I said here that my next post related to immigration would be about Lou Dobbs’ recent on-air announcement that he was leaving CNN, but I got a bit sidetracked thinking about the new movie, “2012.”

But back on point, previously I referenced a New York Times editorial titled, quite fondly so, “A Farewell to Lou,” in which the editorial board points out that Dobbs thoughts on illegal immigration, in particular, have been “corrosive” to the public discourse on the complex issue and damaging to any honest discussion.

As the piece notes, Dobbs stated Nov. 11 while on the air that he was leaving CNN, having been granted

a release from my contract that will enable me to pursue new opportunities

by CNN president Jon Klein. If you are interested, here’s the video:

As part of the short segment, Dobbs said,

Over the past six months, it’s become increasing clear that strong winds of change have begun buffetting this country and affecting all of us and some leaders and media, politics and business have been urging me to go beyond the role here at CNN and to engage in constructive problem-solving as well as to contribute positively to a better understanding of the great issues of our day and to continue to do so in the most honest and direct language possible.

He pointed to climate change, immigration, the two wars and other issues as some of the greatest challenges facing the country. Dobbs continued:

Unfortunately, these issues are now defined in the public arena by partisanship and ideology rather than by rigorous, empirical thought and forthright analysis and discussion. I will be working diligently to change that as best I can.

Before I continue, let me say that I agree with The Times that Dobbs is, indeed, the same polarizing figure of which he seems to be attempting to refute. The editorial said:

Mr. Dobbs couldn’t have phrased a more apt criticism of himself. He calls himself Mr. Independent, but he is far closer in style and method to the right-wing ranters who mold the facts to shape the argument on television and on AM radio, where Mr. Dobbs still has a show. Mr. Dobbs’s CNN program has long been a nesting ground for untruths and conspiracy theories: fretting over a nonexistent, immigrant-borne leprosy epidemic; questioning President Obama’s citizenship; issuing dark warnings about the “North American Union,� a supposed plot to strangle United States sovereignty.

No argument there, and again, I agree, but I must point out that The Times piece cut off the quote before Dobbs said, “I will be working diligently to change that as best I can.”

I don’t believe him, of course, and I think he was just throwing a bone to critics who say he is, indeed, a partisan in populist clothing, but I just thought it was important to note that The Times skewed what Dobbs was saying in that part, even though it’s clear to me, and undoubtedly to The Times, that either, A) Dobbs doesn’t really mean what he said, or B) Dobbs doesn’t know the difference between “partisanship and ideology” and approaching issues with “empirical thought and forthright analysis.”

Regardless, he really did make “the most trusted name in news” more partisan, and lest the network replace Dobbs with another talking head, it will be a somewhat more even-handed network. Even with Dobbs, it was more “sober,” as the editorial puts it, than FOX News and MSNBC, both of which really should be ashamed because they are each perfect foils of the other, right and left, respectively, and are doing their part to ensure that journalism will meet certain death.

It’s unclear what Dobbs will do next, but he’s apparently just going to focus on his radio show for now and continue to prop up the already right-wing dominated airwaves. Not that I care, and free speech for all, I say, but he’s certainly stewing in the cesspool along with Sean Hannity’s, Neal Boortz, Rush Limbaugh and others, and is far from independent.

A story from Reuters traces how Dobbs transitioned from a straight-laced newsman to an all-out commentator:

He returned two years later (after a stint at the network from 1980-1999) to become host and managing editor of a new general news broadcast, and for a time renewed his Moneyline show.

But Dobbs’ role at the network changed dramatically.

“He morphed from being an economic and finance guy to being much more in the style of an opinion commentator,” independent television news analyst Andrew Tyndall said. “He turned into specializing on the illegal immigrants story, which was very hot three years ago or four years ago.”

Thus, he probably did CNN a favor by stepping down (or maybe he was forced into the decision) if the network wants to be truer to its “most trusted name in news” mantra. Tyndall noted the “differences” between Dobbs line of thinking editorially and CNN officials.

“There’s clearly editorial differences between the way CNN wants to go and the direction he wants to go.”