Ryan Rosado Professor Duke ENC1101 3/31/14 Immigration Time-Out To the blind reader one might read Immigration

Time-Out by Patrick Buchanan and recite no word or thought how he argues his point somewhat respectable, however his use of argument are blanketed by flaws. He constructs his writings with hope that his readers do not have the drive to research if his facts/arithmetic is in fact valid. Buchanan forces the readers into only believing if there is a right and wrong way, no other solution. Yet the argument concludes so abruptly with no facts that will be able to back up his words. In this century alone, we as people do know the real disadvantages, dislike, and revolt against people that are here in America illegally. Buchanans writings were about twenty years ago and his words are seemingly coming true. As Buchanan notes that Southern California and South Texas will be primary Hispanics in the next sixty years. Respectively they will have millions of people whose historic roots would begin from Mexico (150). The fallacy here that occurs is a red herring. This is a red herring because of its nature to go to assumption, which in that case hypothetically no one can tell the future. Its effects the author argument in a way that he does not have to put much thought in his words and that he may just assume what will happen in the near future, instead of asking for an experts study.

Additionally, his quote If America is to survive as one nation, one people, we need to call a time-out on immigration, to assimilate the tens of millions who have lately arrived. We need to get to know one another, to live together, to learn together Americas language, history, culture, and traditions of tolerance, to become a new nation family, before we add a hundred million more. And we need soon to bring down the curtain on this idea of hyphenatedAmericanism (150). False dilemma is portrayed quite obviously throughout this quote. There is essentially no clear cut way to fix immigration. There are way too many views towards, against, and if they do or do not care about the subject at all. The logic is idealized by stating my way or the highway. This effected his argument because it shows that he jumps around frantically not knowing what to say with evidence instead of just what he wants to hear/write. Furthermore, the author closes his article quite abruptly for no particular reason. If we lack the courage to make decisions as to what our country will look like in 2050 others will make those decisions for us, not whom all share our love of the America that seems to fade away (150). He could have easily had more information on why his mindset is set on what it is. The audience is getting a case of sweep generalization because it was at the end, he knew people would accept the fallacy, knowing the reader is at the end of passage wanting to finish. Buchanans proposal towards this subject is quite interesting and influencing. So much that it made me agree with what he had to say. I agree with Mr. Buchanan because his main point is stopping benefits for illegal aliens. My opinion was swayed that way ever sense I was little. If you are not from this country then you should be benefitted for getting in illegally and expect us to care for your needs. The proposal goes off a very creditable source in it being Proposition 187 - which states it would cut off social welfare benefits to illegal aliens. However if I were to

critique his work I would change the fallacies above to more creditable source, where I can actually fight my opinion validly. To get back to point, Buchanan has three very clear logical fallacies, which in fact sway his argument greatly but are not creditable. With the red herring fallacy showing up at the start he is already portraying assumption to the reader. For false dilemma, the logic he tries to write is of sheer right or wrong way; when there are obviously more ways than that. Finally at his conclusion he wraps it up with a sweep generalization even though his logic is nonexistent.

Work cited Kirszner G., Laurie. Mandell R., Stephen. The Practical Argument. 2014. Kindle Edition