Heaven ForbidImmigration has always been a much-discussed topic. Many people believe that borders should be stricter, or that deportations should be enforced, or that illegal immigration poses a serious threat to America. On the other side of the coin, many believe that restricting immigration in any way is cruel and un-American, or that if you arrive on American soil, you should be allowed to stay there. John Tierney, comic strip writer and New York Times columnist, belongs, with me, to the latter pro-immigration category. John Tierney expressed his views in an essay titled Angels in America, published in the New York Times in April 2006. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Tierney tells his readers the very pathetic story of a hard-working Mexican immigrant named Ángel Espinoza. Tierney likens Espinoza to Tierney's own grandfather. They are both first-generation immigrants who left farms, took very low-paying jobs, and worked their way up to better positions. They both married citizens born in the United States. Tierney discusses Espinoza's citizenship, or lack thereof: Espinoza, unlike Tierney's grandfather, was denied a green card because he had been deported in the past. Tierney uses this as a segue to discuss the difference between previous immigration policies and current immigration policies. “There were no quotas for Europeans or most other immigrants in 1911, even though, relative to population, there were more immigrants arriving and living here than today. If America could absorb my grandfather, why exclude Espinoza? » (622-623) he asks. Tierney discusses an oft-repeated anti-immigration argument: that because Mexico is so close, Mexicans will not assimilate and "risk becoming an underclass living in linguistically isolated ghettos." (623) Tierney compares this argument to the story of Espinoza and those whose lives resemble his own. I personally agree with Tierney's seemingly pro-immigration stance, but there are some problems with his presentation. First, he never clearly states any statement or position. He can be determined to be pro-immigration because of his support and empathy for Espinoza, but he never comes out and says anything about immigration. This works in his favor in some ways: it makes him seem moderate and opinionless. In another way, this fails him: he never makes his convictions known, nor his demands heard, and he therefore falls a little flat. It's unclear what Tierney is trying to persuade you to believe, and so he fails to convince his readers of anything. Second, Tierney's essay is almost entirely based on pathos. His barely distinctive argument relies entirely on your pity for Espinoza. He presents only one statistic, in his twelfth paragraph: eighty percent of third-generation immigrants are predominantly English. Tierney states that "if you look at immigrant studies, you see that the typical story is much more like Espinoza's."(623) It is obvious that he has read these studies, if he bothers to quote them - so where are they? What are the numbers? Tierney does not provide it, or even hint where he may have found his information. His essay completely lacks ethos. Third, Tierney's argument relies on history..