Monday, August 28, 2006

Vote for REAL Change: Vote Republican

People sometimes ask me what a person with my background in organizing the counterculture and alternative/cutting edge revolutionaries, is doing running for office as a Republican, but see quickly, the logic of my response, “That in Hawaii, the Republican Party is the counterculture.”

Only a few are prepared to counter, that “But the Republicans are the party…,” and their minds shut down because they have no clear idea what a Republican or the Republican Party does mean, because it was always just the “unthinkable.” They could not even think of voting “Republican” -- that was the success of their conditioning (indoctrination) by their Democrat/union teachers.

But with the election of Governor Lingle -- and seeing that Christmas and different sex marriages were not abolished as the Democrat scare-mongers had promised if she was elected, many more came around to realizing that they were just being manipulated and deceived by those who think it is all right to do so, as long as they get paid for doing so and follow the professional rules that make such wrongs “right.”

Unfortunately, a lot of those types of people, are drawn into politics, or had been in the last several decades -- dominating it almost exclusively -- and driving everybody else away and out of it. And so government came to have a bad name and reputation that most people no longer wanted to have anything to do with.

And that’s primarily why we need a change -- because government shouldn’t be regarded with such low esteem. It should be attracting our most innovative and resourceful minds. What I’ve always been impressed with about such people, is that they are eminently communicative, rather than secretive about how they think and arrive at their conclusions -- and plans for action; what is described in politics as “transparency.” You see the logic of how they arrive at their conclusions -- and not just a mystifying conclusion after all is said and done, which is of course, tremendously discouraging to participation.

Such a manner of information processing can be described as “arbitrary” -- that there is no rhyme or reason for that conclusion other than what that person says so. Thus people drop out of participation to de-legitimize that institution and its processes. While the public is invited to participate and give their input, the feeling is, the decision has already been made, and one is just window dressing the outcome to make it seem “legitimate.”

The newspapers, as witnessed to these events, rather than reporting on such irregularities, further distort and legitimize such travesties -- and seem to take particular delight in doing so -- as though they had a stake in that perverse outcome.

In reading the “letters to the editor,” and now the many other (Internet) forums, the obvious and naked manipulations and deceit, are almost comical in their childishness and intents -- in an age in which most people know, and have seen better. “Real” people are not so highly-motivated to risk their credibility in such obvious deceptions and manipulations -- and do it so regularly and singlemindedly.

That is the weakness in the community information pool that is now the most exploited and tainted -- to the point in which it has virtually no credibility and integrity -- but also mandating the necessity for change. Something else emerges as the best of its time…

Few could predict that because of the Akaka-Case toxicity, the letters section would devolve from unrestrained Bush-bashing to a cesspool of unsubstantiated fabrications and personal attacks that is always the last gasp of a dying institution and way of life. But is it the newspapers or the Democrat Party?


At August 29, 2006 9:08 AM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

"Who are you calling inept?"

Case to Akaka, Akaka to Case: You're ineffective

By Richard Borreca

Two members of Congress ranked as some of the least effective -- Rep. Ed Case and Sen. Dan Akaka -- are battling over who has the worse rating on a national political Web site.

The nonpartisan Web site is owned by Capitol Advantage, which publishes congressional directories and helps link public advocacy group to members of Congress.

The Web service also rates the 435 members of the House and 100 senators on a scale for their power and influence in Washington.

Akaka is ranked 71 out of 100, and Case is ranked 410 out of 435, according to Case is running against incumbent Akaka for the U.S. Senate in the Sept. 23 primary election.

The Web site says each member of Congress is rated on 15 criteria that "demonstrated power and the ability to be effective in Congress in 2005. This resulted in a power score that ranked members for overall power in each chamber of Congress."

On Sunday, Case started running a television commercial questioning Akaka's accomplishments and noting that " ranks him one of our nation's three least influential senators."

Akaka's camp fired back yesterday, saying Case is much worse than Akaka according to, which Akaka's campaign said "is a respected nonpartisan service dedicated to facilitating civic participation."

Case's TV ad does not mention that Akaka is ranked 30th in the Senate for "legislative activity" while Case is ranked 426th in the House, Akaka's campaign staff complains.

Yesterday, Akaka said his campaign staff was trying to set the record straight.

"Our response was to tell the whole story that would be different from what he (Case) was saying," Akaka said.

Assigning a number to legislative performance does not tell the whole story, Akaka said in an interview after a speech to a group of veterans.

"For whatever criteria they use to determine that, I am unaware. When you look at the kind of response I get from live people, from colleagues, it is different," Akaka said.

In response, Case said because Akaka has been in Congress for 30 years, including 16 in the Senate, his ability to get legislation passed is important, but in contrast, Case had been in Congress for only three years, when the rating was compiled.

"Seniority doesn't mean much if you don't know what to do with it," Case said.

Akaka's campaign pointed out that Case "earns a power score of 5.02, in the bottom 10 percent of the House," while Akaka has a power score of 24.67.

In comparison, Hawaii's senior Sen. Daniel Inouye had a power score of 39, although he is ranked 33rd in the Senate.

Inouye gets a higher score because his long tenure in Congress gives him more clout, he is a member of the Appropriations Committee, he has good committee assignments and has successfully passed bills out of the Senate, according to the Web site.

In comparison, Akaka's rating notes only that he is a ranking member of a subcommittee, has successfully passed a bill in either the House or Senate and has successfully amended a measure.

Case's score, however, suffers from "having too few terms or years in office to have significant clout."

The Web site also notes that "members lose power points due to running for higher office, which usually translates into reduced resources and ability to exercise power in the legislative process."

In his television ad, Case notes that Time magazine ranks Akaka as "one of our country's five worst senators."

According to, both Case and Akaka have little measurable influence in Congress.

At August 29, 2006 9:15 AM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

"According to, both Case and Akaka have little measurable influence in Congress."

Meanwhile, back in the Islands, the news media eats like candy, their own self-generated press releases of "legendary accomplishments" on behalf of the people of Hawaii.

If that isn't the real source of inflation, I don't know what is.

At August 29, 2006 9:56 AM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

Understanding Conditioning with Mike Hu

Channel 52

9/28/06 Thursday 10:00am

This 60 minute video is my landmark observations in the field of exercise and conditioning -- which is a revolutionary approach in making exericse simpler and easier (as well as more productive)-- rather than more complex and difficult (and therefore simply not done).

I formulated these ideas in the late '80s when "No pain, no gain," was the current mantra. So I know what it is like to go against the whole grain and infrastructure of thinking and introduce a new paradigm that eventually becomes the dominant theme in the new thinking.

The demographics were obvious: as people age and become more disabled, they need exercise that is easier to do -- and not harder regimens that dicourage any attempts at participation. That's just the wrong psychology and misunderstanding of human motivation -- perverted by wishful-thinking.

And that's why we need more models of clear-thinking -- in politics, media, schools, the universities, which have become dominated by personal ambition and self-interests, rather than the collective "big picture" good.

That is the source of most of Hawaii's problems -- and more partisanship and self-interest, is not the solution. So in the coming elections, we need to choose as leaders and representatives, those with the greatest vision of what life can be -- for everyone, and not just a larger slice of a shrinking pie, as their "fair share."

For many people, Understanding Conditioning, is their first exposure to this kind of clarity -- in the discussion of any subject matter -- because all they've seen before in the media, is hype, and think that that is all there is.

Then when one sees something authentic, one knows what it is like -- and then recognizes what isn't.

At August 29, 2006 10:26 AM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

Above all else, leaders and representatives need to be open to alternative sources of information, and not just allow themselves to be spoonfed by the lobbying self-interests.

It's the Teachers Unions, Stupid!
by Chuck Muth
Posted Aug 29, 2006

In state after state, all across the county, we hear the same, tired refrain from apologists for the government-run education bureaucracy: "Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money!"

Indeed in Nevada, where education already eats up more than half of the state's annual $3 billion budget, the State Board of Education recently asked the Legislature for an extra $1 billion for next year. At about the same time, a liberal Denver consulting firm, with a history of "discovering" that states aren't spending enough on education, has also concluded that Nevada taxpayers need to cough up an additional billion to reach their self-determined level of "adequate" spending on education.

Naturally the conservative reaction to such outrageously brazen "mo' money" demands from education bureaucracies often begins with a bunch of four-letter words normally reserved for public school playgrounds and ends with the words, "When pigs fly."

However, on further reflection maybe the Right shouldn't respond in such knee-jerk fashion. Maybe conservatives should be open to significant funding increases for education. After all, a solid education - not like the ones way too many kids in our government schools get today - is the ticket to a better, more productive life and an improved community. In return, however, conservatives should demand significant education repairs.

Not band-aids. Not tinkering around the edges. Massive overhaul.

For example, system-wide local implementation of teacher proficiency testing and merit pay would be an excellent start. It's time to stop paying crappy teachers the same amount of money as excellent teachers - no matter what the teachers unions say.

Then there's school choice. And by that I mean voucher programs for EVERY parent and child - not just the poor and those currently condemned to the worst-of-the-worst government schools. The freedom to choose which school your child attends should be available to every parent. That means private schools, religious schools, distance-learning schools, Internet schools, co-ops and yes, home-schools. Public education and public schools are not mutually exclusive. Public education does not and should not mean a monopoly of expensive, mediocre, poorly-run government education centers - no matter what the teachers unions say.

More money for education should also mean significant changes in state laws and funding programs which make it easier and less expensive to open innovative charter schools - no matter what the teachers unions say.

Additionally, states should begin opting-out of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) program. Education is and should be a local issue...period. States can and should take care of their own education needs without jumping through Uncle Sam's hoops. If state taxpayers are going to cough up significantly more money for education, there should be no need for federal dough and all the strings and red-tape that come attached to it.

And speaking of NCLB, states should seek to exceed those federal standards, not meet them. State and local school districts should be pursuing superiority and excellence, not just "adequacy" - no matter what the teachers unions say.

Finally, in exchange for significant increases in education spending, the teachers unions should be banned for a minimum of twenty years. Absent that, there should be a new requirement that all collective bargaining sessions with public employee unions be conducted in public and webcast on the Internet. In addition, there should be a requirement that all such agreements in the future be ratified by a vote of the people - no matter what the teachers unions say.

Most importantly, though, significant increases in education spending need to be substantially offset by significant spending cuts in less-important areas elsewhere. Citizens, especially parents, are not a bottomless pit of tax dollars. It's time for government to do what every family does: Set spending priorities. You can't always get what you want - but if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need. (Hmm, where have I heard that before?)

Yes, the "mo' money" mantra from the education bureaucrats and their enablers on the Left has grown old. But if significantly higher education spending comes with spending offsets in other departments, combined with serious education repairs which break the government-school monopoly on education, it might be worth considering.

The only thing apparently standing in the way is: the teachers unions. Go figure.

Mr. Muth is president of Citizen Outreach, a non-profit public policy advocacy organization in Washington, D.C. The views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Citizen Outreach.

At August 29, 2006 3:54 PM, Blogger Mike Hu said...


Success Is Failure
Posted 8/29/2006

Appeasement: Democrats are calling our victories in the global war on terror defeats. Hysteria like this from an increasingly disloyal opposition is no help in America's long war against a new kind of enemy.

In George Orwell's fictional "Nineteen Eighty-Four," the tyrannical regime of Oceania told its citizens that "war is peace," "freedom is slavery" and "ignorance is strength." Today the Democratic Party could adopt the motto "winning is losing."

This week, Joe Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, made a stunning declaration while stumping for president in Iowa: "If anything is shown by the British uncovering the plot on the airliners, it's simple — we are not protected."

You'd think the saving of thousands of lives might warrant a pat on President Bush's back. Instead, Biden claims "we are not safe" and complains about "this administration's refusal to do anything about homeland security."

But there have been no terrorist attacks on the homeland in the five years since 9-11. How much safer can you get than that?

As Vice President Dick Cheney pointed out this week to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, terrorists since 9-11 "have successfully carried out attacks in Casablanca, Jakarta, Mombasa, Bali, Riyadh, Baghdad, Istanbul, Madrid, London, Sharm al-Sheikh, Bombay and elsewhere. Here in the U.S., we have not had another 9-11."

Meantime, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean's reaction to the foiled airline plot was to issue a statement again complaining that "Osama bin Laden, al-Qaida's mastermind, is still on the loose." But bin Laden might as well be in jail, considering how emasculated he is.

What's more, if Democrats had their way, the most valuable tools that have successfully prevented more than a dozen terrorist operations — like the National Security Agency's surveillance of international telephone calls — would be shut down.

The Bush administration isn't giving its opponents a pass. Also speaking to the VFW, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld noted that "it is apparent that many have still not learned history's lessons." He issued a reminder that we face nothing less than "a new type of fascism" in this war.

Let's also not forget that prominent Democrats want us to cut and run in Iraq. The vice president warned that "retreat would convince the terrorists, once again, that free nations will change our policies, forsake our friends and abandon our interests whenever we are confronted with violence and blackmail." Rumsfeld made it clear: "We have only two options in Iraq — victory or defeat."

Sadly, Democrats can't tell the difference, and with a chance to pick up congressional seats, they are stooping to the Orwellian.

At August 30, 2006 1:35 PM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

You'd hope that the local newspapers would give some consideration to the Republican candidates for congress (and other offices) -- instead of being so dismissive of them as "not serious candidates."

After all, nobody ever refers to those writers as being only "lifers" at the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and Advertiser.

At August 30, 2006 1:35 PM, Blogger Mike Hu said...

You'd hope that the local newspapers would give some consideration to the Republican candidates for congress (and other offices) -- instead of being so dismissive of them as "not serious candidates."

After all, nobody ever refers to those writers as being only "lifers" at the Honolulu Star-Bulletin and Advertiser.

At November 15, 2009 3:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...




Post a Comment

<< Home