by Matt Towery of Florida Insider

Will the proposed state constitutional amendment on same-sex marriages pass?

We don't know.

How's that for a dazzling lead?

Sorry, but guessing on Amendment 2 amounts to exactly that, a guess.

Okay, our guess is no, it won't pass. But we've demurred on polling the issue. The pattern on polling amendments in Florida is that the polls more times than not slightly undercount the 'yes' votes. (Probably because poll respondents get impatient with the details of often laborious amendment wordings and lose focus while on the phone.) If that pattern of poll undercounts sustains through Nov. 4, the ban may make the required 60% it needs to become state law.

It should be close, and not necessarily for any exciting reasons to do with bigoted conservatives or licentious liberals. Most proposed constitutional amendments get between 55% and 65% in the Florida. (Which is an endorsement of the new constitutional requirement that proposed amendments must win 60%, not the previous 50% plus one, to pass.)

Across America in recent years, constitutional bans on gay rights have usually served the secondary - or perhaps the primary - purpose of priming the pump of conservative turnout. We've read some analyses of the Nov. 4 vote in Florida that say McCain will benefit from the amendment being on the ballot.

Maybe. But we're more inclined to think McCain will benefit from Barack Obama being on the ballot, though it many not be enough for him to carry off the state's 27 electoral votes. Put another way, turnout is going to be huge, gay rights or not. The question this election cycle may be the reverse of in the past: Will the top of the ticket boost the amendment vote?

The answer is obviously yes. But big turnout by itself is an overrated phenomenon. Who or which side gets the disproportionately big turnout versus the other guy. That's the issue. And the likely answer to that is Obama and the pro-gay rights electorate.

Moneyed activism is overrated too, this time. Little education on gay rights is needed, or at least so voters think. The issue is moral, not financial. It's intuitively understood by most all. People already have their opinions on what's quickly becoming an old-hat issue. The money mostly affects turnout, and that's going to be high already.

The most interesting sidebar to this story is Gov. Charlie Crist - he of the unceasing and largely unfair rumors about his being or not being gay himself. The governor would seem to have the political golf ball all teed up to put the rumors to rest. Combined with his announced marriage plans, sticking to the party line and publicly opposing same-sex marriage would seem to have been the wise (if cynical) strategy; especially considering that Crist backed such bans when he campaigned for governor in 2005-2006. But he has since backed off this GOP fallback position. And he has repudiated his former stance with vague language that suggests…well, never mind.

Being the amoral political analysts that we are, we're less interested in the legalities of gay marriage than the politics of it. And as is often the case, today's winners may be tomorrow's losers, and vice versa.

If the gay marriage ban passes, gay activism in urban areas of Florida will manifest in legal action, sympathetic media attention, and probably some form of civil disobedience.

Remember that cities in places like Miami-Dade, Alachua and Monroe counties have civil ordinances that allow for domestic partnerships. Where a new constitutional amendment would leave those local laws will likely be a matter of one or probably more courts to decide.

But the public noise would remain, and so too would the activism and fundraising on both sides. Because media will be largely sympathetic to the pro-gay lobby, the conservatives will continue to be portrayed as embarrassingly reactionary.

Combine that with a much more important dynamic -- that national entertainment media have largely accepted gay lifestyles as mainstream (see the new Sean Penn film) -- and you've got the ingredients for gays winning the day in the long run, if by compromise with the unbending reality that gays are here, and they are many.

Morality aside, ultimately the issue is more accurately analogous to prohibition than to black civil rights. Gay rights are about behavior. Too many millions of people are gay to ever put this genie back in the bottle.

Where will it end? If it ever does, it will probably be with a gay rights version of Roe vs. Wade from a US Supreme Court gone liberal from Barack Obama appointees. Ultimately, gay rights must be legally a matter of civil rights, one way or the other (and contrary to the argument just above.) It has to be decided thumbs up or thumbs down. And civil or human rights issues end up in federal court, for better or for worse.

WakeUpDaytona! correspondents Tom Blawn and William Covert traveled to Kissimmee, FL Sunday afternoon to cover the visit of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin who was here to speak to Central Floridians about clear choices...the choice of Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin...and what the consequences of your choice in the voting booth may be over the short and long term. We have amazing audio of the speech and great interviews by Tom and William of the feelings of the people in attendance...William also captured some photo's from as little as 7 feet from the podium. You are free to download the audio and share it with your friends, or recommend that they come listen to it here at wakeupdaytona.com/palin Stay tuned...

Originally Posted by Joseph Farah: October 13, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
www.worldnetdaily.com
© 2008

Americans are searching for answers to the economic crisis characterized as the worst since the Great Depression.

But, as so often happens, we are looking in all the wrong places.

I know it's not fashionable to suggest the Bible as a source of wisdom on matters of contemporary concern. Ask me if I care.

While others are turning to their favorite economists for answers, I've been turning to the one and only inerrant book inspired by the sovereign Creator of the universe. I think everyone else is crazy for not looking there.

So what does the Bible say about our current economic morass?

For one thing, it explains how to avoid such catastrophes - and, I believe, how to fix this one.

First of all, you've got to understand the fundamental problem we have is one of gargantuan debt. That's the central problem in the mortgage scandal. It's the reason banks and investment houses are going out of business. It's the reason the stock market is failing. And it's the reason so many Americans, burdened by excessive credit-card debt, are hurting.

The Bible has much to say about debt. It has a radical solution for it, too. Though, I confess, I doubt many will be willing to listen - since our society moves further from the principles of the Bible on a daily basis.

But, for what it's worth, I'm going to offer it as my own prescription for the economic crisis that is now affecting the entire world. I know how America can reclaim its position as a shining city on a hill in that world right now in addressing its own financial problems - not just with a bailout Band-Aid, but with a permanent and lasting solution that is just, fair and compassionate.

The answer is found in Leviticus 25. It's called the year of jubilee. It is a system of forgiveness of debts that occurred in ancient Israel every 50 years. And, ironically, it just so happens a new year of jubilee began last week on Yom Kippur, or the Day of Atonement - the highest holy day in the Hebrew calendar.

Whether or not George Bush or John McCain or Barack Obama or Ben Bernanke could see our current crisis coming, God clearly could. He understood thousands of years ago that debt would ultimately spiral out of hand if left unchecked. So, along with many other important economic lessons we have forgotten, He gave us a prescription that would protect people from the kind of pain they are feeling today, from the kind of injustice our government is sticking us with today, from the kind of oppression all but the very wealthiest are experiencing today.

The jubilee year was part of the Sabbath system - something few Christians even understand today, despite the fact that honoring the Sabbath is still part of the Ten Commandments. The last day of the week, not the first, was to be kept holy, set apart from servile work, maintained as the Lord's day. Likewise, every seventh year was to be kept as a sabbatical for the land. No crops were to be grown, no orchards planted. Storehouses were to be maintained for grain and dried fruits and vegetables during the six non-sabbatical years for the seventh, eighth and even ninth years when the pattern of sowing and reaping would begin again.

Then there was yet another Sabbath. After seven cycles of sabbatical years - a total of 49 years - the 50th year was special in another way. The Hebrew year 5769, which commenced last Thursday, is one of these special jubilee years.

So what should happen according to God's prescription?

It's simple. But, as I said, it's radical. You will be told there are thousands of reasons we could never accept such a solution. And that's why we will continue to put Band-Aids on the patient who is rapidly bleeding to death.

In a year of jubilee, you declare all debts forgiven. Period. End of story. It was not only a year to set captives free and to end the bondage and oppression of men, it was also a time to cancel all debts.

I can think of no better solution for America today.

It would be better than a tax cut. It would be better than another "stimulus package." It would be better than the bailout. It would be better than any other government-directed wealth-redistribution program on the table or off.

Barack Obama and Andy Martin confront each other in Honolulu
Andy Martin's investigative team provokes a "suspension" of Obama's campaign and a desperate trip to Hawai'i by the presidential candidate
The drama builds to a Hollywood "High Noon" confrontation.

As submitted by:
ANDY MARTIN
Executive Editor
ContrarianCommentary.com

"Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Barack Obama and his nemesis, Obama author Andy Martin, face off in Honolulu

Martin's Hawai'i investigaiton causes Obama to panic and suspend his presidential campaign to head off Andy's stories.

Chicago crusader Andy Martin is on the verge of taking down the Obama campaign

(HONOLULU, HI)(October 20, 2008) You have to turn to Hollywood and "High Noon" to find more drama than the confrontation building in Hawai'i. The good sheriff stands alone against the Obama Gang. Eliot Ness and the Untouchables? The Long Ranger? Pick your own hero. Martin vs. Obama explodes into a Hollywood classic.

I will do my best to defeat Obama even though I essentially stand alone. I stand tall. All of the protagonists are from Chicago. Despite ridicule and envy from Chicago's corrupt mainstream media, I have spent over forty years successfully fighting crooked politicians like Barack Obama and his Daley Machine cronies.

But take a look at one of the most dramatic time lines in recent political history.

Two weeks ago on October 5th Sean Hannity aired a program that terrified the Obama campaign. You can probably see my role at FoxNews.com or on YouTube. The New York Times itself reported that the morning after Hannity's program, I became the target of a massive liberal assault at the Times. On October 6th I wrote a column predicting that Hannity's show would become the most important political program of 2008. On direct orders from the Emperor Obama, the New York Times then unleashed its smear machine on me.

One week ago, on October 13th, the Times tried to destroy me with a front-page package of lies, distortions and outright fraud. The Times failed. My investigative team arrived in Hawai'i and began to dig, dig, dig.

I also predicted in a column that attacking me was the first big mistake Obama and the Times had committed. You be the judge of whether I am being proven correct.

I am still standing and the Times' credibility is going into the toilet.

Before my team left for Hawai'i I predicted we would bring down Obama. By sheer coincidence, one TV network was interested in my mission and has been tagging along with a camera crew.

Monday (today) we petitioned the Hawai'i Supreme Court to order Obama's secret birth records released.

How did Obama respond? He suddenly discovered that his grandmother, who had supposedly been released from her hospital a week ago, when he showed no interest in her, needed his immediate attention. Cool, calm, collected Obama suddenly suspended his campaign and headed for Hawai'i.

High Noon.

I have been issuing reports from Hawaii and we are on the streets digging for the truth. This weekend we issued our story list for Monday-Wednesday (Monday has been rescheduled-see above).

What has Obama done? Cancelled his campaign and announced he is jumping on a plane to join Andy Martin in Hawai'i. Welcome home, Barry (Obama's grandmother calls him "Barry.")

High Noon in Hawaii.

Barack Obama vs. Andy Martin. The drama builds as we move closer and closer to disclosing the dramatic truth about Barack Obama.

Was I right when I predicted Obama made a classic mistake when he attacked me? Will Jim Rutenberg and all of the other Times slimeballs regret their malicious attacks? You betcha.

Obama did not pay any attention to his grandmother until I showed up in Honolulu. Suddenly she is the center of his attention. She is so central to his campaign that he has suspended it! But when Obama was here last summer he only visited his grandmother for an hour. One hour! Now he suspends his campaign for her?

Could anyone have predicted a more dramatic series of developing events? Hannity puts me on the air as the Chicago expert who confirms the links between Obama and his longstanding anti-American, terror network. Obama's goon squads immediately try to smear me in retaliation. The New York Times creates a front-page story out of 25 and 35 year-old nonsense in a desperate attempt to discredit and derail my upcoming Hawai'i investigation.

And Andy Martin's investigative team lands in Honolulu and goes where no mainstream media have gone before, on the streets of Honolulu to dig out the secret truths about Barack Obama.

Hawai'i Five-O looks tame by comparison.

I am still standing, fighting, and investigating, right here in Obamaland. And Hannity's dramatic show on October 5th will prove to be the turning point in the fight to retake America from the Obamabots and their crooked clandestine campaign cash (Without Andy, Hannity's second show on October 19th was dull by comparison and provoked no response from the Times or Obama).

The day we landed in Honolulu was Obama's D-Day. He can't scare us. He can't stop us. He can't intimidate us and the New York Times can't smear us with lies, half-truths and distortions.

The irony in all of this television drama is that Fox News is not the network following me around Hawaii. I will leave it to the network to disclose which one it is.

Barack Obama is looking increasingly like a desperate, doomed candidate whose Big Lie is about to be exposed.

The New York Times tried to suggest I exaggerate. Do I exaggerate? Apparently Barack Obama doesn't think so. He knows what I know. And soon you will know what Obama and I know.

What Obama fears most is that I search for the truth not because I am associated with McCain (I am not) or because I am a partisan Republican (I am not a right-winger). Rather I search for the truth for the sake of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I took an oath as an 18 year old to defend the Constitution of the United States from its enemies.

Barack Obama is an enemy of the Constitution. He is using tens of millions of dollars in clandestine campaign cash from unknown sources to stage an electoral coup d'etat in our nation. That is why I keep fighting for the truth.

Barack Obama has been lying to the American people. And his Big Lie is about to be exposed.

Now that his secrets are on the verge of being revealed he has panicked and suspended his campaign to visit Hawai'i. Do you believe Obama's explanation for the sudden trip?

Or do you believe me?

Do you believe the smear merchants at the New York Times? Or my truthful words on Sean Hannity's America?

If Barack Obama is defeated, he will have two people to blame: me and Sean Hannity.

It doesn't get any better than this.

Stay tuned for High Noon in Honolulu. HERE IS THE ACTUAL SUPREME COURT PETITION


Petitioner Pro Se



IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I


SUPREME COURT DOCKET NUMBER: 29414



ANDY MARTIN,

Petitioner,

HON. LINDA LINGLE, in her
official capacity as Governor;
DR. CHIYOME FUKINO, in her
official capacity as Director
of the Department of Health,
HON. BERT AYABE, in his official
capacity as Circuit Judge,

Respondents.

___________________________________


EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS



INTRODUCTION AND PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The question of the authenticity and public availability of the birth certificate of Senator Barack Obama (hereinafter "Obama") has become a source of increasing embarrassment for Hawai'i Government.
Although Obama has purportedly posted a copy of his birth certificate on his own web site, and others claim to have posted other versions, Obama refuses to allow public access to the official records of the State of Hawaii.
Petitioner is an author and columnist who came to Hawai'i to do research on Obama's years in Hawai'i. After arriving in Honolulu, Petitioner decided he needed a copy of the original birth certificate, as well as any official files relating to the issuance of said certificate.
The Executive Branch Department of Health has repeatedly and egregiously mischaracterized the Hawai'i statute governing access to birth certificates, and did so again on October 17th in a statement to the Honolulu Advertiser.
Petitioner applies to this Court for an appropriate writ, and offers two separate avenues of potential relief for the Court to consider.
I.
JURISDICTION
This court has jurisdiction of this Petition pursuant to HRS Ã'§ 602-5 (a)(3).
II.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
1. The Petitioner
Petitioner Andy Martin has been writing about Obama for over four years. Petitioner is the author of the best selling book "Obama: The Man Behind The Mask."
Petitioner publishes an Internet newspaper, http://ContrarianCommentary.com, as well as related blogs, http://Contrariancommentary.wordpress.com and http://ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com.
Although Petitioner is not a practicing attorney, he is a respected public interest and consumer rights litigator, see http://www.AndyMartin.com. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law.
For example, in 2003 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted Petitioner special leave of court to represent a U.S. Marine in a landmark case arising under the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act of 1940, see http://www.firstrespondersonline.us/director.htm (see attached).
Petitioner is also highly controversial. His corruption-fighting efforts in the Illinois courts and federal courts have provoked intense hostility and counter-reactions from judges who were the targets of his exposures see http://www.AndyMartin.com. These judges have sought to vilify and demonize petitioner, and Obama has sought to use these corrupt techniques to divert attention from Obama's own questionable personal history.
Petitioner is undaunted.
In Hawai'i, petitioner is accompanied by a network television camera crew. Thus the bona fide news value of his current litigation activity is not subject to question.
2. The Respondents
A. Respondent Linda Lingle is named in her official capacity as Governor and Chief Executive of the Executive Branch of Hawai'i government.
B. Respondent Dr. Chiyome Fukino is joined in her official capacity as Director of the Hawai'i Department of Health.
C. The Hon. Bert Ayabe is named in his official capacity as a Circuit Judge of the First Circuit. As will be shown below, Judge Ayabe's joinder in this petition does not necessarily involve any criticism of the judge and reflects the absence of any local rules to govern the judge's authority.
3. The birth certificate (certificate of live birth)
A. For the convenience of this court, Petitioner has submitted a copy of the Circuit Court proceedings as a separate Appendix. Those documents are incorporated by reference in this petition.
B. In summary, Petitioner applied for and was denied a copy of Obama's birth certificate. Petitioner then commenced a proceeding in the First Circuit on October 17, 2008 while still physically present in Honolulu.
C. Petitioner notified Judge Ayabe of Petitioner's limited availability in Hawaii, and requested or suggested an emergency hearing.
D. Judge Ayabe responded promptly through his judicial assistant with a hearing date after the 2008 election on November 7th. Petitioner was also notified that in order to exercise his rights and pursue his petition he would have to return from Chicago to Honolulu, as there was no provision for telephone hearings. (It was not clear whether the judge viewed the absence of telephone rules as a preclusion of telephone hearings, or was imposing his own individual rules of practice).
E. Petitioner was required to file his lawsuit in Hawai'i. No other court system has jurisdiction of local Hawai'i officials. Petitioner should be as welcome in the Hawai'i court system as a Hawai'i citizen would be on the mainland. There are no artificial boundaries or distinctions under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U. S. Constitution. If Petitioner must be present in Hawai'i in order to vindicate rights and remedies under the Hawai'i Constitution and statutes he will be precluded from doing so.
F. Hawai'i is a sophisticated international business center. It is simply impractical for parties to be physically present in the State as a precondition of access to Hawai'i government or the judicial system.
G. Rule 11 of the Probate Rules provides for "Telephone Conference Call Hearings." On information and belief there is no parallel provision in the Civil Rules.
H. Petitioner remains present in Hawai'i through October 22nd and available for emergency hearings in person.
I. This Court can take its own judicial or official notice that numerous state and federal court systems provide for telephonic participation, see e.g. Florida Rules of Judicial Administration 2.530.
III.
RELIEF REQUESTED
This Court can deal with this petition by either one of two separate approaches.
First, the Court could decide that the Executive Branch's misapplication and misinterpretation of the relevant statute (see Exhibit 1 to the Circuit Court Complaint) raises issues of sufficiently great public and national importance that the Court will entertain the issues presented as a matter of the exercise of this Court's original jurisdiction. In that case the writ of mandamus, if granted, would issue directly to the executive branch and Judge Ayabe's role would become moot and coram non judice.
Second, this Court could decide that the Circuit Court should conduct an expedited hearing, and do so either while Petitioner is still physically present in Hawai'i or while Petitioner is allowed to participate on the telephone, directing that the Circuit Judge either schedule a prompt hearing or ask that the case be reassigned to a judge who can conduct a hearing before the 2008 election. In that case the writ, if granted, would issue to the Circuit Judge.
The approach which this Court prefers to adopt is entirely at the discretion of the tribunal.
IV.
BASIS FOR GRANTING RELIEF
A. The constitutional issue
In Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373, 96 S. Ct. 2673, (1976) the Supreme Court stated "The loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury." The authenticity and contents of a presidential candidate's birth certificate is at the apex of First Amendment concerns, Monitor Patriot v. Roy, 401 U.S. 265, 91 S.Ct. 621 (1971)("[I]t can hardly be doubted that the constitutional guarantee has its fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for political office.")
To say that a proceeding will not be convened until after the election is to create the very type of unconstitutional delay precluded by Elrod, and creates a justifiable public suspicion of a conspiracy and cover-up by Hawai'i officials.
Elrod does not appear to have been cited by any Hawai'i court but has been cited numerous times by federal judges in Honolulu, see e.g. Rapp v. Disciplinary Board, 916 F. Supp. 1525, 1539 (D. Hawai'i 1996); Walsh v. Honolulu, 423 F.Supp.2d 1094, 1108 (D. Hawai'i 2006); Swanson v. University, 269 F. Supp. 1252, 1260 (D. Hawai'i 2003); Legal Aid v. Legal Services, 961 F. Supp. 1402, 1417 (D. Hawai'i 1997). Although Petitioner filed his Circuit Court lawsuit under the Hawai'i Constitution and not the First Amendment, this Court has previously interpreted those rights to be coextensive.
B. The procedural issue
There is an anomaly under Hawai'i procedure where probate rules provide for telephone hearings but civil rules do not. Perhaps this gap motivated the circuit judge to deny a hearing, or to adhere to such procedures as a general practice.
Certainly in the modern commercial age, with Hawai'i at the crossroads of international business, antiquated notions of physical presence as a precondition for access to Hawai'i government should be reconsidered. The Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U.S. Constitution would also appear to lean in favor of allowing out-of-state litigants from the mainland to be heard by telephone.
C. The substantive issue
a. The statute
HRS Ã'§ 338-18 (b) limits disclosure of records to persons having "a direct and tangible interest in the record." The statute then provides thirteen (13) examples as illustrative, but not exclusive, including number (9): "A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction."
The Respondents have steadfastly misinterpreted the "direct and tangible interest" standard into one requiring a direct and tangible "relationship" between the party and the record. Thus there is a serious abuse of discretion and statutory misinterpretation by the executive branch. The Respondents have persisted in this misinterpretation despite notice that their interpretation of the statute was a misinterpretation, and will no doubt proffer the same misinterpretation to this Court as their initial response to this petition.
Researchers, scholars, writers and news media-and Petitioner has attributes of all of the foregoing-have a "tangible interest" in many public citizens without any "relationship" to those persons. Petitioner is sensitive to privacy issues and identity theft issues. But no one is likely to try to hold themselves out to be "Barack Obama" using a birth certificate issued by Respondents.
Nevertheless, the very vehemence with which Hawai'i officials have misconstrued a state statue, and the manner in which Obama has attempted to manipulate and control access to his personal records (see infra), raise legitimate suspicions in the mind of the public.
b. The waiver and admission issues
Obama claims that he has posted a conformed copy of his birth certificate on a web site. It is impossible to say whether this assertion is true, because Petitioner has no official copy to compare to the Internet version. Obama has not posted any of the source information or supporting data. If Obama has posted a version of his birth certificate, it would appear he has waived any privacy issues and the statutory restrictions on issuance of a copy to Petitioner no longer apply.
It is indeed a very peculiar state as now exists where Obama claims he has released his birth certificate or at least his latest version of the document, and yet claims that no one should be able to obtain an official copy of the same document from the State of Hawai'i or review the source information for the certificate. Waiver would appear to be applicable and render nugatory any privacy concerns.
Obama has claimed he was born in a Honolulu hospital, but there is no verifiable evidence to sustain that claim. An examination of birth records is thus essential to resolve the lingering doubts.
As judges, certainly the members of this Court are aware that punctilious concern for accuracy would mandate that any counsel preparing a case in which the birth certificate was an issue, must obtain a certified copy and not a copy grabbed off an Internet web site. As an author and columnist, Petitioner adheres to the same high standards of accuracy in the search for original truth.
The fact that Obama has in fact posted his birth certificate on the Internet is a confirmation that he believes that issue is a topic of legitimate public interest.
D. The common law writ of mandamus
Petitioner has reviewed this Court's jurisprudence concerning and construing the common law writ of mandamus. Petitioner submits that the extraordinary facts of this Petition provide a basis for extraordinary and emergency action. As the attached docket sheet from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court attests, Petitioner is experienced in preparing, filing and obtaining relief through extraordinary writs on an emergency basis.
CONCLUSION
Most respectfully, Petitioner asks this Court to take emergency action and to grant one of the alternative forms of relief outlined in this petition.
DATED: October 20, 2008
Honolulu, HI

Respectfully submitted,
ANDY MARTIN
Post Office Box 1851
New York, NY 10150-1851


Andy Martin is a legendary Chicago muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He is currently based in New York selling his new book, Obama: The Man Behind The Mask. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. © Copyright by Andy Martin 2008. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with over forty years of experience. He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law.

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com. Andy is the author of Obama: The Man Behind The Mask, published in July 2008, see http://www.OrangeStatePress.com.

Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this: The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay $1. The sixth would pay $3. The seventh would pay $7. The eighth would pay $12. The ninth would pay $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so: The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. 'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!' 'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got' 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!' 'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!' The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill! And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Henry Paulson and I walked along past the banks, their branches closed up by the gloom. Posing our questions to the President and his friends, as our cash slipped away all too soon,

Cause they've squandered my fortunes and maybe yours too, but I can't seem to find my friends Lehman and WaMu.

Chorus-So help me if you can I've got to get back to my poor house-the foreclosure's at one, you'd be surprised there's so much to be done--count all the Feds in my drive, chase the vultures from the sky, back to the days of simple bank robbers and clues.

Barack and McCain they don't know what to do, they've got issues and press on their nose.

So I question their sanity they want to be king, and hope they don't ask me what to do.

I'd send them to talk with old Ben if he's there; ask how he plans to pull billions from the air!

Chorus- So help me if you can I've got to get back to my poor house-the foreclosure's at one, you'd be surprised there's so much to be done--count all the Feds in my drive, chase the vultures from the sky, back to the days of simple bank robbers and clues.

Back to the days of simple bank robbers

Back to the days of simple bank robbers

Back to the days of simple bank robbers leaving clues

Russ Riendeau, is a Barrington IL business consultant and a musical aficionado and humorist.

Since 1988 he has traveled throughout America giving keynotes, workshops and panel discussions on topics of motivation, peak performance and talent management. He specializes in creating song parodies on a variety of business topics to entertain and educate his audiences.

Some of this earlier parodies include our obsession with material possessions (Spam), our overly litigious society (Sue Peggy Sue), greed and temptation (I Fought the Law),technology (Blackberry Man), and office romance (Why Must I Be A CEO In Love), to name some.

With 'House On Poor Corner' Russ seeks to strike a heartfelt note with both the old and a new generations of worried and nervous, fellow citizens.

'We're all feeling fear over the financial crisis', Riendeau said.'The song takes humorous aim at all those who may have a hand in the situation - government, banks, and opportunists.

To learn more about Russell Riendeau and find links to the 'House on Poor Corner' visit www.russellriendeau.com.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008; Page A21

The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels?

On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned.

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

georgewill@washpost.com

Teachers aren't the only ones who think they are underpaid.

'The school district has gotten cheap labor for a long time in this position,' said Orange School Superintendent Ron Blocker, who thinks he is being shortchanged, too.

Blocker pulls down $298,756 a year, when his salary and extras including an annuity and expense account are tallied. That's more than six times what the average teacher makes.

Gov. Charlie Crist earns only $132,932 a year under a state pay scale that provides considerably stingier benefits than local school boards heap on superintendents.

School superintendents across the region get a good dollar, compared with earnings for the average Joe -- or even the average Joe college graduate with an advanced degree similar to one a superintendent might have.

U.S. Census Bureau statistics for 2007 indicate that just under 8 percent of Florida workers earned more than $100,000 a year.

The average wage earner with an advanced degree made $56,542. The average salary for a teacher in Central Florida is between $42,000 and $49,000.

But the school superintendents, who make four or five times as much, say they are worth every penny.

'I am responsible for the education of more than 64,000 students, and I take it very seriously,' said Bill Vogel, superintendent of Seminole County schools, who tops Blocker's take by snagging $310,981 from taxpayers annually.

Vogel got a pay increase this summer, even though School Board Chairman Diane Bauer said the district 'didn't have a penny' to give raises to teachers and other employees.

The School Board is chopping nearly $30 million from school district programs this year because of cutbacks in state funding and rising costs for necessities such as electric and diesel fuel.

But Vogel's contract required a nearly 4 percent cost-of-living increase. The superintendent says he will donate net earnings from the extra $7,058 to the school system's charitable foundation this year, although it will figure in his base pay in subsequent years.

Vogel, Blocker and the other superintendents have a number of cash benefits in addition to their salaries that boost their incomes. The perks are written into their contracts.

Blocker got a $19,256 bonus from the School Board this past school year after the School Board said he was doing a good job.

Vogel 'retired' from the school system two years ago and draws a $5,940 monthly state retirement check in addition to his pay and other cash benefits. He returned to work a month after retiring, as allowed by state law.

Peg Smith, superintendent of Volusia schools, gets $652 a month to lease a big Buick. She also gets cash tucked away in an annuity -- $26,275 this past year.

'Reasonable compensation'

'It has to be reasonable compensation for all of the years of experience and training,' said Smith, who is in line to earn as much as $240,908 this year.

Smith points out that she plans to take a 2 percent cut in base pay this year -- about $3,500 -- because the district is in desperate financial straits. She says she also might give up a $14,431bonus she earned based on student FCAT scores, dropout rates and graduation rates.

Still, Smith and most of the other superintendents are paid considerably more than the state's suggested salaries for school-district heads.

Authored by Chuck Norris


Posted: September 22, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

by Joseph Farah

Posted: September 08, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008