Last week, President Bush and the House of Representatives put together a package designed to stimulate the economy, and the Senate is considering the package as we speak (if you read this aloud).

The package would cost the government approximately $150 billion, or about $500 for every human in the United States.

Then Monday, President Bush made his full budget proposal, and this full budget would come to about $3 trillion. The budget deficit would get even bigger than it is now. It would expand from the current $167 billion to more than $400 billion.

That is to say, President Bush is proposing that about 13 percent of the money needed would have to come from borrowing. The $150 billion stimulus package can be seen, then, as a part of that amount that we would be borrowing.

And we all know that, in a sense, the government seldom actually repays what it borrows. It does, of course, repay a specific debt -- we never have any trouble cashing in our savings bonds -- but, in a typical year, the government borrows from Peter to pay Paul, and it seldom actually pays down its debt. That means the interest just keeps mounting.

Our current political leaders have talked about building a democracy in Iraq if the Iraqi people are ready for democracy. But the more immediate question would be closer to home.

Are we ready for democracy in the United States?

For a democracy to function well, the democracy should be meeting four conditions. First, those voting should be able to do so freely, without being punished for their votes.

We in the U.S. seem to be doing OK on that one. The secret ballot is the key here, of course.

The Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary are big news because of their results. And that is as it should be. But there are two aspects of the campaigns that really deserve some comment, even though they easily might escape our notice.

The first is our unblinking acceptance of "The Mod Squad." When a TV show of that name ran in the late '60s and early '70s, it showed off just how hip it was by advertising the three police heroes of the series were "One white, one black and one blond."

We have had white, black and blond candidates for president before, of course, but this time we have candidates of those persuasions as the top three candidates for the Democratic nomination who are serious candidates with a real chance to win. A white candidate will win the Republican nomination, and in all likelihood we will have a black candidate (well, sort of) or a blond candidate (well, sort of) win the Democratic nomination.

Last week, at least two things happened that had nothing to do with the season, surprising as that may be. But both of them concern education. Since education concerns me, I will pass on this information and a bit of comment.

First, the PISA study results were released. PISA is the Programme for International Student Assessement, and it was created by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. The United States participates in both the umbrella organization and in this study.

PISA arranges with countries to test a random sampling of 15-year-olds in math, science and reading. It began in the year 2000, and then it has been done again in 2003 and 2006. The 2006 results are the ones that were just released.

"Everybody has a right to his own opinion," one hears often enough, especially if one happens to be talking about Iraq, civil liberties or wind power.

But does everyone have such a right? At the risk of sounding like President Clinton trying to slither out of a tight ethical squeeze by saying "it depends on what you mean by 'is'," I have to say that it depends on what you mean by "right."

Although we talk about rights pretty easily, if one really tries to figure it out, you find that there are significantly different types of rights, that people can mean significantly different things when they talk about rights.

"So Kansans would have 15 percent of the energy and 100 percent of the pollution and environmental impact of 11 million new tons of CO2 each year," Gov. Kathleen Sebelius wrote in An open letter to the people of Kansas.

Society exists so that we can live better than we could live alone. We cooperate, but as soon as we do not all do exactly the same thing -- as soon, that is, as there is a division of labor -- we have to figure out who carries the heavier burdens.

And when we have divided up the tasks, when one person sows and another reaps, then we also have to figure out how we should divide up the benefits of the cooperation.

My phone rang. "Hold that thought, Rudy," I said, "I have to take this call. It's my wife, and you of all people should understand that." Chuckle, chuckle.

"Hi, Honey. You sound upset." Covering the speaker, I said to Rudy, "Rudy, this may take a while. Help yourself to some nuts."

Back to my better half. "Oh, you were at the county commission meeting. Now calm down and tell me what happened. Keith Pfannenstiel and John Schmeidler spoke. That's nice. What did they talk about? Ah, the moratorium again. Yes again. They asked for a year's moratorium to allow time to establish a comprehensive plan and fix the zoning regulations before any big industry comes into Ellis County? I see. Makes sense, so what's the problem?

A few weeks ago, a published commentary by Dr. Thomas Krannawitter said some true and truly important things. The piece, Anti-Americanism in American Schools, by Dr. Krannawitter, a professor of political science at Hillsdale College and an FHSU graduate, appeared in the Aug. 24 edition of the HDN.

Dr. Krannawitter paints a striking picture, and a picture that conveys an important message, but he paints the picture, I think, with too broad a brush.

The heart of his position is his forceful rejection of "the hypothesis that what ordinary people believe is 'true' is nothing but their own cultural prejudices." Like Dr. Krannawitter, I believe that far too many people and far too much of our culture has adopted this sort of position.

As Dr. Krannawitter points out, there would seem to be an inherent contradiction in this sort of position. The relativist of this sort says that there is no such thing as real truth, as, that is, a correspondence between a thought or statement and reality. But then the relativist says that his position on this matter is true.

Well, you cannot have it both ways.

Yesterday, the County Commission in my county voted against approval of the application for a conditional-use permit to establish an industrial wind project west and southwest of my local community.

I have been following this issue since it first surfaced in March, and I have been involved in it. Based on the debate I have witnessed and joined in from time to time, I would like to suggest that there are four things my county ought to work on now.

Back in March, I wrote a column in which I argued that the development of the Internet has become a threat to the functioning of democracy.

Since then, three things have come along to make me give a little more thought to this argument. First of all, Ron Schott, who is my colleague at Fort Hays State University, offered an argument to the contrary and asked that I read a few things he sent along. Ron disagrees with my conclusions. Second, just last month a book came out that argues pretty much the same thesis I did. Andrew Keen's The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture goes beyond my thesis, but part of his argument is along the lines of mine.

Third, since the Internet piece was published in March, I have been a hesitant participant in a local battle that has been covered spottily and perhaps prejudicially by our local media.