This article is about how moderates in the U.S are currently being criticized from both parties because of their so-so commitment to choosing a party. I found this article interesting on several levels.
One: the article was kind of like a profile of one prominent moderate in congress, John Barrow. The article started with talking about Barrow and the decision's he's made and legislature he's voted for and voted against. Then, the article took a turn and related Barrow to the over-arching issue here which is moderates in general and how they are being criticized. I liked this approach because it showed the reader a personal account of how people make decisions and the effects their decisions have on them then relating that person to a group of people to show how there's a problem.
Two: I also thought this article was interesting because, as I was reading I was thinking, "Hey, this Barrow guy sounds pretty cool. He can work with democrats and republicans and doesn't really ally himself with one side or another". I thought that this was a nice outlook on politics because, especially in an election season, I think people get too caught up on which side they're on or being loyal to their party that they overlook important issues that others have to say. Barrow (although he says he is a democrat) agrees with some of what democrats say and some of what republicans say, I feel this makes for a more well-rounded politician because he's looking at the whole picture instead of just one side. And yet, Barrow (and people like him) are being criticized for not choosing a side and for being more open-minded, hmmmm, it just doesn't seem right to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment