"Nothing could be more dishonorable, or argue greater want of Judgement, than in affairs of the highest moment, to take measures upon the information of an enemy." -- General Lucius Arunculeius Cotta, Roman Army, 54 BC
by Andrew Walden
After years of pretending to be concerned about Hawaii's worst-in-the-nation voter participation, today the Honolulu Star-Bulletin has shown its true colors.
In an editorial titled "Religion risky for GOP", SB editors condemn a church-based statewide voter registration drive. They complain bitterly that, "...the goal is to convince 80 percent of Christian churchgoers to register to vote and then persuade 80 percent of those who register to vote...."
This contrasts sharply with the Star-Bulletin July 21, 2009 which cried, "Hawaii dead last in voter turnout."
Even with Hawaii's native son on the presidential ballot, only 51.8% of eligible voters cast a ballot last November. Among voters age 18-24 it was only 25%. In the July article, political scientist Neal Milnor pointed out, "The total absence of competitive elections here helps to create an atmosphere where people just don't take voting very seriously."
What might possibly account for the Star-Bulletin's sudden change of heart?
SB editors remark that it is "intolerance" to "be more conservative on cultural issues such as gay civil unions, abortion rights and physician-assisted suicide...." They don't even argue the point. They refer to "intolerance" in passing as if no other explanation were possible.
SB editors then claim, "Republican Lt. Gov. James "Duke" Aiona, a candidate for governor, has made clear his strong religious convictions and his conservative views on social issues, including opposition to civil unions, gay marriage and abortion."
With Election Day a year away--before the opposing candidates have laid out their campaign themes and their vision for Hawaii's future--the editors of the state's second-largest newspaper have determined that Duke Aiona is "intolerant." Does anybody expect that he will get a fair shake in campaign coverage from the Star-Bulletin?
The Star-Bulletin claims to fear "further marginalization of the GOP." Who could possibly be stupid enough to take their words at face value? It will be amusing and instructive to see.
Star-Bulletin editors place substantial weight on a poll--sponsored by the religious leftists of "Faith in Public Life" who purport to show that young "white evangelicals" support gay marriage or gay civil unions. "Faith in Public Life" is at the cutting edge of efforts to make the global warming scam part of the evangelical ministry. Now they are working on gay marriage as well. If the views of the religious left are as popular as the poll claims, then why would gay marriage advocates fear a church-based voter registration and voter participation drive? Their fear proves the dishonesty of their arguments.
These editors need to get out more. This is Hawaii. Most of the evangelicals--and most of Hawaii's people--are hapa, not "white". But perhaps this bizarre oversight is the clue to what the gay marriage advocates fear most of all.
As Obama swept California last November, Proposition 8, outlawing gay marriage, was approved--to the chagrin of gay activists. It wasn't "white evangelicals" who made the difference at the polls--it was black voters coming out 70%-30% in favor of Prop 8. Among black women it was 75%-25%. A similar pattern emerged in Florida where black voters voted heavily for Amendment 2 which bans gay marriage.
These exit poll numbers caused many gay leaders to show their true colors. Black gay activists reported from a November 6, 2008 West Los Angeles rally:
It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at me. If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple...me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.
Similar comments now pepper gay websites across the nation.
The paradigm describing the fight for gay marriage as--"tolerance and diversity" vs "intolerant bigoted white evangelicals"--has come crashing down around their ears. But the Star-Bulletin keeps repeating robotically--as if nothing has happened.
The Star-Bulletin editors also pretend the question is solely one for Republicans. This is an insult to the intelligence of their readers. It is well known that Sen. Mike Gabbard has switched parties and that gay marriage advocates within the Democratic Party have been sharpening their knives for a 2010 primary battle as he seeks reelection for the first time as a Democrat. There is even a fake twitter account in the name of Gabbard with "dead meat" as the icon. More recently, term limited pro-traditional-marriage Honolulu City Councilman Gary Okino announced his challenge against Rep. Blake Oshiro--a key proponent last session of gay civil unions HB 444--in next year's House District 33 Democratic primary.
Yet none of this elicits the slightest warning from Star-Bulletin editors concerned that the "intolerant" Gabbard and Okino might somehow "marginalize" the Hawaii Democratic Party. In fact the result of these two campaigns will show whether cultural leftists will now cement their control of the Democratic Party. If the left succeeds, their control would run the risk of marginalizing the Democrats.
The editors are liberals. Their root concern: Too many conservative-oriented voters participating in the political process--in either party. A quote from Milnor in a 2006 Star-Bulletin article says it all:
"You don't want a lot of people at the polls unless they are going to vote for you."