Posts: 4,144
Threads: 123
Joined: May 2009
06-20-2025, 07:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-20-2025, 07:23 PM by ironyak.)
Not much to add to the points raised other than to say thanks to Obie for sharing that informative SA/ProPublica article. Any follow up with similar depth as it was published 5 years ago?
ProPublica does a great job with long-form journalism and the issue of managed retreat is a complicated one with a mix of short and long term trade-offs. Never seen it reduced to "tan-suit man bad" before so guess it's also a good reminder of how silly and surprising people's hot takes can be.
Keep up the good work - may the PunaWeb Bicker Board always provide a tidal surge of posts and plenty of beachin!
Posts: 2,957
Threads: 88
Joined: May 2023
"Feel free to ask Sophie Cocke:"
Now that's a darn good suggestion!
Except, as Ironyak astutely points out, the article was from 5 years ago.
Further, it appears that Ms. Cocke took a buyout from the Star Advertiser in 2023 and has simply vanished off the face of the public internet searchable face. Seems she "took the money and ran."
Now one thing that can be said, at least Obama's friend Mr. Nesbitt has done everything legally within the confines of the law with respect to the required permits etc. unlike these two:
William and Melinda Kernot and Rodney Youman
And imagine this - they're immigrants!
Oh well, anything to distract from current events!
Carry on!
Posts: 702
Threads: 28
Joined: Aug 2009
Take a look at the other links to related articles regarding illegal shore erosion activity in the link posted by HJ. Would be interesting to know what the final outcomes were in these cases.
Wahine
Lead by example
Innocent people don't delete the evidence proving their innocence
Posts: 12,616
Threads: 821
Joined: Sep 2012
simply vanished off the face of the public internet
No guarantee, but try this:
sophie.cocke99@gmail.com
Posts: 5,391
Threads: 85
Joined: Feb 2009
06-21-2025, 12:16 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-21-2025, 12:17 PM by Obie.)
I actually was getting tired of you guys bitching about millionaires not doing enough to benefit Hawaii.
Just trying to liven up the bicker board for you.
Sophie Cooke wrote about everyone who is destroying the beaches on Oahu not just tan-suit man.
Here's a few.
https://www.propublica.org/people/sophie-cocke
Posts: 2,957
Threads: 88
Joined: May 2023
"I actually was getting tired of you guys bitching about millionaires not doing enough to benefit Hawaii."
I'm actually thinking it's you being so damned embarrassed at having to carry the weight of the daily insanity that as MyManao puts it, the "orange orangutan you all are so enamored with" spews out constantly that you went on the internets and found 5 year old stories of a reporter who retired 3 years ago and found ONE that had Obama's name on it and bingo!!!
Yes, Obie, you sure did "gotched" everyone with that 5 plus year old absolutely irrelevant news.
As for getting tired, yes, I would love for our national discourse to back to the days where a POTUS wearing a tan suit was the most insidious crime your side claimed could have ever been committed instead of the hourly screaming from a kindergartner leading a pack of kindergartners.
As for livening up the bicker board, while at the same time giving you Obie something to even say, "yeah, yeah" too, check these new parody ads this YouTube channel is making from the old Dos Equis beer advertising campaign done years ago with the Most Interesting Man in the World theme:
Posts: 2,168
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2016
(06-19-2025, 09:32 PM)HiloJulie Wrote: A quick clarification:
The property is NOT owned by the Obama's. It is owned by Martin Nesbitt's Venture Capital firm. Nesbitt, a close friend of the Obama family serves as the Chairman of The Obama Foundation and has worked with the Obama's for decades.
Further, with respect to the private beach access issue, it is for security reasons. If ANY other former or current POTUS ever stayed at that residence would the beach still be open to the public?
At any event, please excuse my interruption of the "but, but, but OBAMA!" conversation.
Carry on!
It's confusing because some news outlets have reported that the Obamas bought the property. Google AI says they own three homes in the US (DC, Chicago and Martha's Vineyard) but not one in Hawaii, so I'm inclined to believe that.
Regarding the seawalls, the ocean front properties should have never been permitted in the first place way back when. But they were, and the damage was done, so what now?
This quote from one of the ProPublica stories rings true for me:
"..The Department of Land and Natural Resources defended its approval of easements. Spokesman Dan Dennison said most applications cover seawalls located along coastlines where there is little to no beach left. Rarely would removing an old structure significantly improve beach width or public access, he added. Asked why officials did not consider sea level rise in approving easements, he suggested that the idea was to let nature take its course. “Coastal structures such as seawalls will invariably be damaged and maintained as long as possible during the lease term until the property is overwhelmed by flooding, erosion and wave inundation due to sea level rise,” Dennison said..." https://www.propublica.org/article/obama...-loopholes
Posts: 5,391
Threads: 85
Joined: Feb 2009
"Yes, Obie, you sure did "gotched" everyone with that 5 plus year old absolutely irrelevant news."
I actually posted the newest article 1st. March 2025. New enough for you ?
https://www.khon2.com/local-news/10-fact...t-mansion/
Everyone needs to read the Star Advertiser article to the end.
Let's have a discussion about climate change and the fact that the average guy has to be concerned about it and retreat from the ocean but if you have deep enough pockets you can combat it and continue on.
Posts: 4,144
Threads: 123
Joined: May 2009
Civil Beat had a good 2024 overview of the illegal seawall issue on the North Shore for a comparison as to what happens without a seawall being "grandfathered" in.
https://www.civilbeat.org/2024/06/north-...illegally/
Of course if you have millions of dollars for property with a seawall you have options the average guy doesn't. Unless you're suggesting Obie that the state spend tax dollars on equally hardening everyone's ocean front property? (which is where most average guys live of course) Or is this where Hawaii's emotional support billionaires come in? Look under your seat - you get a seawall, you get a seawall, and you get a seawall!
Lots of complaining Obie but no real solutions being discussed. How would you address Hawaii's coastal erosion in a way that fairly balances everyone's interests?
Posts: 2,168
Threads: 25
Joined: Oct 2016
(06-21-2025, 03:44 PM)Obie Wrote: Everyone needs to read the Star Advertiser article to the end.
Let's have a discussion about climate change and the fact that the average guy has to be concerned about it and retreat from the ocean but if you have deep enough pockets you can combat it and continue on.
Because?
The average guy can sell to a rich guy, who then takes up the battle. Sounds like a typical gentrification scenario to me.
Eventually everyone must retreat and the ocean wins.
