On Sunday, Feb. 22, 2009, an article by a Mr. George F. Will (of the Washington Post) was posted on TheState.com website. And, the item is entitled Will: The continuing fall of federalism The item was written with the purpose of being an outlet for the author to share his opinions about the constitution, etc. Hence, it seems as through this article is primarily an opinion-piece, with its ultimate goal being to produce public arousal. In other words, by sharing his opinion, the authur of the article hopes to cause more people to see things the way he does. And, being that he is so obviously fixed in his views---and even a bit anti-liberal---it goes without saying that the article would of course, be directed toward a more like-minded audience; which in his case, would probably be people who are more along the lines of conservatism.
With the subject of the article being Wisconsin senator, Russ Feingold, and his desire to change the 17th Amendment, it is clear that the author's aim is to argue against it. In the article, it states at many times that Russ Feingold is of the progressive ideology. Thus, he believes that the constitution is never off-limits to change. Basically, the article is an argument against changes to the Constitution (and more specifically, changes to the 17th Amendment). Again, on the one hand, there is Russ Feingold---who of course is for it, and then there is the author, Goerge F. Will---who is against it. Therefore, it stands to reason that being for change is a more liberal view, whereas being against change is a more conservative view. Also, as part of the author's argument, he believes that the sort of change which Feingold (and his backer, McCain) advocate is essentially a threat to Federalism (including the checks and balances wherein the Framers had implemented). Thus, in its most basic sense, this article is an argument about allowing more direct democracy (which means giving the people more voting power), vs. sticking with the way things are.
