2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I think that the point has been lost. This isn't about money, this is about families, and whether we value families and family values. One caller applauded how we had better standards of living than anywhere else in the world - but do we have better families? Are children and elderly better off when they are shoved off to facilities to get their early learning, or to die? Is our ability to buy a third car more important than spending time with those we (should) love and care for? If we really value families and family values, as you would think listening to presidential election campaigns, then this 2 cent tax, whether used by those paying it or not, should not matter.

posted 4 years, 1 month ago
view in context