Gone at the speed of lawmaking

Hawaii government's recent renewed attack on the homeless, which include limiting the times parks are open and passing laws against sleeping at bus-stops, demonstrates how quickly governments can act against the the disenfranchised.

On the other hand, laws against selling products whose proper usage kill people, such as tobacco, are weak and take decades to pass.

Meanwhile, state-originated non-profit public access television service providers that violate State procurement laws are exempted from compliance with those laws.

Citizens recently observed as with the Superferry process, if exemptions are not possible within the current legal framework, laws are quickly changed.

In summary, it is easier to pass laws that victimize the victims than it is to pass laws against the victimizers. As Hawaiian sovereignty activist Dr. Kekuni Blaisdall once remarked, "Someone's a victim, blame them."

Kauai Council members promote self-serving scam?

Andy Parx may have uncovered a nationally franchised self-promotion scam (See: another-round-of-imaginary-kibble) to help local politicians be viewed more favorably by voters. It appears no money is involved beyond the waste of time on the part of the perps and their dupes (i.e. the politicians involved and the citizen marks that fall for the time-wasting scam). If the facts check out it appears to be a very sophisticated scam cooked up by the trade group for local politicians NACO , or the National Association of Counties and franchised around the country by NACO members. No one really gets hurt and it's a great way for councilmembers to boost their positive image in the community.

I'm Voting Republican

Barack reality check: Who are you calling a dictator Obama?

In a speech Barack Obama gave in Flint, MI, called "Renewing American Competitiveness" on Jun 16th, 2008 he said;

Oil money pays for the bombs going off from Baghdad to Beirut, and the bombast of dictators from Caracas to Tehran.

Clearly Barack Obama agreeing with President Bush is calling President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela a dictator. Historical facts indicate otherwise. Chávez won the 1998 presidential election on December 6, 1998 with 56% of the votes (the largest margin in 40 years). In 2000 Chávez was reelected by 59.76% of the popular votes. Chávez survived a failed coup attempt in 2002 that tried to install the Chamber of Commerce president Pedro Carmona and in 2006 Chávez again won the OAS and Carter Center certification of the national election on December 3, 2006 with 63 percent of the popular vote.

Compare this to the United States 2004 election of George H.W. Bush by only 50.73% percent of the popular vote in a highly controversial election. The only international organization allowed to monitor the election, The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) Election Observation Mission Final Report said this;

In keeping with its OSCE commitments, the United States invited the OSCE/ODIHR to observe these elections. OSCE observers were granted access to polling stations in a number of states, although sometimes only in specific counties. However, in other states, access was not possible or was limited. This was a result of state law, either because international observers were not included in the statutory categories of persons permitted to be in polling places, or because the lack of reference to international observers in state law was deemed to constitute an obstacle to their presence in polling places. Lack of observer access to the election process, both international and domestic, including at polling station level, is contrary to OSCE commitments, and limited the possibility of the OSCE EOM to comment more fully on the election process.

Instead of pandering to popular ignorance of world affairs and U.S. propaganda by the current administration perhaps Barack Obama should look a bit closer to home if he wants to call someone a dictator.

Would you be shocked if only police had Tasers?

Did you know that Tasers are prohibited for civilian use in Hawaii, but legal for police use?

• Haw. Rev. Stat. § 134.1. Electric gun = any portable device electrically operated to project a missile or electromotive force

• Electric guns are not to be possessed, sold, given, or delivered except to law enforcement (§ 134.16)
  

• Unlawful possession of electric gun is a misdemeanor (§ 134.17) (Haw. Rev. Stat. § 134.1).

Asymmetrical bad apples and institutionalized abuse of power

When one speaks in the abstract about "institutionalized" abuse of power it is important to remember it is the combined individual actions (or lack thereof) of those individuals that comprise the actors within the institution itself that are responsible for the abuse.

In short, it is the sum total of individual collective actions that perpetuates institutional abuse of power.

By definition, if there were only "a few bad apples" it would not be institutionalized abuse of power. Moreover responsibility for such abuse of power is not uniformly distributed throughout the pool of institutional actors.

In a hierarchal organization bad actions (or non-action to correct the bad actions of subordinates) by those at the top have an asymmetrical influence on promoting the institutionalized abuse of power within the organization.

In other words, institutional abuse of power by a few bad apples at the top of the barrel is similar to a rotting fish. The ethics rot begins at the head and rots downward infecting the entire institution. Subordinates who tolerate bad apples at the top and/or the bad actions of their colleagues through non-intervention (i.e. not participating in the bad action themselves but ignoring and/or not reporting it) have begun the progressive process of ethics rot themselves.

When this putrification process has spread throughout the institution the abuse of power is said to have become institutionalized, and any self-corrective action from within is impossible. At this point only the actions of people outside the institution itself can stop the decay, and frequently the only recourse is to disband the institution and replace it with another.

The Last Winter

I viewed "The Last Winter" a movie about a small band of oil workers in Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) trying to begin an ice road to bring in oil drilling equipment and ran into unseasonable weather. It was raining in February.

It was a bottom of the ninth, bases loaded and mother nature up at bat sort of movie, but what struck me was the premise that the permafrost was melting, oil was seeping into the melted muck and the more that happened the more it continued to happen. Evidently the fumes poisoned the air making the workers delusional (or was it nature fighting back?). In any case it occurred to me I had heard this premise almost 40 years ago when I lived in Alaska from Charlie Edwardson Jr. (Etok) in 1970!

Etok called it "a runaway blow-in" Etok an Inupiat Eskimo activist from Point Barrow was the prime mover behind the Alaska Land Claims Settlement Act.

Anyway the point is all this global warming stuff has been obvious to the astute observer since at least 1970. I don't want to spoil the plot but lets say "The Last Winter" could have been dedicated to those who left early, haven't arrived, and don't know they aren't going to.

Just who those people are I'll let you determine.