Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Saturday, December 4, 2010


Texas talk show host Lynn Woolley nails what's wrong with the DREAM ACT in his latest column that appears in the Dallas Morning News. Aside from pointing out the eye-rolling string of words that make up the acronym that IS the Dream Act, Woolley highlights the incrementalism that is inherently part of the bill as well. As of today, an illegal alien woman can give birth to a legal American citizen simply by doing so on American soil. This new bill would allow that same woman to have given birth to that same child in Mexico five years ago but only bring that child to America to make him / her legal.

Via the Morning News:
Lynn Woolley: Why the Dream Act should fail
07:32 PM CST on Friday, December 3, 2010

By some strange quirk of fate, the initials of the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors legislation now being considered by our lame duck Congress spells "DREAM." It should spell "AMNESTY," but that wouldn't have sent the right message to compassionate taxpayers who are being asked to give away the store.

The "store" in this case is a big prize: The act offers legal status to immigrants younger than 35 if they arrived in the United States before age 16 and if they complete two years of military service or college.

The Dream Act is the brainchild of liberal members of Congress, championed by Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, who for years has been attaching it in some form to various pieces of legislation. It is a key component to the so-called "path to citizenship" that various immigrant groups have been demanding.

One of those groups is the Immigration Policy Center, which has issued a long list of reasons the Dream Act should be passed. Mostly, the IPC argues on humanitarian grounds that it's simply the right thing to do: "[Undocumented youth] have the potential to be future doctors, nurses, teachers and entrepreneurs, but they experience unique hurdles to achieving success in this country."

The argument is a non sequitur. Most of the students who are in the country legally have such potential, so what is the compelling reason to replace them in the pecking order for tough-to-get slots at the University of Texas or Texas A&M with students who are undocumented?
Read it all.

Also via Be Logical

No comments:

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive