Thruelsen, Richard. "The Things That Happen On 'The Island' " Saturday Evening Post 21 July 1951. Print.
This article is a secondary source talking about Ellis Island and what really happens there. It talks about how no matter who you are, on Ellis Island you're always looked upon as an immigrant-- never a future U.S. citizen.
Showing posts with label Crysta grade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Crysta grade. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
American Immigration
United States. Cong. House Judiciary. American Immigration. By Daniel J. Tichenor. 110 Cong., 1st sess. Cong. Doc. MasterFILE Premier, 2007. Print.
This report given to the U.S Congress by Daniel J. Tichenor, is a secondary source that gives some current perspective to historical immigration reform. It talks about the people that went through Ellis Island and the fears that people had about letting Europeans enter their country at the time. It talks about how the Immigration Act of 1924 restricted the immigration of Europeans and Asians but allowed the borders of Mexico and Canada to remain open. Something that has created problems for Americans today.
This report given to the U.S Congress by Daniel J. Tichenor, is a secondary source that gives some current perspective to historical immigration reform. It talks about the people that went through Ellis Island and the fears that people had about letting Europeans enter their country at the time. It talks about how the Immigration Act of 1924 restricted the immigration of Europeans and Asians but allowed the borders of Mexico and Canada to remain open. Something that has created problems for Americans today.
California: Ellis Island of the 80s
Mccarthy, Kevin F. "California: Ellis Island of the 80s." Challenge July & Aug. 1983: 59-63. Print.
This magazine article is a good secondary source that talks a lot about how California became the main gathering place for immigrants-- illegal and legal alike-- in the 1980s. It talks about how this was effecting business and whether or nor California would remain to be a attractive place to move to for immigrants in the future.
This magazine article is a good secondary source that talks a lot about how California became the main gathering place for immigrants-- illegal and legal alike-- in the 1980s. It talks about how this was effecting business and whether or nor California would remain to be a attractive place to move to for immigrants in the future.
Ellis Island a Welcome Site? Only After Years of Reform
Guzda, Henry P. "Ellis Island a Welcome Site? Only After Years of Reform." Monthly Labor Review 109.7 (2001). Print.
With his article title, Ellis Island a Welcome Site? Only After Years of Reform, Henry P. Guzda does a play on words that tells the reader essentially what the article is about. A welcome site refers to a place where people meet and great others while a "welcome sight" is when people are so relieved to see something. The article talks about whether Ellis Island was a "welcome sight" not only for the immigrants, but for the politicians that ran it. This article is a good secondary source that deals with the idea that many people weren't pleased with Ellis Island and the way it was being run as a "welcome site."
With his article title, Ellis Island a Welcome Site? Only After Years of Reform, Henry P. Guzda does a play on words that tells the reader essentially what the article is about. A welcome site refers to a place where people meet and great others while a "welcome sight" is when people are so relieved to see something. The article talks about whether Ellis Island was a "welcome sight" not only for the immigrants, but for the politicians that ran it. This article is a good secondary source that deals with the idea that many people weren't pleased with Ellis Island and the way it was being run as a "welcome site."
U.S. Immigration: Sanctuary and Controversy
Barnhill, John H. "U.S. Immigration: Sanctuary and Controversy." Source: History Behind the Headlines: The Origins of Conflicts Worldwide 2 (2001): 292-301. 2006. Web. 9 Mar. 2010.
The article U.S. Immigration: Sanctuary and Controversy, talks about the various controversies that have surrounded the issue of immigration-- particularly illegal immigration-- throughout the years. It it a good primary source that goes through the different issues from Ellis Island up to nowadays and discuesses the various controversies that surround each one.
The article U.S. Immigration: Sanctuary and Controversy, talks about the various controversies that have surrounded the issue of immigration-- particularly illegal immigration-- throughout the years. It it a good primary source that goes through the different issues from Ellis Island up to nowadays and discuesses the various controversies that surround each one.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service
Aneesh, A. "The Immigration and Naturalization Service." Encyclopedia of American Immigration. Vol. 1. New York: Sharpe Reference, 2001. 341-48. Print.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service, is responsible for regulating immigration into the United States. This article in the Encyclopedia of American Immigrataion explains what the INS is, what they are supposed to do, and what they have done in the past. This secondary source talks about the INS's various actions with regards to the different immigration laws that America has had in the past and what their job is now.
The Immigration and Naturalization Service, is responsible for regulating immigration into the United States. This article in the Encyclopedia of American Immigrataion explains what the INS is, what they are supposed to do, and what they have done in the past. This secondary source talks about the INS's various actions with regards to the different immigration laws that America has had in the past and what their job is now.
Immigration: Law and Policy
Baynton, Douglas C. "Immigration: Law and Policy." Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale, 2006. Web. 9 Mar. 2010.
This article discusses the immigration laws from 1882 up to nowadays and talks about the way they are being implemented. Douglas C. Baynton goes through different immigration laws and talks about their varying levels of effectiveness. One of the examples that he gives in this primary source is the laws that filtered what immigrants were allowed to enter the United States. Baynton talks about whether or not these laws were effective in doing what they were supposed to do.
This article discusses the immigration laws from 1882 up to nowadays and talks about the way they are being implemented. Douglas C. Baynton goes through different immigration laws and talks about their varying levels of effectiveness. One of the examples that he gives in this primary source is the laws that filtered what immigrants were allowed to enter the United States. Baynton talks about whether or not these laws were effective in doing what they were supposed to do.
Immigration Stations
Zeidel, Robert F. "Immigration Stations." Gale Virtual Reference. Gale, 2001. Web. 9 Mar. 2010.
Ellis Island wasn't the only checkpoint that immigrants could pass through before entering the United States. There was Angel Island as well as many station in the Atlantic, Pacific, and in the Gulf. Ellis Island is the most commonly known checkpoint for approving immigrants, but there were many other places that the Americans manned in order to insure that their immigration laws were put in force. This primary source talks about these other checkpoints and about their effectiveness in doing their job.
Ellis Island wasn't the only checkpoint that immigrants could pass through before entering the United States. There was Angel Island as well as many station in the Atlantic, Pacific, and in the Gulf. Ellis Island is the most commonly known checkpoint for approving immigrants, but there were many other places that the Americans manned in order to insure that their immigration laws were put in force. This primary source talks about these other checkpoints and about their effectiveness in doing their job.
Immigration Policy in the United States
United States. Cong. Congressional Puget Office. Immigration Policy in the United States. Ed. Donald B. Marron. 109 Cong. Cong. Rept. 2006. Print.
In 2006 a report was requested in Congress regarding the immigration laws of the United States. In this report, the laws were discussed as well as how these laws are enforced. The report also included various statistics on information such as admission and implementation of immigration laws. This report is a primary source that's unbiased and makes no recommendations-- rather it just states the facts for as they were.
In 2006 a report was requested in Congress regarding the immigration laws of the United States. In this report, the laws were discussed as well as how these laws are enforced. The report also included various statistics on information such as admission and implementation of immigration laws. This report is a primary source that's unbiased and makes no recommendations-- rather it just states the facts for as they were.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Immigration Act of 1924
Immigration Act of 1924, S., 68 Cong., XLII The Statutes at Large of the United States of America 153 (1924). Print.
In 1924, many people in America were worried that the immigrants were going to take over the country. They were worried that the immigration limit of three percent per an ethnicity that they had at the time wasn't enough to slow down the immigrant input in the country. Congress passed this act in order to limit the migration to two percent per an ethnicity. This Act is a primary source that shows how immigration was dealt with in America's past. One of the other things this Act did was allow the borders of Mexico and Canada to remain open-- even though it limited the immigration of Europeans and Asians.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Reading Logic
“The Greek word logos has several different meanings. It can mean ‘word, thought, reason, or order’ ” (Writing and Rhetoric pg. 70). Logos is what causes the reader to see the writer’s logic. It’s what allows the reader to see where the writer was coming from. It helps the reader see why one should believe what the author believes.
In the article Congratulations, Graduate. Now Leave the USA, the USA Today explores the issue of refusing jobs to immigrants. It says “Around this time each year, thousands of foreign students graduate with science and engineering degrees from U.S. universities. Many are eager to start in America and contribute to the U.S economy. So does the United States welcome them with open arms? No, the government tells thousands of them to hit the road—and take their sought-after skills and brainpower to countries and companies that compete with the USA” (par.1-2). The article goes on to explore the idea that this is self-defeating policy—allowing other countries to make a profit at America’s expense. The USA Today journalist gives points that are crucial to the argument and oftentimes includes links so that one can continue to read up on the issue. The author not only clearly states his case, but he also makes it so that the reader can see through his thought process and logic.
In the article Congratulations, Graduate. Now Leave the USA, the USA Today explores the issue of refusing jobs to immigrants. It says “Around this time each year, thousands of foreign students graduate with science and engineering degrees from U.S. universities. Many are eager to start in America and contribute to the U.S economy. So does the United States welcome them with open arms? No, the government tells thousands of them to hit the road—and take their sought-after skills and brainpower to countries and companies that compete with the USA” (par.1-2). The article goes on to explore the idea that this is self-defeating policy—allowing other countries to make a profit at America’s expense. The USA Today journalist gives points that are crucial to the argument and oftentimes includes links so that one can continue to read up on the issue. The author not only clearly states his case, but he also makes it so that the reader can see through his thought process and logic.
Why Read?
When one looks for an article to read in their spare time, oftentimes one looks for an article that appeals to their interest. It isn’t very likely that one will choose to read an article that’s about something they aren’t interested in.
In Dan Amato’s article The Dark Side of Immigration he says “Most Americans are against illegal immigration, but I feel that the majority just don’t know that dire situation that our country is in and the damage that illegal aliens are doing to the United States” (Introduction, par. 4). Here he’s stating that he believes that most of his readers know nothing and are anti-immigration. He then goes on in his article to consistently give facts and data—just as if his audience knew nothing.
Is his audience really that uninformed though? Maybe they are. Most people in the United States are unaware of exact data and not many people can quote statistics at the top of their head. Is this what his readers are going to want though? Most people don’t want to read through long lists of every single thing that every single immigrant has done in the United States. Most people don’t even care whether or not this crime happened on this date at this time and at this place. They just want to know how this effects them in their life. Most readers are going to be paying attention to what’s in it for them—not what happened to some person in L.A five years ago.
In Dan Amato’s article The Dark Side of Immigration he says “Most Americans are against illegal immigration, but I feel that the majority just don’t know that dire situation that our country is in and the damage that illegal aliens are doing to the United States” (Introduction, par. 4). Here he’s stating that he believes that most of his readers know nothing and are anti-immigration. He then goes on in his article to consistently give facts and data—just as if his audience knew nothing.
Is his audience really that uninformed though? Maybe they are. Most people in the United States are unaware of exact data and not many people can quote statistics at the top of their head. Is this what his readers are going to want though? Most people don’t want to read through long lists of every single thing that every single immigrant has done in the United States. Most people don’t even care whether or not this crime happened on this date at this time and at this place. They just want to know how this effects them in their life. Most readers are going to be paying attention to what’s in it for them—not what happened to some person in L.A five years ago.
Acting for Themselves
When one thinks of a fallacy, they often think of a lie— an untruth. Sometimes it may be a blatant lie and other times it just may be that its something that hasn’t been proven to be true yet. In writing oftentimes a common logical fallacy is to state their own personal opinion instead.
In Roy Beck’s article What a Jobs-Focused State-of-Union Ought to Say About Immigration he oftentimes makes the mistake of telling the audience what to think. He says “The President should tell the Members of Congress that if they aren’t willing to gather their unemployed voters, look them in the eye and explain why illegal aliens and new foreign workers have precedence over the 500,000 unemployed in every district” (par. 29). Instead of giving the facts and letting the readers decide what they should do, he tells the what course of action they should take. Even at the very beginning of the article when he says “be sure to send this fax to President Obama with State of the Union suggestions” (par. 1), he’s telling his readers how they should behave instead of letting them figure out for themselves what they should do.
In Roy Beck’s article What a Jobs-Focused State-of-Union Ought to Say About Immigration he oftentimes makes the mistake of telling the audience what to think. He says “The President should tell the Members of Congress that if they aren’t willing to gather their unemployed voters, look them in the eye and explain why illegal aliens and new foreign workers have precedence over the 500,000 unemployed in every district” (par. 29). Instead of giving the facts and letting the readers decide what they should do, he tells the what course of action they should take. Even at the very beginning of the article when he says “be sure to send this fax to President Obama with State of the Union suggestions” (par. 1), he’s telling his readers how they should behave instead of letting them figure out for themselves what they should do.
Standing On a Soapbox
"Think about the people you trust. Why do you trust them? You might trust them because they have authority... Generally, we trust people who are knowledgeable and experienced... Because we can't know everything about every issue we need to form an opinion on, we often value the opinion of experts" (Writing and Rhetoric, pg. 56). Ethos is all about trust. We trust people that believe what we believe or who have a greater level of knowledge than we have. Oftentimes we feel most comfortable trusting those who respect our intelligence and who act as such.
In Roy Beck’s NumbersUSA article What a Jobs-Focused State-of-the-Union Ought to Say About Immigration, he tries to set up his ethos by saying “What Pres. Obama says—or doesn’t say—about immigration will be the easiest tip-off to whether his first priority truly is putting Americans back to work. Or whether his talk about jobs is mainly a political ploy to gain back support from Independent voters. Here is what he should say (be sure to send this fax to President Obama with State of the Union suggestions)” (par. 1) Here Beck is trying to establish trust with his readers by talking in what he thinks will be an easier way to understand him. Like saying “Pres.” instead of “President.” By using writing in an informal style, Roy Beck is giving up a lot of credibility in showing that he’s not a professional writer. Readers read that and think he’s inexperienced and believed Beck doesn’t know what he’s talking about. They aren’t sure whether they can take his writing seriously or not. They're also not sure if he's doing that just because he doesn't believe they're smart enough to understand him if he talks less informally.
A little later in his article, Roy Beck writes “Thus far, federal spending to put (or keep) nearly 1 million Americans in jobs has cost between $200,000 and $350,000 per job. (See my earlier blogs on Stimulus jobs vs. opening u jobs held by illegal foreign workers)” (par. 2). Here instead of linking a credible source to back up his information, Beck puts up a link to his own blog where he wrote his own opinion on the matter. This doesn’t add to his credibility because it makes the reader wonder if what he just said is really fact or if its his own opinion. It makes the reader wonder if its really worth their while to continue to read this article if all its going to do is advertise Beck’s opinions instead of addressing issues that the reader’s themselves are looking for answers to.
In Roy Beck’s NumbersUSA article What a Jobs-Focused State-of-the-Union Ought to Say About Immigration, he tries to set up his ethos by saying “What Pres. Obama says—or doesn’t say—about immigration will be the easiest tip-off to whether his first priority truly is putting Americans back to work. Or whether his talk about jobs is mainly a political ploy to gain back support from Independent voters. Here is what he should say (be sure to send this fax to President Obama with State of the Union suggestions)” (par. 1) Here Beck is trying to establish trust with his readers by talking in what he thinks will be an easier way to understand him. Like saying “Pres.” instead of “President.” By using writing in an informal style, Roy Beck is giving up a lot of credibility in showing that he’s not a professional writer. Readers read that and think he’s inexperienced and believed Beck doesn’t know what he’s talking about. They aren’t sure whether they can take his writing seriously or not. They're also not sure if he's doing that just because he doesn't believe they're smart enough to understand him if he talks less informally.
A little later in his article, Roy Beck writes “Thus far, federal spending to put (or keep) nearly 1 million Americans in jobs has cost between $200,000 and $350,000 per job. (See my earlier blogs on Stimulus jobs vs. opening u jobs held by illegal foreign workers)” (par. 2). Here instead of linking a credible source to back up his information, Beck puts up a link to his own blog where he wrote his own opinion on the matter. This doesn’t add to his credibility because it makes the reader wonder if what he just said is really fact or if its his own opinion. It makes the reader wonder if its really worth their while to continue to read this article if all its going to do is advertise Beck’s opinions instead of addressing issues that the reader’s themselves are looking for answers to.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Effective Tools?
Style is what sets writers apart. An author’s use of metaphors, similes, metaphors, irony, and kennings can make or break an piece of writing. Oftentimes, it will be the language of the writing that will make the piece meaningful to the readers.
Laura Parker, a writer for the USA Today, uses the language tools in an interesting and effective way in her article USA Just Wouldn't Work Without Immigrant Labor. She uses the simile in an interesting way to make her point, “Most of the nation's 17.7 million immigrant workers toil, like those who preceded them, in jobs that native-born Americans refuse to do. They work as meatpackers, hotel maids, hamburger flippers, waiters, gardeners, seamstresses, fruit and vegetable pickers, and construction hands” (par. 5, emphasis added). Parker makes an interesting comparison to the past by saying that immigrants today still behave like immigrants always have. It was like she was comparing the jobs that immigrants get to leftovers– the positions that nobody else wants.
Later in the article, Laura Parker says. “Lured by employers who have recruited them aggressively, immigrants have moved from the coasts and border states and settled in the heartland” (par. 8). Here Parker plays with a dangerous metaphor. She first uses the word lured which makes it sound like they were attracted to America with promises of either wealth or power. After she says that though, Parker went on to use the words “recruited… aggressively.” These words don’t quite match up with the word “lured.” Lured implies that the employers carefully thought and planned their strategy to get them– like a fisherman does when he chooses what type of lure he’s going to use when he fishes. Fisherman don’t usually go after their fish aggressively. When one is trying to lure another person they don’t attack them or try to force them. They usually go after them with subtle means. By using the words “lured” and “aggressively,” Laura Parker contradicts herself and leaves her readers wondering whether the employers recruit their potential immigrant employees with subtleties or force.
Laura Parker, a writer for the USA Today, uses the language tools in an interesting and effective way in her article USA Just Wouldn't Work Without Immigrant Labor. She uses the simile in an interesting way to make her point, “Most of the nation's 17.7 million immigrant workers toil, like those who preceded them, in jobs that native-born Americans refuse to do. They work as meatpackers, hotel maids, hamburger flippers, waiters, gardeners, seamstresses, fruit and vegetable pickers, and construction hands” (par. 5, emphasis added). Parker makes an interesting comparison to the past by saying that immigrants today still behave like immigrants always have. It was like she was comparing the jobs that immigrants get to leftovers– the positions that nobody else wants.
Later in the article, Laura Parker says. “Lured by employers who have recruited them aggressively, immigrants have moved from the coasts and border states and settled in the heartland” (par. 8). Here Parker plays with a dangerous metaphor. She first uses the word lured which makes it sound like they were attracted to America with promises of either wealth or power. After she says that though, Parker went on to use the words “recruited… aggressively.” These words don’t quite match up with the word “lured.” Lured implies that the employers carefully thought and planned their strategy to get them– like a fisherman does when he chooses what type of lure he’s going to use when he fishes. Fisherman don’t usually go after their fish aggressively. When one is trying to lure another person they don’t attack them or try to force them. They usually go after them with subtle means. By using the words “lured” and “aggressively,” Laura Parker contradicts herself and leaves her readers wondering whether the employers recruit their potential immigrant employees with subtleties or force.
Are They Doing Anything To Help Us Now?
In 2004, many people were still worried about immigration. After 9/11, many immigration laws had been put in effect, but the opinion of many was that they were still not being implemented. Many were worried that there was nothing being done to stop terrorists from entering the United States.
Heather MacDonald, a writer for the City Journal, address this issue in her article The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave. She says, “Some of the most violent criminals at large today are illegal aliens. Yet in cities where the crime these aliens commit is highest, the police cannot use the most obvious tool to apprehend them: their immigration status” (par. 1). MacDonald realized that using by using an example of growing crime and then pointing out how the police are doing nothing to stop the illegal immigrants that congress passed laws to insure that crime like this wouldn't happen again. By writing this article at a time when many people were wondering how the laws were being enforced, it would’ve fed off of people’s curiosity about whether or not the laws were doing their job. It would’ve answered the question as to whether or not another terrorist attack would be prevented by these laws.
One thing that Heather MacDonald failed to do in this article was use more recent examples. She starts off promising with getting the reader’s attention, but then fails to give concrete recent examples of failed law enforcement. She instead brings up events that happened in 1995 through 1997. When she does mention more recent events it is to quote government officials. The only mention of the devastating attack is to say “On September 5, 2001, his handpicked charter-revision committee ruled that New York could still require that its employees keep immigration information confidential to preserve trust between immigrants and government. Six days later, several visa-overstayers participated in the most devastating attack on the city and the country in history” (par. 20). A fact that while interesting does nothing to answer reader’s questions about whether or not the immigration laws in force now are being enforced and if so to what success. MacDonald never mentions the facts that most of her American readers would be interested in– whether or not the immigration laws are going to protect their country from being attacked again.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
People vs. Things
Humans want to be important. Everyone wants to be considered as special and unique. Nobody wants to be compared to an object or a thing. Nobody wants to have it inferred that things are held more in value than they are.
In his article Bordering on Absurdity, Michael Mandel starts out an emotional appeal by saying that Americans value their 'toys' more than they do people of other nationalities. He points out the fact that while "goods and services move easily across national borders... flows of people are strictly regulated" (par. 1). This attracts people's attention by causing them to realize that while we make laws that allow all the appliances that make our lives convenient to enter our country, we have laws that prevent allowing many immigrants to enter the country.
Being an economic writer for BusinessWeek, Madel focuses on the economic side of the issue of immigration. He focuses on the effect immigration has been having on the economy by talking about the issue of wages and the value immigrants can add to America's economy. For example he says, "A world of open borders would mimic, on a larger scale, the situation that already exists within the U.S. People can move long distances from one part of the country to another, chasing better jobs and higher pay. Florida and Arizona do not erect barriers saying, 'No more immigrants from the Midwest.' Instead, they welcome them and even boast about the number of people moving to their states as a driving force for growth" (par. 5). By comparing the issue of closed borders to something that strikes closer to home, Madel creates the feeling that Americans are completely self-interested. That we are willing to allow other Americans to move into our neighborhoods to create new jobs but when it comes to allowing foreigners we'd rather have them make our 'toys' in their own countries than to come and make them in our own backyards. He uses examples that will strike a cord in people's minds; causing them to realize that we as Americans really do this. Mandel is trying to create an appeal with the business world of America that while "open borders for immigration are not going to happen anytime soon. The political and cultural obstacles are too large, as the latest immigration debate in the U.S. shows. But over time, facilitating the free flow of people is going to be a critical step toward achieving a truly global economy. " (par. 12). Mandel is trying to appeal to American's sense of fairness and compassion by saying that we aren't willing to carry these values that we believe in to outside of our own country.
In his article Bordering on Absurdity, Michael Mandel starts out an emotional appeal by saying that Americans value their 'toys' more than they do people of other nationalities. He points out the fact that while "goods and services move easily across national borders... flows of people are strictly regulated" (par. 1). This attracts people's attention by causing them to realize that while we make laws that allow all the appliances that make our lives convenient to enter our country, we have laws that prevent allowing many immigrants to enter the country.
Being an economic writer for BusinessWeek, Madel focuses on the economic side of the issue of immigration. He focuses on the effect immigration has been having on the economy by talking about the issue of wages and the value immigrants can add to America's economy. For example he says, "A world of open borders would mimic, on a larger scale, the situation that already exists within the U.S. People can move long distances from one part of the country to another, chasing better jobs and higher pay. Florida and Arizona do not erect barriers saying, 'No more immigrants from the Midwest.' Instead, they welcome them and even boast about the number of people moving to their states as a driving force for growth" (par. 5). By comparing the issue of closed borders to something that strikes closer to home, Madel creates the feeling that Americans are completely self-interested. That we are willing to allow other Americans to move into our neighborhoods to create new jobs but when it comes to allowing foreigners we'd rather have them make our 'toys' in their own countries than to come and make them in our own backyards. He uses examples that will strike a cord in people's minds; causing them to realize that we as Americans really do this. Mandel is trying to create an appeal with the business world of America that while "open borders for immigration are not going to happen anytime soon. The political and cultural obstacles are too large, as the latest immigration debate in the U.S. shows. But over time, facilitating the free flow of people is going to be a critical step toward achieving a truly global economy. " (par. 12). Mandel is trying to appeal to American's sense of fairness and compassion by saying that we aren't willing to carry these values that we believe in to outside of our own country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)