortgages, would qualify. But the sense of being a victim has seeped into the auditorium and Lou has most of the audience eating out of his hand.
In Dobbs’ talk, you hear echoes of Ross Perot- or George Wallace-type populism. There is no difference between the parties; Democrats and Republicans equally share the guilt. An audience member shouts out, "Tweedledee and Tweedledum." Lou nods in agreement. I think of Wallace shouting, "There’s not a dime’s worth of difference."
Bush 41, Bill Clinton, and Bush 43 are all treated with scorn because they support free trade. And Dobbs reminds us they all went to Yale. He says he’s had it with Yale and the educational elites. He’d like to see the next president hail from a good, state school. No word on how he feels about that elitist Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who saved capitalism and the middle class.
When I challenge him with the question-comment, "Please tell us, Lou, that you are not saying that if Al Gore or John Kerry had been elected, that there would not have been a difference?" Dobbs fills with disdain. I am under some kind of illusion. I’m seeing things through a partisan slant, he says sadly, and due to be very disappointed.
Really? Does Dobbs mean we would be in Iraq if Gore had been elected? Wouldn’t the working poor (the folks that really get screwed in this country) still be enjoying the Earned Income Tax Credit that, under Clinton, dramatically narrowed the rich-and-poor gap, which Bush wiped out? Dobbs appears to be interested in solving global warming, yet doesn’t think Gore would have been at work solving the problem instead of giving oil companies additional tax breaks. Would Gore or Kerry have sanctioned the torture of prisoners at Gitmo and Abu Graib? Would there be unconstitutional wire-tapping?
I’m no wide-eyed dreamer. You might not agree with the direction the Democrats would have taken the nation, but there is a difference. Beneath the fact both parties bow to lobbyists too often, there is a difference.
Dobbs wants the audience to switch to Independent registration and choose on the basis of the best candidate, not party affiliation. But registering Independent means you lose the right to vote in the primaries. By giving that up, you reduce your choice, not expand it. But wait, if you register Independent, you can vote for Lou Dobbs if he runs as a third-party candidate.
I think I’ve got Lou Dobbs figured out.
