Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.
Aloha dear readers,
As you know I am in favor of unity, equality, and aloha for all. These principles are described in detail at
Unity: I believe Hawaii should remain unified with the United States, and not secede to become an independent nation. I believe the people of Hawaii should remain unified under the single sovereignty of the State of Hawaii, and not divide our lands and people along racial lines as the Akaka bill would do.
Equality: I believe we are all equal in the eyes of God regardless of race, contrary to a version of the beautiful Hawaiian creation legend which Hawaiian sovereignty activists have twisted to support their view that ethnic Hawaiians are entitled to racial supremacy because they are the children of the gods and brothers to these lands in a way nobody ever can be who lacks a drop of Hawaiian native blood. See "A deep religious belief in a genealogical (family) relationship among the gods, the land, and the people" at
In addition to my belief that we ARE all equal in the eyes of God, I also believe we SHOULD all be treated equally under the law by our government, contrary to the Akaka bill and contrary to about 900 racially exclusionary programs funded by federal and state government money.
Aloha for all: I believe the Aloha Spirit is our local name for what Christians would call the Holy Spirit (one of the three all-powerful aspects of God). The Aloha Spirit is the core of our souls. It's what brings us together; makes us children of God; makes us equal in the eyes of God regardless of race; and calls us to seek wisdom and justice.
With those principles in mind, I have recommendations for voting in the election of 2012. I'm focusing on the following contests in this order: U.S. President; Hawaii's U.S. Senator; Hawaii's U.S. House districts 1 and 2; the five seats up for election on the board of trustees of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs; and the state legislature.
RACIAL SEPARATISM IS A GREATER THREAT TO HAWAII THAN ALL OTHER ISSUES COMBINED
I believe racial separatism and ethnic nationalism are the greatest threats to long-term peace and stability in Hawaii. Yes, it's true that our nation and state face great difficulties related to budget deficits, unemployment, taxation, foreign policy, etc. But racial strife is a far greater threat than any of those things. Other places in recent years have also had severe budget deficits and unemployment, but racial strife dwarfed those concerns. Consider Bosnia, where Europeans of three different ethnicities were living, working and playing together and intermarrying (similar to Hawaii), until Serbs, Croats, and Muslims started killing each other, engaging in ethnic cleansing and racial separatism. Consider Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Darfur, East Timor, Sri Lanka, etc. where ethnic strife led to civil war and mass atrocities.
We in Hawaii must do all we can to defeat racial separatism before it pulls us apart and leads to violence. I appeal especially to conservative Republicans who think it's very important to win Republican control of the U.S. Senate and keep control of the House. But my friends, I say to you that there comes a time when we who live in Hawaii must give top priority to what's best for Hawaii, even if it means we send to Congress people who will vote the wrong way on national economic matters and foreign policy.
The threat of racial separatism is far more important than all other issues combined. In Hawaii we already have two branches of the state government which focus on using government money to provide racially exclusionary benefits: OHA and DHHL (Department of Hawaiian Homelands). There's also the KIRC -- Kaho'olawe Island Reserve Commission, consisting of ethnic Hawaiian commissioners who oversee that island until such time when a Native Hawaiian Governing Entity has received both federal and state recognition, whereupon that island will automatically be turned over to that race-based entity, as provided in state law. The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii has compiled a list of nearly 900 racially exclusionary programs funded by federal and state money, often including information about how much money was given, who received it for what purpose, etc.; see
I will vote against candidates who agree with me on most issues but who push for the Akaka bill, racially exclusionary programs, and racial separatism. The only reason the Akaka bill has never passed in 12 years is because of the principled opposition of Republicans who have repeatedly blocked it in the Senate. If a leftwing Democrat and a conservative Republican both push the Akaka bill, I will vote for the Democrat rather than send a Republican to represent Hawaii who will make deals in the Republican caucus to undermine Republican opposition to the Akaka bill. Linda Lingle, Charles Djou, and Kawika Crowley have abandoned both the national and the state Republican Party platforms that oppose the Akaka bill. So conservative Republicans should not hesitate to abandon those candidates. See "Republican and Democrat 2012 national and state party platforms regarding the Akaka bill and Hawaiian racial entitlements" at
VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY TO GET RID OF BARACK OBAMA
On most issues I can be described as politically conservative, libertarian, tea-party. I will vote for Mitt Romney for President because I support fiscal conservatism and a strong foreign policy based on American exceptionalism. Romney has not yet said anything about the Akaka bill. He might waffle and seem indecisive about it early in his first term. That's what happened with President Bush, whose Department of Justice initially seemed to accept the general concept of the Akaka bill and negotiated with the Hawaii delegation over the details of the bill; but in the end, when the decisive battle took place on the Senate floor, President Bush sent a strongly worded message promising to veto it. For details about President Bush's early waffling on the bill, see "Bush Administration Actions and Statements on Akaka Bill, 2001-2008" at
Barack Obama spoke in favor of he Akaka bill on the floor of the U.S. Senate and voted for cloture in 2006.
Obama comes from a radical leftwing background. His father was a tribesman from Kenya who was already married there, sent to the University of Hawaii on a Kenyan government scholarship funded by Kenya's patron, the Soviet Union. His mother was a Caucasian hippie from Kansas and California who decided to have an adventure studying at the University of Hawaii. The two of them met when they were both students in a Russian language class, and the young white woman thought it would be exciting and exotic to have a fling with an older black man with an unusual accent and leftist political views. Barack senior soon abandoned the boy and his mother to move on to other adventures, and the boy's mother soon hooked up with an Indonesian man and followed him to Indonesia with the boy, who received his early education in a Muslim madrassa. After a few years the boy moved back to Hawaii to live with his white liberal grandparents while he attended Punahou school, and then moved to Harvard University. After law school he became a "community organizer" in Chicago, became a protege of radical anti-American protesters who blew up buildings, and he spent 20 years in a radical black church headed by the infamous Reverend Jeremiah Wright who preached black liberation theology and famously said "God damn America" and (regarding the 9-11 World Trade Towers disaster) "America's chickens have come home to roost."
Obama grew up believing America is a colonial power oppressing third-world nations, the Caucasian power structure oppresses black people, and wealthy individuals oppress poor ones. He sees an America where class warfare and racial resentment are the norm. He uses those attitudes to divide America, seeking support from victim groups like women, blacks, hispanics, Indians, labor unions, poor people, etc. Obama is ripping our country apart. The Akaka bill fits right in with Obama's attitude. We voters need to stop him from getting a second term. Please vote for Romney. See the book "The Roots of Obama's Rage" by Dinesh D’Souza.
U.S. SENATE: PLEASE VOTE FOR MAZIE HIRONO
For U.S. Senate: We must never allow Linda Lingle to sit in the Senate. Throughout her 8 years as Governor she constantly contacted the Republican President and Republican Senators to lobby for the Akaka bill. She made numerous trips to Washington to do that, twice testifying before the Committee on Indian Affairs, personally meeting Senators on the floor during quorum calls, spending an overnight in the White House while lobbying President Bush, etc. To ensure Lingle's defeat it's not enough to abstain from voting; Hirono must get more votes than Lingle, and the election might be close. Please hold your nose and vote for Mazie Hirono for Senate, even though she is an arrogant leftwing machine Democrat who will vote the wrong way on economic issues and foreign affairs and who probably doesn't comprehend complex issues any deeper than the Democrat talking points. The two best things about Horono are: she will be an ineffective back-bencher, and Republicans will ignore her. For further details about Lingle's actions and motives in pushing the Akaka bill, including text of news reports and commentaries, see a lengthy section below.
U.S. HOUSE DISTRICT 1: PLEASE VOTE FOR COLLEEN HANABUSA
For U.S. House District 1: We must not allow Charles Djou to sit in the House. In 2010 he sat for a half-hour interview on the OHA radio program in which he enthusiastically explained how he could persuade his fellow Republicans to vote for the Akaka bill and for the numerous federal programs providing racially exclusionary benefits to ethnic Hawaiians. He downplays his strong support for the racial separatist movement when speaking to the general public, advocating fiscal conservatism and budget cutting. But in the interest of protecting ourselves against the Akaka bill and racially exclusionary handouts, Hawaii cannot afford to send him to Congress. In 2010, when pressured by his Republican base to stop supporting the Akaka bill and to demand a referendum on it by Hawaii's people before it could become law, the best he could do was to offer a non-binding referendum (whose results he would ignore anyway). To ensure Djou's defeat it's not enough to abstain from voting; Hanabusa must get more votes than Lingle, and the election might be close. Please hold your nose and vote for Colleen Hanabusa, even though she is an arrogant leftwing machine Democrat who will vote the wrong way on economic issues and foreign affairs. Hanabusa is intelligent and can speak effectively; but Republicans will ignore her views on the Akaka bill whereas they might listen to Charles Djou. For details about what Djou said on the OHA radio station, see below.
U.S. HOUSE DISTRICT 2: PLEASE VOTE BLANK
For U.S. House District 2: The Republican nominee is Kawika Crowley. Who? He's virtually unknown -- a scruffy-looking homeless middle-aged cigar-smoking Caucasian man living in a van, who has no chance against the popular, young and beautiful Tulsi Gabbard. Crowley is a conservative on most issues that concern Republicans including deficit reduction, support for veterans and a strong military. But Crowley strongly supports the Akaka bill, and he also wants to rip the 50th star off the flag and reinvent Hawaii as an independent nation. Tulsi Gabbard worked as an aide to Senator Akaka. She strongly supports the Akaka bill and the racially exclusionary government programs for ethnic Hawaiians. She has Samoan ancestry and feels solidarity with ethnic Hawaiians as fellow Pacific islanders with a mutual history of independent nationhood and dependence on handouts from the federal government. Crowley, as a Republican who favors the Akaka bill (and also secession!), must not be allowed to go to Congress representing Hawaii. But there's no danger of that. Gabbard will cruise to an easy and large victory. We don't need to vote for Gabbard just to keep out Crowley. Therefore we can safely cast a principled blank vote to show that we don't like either candidate.
FIVE OHA SEATS: PLEASE VOTE ENTHUSIASTICALLY FOR DR. KELI'I AKINA AT-LARGE; VOTE BLANK ON THE MOLOKA'I SEAT (AGAINST MACHADO); AND VOTE HOWEVER RELUCTANTLY FOR JACKIE BURKE (KAUA'I), JOHANNA AMORIN (MAUI), AND ROBERT LINDSEY (HAWAII ISLAND)
Five OHA seats will be on the ballot November 6. Everyone can vote regardless of race. Everyone can vote for all 5 seats regardless of island designation of candidates -- even if you live on O'ahu you can vote in the contests for the seats representing Maui, Kaua'i, Moloka'i, and Hawaii Island. This is our chance to fundamentally change OHA. The general principle is: throw the bums out! But for whom should you vote?
The incumbent for the OHA at-large seat is Haunani Apoliona. She has served as trustee and chair of the OHA board for many years, and has consistently pushed the Akaka bill. Let's toss her out! Fortunately there's a truly outstanding candidate running to replace her -- Keli'i Akina, Ph.D. Dr. Akina is a professor both in Hawaii and in China. He strongly opposes the Akaka bill and the Act 195 state-recognized Akaka tribe. He believes that Hawaiians of the blood and Hawaiians at heart should all work together for the betterment of us all and to reform OHA. He is the opposite of a racial separatist. I strongly endorse him and hope you will vote for him. He wrote in the September 7, 2012 issue of Hawaii Reporter: "I am on record as the only candidate for Trustee of OHA in the upcoming General Election opposed to calls for a race-based Hawaiian nation or separate sovereign entity. While I am a passionate advocate for the welfare and betterment of Hawaiians by blood, I am committed to Queen Liliuokalani’s vision of Hawaii as a land which also embraces Hawaiians at heart, regardless of race. At stake in the upcoming General Election is whether OHA will use its growing wealth and power to fuel a vision of a racially divided Hawaii or will fulfill the noble vision of Lili’uokalani, a Hawaii which is a true melting pot." His complete article is at
The incumbent for the OHA Moloka'i seat is Colette Machado, who is currently the OHA chairperson. She has served for several years on the OHA board and is a strong supporter of the Akaka bill. Let's toss her out! Unfortunately we cannot do that because there are no other candidates for the Moloka'i seat. It's like an election in Cuba or the old Soviet Union where there's only one candidate. The only way to show our displeasure is to vote blank in this contest. Hopefully there will be far more blanks than positive votes for Machado, thus showing a vote of no-confidence in her. I strongly recommend a blank vote in the Moloka'i contest.
For the OHA Kaua'i seat I recommend a vote for Jackie Burke, because she opposes the Akaka bill. She opposes it for the wrong reason -- she is a secessionist advocating an independent nation of Hawaii. And she supports the racially exclusionary government handouts for ethnic Hawaiians. So I certainly do not endorse her. I only recommend a vote for her because she's the least bad among the candidates, and most importantly because she opposes the Akaka bill.
For the OHA Maui seat, incumbent Boyd Mossman resigned to answer a "calling" to work for his Mormon church. So there's a special election to fill the unexpired two years of his term. His son Kaulana Mossman is one of the candidates, but I recommend against him. I don't like the idea of establishing a dynasty where a son feels entitled to inherit his father's seat by virtue of name recognition alone. Carmen Lindsey is the incumbent appointed by Governor Abercrombie to fill Boyd Mossman's unexpired term, after the remaining 8 trustees could not agree on a replacement. Carmen Lindsey promised Abercrombie she would not run for election in November, as a condition Abercrombie required before appointing her; but she has broken that pledge and should not be rewarded for doing so. Breaking her word shows a serious character flaw that would make it hard for anyone else to work with her. None of the candidates has much to offer. But I recommend Johanna Amorin, because she has considerable experience volunteering for community service groups and some of those groups are racially inclusive for the benefit of the general community. Amorin seems to see herself as a community service volunteer and not primarily as a racial separatist.
For the OHA Hawaii Island (Big Island) seat, none of the candidates has much to offer. Incumbent Robert Lindsey favors the Akaka bill but does not push it aggressively nor make it a focus of his efforts. He works humbly and quietly but effectively to get OHA to spend its money on programs that actually help needy Native Hawaiians. I cannot endorse him, because he does favor the Akaka bill. But I recommend a vote for him because he's the least bad candidate and has actually done some good.
STATE LEGISLATURE: STRONGLY SUPPORT SENATOR SAM SLOM; AND GENERALLY LEAN REPUBLICAN IN ALL OTHER CONTESTS
Finally, what about the state legislature? Frankly, there are many incumbents and candidates about whom I know little or nothing. However, there is one candidate who stands out above all others as a champion of unity, equality, and aloha for all -- a man who not only opposes the Akaka bill but has traveled to Washington D.C. to lobby against the Akaka bill at a time when it was vitally important to have an elected official from Hawaii telling U.S. Senators that we oppose the bill. I'm talking, of course, about the only Republican in the Hawaii state Senate, Sam Slom. Senator Slom also organized a celebration of Statehood Day in front of the former Capitol of the Territory of Hawaii where the transition to statehood took place (Iolani Palace), and he bravely stood with a group of Hawaii patriots there who were assaulted with vile language and threats of violence from Hawaiian sovereignty hooligans who consider the Palace to be their Capitol of a still-living Kingdom of Hawaii. Senator Slom has consistently voted against resolutions in the legislature supporting the Akaka bill, and he was the only legislator out of 25 in the Senate and 51 in the House who voted against Act 195 (2011) that establishes a state-recognized Akaka tribe and a racial registry to begin organizing it.
So I strongly endorse Senator Sam Slom for re-election. May he live long and prosper!
In other contests for the state legislature my general inclination is to support Republicans because they usually seem more eager than Democrats to cut spending, reduce taxes, reduce bureaucratic and tax policies that harm small businesses. Republicans also may be more willing than Democrats to step away from "political correctness" and perhaps get some courage to oppose racial entitlements, OHA, and the demands that will inevitably be made for transfer of land, money, and jurisdictional authority to the Akaka tribe.
REPUBLICAN SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES PUSHING THE AKAKA BILL ARE FAR MORE DANGEROUS THAN DEMOCRATS DOING THE SAME THING
While it is true that the Democrats running for U.S. Senate and House are just as enthusiastic as the Republicans about pushing the Akaka bill and the Hawaiian racial entitlement bills, there's one very important difference. It is the Republicans in the Senate who have blocked the Akaka bill for more than 12 years. The House passed the bill in three different years, but Senate Republicans blocked it. Even when the Republicans were in the minority, and even though a few of them voted with the Democrats, conservative Republicans placed a hold on the Akaka bill and, in 2006, staged a filibuster for five hours on the Senate floor that killed the bill. Those Republicans opposing the Akaka bill are standing firm on fundamental principles of unity, equality, and individual self-reliance. They oppose being steamrollered by Democrats catering to divisive special interests like ethnic groups, victimhood grievances, wealthy and powerful lobbyists, and demands for race-based group communal ownership and governance.
If Linda Lingle gets elected to the Senate she will sit in countless caucus meetings with her fellow Republicans, always pushing the Akaka bill, trading votes, bargaining away other things that would be good for Hawaii in order to get her colleagues to stop blocking the Akaka bill. That's how she behaved throughout her 8 years as Governor, traveling to Washington numerous times to testify at Senate committee hearings and to lobby the President and Senators not only in their offices but on the Senate floor, and lobbying the President when he came to Hawaii. Lingle squandered her political capital to push for the Akaka bill at the expense of other programs that would have benefitted all Hawaii's people.
As a Republican (even if in name only) she might succeed where no Democrat possibly could. Having Lingle in the Senate would be very dangerous for the long-term well-being of Hawaii. That's why she must be defeated.
It's not enough for Republican voters to stay home or leave a blank on the ballot for that contest. Hirono must receive more votes than Lingle.
Defeating Lingle will also send a strong message to leaders of the Republican party -- the Republican rank and file will no longer tolerate party leaders who betray Republican principles merely in hopes of winning an election. Conservative Republicans must do in Hawaii what they did in Indiana when they tossed out Senator Richard Lugar who had started out as a conservative when first elected in 1976 but gradually migrated toward a "bipartisan" stance. So long as Linda Lingle rules the Republican party, the party will be unable to stick with its conservative principles. Lingle would be a clone of the two Republicans-in-name-only from Maine, Senator Olympia Snowe and Senator Susan Collins, who often vote with Democrats on key issues and express pride in their "bipartisanship." For Lingle, being bipartisan means being Democrat-lite. So Hawaii might as well have a real Democrat whom Senate Republicans can ignore, as they have done for all these years with Dan Akaka. By purging the Republican Party of bipartisan Democrat-lite leaders such as Lingle and Djou, there's hope that true Republicans standing on principle will have a chance to rise to party leadership.
LINGLE'S SUPPORT FOR THE AKAKA BILL AND RACIAL ENTITLEMENTS IS A DEFINING CORE COMMITMENT, ARISING FROM THE SAME ZEALOTRY AND FERVOR AS HER SUPPORT FOR THE RIGHT OF ISRAEL TO EXIST AS A JEWISH NATION.
Linda Lingle's main motive for supporting the Akaka bill, OHA, race-based entitlements, and Kamehameha Schools' racially exclusionary admissions policy is her strong support for Zionism and her mistaken belief that the Hawaiian sovereignty movement is comparable to the struggle to establish and maintain a Jewish nation of Israel.
Lingle has repeatedly and zealously done everything she can to support race-based political power for ethnic Hawaiians; and she has consistently supported government and private institutions providing racially exclusionary benefits to them. When asked about it, she says simply "Hawaiians should decide for themselves whether to create their own government." (But what about the rights of the rest of Hawaii's people?) or "I made a promise when campaigning for Governor and I am keeping my word." (But she has broken other promises, so why not this one?) Those answers are superficial, and fail to disclose what is actually motivating her.
Letters to editor from two Kamehameha School graduates published in 2008 explained Lingle's true motives. (Full text of the letters is provided in a webpage cited at the end of this section). They said she had spoken with the Kamehameha alumni group during her 2002 campaign for governor, explaining that as a Jew she sees the ethnic Hawaiian pursuit of sovereignty in the same way she sees the historical drive to create and sustain the nation of Israel. The letter writers made it very clear that this was not merely their interpretation, it was what Lingle had actually said. Lingle herself asserted the analogy as providing a religious justification for exercise of political power by a racial/religious group -- "a people" has a right to self-determination, whether it is the Jewish people establishing Israel as a Jewish nation or the ethnic Hawaiian people establishing a race-based nation of Hawaii.
The zealousness of Lingle's commitment to Hawaiian sovereignty is measured by her zealousness for Zionism.
Lingle has had a strong lifelong commitment to the Jewish religion and to the right of Jews to have their own nation defined by race, religion, and historical claims (which is the same view held by Hawaiian sovereignty activists to justify their demands for a race-based government). She's a life member of Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of America. The "Jewish Journal" of May 13, 2004 reported: "Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle is stopping in Los Angeles this week before embarking on a six-day trip to Israel. The visit to the Jewish state will be the governor's first. Lingle, a Jewish Republican, accepted the Golda Meir Award at a State of Israel Bonds luncheon on Thursday at the Four Seasons ..."
The day after Lingle won election as Governor in 2002 an article was published in Haaretz, a major newspaper in Israel, noting with pride that Lingle is Jewish and also the first female head of government in Hawaii since Queen Liliuokalani. The title of the newspaper article was: "Hawaii's Jewish Queen." The article in Haaretz has a lengthy section on Hawaiian history (the distorted version in the apology bill) entitled "Successor of the Queen." It says "Some of Lingle's supporters see her as a modern reincarnation of the islands' last queen, Liliuokalani. ... Today, 110 years after the queen's abdication and nine years after the American apology, some perceive Lingle's election as amending a historic injustice and like to think of the governor-elect as stepping into the deposed queen's shoes."
Should the Governor of a fully integrated, multiracial, multireligious state be imposing her religious views as a basis for reorganizing our governmental structure? And aside from her personal religious views, should she be imposing on us the views of Hawaiian activists who claim their racial group's right to control Hawaii is given to them by their ancient gods in the same way as the Jews' right to control Israel?
For detailed analysis and source citations about Lingle's commitment to Zionism and how it shapes her zealousness in support of race-based political sovereignty for ethnic Hawaiians, see "Hawaiian Sovereignty, Zionism, and Governor Lingle" at
EXAMPLES OF LINGLE'S ZEALOUSNESS IN PUSHING THE AKAKA BILL
Linda Lingle was elected to her first of two terms as Governor on November 5, 2002. During her first term in office she spent all of her political capital at the national level pushing for the Akaka bill, and perhaps most of her political capital at the state level promoting and defending racial entitlement programs.
Details and webpage links for items reported from 2003-2004 can be found at
Details and webpage links for items reported from 2005-2006 can be found in the subpages summarized at
The Akaka bill had already been working its way through the 106th and 107th Congresses, since July 2000. The 108th Congress convened in January 2003. The Akaka bill was introduced simultaneously in both the Senate and the House, on February 11, 2003 -- In the Senate the bill was S.344; and in the House the bill, with identical language, was H.R.665. Barely two weeks later the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing on the Akaka bill. The hearing opened with OHA chair Haunani Apoliona giving a chant in Hawaiian language. Governor Lingle personally attended and gave testimony in support of the bill. It was only her fourth month in office. She also lobbied various Senators and White House officials while in Washington.
On October 23, 2003 President George W. Bush spent 12 hours in Honolulu during a refueling stop on his way home after a meeting in Asia. Honolulu newspapers reported that Lingle lobbied President Bush aggressively about the Akaka bill, including in the back seat of his limousine on a trip between the airport and Hilton Hawaiian Village. "The governor said she took every opportunity she could to mention the issue during her time with the president. Although her trip to Washington in December is to attend a conference on long-term care, Lingle said that would not stop her from pursuing the issue of federal recognition. "I'll follow up with the Department of Interior, with Justice again and with (Bush adviser) Karl Rove and the staff of the White House and just continue to talk with them and see if they can help us get this scheduled for a vote in the Senate," she said. ... Lingle said she had mentioned Washington Place and the history of Hawaii's last queen, Liliuokalani, when first lady Laura Bush mentioned that she had bought a biography of the queen. "Mrs. Bush said it was a sad story," said Lingle. The governor said she told the Bushes that the queen's overthrow formed the basis for the whole federal recognition effort "because the country was taken away."" (Honolulu Star-Bulletin, October 25, 2003) The Star-Bulletin's editorial on October 25 also noted "While the president stopped short of endorsing the bill during his one-day visit to Hawaii, Lingle's plea should make him reluctant to oppose it. If the Bush administration remains neutral on the issue of Hawaiian recognition, it will not be because of the governor's lack of trying to persuade her fellow Republicans. In February, Lingle testified before Congress on the bill sponsored by Senator Akaka and spoke with Attorney General John Ashcroft, Bush political strategist and adviser Karl Rove and Interior Secretary Gale Norton, whose department would house an Office of Native Hawaiian Relations under the Akaka bill."
Star-Bulletin cartoonist Corky on October 26 poked fun at Lingle's zealousness in lobbying President Bush in the limousine. The cartoon showed Lingle teaching Bush how to do the "shaka."
The Akaka bill was introduced in the 109th Congress on January 25, 2005 in both the Senate and the House. Its bill numbers were S.147 and H.R.309.
On Sunday February 27, 2005 Governor Lingle was already in Washington where she spent two nights in the White House sleeping in Jenna Bush's bedroom. Lingle spoke about the Akaka bill with President Bush Sunday night. Monday February 28 Lingle met with Senator John McCain, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. On Tuesday March 1 Lingle testified before the committee during its hearing on the Akaka bill. Her testimony was printed in full in the Honolulu Advertiser. "Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Lingle said she met this week with White House budget director Joshua Bolten and Bush advisors Karl Rove and Claude Allen about the bill. Lingle, who slept two nights at the White House, said she also raised the issue with Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney during dinner. In her meetings, Lingle said she explained how the state of Hawaii faces a flood of legal challenges in how it handles Native Hawaiian homelands, education and other grants." (Hawaii Tribune-Herald (Hilo), Wednesday, March 2, 2005)
On Sunday February 27, 2005 Star-Bulletin cartoonist Corky was so amazed by Lingle's zeal in pushing the Akaka bill that he published a cartoon showing Lingle pleading with a Senator in his office (looks like Jon Kyl?) with a portrait of President Bush on the wall behind him. The caption says "It's Akaka bill senator, not kaka" (Note: the word "Kaka" means "crap" in Hawaiian slang) The cartoon's URL is
In September 2005 Lingle was again in Washington to lobby Senators for the Akaka bill. The bill was scheduled for floor action immediately after the August recess. But when Hurricane Katrina blew the Akaka bill off the Senate schedule, Lingle was right there. On Wednesday September 7 the Honolulu Star-Bulletin reported
"Lingle was able to increase her own lobbying yesterday after she found out from Akaka's staff that as a sitting governor she is allowed on the Senate floor. Lingle said she took advantage of the location to snag senators during recesses. "I had more privileges there than I have at home with the Legislature," Lingle said. "I was talking with Sen. (Norm) Coleman, R-Minn., one of the bill's co-sponsors, and he said, 'Let's go talk in the cloakroom,' so I was able to hook up with senators who I have not seen before. To be there in person and let them know I feel it is important to the state, I think has made an impact," Lingle said. The lobbying effort was helped, Lingle said, when senators came up to Akaka and he introduced them to her. "They can't pass him by. And he would say, 'Do you know our governor,'" Lingle said. With the GOP controlling 55 Senate seats, Lingle said it helps to have bipartisan lobbying. "It does underscore for me how important it is to have balanced representation up here, and again, no matter how long you have had someone in office, regardless of party, being able to work both sides, as we are doing now, has made a difference," Lingle said."
Throughout her first term as Governor, Lingle continued pushing the Akaka bill as her most important federal priority. In May 2006 it was reported Lingle would travel to Washington yet again, in early June, to lobby Senators at the time when the Akaka bill was scheduled to come to the floor for a vote.
On May 22, 2006 Star-Bulletin cartoonist Corky once again lampooned her zealousness. Corky's cartoon shows Governor Lingle going down a dark staircase to the U.S. Senate catacombs to see what happened to the Akaka bill. The photo has original URL of:
Throughout her second term as Governor, Linda Lingle continued her zealous support and lobbying for the Akaka bill. There was one version of the bill which was kept secret from her until the day before it was introduced in a House committee, and which Lingle opposed because it would have granted major powers to the leaders of the Akaka tribe even before negotiations with the State of Hawaii. Senators Akaka and Inouye reluctantly promised to introduce a version which she could approve, whereupon Lingle once again sent letters to all 100 Senators announcing her renewed support for the bill.
Although the focus of this review of Lingle's performance is the Akaka bill at the federal level, there are many other issues at the state level where Lingle proved her zealous support for racial entitlement programs which are horribly divisive for Hawaii's people.
One such example is how Lingle unilaterally restarted payments of state government money to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Several years before Lingle became Governor OHA had filed a lawsuit against the State of Hawaii demanding payment of 20% of revenue from the ceded lands for the airport, the Duty Free Shop in Waikiki, Hilo Hospital, and other institutions. After a lengthy delay the state Supreme Court had ruled that the amount of money owed to OHA is impossible for the Court to adjudicate, and therefore the state did not owe any money to OHA until the legislature resolved the matter. But during an OHA-sponsored gubernatorial debate between Mazie Hirono and Linda Lingle on the Friday night before the Tuesday election, Lingle promised that if elected she would immediately order her department heads to start sending checks to OHA for 20% of each department's revenue from ceded lands. And that's exactly what she did within the first few days after she was inaugurated as Governor. Hirono had warned during the debate that such an action was probably illegal, but Lingle threw prudence and caution to the wind in order to support OHA's racial entitlement.
Another example is how Lingle zealously supported Kamehameha Schools' racially exclusionary admissions policy. On August 2, 2005 a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a 2-1 decision in the case of Doe v. Kamehameha Schools. This decision ruled that the schools' racially exclusionary admissions policy is illegal. On August 6, 2005 there was a huge protest rally of about 15,000 people at 'Iolani Palace (seat of government of the Kingdom of Hawai'i). The protesters wore red shirts with the slogan "Ku I Ka Pono" (Stand up for justice). Governor Lingle attended the rally, wearing the red shirt with slogan over her heart, and gave a speech in favor of racial segregation and denouncing the court's decision. Among the things that made her action remarkable is that the State of Hawaii was not a party to the lawsuit, so there was no reason for the Governor to take sides except that she wanted to show solidarity with Hawaiian sovereignty activists. Here's a photo of Governor Lingle and Lieutenant Governor Aiona standing on the coronation pavilion at the Palace giving her speech while wearing the red shirt
News reports describing that Palace event, and numerous photos showing the anti-American attitude of the rally, are on a webpage at
Throughout her campaign for Senate in 2012, Lingle has continued to pledge her strong support for the Akaka bill. Lingle's pledge to push the bill can be found in the following 7-paragraph quote from her campaign webpage at
"Native Hawaiian Federal Recognition
"Hawaii's next Senator should work expeditiously with the other three members of the Hawaii Congressional Delegation (as well as Senator Akaka) to examine and understand the reasons why native Hawaiian federal recognition in the form of the Akaka Bill has not become law after more than a decade of work by the delegation. Next, the Delegation should develop a strategy that reflects a unity of purpose and approach.
"We know already from history that it is not enough for Hawaii's Congressional delegation alone to support the Akaka Bill. Its passage will require bipartisan support from a majority of members of both houses of Congress.
"No version of the Akaka Bill has ever passed both houses of Congress and made it to the desk of any President. This is true even though the Akaka Bill has been under consideration during times when Democrats controlled both house of Congress, Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, and control was divided. I believe this was due in part because many members of Congress as well as the broader public did not understand the history of Hawaii and its people, and did not understand the content of the legislation itself. It is clear that Hawaii's next U.S. Senator will need to spend time talking with their fellow senators as well as the public about native Hawaiian federal recognition–both what it means and what it doesn't mean.
"The special status of native Hawaiians as an indigenous people of the United States has been recognized by the United States Congress for almost 100 years. The Admission Act admitting Hawaii to the Union recognizes that status, as do scores of Acts of Congress, including the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act adopted in 1921. At its heart, the Akaka Bill further formalizes the relationship, and many of its provisions will help to protect current programs that benefit native Hawaiians. I have always supported the core provisions of the Akaka Bill that provide that recognition.
"Formal recognition of native Hawaiians by the United States affords native Hawaiians the same type of recognition afforded to American Indians and Alaska Natives and provides a simple measure of justice and fairness.
Those native Hawaiians who support recognition are simply asking Congress to provide them the same political status Congress provided the other native peoples of the United States — no more, but no less.
"If elected as the next U.S. Senator from Hawaii, I commit to continuing to work with Hawaii's congressional delegation as well as other members of Congress in both parties to pass legislation formally recognizing native Hawaiians.
"Passing this important legislation will afford formal recognition to native Hawaiians by putting into place a workable structure for establishing a native Hawaiian governing entity that is consistent with the core values of justice and fairness that are at the heart of our nation's greatness."
CHARLES DJOU'S ZEALOUSNESS IN PUSHING THE AKAKA BILL
Here is an extended version of a letter published by Ken Conklin in online newspapers in 2010. The same points remain valid in Fall 2012.
Aloha dear readers in Hawaii's First Congressional District,
I'm writing to you about the election of November 2, 2010.
I urge you to vote against Charles Djou, a man I admire and respect, whose views I agree with on nearly every issue. Unfortunately that means I'm asking you to vote in favor of a candidate I personally dislike, whose views I disagree with on almost every issue -- Colleen Hanabusa.
So why am I asking you to vote for Hanabusa and against Djou? Let me explain.
It's all about the Akaka bill. I believe the Akaka bill is the most important issue for the people of Hawaii since the Statehood vote in 1959. Although both Djou and Hanabusa strongly support the Akaka bill, Djou would be far more effective in getting it passed, because he is a Republican -- he made that point loud and clear in a radio interview, and he is correct -- so we must not give him the chance.
The Akaka bill is a great evil. Its importance for Hawaii is greater than all other issues combined. It would irrevocably divide the lands and people of Hawaii along racial lines, creating an apartheid system where about half our land and a quarter of our people would live under different laws from everyone else. See the book "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State" available in the library or at
Both Djou and Hanabusa are strongly in favor of the Akaka bill. Both of them refuse to demand an amendment to require a vote by Hawaii's people on the Akaka bill before it can take effect -- they think it's OK to impose an enormous unfunded federal mandate on us without our consent.
Djou and Hanabusa are the only two candidates for Congress this year in Hawaii's First District. There's nobody else to vote for. So, wouldn't it be logical to set aside the Akaka bill, and choose the better candidate based on other issues?
But here's where party affiliation comes into play. I agree with all the political pundits who are predicting a huge victory for the Republicans in this election. The Republicans will win more than enough of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives to have a comfortable majority, even without Charles Djou.
Nearly every Democrat in the House voted in favor of the Akaka bill in 2010. Hanabusa has no need to win votes from Democrats. Republicans will see her as just another radical-left Democrat in the same mold as Abercrombie. Republicans will simply ignore her. No Republican will vote for the Akaka bill based on what Hanabusa, a freshman Democrat with no personal relationships there, tells them. And Hawaii voters, don't worry about getting the pork you've become accustomed to -- members of Congress bring home the bacon even when they're in the minority, as Inouye, Akaka, and Abercrombie proved even when the Republicans held power in both the House and Senate for many years.
Djou is a Republican. On issues related to budget and taxation, he is very much aligned with the Tea Party movement which will have great power in the 112th Congress starting in January. His fellow Republicans will pay attention to him. Those Republicans from other states, especially the newly elected ones supported by the Tea Party movement, who know nothing about Hawaii or the Akaka bill, are likely to go along with whatever he tells them on a matter that seems to affect only Hawaii. That's the reason it would be bad to have Djou in Congress.
Governor Lingle, wearing the label "Republican," has spent eight years aggressively lobbying her fellow Republicans in the Senate to support the Akaka bill, and winning some crucial Republican support for it. She personally testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs in two different Congresses. She actually went onto the floor of the U.S. Senate while it was in session (a seldom-used privilege granted to Governors) to plead with her fellow Republicans to support the Akaka bill. She spent most of her precious time with President Bush when he was in Hawaii trying to persuade him to support the Akaka bill, thereby squandering her political capital and her time with the President which she should have spent on other topics beneficial to all Hawaii's people. Charles Djou, if elected to Congress, would perform just like Linda Lingle, getting Republican votes for the Akaka bill that no Democrat could get.
How do we know Djou is a strong supporter of the Akaka bill? There's nothing about it on his website. Maybe he's embarrassed to let his base of support know about it. But here's a quote from an interview he gave during a 20-minute interview on OHA's daily radio program "Na 'Oiwi Olino" on Tuesday October 5, 2010. The entire hour-long program, including a comparable interview with Hanabusa, can be replayed by clicking here:
"For myself first of all, of course as a Congressman, I eagerly look forward to hopefully passing the Native Hawaiian recognition bill ... Over the ten years I have represented Hawaii [in the state House and the Honolulu City Council] ... I have been a clear and consistent advocate for increasing opportunities for Native Hawaiians, and for expanding access to housing and the just entitlements I think Native Hawaiians deserve."
Continuing in that same interview, here are Djou's own words explaining why everyone who opposes the Akaka bill must oppose Djou, and why he would be far more effective getting votes for the Akaka bill than the equally zealous Colleen Hanabusa. Interviewer Randy Hudnall asked "Now, you just mentioned the Akaka bill. What will you do to garner support for the Akaka bill if it should pass the Senate and return to the House this Congress?"
Djou answered with excitement in his voice: "You know, I think what I can offer is a bipartisan solution -- bipartisan support for the Akaka bill. That's absolutely essential ... It can't come from just one political party, it has to come from both. Hawaii has been trying ... for over a decade to move the Akaka bill ... and we've been unsuccessful, and the reason for that is it's been entirely one-sided. What we need is support from both political parties. Should the Akaka bill come back to the U.S. House I'm confident that I'd be able to garner far more Republican support for the Akaka bill -- make it bipartisan -- make it less controversial, and make its passage far smoother."
Djou also made clear in the interview that he supports not only the Akaka bill but also the plethora of racially exclusionary entitlements in areas such as housing, education, and healthcare; and that he will support those programs that treat ethnic Hawaiians like an Indian tribe even if the Akaka bill fails.
Shouldn't government treat us all equally? The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the equal protection of the laws regardless of race. Charles Djou, as an attorney, should know that racial entitlements and the creation of a phony Indian tribe are unconstitutional. Djou should know enough about Hawaii's history to realize that ethnic Hawaiians have a history totally different from the Indian tribes, and that the Kingdom was multiracial with full equality, voting rights, and active participation in high government positions by non-natives who were either born in Hawaii or became naturalized; whereas the Akaka tribe is racially exclusionary just like the illegal entitlement programs it is designed to protect.
At least Governor Lingle had an excuse for supporting the Akaka bill -- she told the Kamehameha School alumni association during her campaign eight years ago that she feels ethnic Hawaiians are "a people" with a right to self-determination comparable to the right of her own Jewish people to have a racially/religiously defined Nation of Israel. Lingle's romanticization and mystification of ethnic Hawaiians as comparable to her own "God's Chosen People" was terribly misguided, but understandable as a psychological mechanism.
Djou has no such excuse. His support for the Akaka bill is a mystery. He should know that he will get zero votes from the racialists aligned with the Akaka bill, OHA, Kamehameha Schools, etc. -- they are enthusiastic Hanabusa supporters. Hanabusa has not only attended, but also spoken at numerous secessionist rallies over the past ten years, from Wai'anae to 'Iolani Palace to Makapu'u; and has actively pushed Hawaiian racialist legislation as member and then chairperson of the state Senate committee on Hawaiian affairs. The Native Hawaiian Convention in Honolulu this week features speeches by Senator Dan Akaka, Congresswoman Mazie Hirono, and candidate Colleen Hanabusa -- but the powerful lobbying group disrespects sitting Congressman Djou by not even inviting him. He knows the recent Zogby poll shows a majority of Hawaii's people oppose the Akaka bill and an even larger majority demand that it be placed on ballot as a referendum question in a general election. See complete results of the Zogby poll at
Yet Djou continues to support the bill, and he refuses to propose an amendment to the bill to require its approval by Hawaii's people before it can take effect. Shame on him! Nearly everyone who supports the Akaka bill will vote for Hanabusa regardless of Djou's position on it, while he could collect the votes from everyone who opposes the bill if he would stand up and oppose it. Djou's position on the Akaka bill is a loser both morally and politically.
How low will Djou kow-tow before the election to the tycoons of Hawaii's powerful race-based institutions? Watch the televised debates to find out. How much lower will he kow-tow to them in Congress during the lame duck session and for the next two years if he wins in November? All the way to the floor, no doubt. Please vote for Colleen Hanabusa, a candidate I despise, but who will be ineffective in pushing the Akaka bill because the Republicans -- a Congressional majority next year -- will ignore her.
KAWIKA CROWLEY, REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR CONGRESS FROM HAWAII'S SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, SUPPORTS THE AKAKA BILL AND ALSO HAWAIIAN INDEPENDENCE.
Kawika Crowley is known by relatively few people and has no chance against Democrat nominee Tulsi Gabbard. Nevertheless, I encourage voters in the second Congressional district to vote for Gabbard just to make sure Crowley does not win. The reasoning is the same as in the situations of Hirono vs. Lingle and Hanabusa vs. Djou. Gabbard worked for Senator Akaka and has reiterated her support for the Akaka bill; but Crowley is a Republican and thus would be more effective than Gabbard in persuading Republicans to stop blocking the bill.
Here's Crowley's small campaign webpage:
Here's the paragraph he devotes to the Akaka bill in his subpage describing his positions on various issues:
"On a few issues, I do disagree with my fellow conservatives, especially on the issue of Hawaiian Sovereignty. Simply said, the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom in 1893 was flat out wrong and illegal. A nation-within-a nation must come to pass, allowing for a sovereign independent Hawaii Nation. The Nation of Hawaii will arise soon, and I will do everything in my power to help that become a reality. Many think I'm part Hawaiian, but I have not a drop of Hawaiian blood. I am English, Irish, Scotch, and Cherokee. I am indeed proud of my heritage. It is my Cherokee blood, from the survivors of the dreadful Trail of Tears, that allows me to relate and empathize with the Hawaiian people and their desire to resurrect their nation. I am indeed humbled to have been one of the writers of the classic sovereignty song, "Hawaii 78" made popular by Bro. IZ and the Makaha Sons back in the seventies. To this day over 35 years later it touches millions around the world. Chicken Skin indeed. You can find out more about the fascinating story of the writing of this song at my website, Hawaii78.com."
In an interview with the Kona newspaper, West Hawaii Today, Crowley made clear he favors secession. The Republican Party should be ashamed of itself for putting this guy forward as its candidate.
West Hawaii Today, August 02, 2012
Crowley eyes return of sovereign Hawaii
By Erin Miller
West Hawaii Today
** Excerpts related to Akaka bill and secession
Hilo native Kawika Crowley has several big ideas he’d like to see put in place if he’s elected to the U.S. House this fall.
Crowley, 60, now living in Kaneohe, Oahu, is seeking the Republican nomination to run in the 2nd Congressional District, for the seat Mazie Hirono is vacating to run for Senate.
For one, Crowley said he would like to see a return of a sovereign Hawaiian government, with the United States awarding Kahoolawe to that government.
“The Akaka Bill doesn’t go far enough” for Native Hawaiian recognition, Crowley said.
The Hawaiian Kingdom had a monarchy for more than 100 years. It wasn’t a tribe, he said. It had a government, treaties and roads.
LINGLE, DJOU, AND CROWLEY VIOLATE THE HAWAII REPUBLICAN PARTY RESOLUTION EXPLICITLY OPPOSING THE AKAKA BILL, ADOPTED DURING THE PARTY CONVENTION ON MAY 14, 2011; AND THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM ADOPTED IN 2010 IMPLICITLY OPPOSING THE AKAKA BILL.
The following URL allows direct access to the Hawaii Republican Party individual resolution opposing the Akaka bill:
The path to finding it on the Republican Party website is:
Go to Hawaii Republican Party website at
Then hover the cursor over "About us"
And use the pull-down menu to click on "2011 Resolutions."
RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO THE "AKAKA BILL"
Whereas, the "Akaka Bill" violates the fundamental values inherent in the Hawai'i Republican Party's LLIFE platform;
Whereas, the "Akaka Bill" imposes an entirely new level of governance upon the Hawaiian people;
Whereas, the "Akaka Bill" trades away individual Liberty in exchange for government grants and favors;
Whereas, the "Akaka Bill" denigrates the principles of Individual Responsibility;
Whereas, the "Akaka Bill" creates unequal opportunities, fiefdoms of favoritism, and artificial barriers to our citizens;
Therefore, be it resolved, that the Hawai'i Republican Party in convention at Lihue, Hawai'i, May 14, 2011, hereby expresses its unalterable opposition to the "Akaka Bill" and to any iteration of it that robs Hawaiians of Liberty and Equal Opportunity or imposes more government and the fiscal and moral calamities such a course inevitably brings;
Therefore, be it further resolved, that copies of this resolution be posted on the Hawai'i Republican Party website and distributed to Hawai'i elected officials and media for public dissemination.
The 2010 Hawai'i Republican Party Platform
Preamble: The strength of Hawai'i lies within individuals and their families; Constitutional freedoms empower the people to meet current and future challenges. We believe in...
-- Liberty --
Freedom to pursue inherent American guarantees of Life and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Freedom secured by the rule of law, not by arbitrary judicial or executive decrees, provides all Americans an equal choice to pursue a productive and meaningful life.
-- Limited Government --
Government exists to protect our God-given rights, defend our sovereignty and borders, and provide infrastructure for the common good.
The government that governs least, based on the Constitution, governs best.
Government, at any level, should not perform functions which are better and less expensively performed by individuals or private organizations.
Government enforces laws that allow for a prosperous free market; it does not compete with nor over-regulate the free market.
-- Individual Responsibility --
Each person is responsible and accountable for the consequences of their actions.
We embrace the opportunity to help those in need.
-- Fiscal Accountability --
Government is responsible to balance the budget by eliminating waste and reducing spending before raising taxes.
Before any law or regulation is enacted, the economic impact should be calculated fairly and disclosed publicly.
Government should not burden future generations with excessive debt.
-- Equality of Opportunity --
Each individual has the opportunity to achieve, without any guarantee for a particular outcome.
As Americans, we believe individuals are limited only by their vision, abilities, intellect, and personal ambitions.
Epilogue: We believe that America is exceptional. We believe all of our greatest accomplishments are achieved by men and women free to live their own lives and pursue their own dreams.
Send comments or questions to:
You may now
GO BACK TO OTHER TOPICS ON THIS WEBSITE