As a new writer to Innermost Parts and a new student to the Brandeis campus, I see the value in reading through previous posts published on this blog. Granted, I only grasp a quick glimpse into the many dilemmas of the previous year, there is still so much perspective and insight from my fellow writers that I greatly value.

Take a look at the April 18th, 2008 post by Lev. My favorite quote of all:

We need to ensure that candidates who want to take action and transcend petty politics fill these seats.

In my case, I demand a candidate to take action, not just “want to take action.” I demand an activist, not someone who wishes to bring back “an activist spirit.” I demand passion, not politics. I am forced to question the validity of a man’s words when this man¬†disregarded activism in one election and then made it one of his main platform components in another.

I am clearly a Brooks skepticist. But then again, who am I to question the motives of this man?

I am a voter, and that’s my responsibility.

2 comments on “Back to the Future”

  1. Chase Says:

    I think that Carrie has an incomplete understanding of this election. If we were electing president of DFA, I would elect Hughes because of his experience of activism, but being VP of the Student Union is so much more.

    The Vice President has to guide all of the senators to fulfill their individual goals. If Hughes never served as a senator or even served on a University Committee, if I’m not mistaken, then how can he possibly guide the new senators to be the most effective they can be for their constituents?

    For the at-large race, I supported Kaamila and Noam because I think that it’s fine to have fresh faces in the senate, but in the leadership role of VP, I don’t think it’s appropriate for us to put in someone with such inexperience. Hughes for North Quad Senator!! Brooks for VP!!

  2. Bret Says:

    Another experience argument! How original.

    Might I suggest you head to the comments under Lev’s post and read the most recent one by Alex N?