A radio program reported this week that marked the first anniversary of the re-election last year of President George W Bush. In many ways, it has been a tumultuous 12 months for the now second-term president, due in part to so many unforeseen events, including powerful hurricanes, the Indian Ocean tsunami and so many others acts of nature.

There are some political acts, too, which have not gone done well for Mr. Bush and his administration: The indictment last week of his vice president's chief of staff, the utter failure of his FEMA agency to effectively respond to the gulf coast storm, and the sputtering over the Bush plan to restructure social security among them. And who would have ever guessed during the Senate debate over the so-called "nuclear option", when the Democrats were pilloried over their desire to have some influence in Supreme Court nominations, that it was be President Bush's own party members who would exercise their own nuclear option by shooting down Harriet Miers nomination for that court before the Senate could ever formally discuss it?

It speaks to the abysmally low level of public discourse in this country that such matters never receive a full public airing; the exigencies of the 24-hour news cycle have brought public policy discussions to an all time low. It's no longer a question of hearing all sides in compelling public matters; it's become who shouts first, and loudest, that too often carries the day.

And the details of debate are often skewed by the political philosophies of those who report on it. In short, too much power is placed in the hands of people masquerading as journalists who instead have vested interests in the outcome of public policy debates: Al Franken of Air America, the ubiquitous Rush Limbaugh, the Sean Hannitys and Bill O'Reillys of the Fox news machine, and many others, all people who have a personal political agenda and a stake in being on the winning side of political arguments. In such cases, enormous power resides in the hands of those providing the information.

The hyperspeed news cycle is once again at work in the reports about Judge Alito, the new presidential nominee for the Supreme Court. Like him or oppose him, the factions are scrambling for shreds that will reveal compelling reasons to confirm or to deny him this important ninth seat on the nation's highest court. Let us hope that reason prevails, and the Senate takes its time and plays its proper constitutional role of advice and consent. And let us hope that some responsibility returns to public discourse in this great country.

-Ed Forry

Vote next Tuesday

Next Tuesday, November 8 is Election Day in Boston. Voters will have the opportunity to cast their votes for Mayor of Boston and for four at large City Council seats, as well as for district councillors.

For the past four months, this newspaper has presented our readers with complete interviews with each and every candidate, the two major mayoral contenders, the eight citywide Council candidates and the candidates on the ballot in district 3 and 4.

We know how we plan to vote, and we encourage you to make up your own mind and cast your own votes on Tuesday. To that end, we print today a sample ballot with the names of all the contenders.

The new paper ballots are easy to read, and the changes brought about by the City's Election Department in recent years have helped greatly to facilitate the election process.

Now, it's your turn- do your job, get out and vote next Tuesday. - E.F.