Skip navigation.
   Candidate & issue information
Informing Hawaii's voters

Simple Alternative Energy

Lynn Finnegan Campaign Banners and Signs Stolen

Lynn Finnegan

From Lynn Finnegan Campaign

Friday, July 9, 2010

HONOLULU - Over the holiday weekend, a large banner and multiple signs for House Minority Leader Lynn Finnegan’s (R) campaign for Lt. Governor were stolen in Kailua, O‘ahu, on Kainalu Drive.

“The signs were put up on the parade route by our hardworking volunteers all day on Saturday in preparation for the Kailua Independence Day parade. We believe the signs were taken to reduce our visibility during the popular parade,” said Campaign Manager, Peter Finnegan. “Hawai‘i voters are disgusted by this type of political tactic. Those responsible for the theft should be held accountable.”

The Finnegan campaign signs were hung near several Duke Aiona campaign banners, which were also taken prior to the start of the parade. Each sign was hung only after receiving explicit permission from the respective home owners or occupants. When one home owner was asked what happened to the signage, they responded that persons approached their door claiming to be from the Finnegan campaign and they would be taking down the banner.

A police report was filed with the Honolulu Police Department. The collective banners and signs were valued at more than $300 to the Finnegan Campaign.

Any information from the public should be provided to the Finnegan Campaign Headquarters via email at or via telephone at 808-233-9066.

Charles Djou (R) yard signs stolen [HPI] March 25, 2010

New Children's Book Filled with Historical Falsehoods

Kingdom of Hawaii coat of arms at Iolani Palace rear entrance gateway

A new children's book filled with racially inflammatory historical falsehoods should be recalled -- Kim Hunter (author) and Patti Carol (illustrator), "Ka Pu'uwai Hamama — Volunteer Spirit"

by Kenneth R. Conklin, Ph.D.

A book published in May 2010 seems intended to serve three noble and benevolent purposes: show well-deserved appreciation to an elderly volunteer, Mrs. Anne Jurczynski, who has given 24 years of service to Iolani Palace; celebrate the importance of the Palace in Hawaii's history; and help children learn Hawaiian language by telling a story in simple words where every page has a paragraph in English and the same paragraph in Hawaiian.

But the book "Ka Pu'uwai Hamama — Volunteer Spirit" contains some commonly repeated historical falsehoods which serve the purpose of arousing resentment, anger, and racial hostility. In an essay-length book review, the worst falsehoods are quoted and disproved with explanations of what is true and citations where proof can be found.

Here are the most flagrant historical falsehoods or distortions found in the book (either directly stated or implied by innuendo) and disproved in this book review.

When reading these falsehoods, remember that one of the major purposes of the book is to use it as a primer for elementary school children to learn Hawaiian language and Hawaiian history.

TWISTED: When King Kalakaua's dead body unexpectedly came home from San Francisco to Iolani Palace in 1891, the evil (haole) sons and grandsons of the missionaries took advantage of Liliuokalani's grief and confusion to force her to take the oath to support the Bayonet Constitution of 1887 that had been forced on her brother Kalakaua. (pages 11 and 12)

TWISTED: Kalakaua signed the reciprocity treaty with the U.S. only under pressure from the (haole) sugar plantation owners. And when a new reciprocity treaty was needed to extend the old one, and Kalakaua didn't want to give Pearl Harbor to the U.S., the (haole) missionary boys forced the bayonet Constitution on Kalakaua. (pages 13 and 14)

TWO MAJOR FALSEHOODS THAT INFLAME RACIAL HATRED: The Bayonet Constitution stripped most native Hawaiians of the right to vote and/or hold high office; and Kalakaua signed it only because otherwise the (haoles) were going to kill him. (page 14)

TWISTED: Queen Liliuokalani's (haole) cabinet ministers betrayed her and publicly humiliated her by refusing to agree to a new Constitution she was planning to proclaim -- they did this at the very moment she was ready to proclaim it, when foreign ministers were waiting in the throne room and thousands of natives were eagerly waiting in front of the Palace. (page 16)

THREE MAJOR FALSEHOODS PLUS ADDITIONAL TWISTING: "On January 17th, 1893, 162 U.S. marines invaded Hawaii at the request of the U.S. Minister. With guns and cannons pointed at 'Iolani Palace the group of American businessmen proclaimed a new government and ordered the Queen to resign. Fearing bloodshed on both sides, the Queen surrendered to the U.S. and not to the provisional government." (page 18)

TWISTED: U.S. President Grover Cleveland sent his personal representative James Blount to Hawaii to investigate the U.S. role in the overthrow of the monarchy, and Blount wrote an unbiased report saying it was wrong for the U.S. to invade Hawaii in support of the overthrow of the monarchy by white businessmen. (page 23)

ONE MAJOR FALSEHOOD PLUS ADDITIONAL TWISTING: Liliuokalani discouraged Hawaiians from attempting a counterrevolution because she didn't want bloodshed, but when it happened in 1895, the Sheriff went to her home and arrested her, (falsely) accusing her of knowing about the plan. (page 25)

TWISTED: Liliuokalani, imprisoned and on trial under threat of a death sentence, gave up her throne and said the monarchy was finished. (page 27)

MAJOR FALSEHOOD: In 1897 "Nearly all Hawaiian people signed petitions opposing annexation." (page 29)

MAJOR FALSEHOOD WHOSE SOLE PURPOSE IS TO INFLAME RACIAL HATRED: In 1898, at the ceremony of annexation, "The Hawaiian flag was lowered from above the former Palace and cut into small strips to be given away as souvenirs" (to the haoles who had overthrown the monarchy). (page 31)

If the book's author Kim Hunter was innocently repeating commonly heard myths, then he should promptly recall the book and either refund the purchase price or else replace the book with a revised second edition, in the same way Tylenol capsules with cyanide were recalled in 1982 and Toyotas with accelerator problems were recalled in 2010. Otherwise the book will poison the souls of innocent readers as surely as cyanide killed seven Tylenol consumers, and the book's author will be deserving of a Goebbels Award for Outstanding Use of Media for Propaganda Disguised As Fact.

A webpage has quotes from the book to show that each of the falsehoods and twistings listed above is an accurate statement of what's in the book, plus detailed analysis, internet links, and citations of documents proving that each item is false or distorted. There's also further explanation of why books like this are poisonous to the souls of innocent children, and why books like this should be regarded as defective products that should be recalled in the same way as all Tylenol was recalled in 1982 when several people died from cyanide-laced capsules, and Toyota vehicles with sticky accelerators were recalled in 2010.

For the detailed analysis of the falsehoods in the book "Ka Pu'uwai Hamama -- Volunteer Spirit" see

Kenneth R. Conklin's book "Hawaiian Apartheid: Racial Separatism and Ethnic Nationalism in the Aloha State" has 27 copies available in the Hawaii Public Library system, and can also be viewed and purchased through

Do Americans Like a Slave Class of Illegals?

And are they happy with their outsourced slaves in China?

Swiss Refuse to Extradite Roman Polanski to the U.S.

Funding Corruption and Waste in Afghanistan

by Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX)

Last week, GOP chairman Michael Steele came under fire for daring to say what a lot of Americans already know – that our involvement in Afghanistan is an ill-advised quagmire with no end in sight. After nearly 10 years and approaching $1 trillion spent, the conflict is going nowhere because there is nowhere for it to go. After all, if victory is never really defined, defeat is inevitable.

With our economy at home in serious trouble, this wasteful occupation is something we clearly cannot afford. Each soldier costs us $1 million per year, and yet most in Washington are only considering how many more soldiers to send. Fuel costs an astonishing $400 per gallon for our military in Afghanistan! Yet somehow, many politicians feel it is acceptable to squeeze this money out of our taxpayers, who are truly struggling economically, to fund this non-war. Our economy here is not showing any real signs of improvement. Official unemployment is pushing 10 percent and getting worse. (Real unemployment is over 20 percent according to the free-market economists) The growing debt and inflation used to fund this occupation only dooms us to more economic hardship for a long time to come. And - for what?

Where the money for Afghanistan comes from is one problem – where it goes is another. Recently, it has come to light that much of the aid money we send to Afghanistan is lost due to corruption. Billions of tax dollars from hardworking Americans are ending up lining the pockets of corrupt Afghan officials, and likely even filtering into the Taliban we are ostensibly fighting. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that curiously enough, billions more than the Afghan government collects in revenue is leaving the country in the form of cash on huge pallets and in suitcases and mostly ending up in Dubai, as well-connected Afghan officials buy up luxury homes and enrich their personal off-shore bank accounts. Investigations into corruption and graft have been blocked by the Karzai government, probably because Karzai’s own brother would have to be implicated. It is encouraging that the foreign aid appropriations subcommittee has attempted to block billions in aid as a response to these allegations, but this is likely temporary and may not even succeed.

The point is that sending aid money to Afghanistan is not making poor people over there better off. It is making poor people here worse off. Corruption is endemic to Afghanistan, with graft comprising about one-fourth of their economy! Even though it is considered the second most corrupt nation in the world according to Transparency International, we still send the Afghan government billions of dollars in aid and are shocked to find it is not making its way out of the sticky fingers of the officials entrusted with it.

Robbing citizens here to fund corruption over there is not helping average citizens anywhere. We are sacrificing real economic opportunities at home for the opportunity to line corrupt pockets in Afghanistan. Not only that, but American soldiers are being killed and maimed. It is tragic and frustrating how much we have lost and wasted already. It is time to leave Afghanistan to the Afghans to sort out. I am glad more Americans are finally willing to face this reality.

Freedom Watch

Freedom Watch's theme is always the defense of our U.S. Constitution. It airs on Saturdays on Fox News.

Judge Andrew Napolitano's guests this week are Ron Paul, Lou Dobbs, Sharron Angle and more. Topics include the clash among Democrats, Republicans and Libertarians on GOP Chairman Michael Steele's comments about Afghanistan being President Obama's war. Well? Didn't he significantly expand the war there when he became President? But see what the guests say.

Does Lou Dobbs think that illegal aliens have natural rights?

Sharon Angle (R), running for the U.S. Senate against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) in Nevada, is one of the leading figures of the Tea Party movement. There is a real chance that Reid will lose, but will external pressures moderate Angle's views?

Saturday, July 10, 2010

55 Percent Think President Obama Is a Socialist

A poll by Democracy Corps finds that when likely voters are asked how well the word "socialist" describes the President, 33 percent say it describes Obama “very well,” 22 percent say “well,” 15 percent say “not too well,” and 25 percent say “not well at all.”

Read more . . . [National Review]

BP Oil Spill Health Emergency!

Marine biologist and toxicologist Dr. Chris Pincetich says Corexit is being sprayed at night by Coast Guard planes. He explains how the use of the chemical on the Gulf oil spill has a whole cascade of toxic effects.


Marine biologist claims US Coast Guard involved in Corexit spraying [The Raw Story]

Dr. Pincetich's bonafides [University of California at Davis]

Pincetich's Facebook page

The Tyranny of Judges

Murray N. Rothbard

by Murray N. Rothbard

First published as "The Plumb Line: So What Else is New?" in Libertarian Review, April, 1978

One of the fatal flaws in the concept of "limited" government is the judiciary. Endowed with the compulsory monopoly of the vital power of deciding disputes, of ultimately deciding who can wield force and how much can be wielded, the government judiciary sits as an unchecked and unlimited tyrant.

Pledged to preside over the rule of law, law that is supposed to apply to everyman, the judges themselves are yet above the law and free from its sanctions and limitations. When clothed in the robes of his office, the judge can do no legal wrong and is therefore immune from the law itself.

There is a crucial catch-22 in this grisly situation. For if anyone would like to argue against this arrangement, he can do so – in our archist system – only before judges who themselves are part of the problem rather than part of the solution. It is up to government judges to rule on whether government judges are immune from the law. How do you think they would decide? Well, how do you think a group of economists would decide on the question of whether economists should be immune? Or any other group or profession?

Not surprisingly, the United States Supreme Court ruled, in 1872, that judges were immune from any damage suits for any "judicial acts" that they had performed – regardless of how wrong, evil, or unconstitutional those acts may have been. When clothed in judicial authority, judges can do no wrong. Period. Recently a case of an errant judge has come up again – because his action as a judge was considered generally to be monstrous and illegal. In 1971, Mrs. Ora Spitler McFarlin petitioned Judge Harold D. Stump of the DeKalb County, Indiana, Circuit Court to engage in a covert, compulsory sterilization of her 15-year-old daughter, Linda Kay Spitler. Although Linda was promoted each year with her class, Mrs. McFarlin opined that she was "somewhat retarded" and had begun to stay out overnight with older youths. And we all know what that can lead to.

Judge Stump quickly signed the order, and the judge and mamma hustled Linda into a hospital, telling her it was for an appendicitis operation. Linda was then sterilized without her knowledge. Two years later, Linda married a Leo Sparkman and discovered that she had been sterilized without her knowledge. The Sparkmans proceeded to sue mamma, mamma's attorney, the doctors, the hospital, and Judge Stump, alleging a half-dozen constitutional violations.

All of these people, in truth, had grossly violated Linda's rights and aggressed against her. All should have been made to pay, and pay dearly, for their monstrous offense. But the federal district court ruled otherwise. First, it ruled that mamma, her lawyer, and the various members of the "healing professions" were all immune because everything they did had received the sanction of a certified judge. And second, Judge Stump was also absolutely immune, because he had acted in his capacity as a judge, even though, the district court acknowledged, he had had "an erroneous view of the law." So, not only is a judge immune, but he can confer his immunity in a king-like fashion even onto lowly civilians who surround him.

The US Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, unaccountably didn't understand the program, and so it reversed the district court, claiming that Judge Stump had forfeited his immunity "because of his failure to comply with elementary principles of due process," and had therefore in a sense "not acted within his jurisdiction." To allow Stump's action to stand, said the appeals court, would be to sanction "tyranny from the bench."

Now this was pretty flimsy stuff, and besides it opened an entertaining wedge toward holding judges accountable to the law and to the protection of rights like everyone else. But this would have shaken the foundations of our monopoly archist legal system. And so the US Supreme Court, on March 28, set the matter straight. In a 5–3 decision in this illuminating case of Stump v. Sparkman, Justice Byron R. ("Whizzer") White, speaking for the majority, sternly reminded the appellate court of the meaning of the 1872 ruling:

A judge will not be deprived of immunity because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously or was in excess of his authority. Rather, he will be subject to liability only when he has acted in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction."

Justice White conceded that no state law or court ruling anywhere could be said to have authorized Judge Stump's action; but the important point, he went on, is that there was no statute or ruling which prohibited such an action by the judge. Therefore, even though Stump had approved the sterilization order without legal authorization, without holding a hearing, without notice to the child, or without her being represented by a lawyer or guardian, it was still a "judicial act" and therefore beyond the law. Backing Justice White were Justices Warren Burger, Harry Blackmun, William Rehnquist, and John Stevens.

For the minority, Justice Potter Stewart, joined by Lewis Powell and Thurgood Marshall, argued that the judge's unauthorized action was "beyond the pale of anything that could sensibly be called a judicial act." He pointed out that Stump's action

was in no way an act "normally performed by a judge." Indeed there is no reason to believe that such an act has ever been performed by any other Indiana judge, before or since.

In a ringing statement, Stewart concluded, "A judge is not free, like a loose cannon, to inflict indiscriminate damage whenever he announces that he is acting in his judicial capacity."

Ahh, Justice Stewart, but apparently and unfortunately he is so free.

Stump himself will be free for some time to come. Apparently the masses of DeKalb County were not concerned about Linda's rights, for they reelected him last year to another six-year term as circuit-court judge. Bruce Ennis, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, charged that the White decision meant that "judges can violate citizens' constitutional rights and get away with it" and "can ignore the law with impunity." Ennis said that the ACLU would ask for legislation from Congress reversing this "outrageous" decision.

Outrage, yes; but why the shock and surprise?

White and his allies were

  1. simply being thick as judges, guildsmen defending their guild privileges; and
  2. were defending the very cornerstone of our archist system: the immunity from the law of the ultimate decision makers.

Removing such immunity strikes at the very heart of that system, and paves the way for a truly free America in which rights would be protected fully, in which no man or group of men would be above the law, or would have a compulsory monopoly of judicial services. We hail Mr. Ennis and the minority judges; but do they know the full implications when we pit citizens' rights against the "loose cannon" of judges and the "tyranny of the bench"?

Reprinted from

Murray N. Rothbard (1926–1995) was dean of the Austrian School, founder of modern libertarianism, and academic vice president of the Mises Institute. He was also editor – with Lew Rockwell – of The Rothbard-Rockwell Report, and appointed Lew as his literary executor.

The Best of Murray Rothbard

Syndicate content