This book by Al Gore is a masterpiece. Gore begins to put together a case for what went wrong and why in our Republic. He starts with the decline in discourse and reason within our nation. The evolution of television and radio as news mediums are discussed at length in Gore’s book, in that those mediums are one-way and non-interactive. He attributes much of the troubles we face in our Republic to the relative decline of the print media, which requires more of the reader than just to be entertained.
At that point, Gore gets out a scalpel and dissects the many missteps of the Bush Administration. And thankfully, he does a thorough and persuasive job of it. He contrasts the role the Republic’s founders had for the Presidency with the unilateral, unaccountable, and highly secretive administration of George W. Bush. He pulls no punches and articulates the degree to which this administration has violated the law , dismembered the U.S. Constitution, pursued aggressive pre-emptive war, engaged in the promotion of torture and illegal detainment of people without recourse, sought world domination rather than cooperation, etc.
Gore doesn’t pull any punches on a complicit Republican Congress, and on Democrats who have also bathed in the same sewage infested waters. Gore also goes into just how the pervasive use of fear was used to encourage Americans to give up more and more of their personal liberties in the name of national security. Replacing reason with fear rarely results in good policies and Gore contrasts rightly how America’s great leaders have in the past sought to help America’s citizens overcome their fears with resolve, not to magnify them in a callous and corrupt way to grasp additional powers.
Gore goes on to articulate the conservative assault on an independent judiciary and its implications for our Republic. Reading the book at the same time as watching a 5-4 vote on habeaus corpus underscored Gore’s point, and how fragile and at risk our Constitution is currently. You can tell that Gore has a deep affection for the judiciary and the role they play in preventing abuse of power. He also has a deep appreciation for the brave members of the judiciary and legislative branch that stepped in during Watergate to reign in an imperial President, and laments the lack of current will to do the same in our current Congress.
Gore does touch on one of his most favorite topics, climate change, and likens the role played by Exxon/Mobil with the Tobacco Company propagandists who so successfully argued the lack of link between tobacco smoke and cancer despite the overwhelming evidence.
Surprisingly, much about Gore’s book is hopeful. What Gore ultimately argues for is not agreement with Al Gore, but open and free discussion and careful reasoning. Gore’s solution isn’t more politics, but more discussion between leaders and the public. He sees the internet, blogs, and other modern communication means as positive developments which have the potential to help us undo the damage the Bush Administration has done to our Republic. He also plugs his own current project "CurrentTV."
Gore’s optimism in the face of the rise of American conservative authoritarianism is the kind of hopeful thing you expect from our leaders. Gore showed that he still is a force to be reckoned in our national debate about the future of our country. The fact that a former Vice President and a man who nearly ascended to the Presidency has so articulately addressed our most pressing national crises is refreshing and overdue.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Tim Russert was a good guy
The accolades his peers have poured upon him as he tragically passed away shows that he was a truly good guy. He was thoughtful, and considerate. He treated public officials with respect and gave them the benefit of the doubt on many things. How history will treat him is perhaps more circumspect.
As the person who asked the questions of public officials on the most widely viewed Sunday morning TV show, the question that will ultimately define his tenure will be, "did he ask the right questions." Tim was in a most priviledged spot. He was the point man on the nation's most significant TV news show. He had access to the real "players." He was unique in his position to ask the "hard questions." And those questions were never asked.
Most organizations fail, not because they have bad people, but because good people fail to ask the right questions. Tim Russert failed to ask the right questions. He was a good guy, miscast when our country seriously needed a lion, not a lamb. Tim was a good guy. I lament his death, but I hope that our mainstream press will wake up from their slumber, and DO THEIR JOB. I'm not holding my breath.
Tim, rest in peace. You truly were a good guy.
As the person who asked the questions of public officials on the most widely viewed Sunday morning TV show, the question that will ultimately define his tenure will be, "did he ask the right questions." Tim was in a most priviledged spot. He was the point man on the nation's most significant TV news show. He had access to the real "players." He was unique in his position to ask the "hard questions." And those questions were never asked.
Most organizations fail, not because they have bad people, but because good people fail to ask the right questions. Tim Russert failed to ask the right questions. He was a good guy, miscast when our country seriously needed a lion, not a lamb. Tim was a good guy. I lament his death, but I hope that our mainstream press will wake up from their slumber, and DO THEIR JOB. I'm not holding my breath.
Tim, rest in peace. You truly were a good guy.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
General Tax Structure in Utah
Utah has traditionally relied upon what is oftened referred to as a "three-legged stool." The legs consist of the property, sales and income taxes. In Utah, as in many other states, fees have sort of become the fourth stool, or atleast the book you use to make up for a decline in property taxes relative to the other legs of the stool.
The reasons for reliance upon these taxes are sort of two-fold. One, everyone pays into the kitty for government services. Sales tax is a tax on consumption, as is, in much the same way, fees imposed upon the "consumption" of government services. Income is a tax upon, income of course, while the property tax is upon ownership of taxable properties not exempted by Utah's Constitution. The property tax is a "constitutional tax, in that all exemptions from the tax must be articulated in the Constitution under Article XIII. Exemptions for sales tax are statutory, (and as a result, quite numerous), and only require bills passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor.
Utah's Income tax has relied as it's basis the federal income tax. Income is defined for the most part based upon federal statute. Utah does deviate from federal statute in that the personal exemption for dependents is different, and there is exemptions for 1/2 of the federal income tax you pay, etc. However, the same deductions you would get from your 1040 form Schedule A or from your standard deduction carries over to your state income tax.
In subsequent posts, I hope to atleast address certain issues relative to the state income tax and sales tax, as I've already touched upon the property tax. As the trailer from the Johny Carson show used to say, "more to come."
The reasons for reliance upon these taxes are sort of two-fold. One, everyone pays into the kitty for government services. Sales tax is a tax on consumption, as is, in much the same way, fees imposed upon the "consumption" of government services. Income is a tax upon, income of course, while the property tax is upon ownership of taxable properties not exempted by Utah's Constitution. The property tax is a "constitutional tax, in that all exemptions from the tax must be articulated in the Constitution under Article XIII. Exemptions for sales tax are statutory, (and as a result, quite numerous), and only require bills passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor.
Utah's Income tax has relied as it's basis the federal income tax. Income is defined for the most part based upon federal statute. Utah does deviate from federal statute in that the personal exemption for dependents is different, and there is exemptions for 1/2 of the federal income tax you pay, etc. However, the same deductions you would get from your 1040 form Schedule A or from your standard deduction carries over to your state income tax.
In subsequent posts, I hope to atleast address certain issues relative to the state income tax and sales tax, as I've already touched upon the property tax. As the trailer from the Johny Carson show used to say, "more to come."
Friday, June 13, 2008
The Habeas Vote and It's Implications
While the U.S. Constitution was hanging by a thread, four justices held the scissors waiting to clip away one of the Constitution's most fundamental rights. Though relieved and proud that our system managed to roll back just one of Bush's tyrannical policies, one should look with alarm at the implications of this year's elections.
Regardless what your opinion is on the right to choose, universal health care, tax cuts, etal., there is nothing more dangerous to our Republic at this point than the election of John McCain. Admitting that the kind of justices he would appoint are of the type of Thomas and Alito, this election will determine whether future executives will have any substantial check upon their power by the judiciary.
Scalia in his dissenting opinion broadened the definition of war to the point, that we will always be in one. Can you imagine such an opinion becoming legal precedent? The implications it sets forth are greatly disturbing. The Yoo doctrine, that the commander in cheif has unchecked power during war time, incents a power hungry executive into on-going conflicts, and defining them as war.
Will Utahns, seeing the Constitution hanging from a thread, decide to preserve it by supporting Barak Obama, or will they collectively hold their scissors and give the go ahead, to "clip away."
Regardless what your opinion is on the right to choose, universal health care, tax cuts, etal., there is nothing more dangerous to our Republic at this point than the election of John McCain. Admitting that the kind of justices he would appoint are of the type of Thomas and Alito, this election will determine whether future executives will have any substantial check upon their power by the judiciary.
Scalia in his dissenting opinion broadened the definition of war to the point, that we will always be in one. Can you imagine such an opinion becoming legal precedent? The implications it sets forth are greatly disturbing. The Yoo doctrine, that the commander in cheif has unchecked power during war time, incents a power hungry executive into on-going conflicts, and defining them as war.
Will Utahns, seeing the Constitution hanging from a thread, decide to preserve it by supporting Barak Obama, or will they collectively hold their scissors and give the go ahead, to "clip away."
Thursday, June 12, 2008
More on Utah's Property Tax
As mentioned in my previous post, Utah’s truth in taxation ensures that increases in the value of real estate will not result in a windfall to the county or other entities funded by the property tax. However, that does not mean that someone’s taxes can’t go up. Property taxes can go up for a variety of reasons. I will list the most common.
1- Your house was part of a reappraisal process that only affected a percentage of the residential properties in your county. Since the tax rates are calculated by dividing the total budgets by the total taxable value. Say a county has a budget of 200K and total taxable value of property in the county of 20 mill, the tax rate would be 200,000/20,000,000 or .0100. Let’s say that reappraisal of 10% of the properties resulted in a 20% increase in taxable value for that 10% of the county that was reappraised. Your 100,000 property is now reappraised at 120,000. Overall, the total taxable value of the county increases by 10% of 20 million multiplied by 20%. This equation results in a total increase in county taxable value of 400,000 to 20,400,000. This would reduce the tax rate (200,000/20,400,000) to .009804. However, your property increased from 100,000 to 120,000 so your tax bill would have gone from $1,000 (.01x100,000) to (.009804*120,000) at $1,176.50. This is a simplified example not taking into account increases in other property values such as personal property, but I hope it illustrates the point.
2- Another way your property tax can increase is by increasing the budget figure. If a local entity holds a public hearing, and goes through certain steps, they can increase their budget. It is a politically unpopular thing to do, but some counties face certain budget crises for a variety of reasons. In the above example, let’s say that the county approves a 20,000 budget increase. On top of that the reappraisal talked about in example one goes through. You now have a budget of 220k being funded by a taxable value of 20.4 mill. The new tax rate would be 220,000/20,400,000 at .010784. That reappraised property of yours now faces a tax bill of 120,000 x .010784= $1,294, a nearly $300 difference from last year.
3- Another way that your property taxes may go up is through losing a major business or your county (or Tax Commission for that matter) reducing the value of a major business property by a large amount in an appeal. Let’s say that Energy Solutions, which may represent 20% of Tooele County’s tax base decides to pull out and close their operation. In the case above, 20% of the original $20 mill is off the books meaning that the new taxable value is 20.4 mill less 20%x20 mill=4 mill. The new tax rate in this scenario is 20.4 million less 4 million at 16.4 million. The new tax rate is now 220K/16.4 million or .013415 resulting in a property tax on your property of (120K x .013415) of 1,610.
When all of these major factors come to bear at the same time, property taxes can increase considerably, even under truth in taxation. On average however, Utah’s property tax is small comparatively to other states. The Senate Site has a good post regarding this. As mentioned in my previous post, because there is no indexing of the budgets under truth in taxation for inflation, counties and cities are constantly trying to provide the same services with a funding source that declines in real terms. As a result, Utahns tend to get fee’d rather heavily. Utahns tend to get nickled and dimed out of $120 rather than see a $100 increase in their property tax. Though making our tax burden more invisible makes some political sense, we should keep in mind that transparent disclosure of citizen’s true tax burden keeps governments, both state and local, in check.
1- Your house was part of a reappraisal process that only affected a percentage of the residential properties in your county. Since the tax rates are calculated by dividing the total budgets by the total taxable value. Say a county has a budget of 200K and total taxable value of property in the county of 20 mill, the tax rate would be 200,000/20,000,000 or .0100. Let’s say that reappraisal of 10% of the properties resulted in a 20% increase in taxable value for that 10% of the county that was reappraised. Your 100,000 property is now reappraised at 120,000. Overall, the total taxable value of the county increases by 10% of 20 million multiplied by 20%. This equation results in a total increase in county taxable value of 400,000 to 20,400,000. This would reduce the tax rate (200,000/20,400,000) to .009804. However, your property increased from 100,000 to 120,000 so your tax bill would have gone from $1,000 (.01x100,000) to (.009804*120,000) at $1,176.50. This is a simplified example not taking into account increases in other property values such as personal property, but I hope it illustrates the point.
2- Another way your property tax can increase is by increasing the budget figure. If a local entity holds a public hearing, and goes through certain steps, they can increase their budget. It is a politically unpopular thing to do, but some counties face certain budget crises for a variety of reasons. In the above example, let’s say that the county approves a 20,000 budget increase. On top of that the reappraisal talked about in example one goes through. You now have a budget of 220k being funded by a taxable value of 20.4 mill. The new tax rate would be 220,000/20,400,000 at .010784. That reappraised property of yours now faces a tax bill of 120,000 x .010784= $1,294, a nearly $300 difference from last year.
3- Another way that your property taxes may go up is through losing a major business or your county (or Tax Commission for that matter) reducing the value of a major business property by a large amount in an appeal. Let’s say that Energy Solutions, which may represent 20% of Tooele County’s tax base decides to pull out and close their operation. In the case above, 20% of the original $20 mill is off the books meaning that the new taxable value is 20.4 mill less 20%x20 mill=4 mill. The new tax rate in this scenario is 20.4 million less 4 million at 16.4 million. The new tax rate is now 220K/16.4 million or .013415 resulting in a property tax on your property of (120K x .013415) of 1,610.
When all of these major factors come to bear at the same time, property taxes can increase considerably, even under truth in taxation. On average however, Utah’s property tax is small comparatively to other states. The Senate Site has a good post regarding this. As mentioned in my previous post, because there is no indexing of the budgets under truth in taxation for inflation, counties and cities are constantly trying to provide the same services with a funding source that declines in real terms. As a result, Utahns tend to get fee’d rather heavily. Utahns tend to get nickled and dimed out of $120 rather than see a $100 increase in their property tax. Though making our tax burden more invisible makes some political sense, we should keep in mind that transparent disclosure of citizen’s true tax burden keeps governments, both state and local, in check.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Tax Policy in Utah #1- Property Tax
Property tax is a significant funding source for a wide variety of local government services. From your school district, to killing mosquitos, from building local roads, to providing meals on wheels, the property tax is a much used tax. One of the benefits of the property tax from a governmental level is that it is typically more stable than consumption taxes such as the sales tax, or the income tax, which quickly responds to economic conditions.
Utah's property tax faces what is actually something that works quite well. It is called "truth in taxation." What truth in taxation means is that, increases in property values cannot be used by the government as a windfall. New property tax revenues must come from "new growth", not merely a re-appraisal of the value of property. Property tax rates are based upon the budgets of local entities, not upon the values of property. If you receive an increase in property tax, it is more likely that it is based upon a reappraisal of the value of your property, not upon the tax rate charged to you.
Now there are some peculiarities to Utah's property tax structure. One of those is what is referred to as the "residential exemption." Every Utahn's primary residence is granted an exemption of 45% of the value of their residential property. This means that someone with more than modest means and owns a $20 million mansion will recieve a $900,000 exemption from property tax. Some states have decided upon a lump sum exemption for residential property which makes the property tax much more progressive, but Utah values it's mansions and those who occupy them.
Other interesting things about Utah's property tax, is that it is not gauged for inflation. The tax rate setting process allows no increase for the increases in cost. Local government is then required to provide the same services as last year with the same resources, but have to pay their staff additional wages to compensate for increases in the cost of living. The result is that local governments often have to resort in increasing various fees to make up the difference. And fees are inherently regressive.
Also of note is the fact that secondary residential properties receive no residential exemption. As a result, someone who owns a $150,000 home in Murray who also owns a $85,000 cabin east of Kamas, may find themselves paying more property tax for their cabin than for their primary residence.
Another interesting aspect of the property tax process is that small and large business, without any exemptions, pay full property tax on their personal property (equipment, furniture and fixtures, etc.) and are required to keep track of what equipment they keep, and what equipment they discard on "personal property affidavits" that they file with their country assessors. However, influential companies often approach their county assessors or the Tax Commission and seek special consideration. County Commissions, operating as the county's "board of equalization" is often likely to give special favors to businesses with "clout" in their county. In this regard, there are some significant inequities in Utah's property tax administration. Utahns are rarely aware of the degree to which their own county commissioners have the power to reduce the tax burden upon prominent businesses and push that burden upon the other property owners living in their county. And their local press is rarely aware of these decisions and provide adequate oversight.
There are exemptions from property tax that are significant and notable. Farmers pay virtually no property tax. Their equipment is exempt from property tax as is their livestock. The value of their land is appraised on the basis of it's agricultural production value, referred to as "greenbelt." Whenever I hear farmers or ranchers complain about taxes, I pretty much roll my eyes because they are exempt from just about every tax imaginable, and even receive federal subsidies. Pay taxes, and then you have a right to complain about the government. However, what the exemption farmers receive regarding greenbelt (land values) creates a situation where if that land is developed and used for non-agricultural purposes, back taxes are due and is a major irritant to developers and farmers seeking to cash in on the value of their land. It is referred to as roll-back taxes and it is a deterrent to development, but also keeps land ihn agricultural use long after it is feasible.
Property tax is a "constitutional tax" in Utah, which means that it is based upon Article XIII of the Utah State Constitution. Exemptions to the property tax therefore cannot be based upon statutory provision but must require an amendment to Utah's Constitution. The variance from this is an exemption given to the blind that is based upon statute. If that statute was ever challenged, it would certainly be viewed as unconstitutional. Howevand er, no one so far has seen property the most economical use of property. Holding property for mere speculative purposes becomes expensive. Hoardng land comes with a cost. Major corporations like Kennecott find it in their interests to lease their land to farmers adjacent to their operations and have them as buffer zones occupied in agriculture. This aspect of Utah's property tax laws encourages "green space" which many of us find valuable.
Anyway, these are some of my thoughts and analysis regarding Utah's property tax. I welcome the input of other bloggers.
Utah's property tax faces what is actually something that works quite well. It is called "truth in taxation." What truth in taxation means is that, increases in property values cannot be used by the government as a windfall. New property tax revenues must come from "new growth", not merely a re-appraisal of the value of property. Property tax rates are based upon the budgets of local entities, not upon the values of property. If you receive an increase in property tax, it is more likely that it is based upon a reappraisal of the value of your property, not upon the tax rate charged to you.
Now there are some peculiarities to Utah's property tax structure. One of those is what is referred to as the "residential exemption." Every Utahn's primary residence is granted an exemption of 45% of the value of their residential property. This means that someone with more than modest means and owns a $20 million mansion will recieve a $900,000 exemption from property tax. Some states have decided upon a lump sum exemption for residential property which makes the property tax much more progressive, but Utah values it's mansions and those who occupy them.
Other interesting things about Utah's property tax, is that it is not gauged for inflation. The tax rate setting process allows no increase for the increases in cost. Local government is then required to provide the same services as last year with the same resources, but have to pay their staff additional wages to compensate for increases in the cost of living. The result is that local governments often have to resort in increasing various fees to make up the difference. And fees are inherently regressive.
Also of note is the fact that secondary residential properties receive no residential exemption. As a result, someone who owns a $150,000 home in Murray who also owns a $85,000 cabin east of Kamas, may find themselves paying more property tax for their cabin than for their primary residence.
Another interesting aspect of the property tax process is that small and large business, without any exemptions, pay full property tax on their personal property (equipment, furniture and fixtures, etc.) and are required to keep track of what equipment they keep, and what equipment they discard on "personal property affidavits" that they file with their country assessors. However, influential companies often approach their county assessors or the Tax Commission and seek special consideration. County Commissions, operating as the county's "board of equalization" is often likely to give special favors to businesses with "clout" in their county. In this regard, there are some significant inequities in Utah's property tax administration. Utahns are rarely aware of the degree to which their own county commissioners have the power to reduce the tax burden upon prominent businesses and push that burden upon the other property owners living in their county. And their local press is rarely aware of these decisions and provide adequate oversight.
There are exemptions from property tax that are significant and notable. Farmers pay virtually no property tax. Their equipment is exempt from property tax as is their livestock. The value of their land is appraised on the basis of it's agricultural production value, referred to as "greenbelt." Whenever I hear farmers or ranchers complain about taxes, I pretty much roll my eyes because they are exempt from just about every tax imaginable, and even receive federal subsidies. Pay taxes, and then you have a right to complain about the government. However, what the exemption farmers receive regarding greenbelt (land values) creates a situation where if that land is developed and used for non-agricultural purposes, back taxes are due and is a major irritant to developers and farmers seeking to cash in on the value of their land. It is referred to as roll-back taxes and it is a deterrent to development, but also keeps land ihn agricultural use long after it is feasible.
Property tax is a "constitutional tax" in Utah, which means that it is based upon Article XIII of the Utah State Constitution. Exemptions to the property tax therefore cannot be based upon statutory provision but must require an amendment to Utah's Constitution. The variance from this is an exemption given to the blind that is based upon statute. If that statute was ever challenged, it would certainly be viewed as unconstitutional. Howevand er, no one so far has seen property the most economical use of property. Holding property for mere speculative purposes becomes expensive. Hoardng land comes with a cost. Major corporations like Kennecott find it in their interests to lease their land to farmers adjacent to their operations and have them as buffer zones occupied in agriculture. This aspect of Utah's property tax laws encourages "green space" which many of us find valuable.
Anyway, these are some of my thoughts and analysis regarding Utah's property tax. I welcome the input of other bloggers.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
And the Winner Is?
Everyone who didn't have the last name Clinton, could see the writing on the wall. Hillary's monumental sense of entitlement may have shown that she is a fighter, but it also showed how little political savvy she has. The only rational explanation for her behavior, is that she wished to harm Barak Obama's campaign in hopes that she would defeat an aged President McCain in 2012. Atleast that is my take.
There have been several things that have puzzled me with the latter stages of the nomination process.
1)Why do people give a rat's patootie what someone's religious leader has to say on something? We willingingly accept people who believe that there was a worldwide flood, who believe a Godman born to a virgin saves people from the sin committed by some ancient ancestor. Let's listen to what the candidates claim they believe, not focus on what the religious nuts they've hanged with believe.
2)What do blue collar whites and hispanics see in Hillary that they don't in Obama? This was and is a puzzling phenoma I haven't figured out. Is racism among the so-called blue-collar Reagan democrats so pronounced that our Republic isn't ready for a person who is 50% of African descent? And what message resonated with hispanics with Hillary. I truly would welcome some enlightenment there, because on that one, I have no clue.
3)Hillary is no gentleman. No really. There was a gentleman's agreement that candidates would take their names off of the Michigan ballot. Gentleman's agreements don't apply to Hillary, because I suppose, she's no gentleman. But she wants a full delegation sat in proportion to the votes of this illegal primary. And don't get me started on Florida.
4)And being first lady makes you a foreign policy expert? I'm assuming that if John McCain gets elected, we can look forward to Laura Bush being our next Secretary of State. Sure.
5)I never realized just how polarized we are. Barak Obama talks about a new type of inclusive politics. He's got his work cut out for him. I'm guilty of it too. It's us against them. Out politically charged social apparatus both in the media and in cyber-space creates alot of heat, and little light. Changing the focus of our collective energy as a country will be a difficult thing to accomplish.
As a finishing note, I'm encouraged to know that the reign of error that is the legacy of George W. Bush is coming to an end. McCain doesn't appear to be much better, but I really don't know what he believes. He's changed his tune many times. But I can't believe that he could be worse than George W. Bush. I don't know too many people who would be.
Of the things I am most proud, I can say emphatically, that I had the honor twice in my lifetime, of voting against George W. Bush. And I look forward to voting for Barak Obama in November.
There have been several things that have puzzled me with the latter stages of the nomination process.
1)Why do people give a rat's patootie what someone's religious leader has to say on something? We willingingly accept people who believe that there was a worldwide flood, who believe a Godman born to a virgin saves people from the sin committed by some ancient ancestor. Let's listen to what the candidates claim they believe, not focus on what the religious nuts they've hanged with believe.
2)What do blue collar whites and hispanics see in Hillary that they don't in Obama? This was and is a puzzling phenoma I haven't figured out. Is racism among the so-called blue-collar Reagan democrats so pronounced that our Republic isn't ready for a person who is 50% of African descent? And what message resonated with hispanics with Hillary. I truly would welcome some enlightenment there, because on that one, I have no clue.
3)Hillary is no gentleman. No really. There was a gentleman's agreement that candidates would take their names off of the Michigan ballot. Gentleman's agreements don't apply to Hillary, because I suppose, she's no gentleman. But she wants a full delegation sat in proportion to the votes of this illegal primary. And don't get me started on Florida.
4)And being first lady makes you a foreign policy expert? I'm assuming that if John McCain gets elected, we can look forward to Laura Bush being our next Secretary of State. Sure.
5)I never realized just how polarized we are. Barak Obama talks about a new type of inclusive politics. He's got his work cut out for him. I'm guilty of it too. It's us against them. Out politically charged social apparatus both in the media and in cyber-space creates alot of heat, and little light. Changing the focus of our collective energy as a country will be a difficult thing to accomplish.
As a finishing note, I'm encouraged to know that the reign of error that is the legacy of George W. Bush is coming to an end. McCain doesn't appear to be much better, but I really don't know what he believes. He's changed his tune many times. But I can't believe that he could be worse than George W. Bush. I don't know too many people who would be.
Of the things I am most proud, I can say emphatically, that I had the honor twice in my lifetime, of voting against George W. Bush. And I look forward to voting for Barak Obama in November.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
