A strange thing about Welfare

 Something for Nothing

The MAGA crowd likes to complain about poor people getting something for nothing. They call it welfare and act as though receiving an unearned benefit is a moral failure.

But consider the son of a wealthy father who inherits millions of dollars. He did not earn that money. He did not work for it. He received it because he was lucky enough to be born into the right family.

How is that morally different from a struggling family receiving food assistance? In both cases, someone receives something he or she did not personally earn. The difference is that one recipient is rich and the other is poor.

We do not call an inheritance welfare because society respects wealth. We call food assistance welfare because it is easy to look down on people who need help.

The poor person may need assistance to feed children, recover from an illness or survive after losing a job. The rich heir may use his inheritance to buy a yacht or another mansion. Yet MAGA politicians condemn the first person while demanding tax breaks for the second.

If receiving something you did not earn is wrong, it should be wrong for everyone. If it is acceptable for the children of the wealthy, then we should stop shaming struggling families for accepting help.

You cannot honestly defend one and condemn the other. That is not principle. It is hypocrisy.

Far West River boat

 

Payson's wonderful Elk

One of the nicest things about Payson, AZ are the Elk

 

Denise the Republican lying scoundrel

Years ago Kadizzle was upset with gun control. After his daughters school was lockdown over a gun incident Kadizzle stopped at Republican headquarters in Payson to discuss gun control with the right wing Hoopleheads. Things started out ok, but then a Hooplehead woman said " Guns are not the problem, it is mental illness" Kadizzle replied " You are right, 70 million mentally ill people voted for Trump".  An argument errupted and the Republican called the police to have Kadizzle arrested for trespassing. When the case reached court the prosecutor dropped the entire thing. That was the end of it. The head of the Republican Party, Gary Morris, started a lying campaign to attack Kadizzle. Morris pulled every dirty trick in the book. Gary Morris found someone in North Dakota with the exact same name. Morris lied on the radio, and elsewhere claiming Kadizzle had been arrested in North Dakota for assault. Morris went on to set up another false episode that involved Senator Cramer in North Dakota. It is a long story, but Gary Morris was proven to be a pathological liar and he resigned from the position he had with the Republican party. It is a long story and all the details about the lying campaign take to long to write down. 

Now to the current situation. A local woman, Denise Alexander has tried to reignite the entire fabrication Gary Morris started. It did not work for Morris, and Denise for some odd reason thinks she can get the rumors started again.  The problem Morris, and Denise both faced is the public record does not support the lies, unless just half the story is told. There is no record of a conviction anywhere for Kadizzle. Republican have more than once created false police reports successfully, but in court they always fail. Denise tells the first part of the story, but never tells the happy ending when the judges recognize the false accusations and dismiss the nonsense. The judges know it is political theater. Local Republican have used Trump's technique of using the justice system to harass people. Denise loves the idea. Kadizzle has offered Denise to meet in front of the Tea Party and try to defend her lies, but like every right wing liar she does not want to be publicly embarrassed. 

 

Trump's motorcycle gang

 

Addiction

Kadizzle has an addiction. Toying with the minds of the MAGA mentally ill is the addiction. Denise is a special case. Denise loves the Republican MAGA system of telling part of a story. She is obsessed with my encounter with Senator Cramer. One thing about Denise is she will not meet me personally and hear the entire story. This is classic MAGA lying. Like every MAGA she leaves out the important parts of the story. First what was the incident about? A woman in tears with a small baby pleaded with Senator Cramer for health care. Kadizzle got fed up with Cramer dodging the woman and put 23 dollars down Cramer's shirt collar. This story was blown out of proportion by right wing liars like Denise. Cramer himself said on Rob Port's radio show Kadizzle never assaulted him, but years later a famous local liar found the incident. Gary Morris the head of the MAGA crowd in Payson found the incident and pumped it up by claiming Kadizzle was arrested for assault. Ever since then people like Denise have been spreading the false narration. The Republicans have used the police in Payson and the courts as a weapon against Kadizzle. Kadizzle has suffered several incidents of Gary Morris making false claims to the police. These claims are made and then dismissed in court. Denise always makes   a point of telling the first part of the story, but never tells the ending. Kadizzle has a great surprise for the Denise style liars. It is best not to disclose the surprise now, but it will end their game. Stay tunned. 

The Gary Morris story is a good example of how the MAGA lying works. Gary Morris had something on the local judge, so when Gary Morris lied in court the judge never questioned it. The judge realized this could end badly for him, so when Kadizzle went to court against Morris the last time, a judge from Scottsdale came to Payson to hear the case. Kadizzle presented his case claiming Gary Morris was a pathological liar. The honest judge understood. Kadizzle even had a witness testify about how Morris lied. Kadizzle won the case. Denise never mentions this, and Gary Morris quit lying about Kadizzle. There will be another major court case about the Payson liars. It may blast the liars out of the water. Stay tunned. 

The Last Supper

 A fresh wind is blowing in Payson. The Tea Party gang has been decimated. Young progressive men have replaced all but one of the Tea Party activist. What does this mean? Payson can move forward. The new mayor can make the town into a place for everyone, not just those on the verge of bankruptcy. At the Last Supper, I mean town council meeting Steve Otto declared " Forgive them for they know not what they do".  Wrong, we finally have good people who do know what to do. 

Taxes

 

YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR

You get what you pay for. That is true when buying tires, building a bridge, or running a country.

Americans demand first-class results while insisting on bargain-basement government. Then we act surprised when our roads deteriorate, families cannot afford health care, children live in poverty, and homeless people sleep on the streets.

The United States is one of the least-taxed wealthy democracies. According to the OECD, total American tax revenue amounted to 25.6 percent of our economy in 2024. The OECD average was 34.1 percent. Norway collected 40.2 percent and Finland 42.2 percent.

What do people in those countries receive for their taxes? They receive health coverage, stronger retirement security, better family assistance, affordable education and a far more reliable social safety net.

Taxes are not simply money taken away from us. Taxes are how we purchase together what most families cannot afford individually.

Consider health care. The United States spends approximately $14,885 per person on health care—more than any other OECD country. That is 17.2 percent of our entire economy. Yet American life expectancy is only 78.4 years. Life expectancy is 81.6 years in Finland and 83.1 years in Norway.

We spend more and die sooner. That is not frugality. It is failure.

The American infant mortality rate is about 5.5 deaths for every 1,000 births. Recent OECD figures put Finland’s rate below two deaths per 1,000 births. A baby born in the richest country in the world should not face a greater risk of dying simply because we refuse to build a better health-care system.

Poverty tells the same story. The OECD found that approximately 18 percent of Americans lived in relative poverty, compared with only about 5 to 7 percent in Finland. More than one in five American children was classified as income-poor. Government assistance and a fair tax system dramatically reduce poverty in countries willing to make that investment.

Homelessness is another bill we refuse to pay until it becomes an emergency. The Department of Housing and Urban Development counted 771,480 homeless Americans on a single night in January 2024.

Finland took a different approach. Its Housing First program gives homeless people stable housing before requiring them to solve every other problem in their lives. Finland reduced homelessness by roughly 80 percent between 1986 and 2023.

The definitions and counting methods differ between countries, but the lesson is still clear: homelessness is not an unavoidable act of nature. It is a problem that public policy can reduce.

We also need to be honest about who benefits from our tax system.

A nurse, mechanic or teacher has taxes removed from every paycheck. Wealthy investors can often delay paying taxes until they sell an asset. Most long-term capital gains are taxed federally at no more than 20 percent, while ordinary income can face a 37 percent rate. We have built a system that frequently treats income from owning wealth better than income from working.

The 2025 federal reconciliation law continued that priority. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that the law will reduce resources available to households near the bottom while increasing resources for households in the middle and near the top.

That is not an accident. It is a choice.

When children grow up hungry, schools lack resources, mental illness goes untreated, and working families cannot afford rent, we still pay. We pay through emergency rooms, shelters, police departments, jails, lost productivity and destroyed lives.

Our choice is not between paying taxes and paying nothing. Our choice is whether we pay early to prevent problems or pay much more later for the consequences.

We always seem able to find money for bombs, wars, tax shelters and political monuments. We can admire gold-plated ballrooms while telling working people that health care, housing and education are unaffordable.

Would I pay more in taxes for universal health care, good schools, safe housing and a country where children do not go hungry? Yes.

But the wealthy and large corporations should pay their fair share first. Working families should not be pushed backward, and public money must be managed honestly and efficiently.

I would rather pay taxes so a child can see a doctor than pay for an emergency-room crisis. I would rather pay for housing than a jail cell. I would rather hire a teacher than another prison guard.

Norway and Finland are not perfect countries, and taxes alone do not solve every problem. But they demonstrate what happens when people treat health, education, housing and economic security as investments instead of handouts.

America is not poor. We have the money. Our tax laws and budgets simply reveal our priorities.

For decades, we have excused wealth from much of its responsibility and sent the bill for the consequences to working people.

We are getting what we pay for—and what we refuse to pay for.

Sources: OECD Revenue Statistics 2025; OECD Health at a Glance 2025; OECD Society at a Glance 2024; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 2024 homelessness report; Finland Housing Finance and Development Centre homelessness report; Congressional Budget Office analysis of Public Law 119-21; IRS Topic 409 on capital gains.

The principal figures are supported by the OECD tax comparison, OECD health statistics, OECD poverty comparison, HUD homelessness report, and Congressional Budget Office analysis.

Don't Ever Rent from Budget

After a long flight from Phoenix to Pittsburg I went to the Budget Car rental counter to pick up a Toyota Tacoma. I needed the truck with four wheel drive because I was going to visit a difficult place to get to in the hills of West Virginia. My mission was to go to a memorial for my older brother who recently died. 

When I arrived at the Budget counter there was a long line of frustrated people waiting to get cars. After about an hour it was my turn. The Budget people explained some employees did not show up for work, so they were understaffed. I was then told the truck I reserved was not available and I could not get a truck. Budget assigned me a car. After I made the trip to the garage where I was to pick up the car I again found people waiting. It was a warm day and everyones frustration was increasing with the poor service.  After another frustrating wait the manager of the car dispersement system told another pissed off customer that he would award them two free days of rental. Next I asked him for the same treatment. He agreed. 

I expected Budget to honor what he said, but later found out Budget had no intention of honoring what the man said. I corresponded with Budget and was told I needed proof the man made that deal. How in the hell would I prove it. I had no idea that at the time I should have told the man " Put that in writing".  I was already two hours late because of Budget's poor service, now I have to fight them? 

Budget has a simple way to get the proof they need. Budget can call Budget at the Pittsburg airport and ask the man who made the promise. Simple, but no the cheap bastards want to screw me. 

Fix the Future

Keep the Malibu Property for Payson’s Future

Payson’s newly elected council has an opportunity to look beyond short-term fixes and make decisions that will serve the community for generations. Fiscal responsibility is important, but saving money today can become very expensive when a temporary solution fails to meet tomorrow’s needs.

Repairing the aging Taylor Pool may appear to be the least expensive option, but it is a short-term answer to a long-term problem. Payson will continue to grow, and that growth will require additional recreational facilities, public services and infrastructure.

The town already owns approximately 21 acres along Malibu Drive next to the existing municipal complex. This property should not be sold or committed to private development. It should be preserved for a carefully planned civic campus.

A new aquatic center could be the first phase. Its parking could later serve an indoor recreation center and other public facilities. A shared building could provide locker rooms, showers and restrooms for the pool, recreation center and outdoor facilities. Water, sewer, utilities, maintenance and access roads could also be planned together.

Clustering public facilities is generally more efficient than scattering them across town and duplicating parking, utilities and support services at every location. Thoughtful planning now could save Payson millions of dollars in the decades ahead.

The new council is not obligated to continue every proposal advanced by the previous council. It has both the authority and the responsibility to reconsider those plans in light of Payson’s long-term interests.

The Malibu property is a rare public asset. Once it is sold or developed for another purpose, it may never be recovered. Payson should keep it, plan it carefully and preserve it for the community’s future.

Busted Flat in Payson

 Busted flat in Payson

Waiting for the rain

Steve Otto's hope for victory

Went down the drain.

Pornography at the library

another Jim Ferris dream

Things at the Tea Party 

Are never what they seem. 

KMOG sang every lie

The Tea Party knew

The red town 

 Up and voted blue

What in the hell

Could Charlie Bell do?

People smiled 

Then they screamed

The Tea Party was gone

Is what they dreamed.

 

Payson is rid of the stooges

The Three Stooges Are Gone. Now the Real Work Begins.

Payson voters have spoken, and the political landscape has changed. With Brett Flaherty elected mayor, the town now has an opportunity to move beyond the divisions that have consumed so much time and energy.

For all the money spent and all the accusations that were thrown around, the Three Stooges ultimately could not convince the people of Payson. In the end, voters looked past the rhetoric and made their own decision about the direction they wanted their community to take.

If there was one turning point, it was the attack on the library. What may have been intended as a political rallying point became a rallying cry for those who believed the library should remain a place of learning rather than a political battlefield. Jim Ferris's angry outburst and dramatic exit from the council meeting only reinforced the impression that emotion had replaced reason. Instead of strengthening their cause, it became a self-inflicted wound that many voters remembered.

Elections are about choices, but they are also about accountability. Payson has now made its choice.

The challenge ahead is not to relive old political fights or settle scores. It is to restore trust in local government, encourage respectful debate, and focus on the issues that matter most—public safety, responsible growth, fiscal stewardship, strong town services, and preserving the quality of life that makes Payson such a special place to live.

Winning an election is only the beginning. Governing well is the real test.

The Three Stooges have had their day. Now it is time for Payson to look forward instead of backward and build a future that benefits the entire community.

Back in Hillbilly land

 

Kadizzle's Journey Back Into the Hills

Kadizzle took a strange journey yesterday into the hills of Ritchie County, West Virginia. One thing kept catching the eye over and over again—the trees.

West Virginia is slowly becoming what it was when the first settlers arrived. For nearly a century, the forests have been reclaiming the land. Fields that once grew corn, hay, and cattle are now swallowed by towering hardwoods. Nature has quietly taken back what man once cleared.

Kadizzle stopped at the old farm where so many summer days were spent growing up. It sat a hundred miles from our home in Wheeling, yet it felt like a second home. Trees that we planted as tiny seedlings are now giants—seventy feet tall and nearly two feet in diameter. In many places the forest has become so thick it rivals a jungle, hiding old roads, fence lines, and memories beneath a blanket of green.

But the drive down the Ohio River brought another surprise.

Contrary to the image many people have of West Virginia, the communities along the river did not appear trapped in poverty. The chemical plants were operating, coal country still showed signs of life, and what struck Kadizzle most were the homes. Yards were neatly trimmed. Houses were well cared for. The towns looked cleaner and more orderly than they did decades ago.

It was a mystery.

What had changed? Had people simply taken greater pride in their communities? Or perhaps those endless forests were hiding the abandoned places that once seemed to dot every hillside. Whatever the reason, it wasn't the West Virginia Kadizzle remembered.

While waiting in Harrisville for the rest of the family to catch up, Kadizzle wandered into the Ritchie County Courthouse to look up old mineral rights records. Walking through the courthouse felt like stepping back in time. Very little has changed since the building was completed in the 1920s. While browsing through historical displays, Kadizzle stumbled onto an unexpected fact—the courthouse was designed by architects from Wheeling. It's a small reminder of how connected the communities of West Virginia once were.

Then it was on to Hazel Green.

The old country store now stands abandoned, another casualty of changing times. But just up the hollow, the Bird family was sitting on the porch.

That stopped Kadizzle in his tracks.

His nephew Kevin mentioned that Roger Bird wanted to talk. Suddenly decades melted away. Roger remembered playing ball with Kadizzle and his brother. Kadizzle couldn't recall those games, but Roger could.

Back then, we were the city kids from Wheeling, and to the Bird family we must have seemed as out of place as visitors from another planet.

The Birds are living pieces of Appalachian history. Roger and his brother grew up in the old house high in the hollow, without electricity and largely cut off from the outside world. Somehow, someone eventually managed to gravel the road to their home. Beyond that point, however, the road to our old farm has surrendered to time. Today it is little more than a rugged trail. Unless you have a capable four-wheel-drive vehicle—or better yet, a side-by-side—you aren't making it very far.

Standing there, surrounded by towering timber and old memories, Kadizzle couldn't help but feel that he had traveled much farther than one hundred miles.

He had traveled back in time.

More later...

I want to wake up in the morning where the rhododendron grows.

 

Whistledicks and Conniption Fits

Old Kadizzle will soon be heading back to the hills of West Virginia, and it has me thinking about the colorful characters and even more colorful language I grew up with.

My brother and I spent many hot summer days putting up hay for an old hill farmer named Lutrel Davis. Lutrel owned the kind of country store you hardly see anymore. There was a pot-bellied stove where the old-timers gathered to swap stories, solve the world's problems, and invent a few new ones. If you wanted to learn the mountain vocabulary, all you had to do was pull up a chair.

Lutrel had a favorite word that always made me laugh.

"Whistledick."

He used it to describe someone who wasn't exactly blessed with an abundance of common sense. Nobody seems to know where the word came from, but folks in the hills always knew exactly what it meant.

That sent Kadizzle down the rabbit hole looking up old Appalachian expressions. Along the way I stumbled across another classic: conniption fit—a dramatic outburst of anger when someone doesn't get their way.

Then it hit me.

Those two old mountain expressions came together perfectly at the last Payson Town Council meeting.

Councilman Jim Ferris threw what can only be described as a first-class conniption fit after his latest attempt to defund the library went nowhere. When the votes didn't go his way, he stormed out of the meeting and slammed the door behind him.

Back in Lutrel Davis's country store, the old-timers would have smiled, nodded, and said, "Looks like that whistledick just had himself a conniption fit."

Some words never go out of style.

Ferris Explodes

Ferris Storms Out

Last night's Payson Town Council meeting ended with an unexpected bit of political theater.

Councilman Jim Ferris didn't just lose the vote—he lost his temper. After seeing it become clear that the council was rejecting another effort aimed at the library, Ferris stormed out of the meeting and slammed the door behind him. It was a dramatic ending to a campaign that has repeatedly failed to gain support.

The strategy has become familiar. First came claims that the library contained "pornography." That accusation went nowhere because the facts didn't support it. Rather than moving on, Ferris and his allies shifted to a new controversy, raising fears about drag queen story hours and suggesting the library should be punished financially because of positions taken by national library organizations.

The problem is that this argument attempts to solve an issue that doesn't exist in Payson. It's a political formula seen often in recent years: create a controversy, amplify public outrage, and then present yourself as the person who will fix it. When the controversy falls apart, simply move on to the next one.

Fortunately, a majority of the Town Council refused to take the bait. They voted against the proposal, choosing to focus on the actual operation of Payson's library rather than national political talking points.

Ferris frequently presents himself as a man guided by Christian values. Every voter is free to decide whether his conduct at the meeting reflected those values. Storming out of a public meeting after failing to persuade your colleagues does not strike many people as an example of patience, humility, or respectful leadership.

In the end, the loudest statement of the evening wasn't made from the council dais. It was the sound of the council chamber door slamming shut behind a frustrated councilman.

Mayor Steve Otto, and Gary Morris. Two world class liars.

 To the Editor:

One of the most troubling developments in today's political climate is the normalization of dishonesty. Too often, facts are replaced by rumor, distortion, and outright falsehoods. That style of politics has become closely associated with the MAGA movement, where loyalty sometimes appears to matter more than truth.

I have personally experienced this. Two well-known local individuals repeatedly spread false statements about me. When I confronted each of them directly with evidence showing their claims were untrue, neither acknowledged the facts or apologized. Instead, they portrayed being confronted with the truth as if they were the victims.

One example illustrates the problem. A local rumor-monger searched public records until he found someone in another state who happened to have the same name as mine. That unrelated individual had assault charges. Despite knowing—or having every reason to know—that it was a different person, he circulated the story as though it referred to me. Another individual repeated the same falsehood. Even after the deception was exposed, neither corrected the record or apologized.

The irony is that the truth is not difficult to discover. Anyone can examine the public records and determine what is true and what is false. But doing that spoils the game. Falsehoods are far more useful to those who rely on character assassination than verified facts. Once a lie is repeated often enough, some people begin to accept it without ever checking the evidence for themselves.

Healthy political debate depends on honest disagreement, not fabricated accusations. We can disagree about policies, candidates, and priorities, but we should never accept lying as a legitimate political strategy. Our community deserves better.

The clouds lifted for Doug

 Here's a tighter, more polished version that keeps your satirical voice while improving flow and readability. I've softened a couple of statements that could otherwise read as assertions of criminal conduct rather than opinion.

Trump's Greatest Grift?

Donald Trump may be the greatest political grifter of our time.

Reading the New York Times this morning, columnist Thomas Friedman highlighted just how profitable Trump's cryptocurrency ventures have been—not for the people who bought into them, but for Trump himself.

As Friedman noted:

"Nearly 1 million people who bought President Trump's memecoin have lost money through the end of June... Their losses total $3.81 billion... Trump signed a financial disclosure revealing that the same crypto bet dealt him a $636 million payout. In all, his business ventures brought him at least $2.2 billion in 2025."

Think about that. According to those figures, nearly a million supporters collectively lost billions while Trump personally walked away with hundreds of millions.

That's quite a business model.

Then Doug stopped by the Kadizzle house yesterday.

Doug has been one of those folks who swallowed nearly every conspiracy theory and every Trump talking point, hook, line, and sinker. But yesterday something had changed.

Even Doug finally said, "Enough is enough."

Then came the real surprise.

Doug told Kadizzle he had realized that the Three Stooges running for town council are nothing more than Trump-style followers trying to imitate the same brand of politics right here in our own town.

Kadizzle nearly fell out of his chair.

If the clouds can part for Doug, maybe there's still hope for the rest of America.

If you're aiming for maximum political punch, I can also rewrite it in your sharper "Kadizzle" satirical style, with more humor and bite.

We Need aah. Does Payson have a plan?

Does Payson Have a Master Plan?

Great communities are not built by accident. Rome had a plan. Washington, D.C. had a plan. The question is: Does Payson have a plan?

Too often, Payson appears to operate under what might be called the "We Needa" approach to government. We need a pool. We need an RV park. We need a water line. One project after another is proposed without first asking how it fits into a long-term vision for the community.

A master plan is more than a collection of projects. It is a roadmap that guides growth, protects valuable land, saves taxpayers money, and ensures that today's decisions do not become tomorrow's regrets. Good planning identifies where parks, recreational facilities, public buildings, roads, utilities, and future expansion should occur before development pressures force hasty decisions.

Without a master plan, communities often make short-term choices that limit future opportunities. Land that could serve generations of residents may be committed to uses that provide only temporary benefits. Facilities become scattered rather than centralized, increasing costs and reducing efficiency.

The debate over town-owned property near the police department highlights the issue. Before deciding what to do with valuable public land, shouldn't Payson determine how that land fits into a long-term vision for the town? Someday that property could be needed for a recreation center, a swimming pool, public safety facilities, or other civic purposes. Once it is committed to another use, that opportunity may be gone forever.

The real question is not whether Payson needs an RV park, a pool, or any other individual project. The real question is whether those projects fit into a comprehensive plan for the future.

Successful towns don't simply react to today's needs. They plan for tomorrow's opportunities. Payson deserves a master plan that looks beyond the next project and toward the next generation.

The Explosive Question

 Was "Did You Vote for Trump?" a Fair Question?

At the Donuts with Democrats meeting last Saturday, candidates for Town Council were taking questions from the audience. Then came a question that seemed to catch everyone off guard:

"Did you vote for Trump?"

Two of the candidates openly identified themselves as Republicans. A third claimed to be an independent. The room full of Democrats seemed surprised that such a direct question had been asked.

One candidate openly admitted that he voted for Trump the first time, but would not do so again. Another Republican candidate danced around the question and never really provided a direct answer. The independent candidate also avoided giving a clear response.

Afterward, some people questioned whether the woman should have asked the question at all. I disagree. In fact, I think it was one of the most revealing questions of the entire meeting.

Why?

Because elections are about more than smiling faces and campaign slogans. Voters are trying to determine how candidates think, what values they hold, and how they are likely to govern once they take office.

Donald Trump is not just another politician. He is one of the most influential and controversial political figures in modern American history. Whether a person supported him, opposed him, or supported him once and later changed their mind tells voters something about that person's judgment, priorities, and political philosophy.

The answers themselves proved why the question was legitimate.

One candidate candidly admitted he voted for Trump the first time but would not do so again. Whether voters agree with that position or not, they learned something meaningful about him. They learned that he was willing to answer honestly and that his views may have evolved over time.

Another candidate apparently preferred not to answer directly. The independent candidate also chose not to give a clear response. That reluctance was revealing in its own way. Voters can draw their own conclusions.

The important point is that there was no wrong answer. A candidate could have proudly said yes. A candidate could have proudly said no. A candidate could have said they voted for Trump once and regretted it. What matters is that voters receive honest information.

Some argue that Town Council races are nonpartisan and that national politics should stay out of local elections. That sounds good in theory, but in reality political beliefs influence how elected officials view taxes, development, public spending, law enforcement, libraries, parks, and dozens of other local issues.

Political philosophy does not disappear simply because the office is local.

The woman who asked the question was not being rude. She was doing exactly what citizens are supposed to do in a democracy: gathering information about the people asking for her vote.

Democracy is not strengthened when candidates avoid difficult questions. Democracy is strengthened when citizens ask them.

If candidates want the public's trust, they should be willing to answer the public's questions. The voters can then decide for themselves what those answers mean.

That is not unfair.

That is accountability.

The Grey Ghetto

The Three Stooges and the Grey Ghetto Mentality

There is nothing wrong with being old. In fact, many of Payson's retirees built successful businesses, raised families, served in the military, and helped create the community we enjoy today. Age is not the problem.

The problem is that Councilmen Otto, Bell, and Ferris seem to govern as if nobody in Payson has a pulse. Their vision of the future appears to be a town frozen in time, where nothing changes, nothing grows, and every new idea is treated as a threat.

Some residents jokingly call Payson a "Grey Ghetto." While that description is unfair to many retirees, it captures the mindset the Three Stooges seem determined to promote. Their political base often consists of people living on the financial edge, worried about every penny of government spending and terrified that any change might somehow destroy the community.

What makes this especially strange is that Payson is no longer a poor little mountain town. This is a community where homes routinely sell for a million dollars or more. At any given time there can be dozens of homes on the market priced above two million dollars. Wealthy retirees, professionals, and successful business owners have chosen to live here because Payson offers beauty, recreation, and a high quality of life.

Yet the Three Stooges continue to act as though Payson is one step away from becoming a ghost town if the library buys a new book or the town invests in a park.

Their political playbook is predictable. If there is a problem, blame immigrants. If someone disagrees with them, accuse them of being radical. If the library acquires a controversial book, declare that civilization is collapsing because of pornography. If all else fails, dust off the latest Tea Party conspiracy theory and present it as settled fact.

Meanwhile, the real issues facing Payson receive far less attention. How do we attract younger families? How do we create amenities that increase property values? How do we make the town attractive to professionals, entrepreneurs, and visitors? How do we plan for the next twenty years instead of reliving the last twenty?

Instead of discussing those questions, the public is treated to endless culture-war theater. Residents hear more about imaginary threats than actual opportunities.

The irony is that the people pushing this fearful message benefit enormously from the prosperity of Payson. They enjoy the roads, parks, police services, medical facilities, and property values that come from a growing and successful community. Yet they often oppose the very investments that would make the town even better.

A healthy community requires vision. It requires leaders willing to think beyond the next election and beyond the latest outrage circulating on social media. It requires leaders who see Payson as a place with a future, not merely a retirement community waiting for the clock to run out.

Payson deserves leadership that believes the town can grow, improve, and thrive. The Three Stooges seem content to manage decline while blaming outsiders for every problem.

That may be good politics for the Tea Party crowd, but it is a poor strategy for the future of Payson.