Letters for Saturday, November 3, 2007

• Headlines missed the boat

• To spin or not to spin

• Land taken away

• Activists and passivists

Headlines missed the boat

I think that after looking at the count of votes and who voted which way the headlines should have read something more like “O‘ahu rams Superferry down Neighbor Island throats.”

The breakdown for the outer islands was 5-2 against the bill. O‘ahu was 18-0 for the bill.

And in looking at the vote breakdown some more … what’s this “yes with reservations” thing. I believe they said it related to having misgivings about calling the special session in the first place. What kind of thinking is that? “We shouldn’t be doing this at all, but … what the hell, I’ll just say yes.”

Sounds like the perfect politically androgynous way to appear to be in sympathy with Superferry opponents while doing the dirty deed and remaining in sync with the power structure.

And “yes with reservations” was 14 of the 20 votes in favor of the bill … I think those votes should have been counted as 51 percent “Yes” and 49 percent “No.” That would have made it more like 13-12 instead of 20-5 and the governor might not have felt like she walked away with such an overwhelming mandate to forge ahead.

And another question. Did that bill require a simple majority to pass? Or a 2/3 majority? Hmmmm …

Robert Hickling

Princeville

To spin or not to spin

The trouble with political and business “spin doctors” is that they only shoot for damage control after an adverse event. However, like with most goals, efforts to reach them usually fall short of the goal. My spin goal would be not just to cancel a negative image situation, but to go beyond that and turn it into a positive image result. Then, if conditions prevent reaching that full goal, I most likely will have at least canceled out the negative publicity, and then some.

As a current example, let’s look at President Bush’s recent visit to the California wildfire areas. A lot of people took this as simply a politician having to show his face to express concern for the situation. Thus, he gained nothing and, perhaps, lost a few points, as most people realized that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had the situation well under control. Using positive spin, he should have stayed in D.C. and issued a statement like the following:

“My personal presence is not needed in Southern California, as my fellow Republican, Governor Schwarzenegger, has the situation well under control. It would be just a publicity show and I’m above that. The photos and videos presented to me are better views than I could get in person. My time as President is needed here to negotiate for aid to help expedite federal resources to the disaster areas. In essence, I’m an ‘armchair firefighter,’ but that is exactly what I’m paid to do.”

By the above, he would have quashed the eventual publicity stunt statements and emphasized his true executive effectiveness by exercising his powers from where he belonged — in the oval office.

C. William Salm

Kapa‘a

Land taken away

How do I start? And where do I end? People, we are in a revolution here in paradise with all the outside influences and disagreements among ourselves in its reason for atrocity, and who gains? The corrupt politician, landowner manager, the greedy realtor/developer, and so on. We talk about keeping Kaua‘i green, sustainable and the way it used to be. I remember no gates to back roads on plantation lands except for pastures to keep the land eroding, cattle in, to go fishing, hunting and gathering. Now, I’m afraid my children will be thrown in jail for trespassing, and this is where I focus my attention. My dad started leasing back in ‘98 to farm some land (6 acres to be exact) east of Lihu‘e from Amfac Sugar.

I thought that was the best gesture Amfac did for him and his family considering he put 43 good years working for the plantation. The family worked at some point together clearing, planting and of course the harvesting. I consistently hear remarks people say that they appreciate what my dad had shared with them. In my opinion, he never was going to get rich (money wise), but sharing the harvest was rewarding enough.

Oct. 22, 2007, the land was taken away. Thank you good neighbor, Grove Farm Properties. Especially Mike Tresler, who has not returned my calls to work out a solution.

You’re not to blame someone had said to me, it is people you were mentored by. (Sad to be you) I dare you Mike not to break house policy rules.

But then who doesn’t? But be assured, I hope, that land falls in Kaua‘i hands and not some under table dealing to Maui ranchers.

Mario Villatora

Lihu‘e

Activists and passivists

Editors may have their difficult days too, especially when they are flooded with letters on hot topics like the Superferry. We expect them to give a balanced picture of the community’s opinion. This means publishing both pro and con opinions. So, that’s what they do. Their selection of letters published however should not be considered as a certified outcome of any opinion poll. The newspaper polls may be correct, but might have been manipulated. No, not by the newspapers, but the public, or rather by certain individuals or interest groups who want to tilt the opinion-scale in their favor. While in the wee days of newspaper polling, when a voting was done with forms clipped from the paper and returned to the editor the manipulations was done by buying up as many copies of the paper as possible. Later cheater tried to reprint the forms. And now in the electronic age you can buy a program for $40.00 that will mask the identification details of your computer, so the polling software counts your 200 or 2,000 identical clicks as 200 or 2,000 different votes. I don’t know if this was done in any of the Superferry polls, but the potential is there. Now, how can anyone say that the majority wants or does not want the Superferry, unless a certifiable island-wide referendum is held?

There are some good clues, however. See how many opponents (about 95%) and how many supporters (about 5%) were present at the public hearing in Hanama’ulu? As the writer of the letter “Majority favors ferry” stated in the TGI, those who testified at the hearing were activists. Indeed. And all of them who were present were activists, because they took the time and effort to be actively involved in this ongoing quest for a better Kaua‘i and Hawai’i. And those who say support the Superferry but did not come belong to the other group, the passivists. The writer also stated that the supporters he had talked to asking them why they did not come said that “with the majority of the people of Hawai‘i being in favor of the ferry” did not want to expose themselves to possible harm. Excuse me? What harm? The big majority is afraid of the minority? Give me a break.

Janos Samu

Kalaheo