Pilago vs. Kenoi Debate VIDEO NOW AVAILABLE

[Dave Smith]

You know, Rob, when you keep editing/adding to your posts after they are made (without the little *edit* thing that shows up when others do it), it's hard to keep track of your arguments.

[punafish]

Dave,

Instead of telling us why we shouldn't vote for Pilago, how about giving us compelling reasons to vote for Kenoi? I have friends who support Mr. Kenoi and I understand why; they are old school Hilo-ites with personal and family ties that go way back. Right or wrong, it's basic human behavior to support family and friends. (See other thread about prejudice.) It seems to me that most folks who support Pilago (in the Puna area, anyway) are not shackled by relationships that can fog how humans evaluate and select political leaders. Just my humble opinion.

To be fair, I'll concede that Mr. Pilago is PARTIALLY independent of big money donors. But contrary to the implication behind your analogy ("a little pregnent"), control and influence are not either/or propositions. There ARE degrees of influence, there ARE degrees of control. So who will be MORE controlled by the big money donors? Of course I can't answer this definitively, but I have reason to believe that Mr. Pilago would be more independent of the donors than Mr. Kenoi. Just a hunch.

As you can see, I'm not suggesting that Mr. Pilago is perfect; for the sake of argument, let's assume he mis-stated the make-up of his donation base, or even flat out lied. Can you honestly say that Mr. Kenoi never committed these sins? Is he without sin? Looking at the two men objectively, is there a strong pattern of questionable conduct that makes one choice worse than the other? Please convince me that Mr. Kenoi has more integrity that Mr. Pilago, because I have no personal connections with either man.

Keep in mind that if you take an absolutist stance on integrity, then you are either suggesting Mr. Kenoi is perfectly moral, or you are acknowledging that both are morally flawed human beings. But you can't have it both ways.

Bottom line is, the issue of "big money donors" ON ITS OWN is not a deal-breaker for me. Ya gotta come to the shooting match with more potent ammo, my friend. With a solid, persuasive argument detailing Mr. Kenoi's qualifications and accomplishments, you have a shot at winning me over. Please tell me why I should vote for Mr. Kenoi!

I'm waiting to be persuaded...

Tim

[james weatherford]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave Smith

James, in light of recent revelations, such as they are, shouldn't that be Pilago is PARTIALLY independent of big money donors?

Of course, that's kinda like someone being a little pregnant.

---

No, Dave.

The difference is: a few 'developer' donations were accepted, while others were also rejected, by Pilago. These few donations from 'developers' were an exception for Pilago, while developer and off-island donations make up the bulk of dollars in Kenoi's campaign. That is a lot of difference.

If you insist on analogies, it is not about 'pregnant', but about 'virginity' -- Pilago's virtue is in less than perfect tact, while Kenoi's demonstrated behavior is raunchy.

James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park

[Dave Smith]

Tim, I think the platforms of the candidates (and incidents such as Shooters) have been hashed out fairly well in the various media, so I am not inclined to argue for any candidate, and I haven't done that in my voluminous blog and Punaweb offerings.

What I do feel compelled to do is respond to the hypocrisy I see and hear, and I keep hearing the same ol' stuff: that Pilago never, ever even stretches the truth (we know better now) and that Kenoi is definitely "beholden to big money donors" (how could anyone know that?). If Pilago's supporters hadn't been so strident I would have clammed up long ago.

I will repeat a point I have made in the past, that if we're talking integrity let's weigh the two stark examples that keep being cited: a one-time incident that occurred four years ago with accusations being thrown in every direction but in which prosecution was declined (I'm pretty sure in this country we're still innocent until proven otherwise) vs. the repeated, and still continuing, deception of everyone including his supporters about a central campaign theme and promise. To me, that's not even close, but it's up to each individual to vote their conscience.

[james weatherford]

So, there is no good reason to vote for Kenoi.

Pilago supporters "strident"?
No.
Very enthusiastic, yes, about a candidate who, like the rest of us, is only human and less than perfect, but, unlike most of us, including Billy Kenoi, has demonstrated a willingness and ability to broaden the democratic franchise in our community, achieve real and genuine progress in quality-of-life issues for the community at large, and be an extraordinary leader in extraordinary circumstances.



James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park

[Dave Smith]

Not strident? You still won't admit he did wrong. "Less than perfect" doesn't really cut it with something of this magnitude.

And if platitudes were votes, your candidate would have been elected long ago.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dave Smith

Tim, I think the platforms of the candidates (and incidents such as Shooters) have been hashed out fairly well in the various media, so I am not inclined to argue for any candidate, and I haven't done that in my voluminous blog and Punaweb offerings...

---

Mr. Smith...

1. You have been the most vocal online supporter of Kenoi that I have seen.

2. Blog... did you say blog... sniff sniff... I like see!

-------
My Blog

[Dave Smith]

Talk is cheap, Damon. Show me where I've supported Kenoi. Detracting from Pilago is not the same.

[punafish]

Dave, your ammo is weakly bouncing off the target. All I hear is you screaming "hypocrisy". Duh, they're all politicians, full of hyperbole and their own version of truth. Yeah, I'm a cynic. But until you convince me that Kenoi is the better choice, I'm a Pilago supporter. (And as a Pilago supporter, I just admitted that he did wrong.) Come to think of it, I can't remember even one politician in my 50 years on earth that didn't make mistakes or tell lies (from white to blatant and everything in between).

I'm willing to acknowledge that Kenoi's incident 4 years ago was blown out of proportion, and that it's not sufficient information to make a reasonable judgment about the man. (Was the alleged organized crime associations a fabrication? I honestly don't know the answer, but it's another innuendo hanging in the media.) Based on a court of law, the man is totally innocent. But as a human being, I can't help but take the input into consideration, just as you can't forgive the "hypocrisy" of Pilago. It just reflects that you have different values than Pilago supporters, perhaps a tendency toward absolutist thinking?

Just as Kenoi's incidences were blown out of proportion, I also believe you are blowing the hypocrisy issue way out of proportion. If Pilago wins and then acts beholden to the big money interests that chipped in, what, 10%?, then I will not only acknowledge on this forum that I was wrong, but I will buy you a beer, my friend.

[Rob Tucker]

Dave,

You have not made any case for hypocrisy on Angel PIlago's part that I can see. Saying it does not make it so. And continuing just shows a predisposition to attack a good man. You remain stuck in some absolutist limbo.

I do not guess that donation checks come into Angel's campaign with "special interest" or "developer" written on them. So for Angel to examine his early donations and find four that concern him, and then admit and apologize for it is a far, far cry from calling up the Big Boys and asking them to donate to the max.

There is no history here of Angel soliciting or accepting developer money. None. He has actually returned checks when they arrived and were recognized as special interest money.

You keep blowing on the ember trying to make a flame while ignoring the hundreds of thousands Billy Kenoi solicits and banks brazenly from people wanting his good favor. Billy Kenoi is maintaining a bonfire of special interest money and you can only focus on four donations that fell through the cracks in Pilago's campaign. It is a small ember that only keeps you warm.

I do wonder what M. David Paul, a Santa Monica, Calif. developer, finds compelling in Billy Kenoi to donate $2,000. Any guess on your part Dave? Or is it honest and forthright to claim, as Billy Kenoi does, that he is running a "grassroots" campaign while raking in such large amounts of greenbacks?

Just what does Billy Kenoi, or his fundraisers, say to a Santa Monica, CA developer to make them open their check book and write a check for $2,000? Any guesses? Or perhaps he doesn't have to say a thing.