Recently in the Houston Chronicle former Mexican president Vicente Fox’s new book tour was discussed. (For the article, see link at bottom of page.) Written by Dane Schiller, the article touched on various interviews Fox has done during tour stops. So far it seems his main fight is for rights for Mexicans to become permanent American residents.
While everyone is entitled to their own opinion on immigration, I take issue with the way the article was written and the way Fox was presented. The first sentence stated, “Former Mexican President Vicente Fox doesn’t get many breaks these days.” The article went on to build sympathy for the former president, even giving a quote from a former Mexican citizen now living in America saying he is the “greatest.” The author feels that the news programs Fox has been on have not given him a break; alleging they hammered away to harshly at him concerning the immigration issue. What I cannot seem to understand is why the article caters to him but does not have any real data to back up why we should listen to and agree with Fox. Instead the writer attempts to sway the readers with emotion. The article also fails to mention how illegal immigration negatively affects America. Instead Americans are portrayed as xenophobes who are fearful of immigrants and view them as terrorists. The article gives examples of Fox naming the good qualities of Mexico; furthering the argument that he is a man who loves his country. The way I see it the big questions should of been: If one loves their country and wants to see it thrive, why would they encourage their people to go to another country to live and work? Why would they not instead want to build the economy, strengthen the school system and get rid of the corruption present in the government? These are some of the questions the author should have asked instead of making Fox sound like the revolutionist he believes he is.