DREAM Act editorial a nightmare of stupidity

Back when I used to write staff editorials for "the newspaper" some years ago, there was a requirement that you had to actually know something about the subject matter before you started writing.

After reading this editorial about the DREAM Act, I can see this standard no longer applies.

People can have different opinions, but not different facts. This editorial fails to accurately describe what the DREAM Act is, and instead suggests it would give amnesty to every illegal alien in the country.

It calls it a "liberal Democratic initiative" That's only partly accurate. The original author of the DREAM Act was Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, who hardly qualifies as a liberal. The legislation was supported by other Republican senators, including John Kyl, John McCain, John Cornyn, Lindsey Graham and Kay Baily Hutchinson. By today's measure, that counts as a truly bipartisan bill.

But this was before the onset of Obama Derangement Syndrome, when all Republicans rushed to blindly oppose anything the president supported, even if it meant changing positions on their own legislative initiatives.

The DREAM Act became a victim of the partisan gridlock that has paralyzed Washington, hampering efforts to get anything done about the big problems we have. The editorial praises Sen. Dean Heller for taking this partisan stand against the DREAM Act, just days after quoting him on how much he hates partisanship (a subject I will tackle later this week).

What the DREAM Act actually does is allow those children "of good moral character" who were brought here illegally by their parents to have a chance to become legal citizens. These kids — who the editorial refers to as "lawbreakers" — are children who did not choose to become illegal immigrants. They have spent most of their young lives in this country, and are here under no fault of their own. Some arrived as infants, and don't even speak the language of their birthplace. They attended American schools, play American sports, and do the same things as other American kids.

The editorial also suggests a pathway to citizenship already exists for these kids. Really? This pathway would include uprooting kids from the only country they have ever known and sending them back to a place where they would be the alien, and wait years in line to maybe come back to the place they call home. That's not much of pathway.

The DREAM Act has its own pathway that is anything but easy. To take advantage of this program, these kids have to serve two years on active duty in the U.S. Military, or attend college for two years in order to get a six-year visa to stay in the country. During that six years, they must complete either another two years of military service and be honorably discharged, or complete a four-year college degree in order to become full citizens.

The "good moral character" requirement also further weeds out the bad elements. This isn't Green Cards for Gangbangers. The DREAM Act rewards the best and the brightest, the kind of citizens we want in this country.

Different sides can debate the details. Perhaps the age limit should be lowered so it doesn't cover teenage immigrants. Or maybe there should be more requirements for those following the college option. Perhaps the "good moral character" requirement could be tightened. Those are differences that could easily be worked out in a normal political environment.

But it's hard see how any Republican could oppose granting citizenship to a young person who puts on the uniform and risks his or her life to serve this country, a service so many of those same politicians avoided.

If Heller and other DREAM Act opponents really believe their own rhetoric, let them attend one of the many homecoming celebrations for U.S. troops, and have them personally pick out the illegal aliens in uniform and turn them over for deportation. Let's see some of that pro-family "compassionate conservatism" at work.

Republican opposition to the DREAM Act is rooted in hatred. Some of that hatred is racial, but most is purely political. They hate President Obama, and reflexively oppose anything that might make him look good, even if it's the right thing to do.

This act of putting party over country shows these politicians — and those who write ignorant editorials supporting them — have far less moral character than the kids who would benefit from the DREAM Act.

Perhaps they should switch places.