What would you do if you were a conservative candidate for public office in a deep blue state where the Democrats control all levels of government and have the media in their pocket? Oh, one more thing, the Republican Party is afraid of its own shadow and always plays Dem-Lite Games. The few politicians with an [R] after their name who actually get elected are virtually indistinguishable from Democrats once they take office.
Last year in Hawaii, I volunteered in the primary campaign of John Carroll for Hawaii Governor. At the end of June 2018, I interviewed him in his office and transcribed his words. Over the next four days, we worked together to ensure that his remarks were accurately conveyed in the article which I authored in his behalf.
There was just cause to believe that the article would be published in the local media in keeping with coverage of all candidates in the Gubernatorial race. At the time, the incumbent Democrat Hawaii Governor David Ige also had a primary challenger.
The article which you are about to read was ready for publication on June 24th, 2018 which was nearly 7 weeks before the August 11th primary. That was early enough to have had a significant impact and well before early mail-in and walk-in voting began.
Unfortunately, there was no objective unbiased media outlet here in the 50th state willing to let the voters make their own decisions after reading an article which contained not only political considerations but moreover was of significant historical value. It is presented here in NOQ Report verbatim in its entirety.
We will never know whether this would have altered the results of the Hawaii Republican Primary last year in which Andria Tupola prevailed, only to be defeated significantly by Governor Ige in the General Election on November 6th. Could John Carroll have done better in that one-on-one contest against the incumbent Governor? That question will never be answered.
For the 2020 election, we will need to rely upon media sources based outside of Hawaii to reach conservatives here in the islands. The shortcomings of Hawaii GOP which did not adequately promote the message of conservative candidates must also be addressed in the immediate future.
The implications of this media blackout extend beyond Hawaii. The isolation and self contained nature of an island state in the middle of the Pacific Ocean are definitely aggravating circumstances. However I’m sure conservatives in California, Illinois, New York and other blue states will empathize and see relevance to your own circumstances and challenges that you face in next year’s election.
Here is the original article which has been approved for publication in NOQ Report by John Carroll:
John Carroll Rates Every Hawaii Governor Since Statehood
By David Ware
On Behalf of John Carroll for Governor
June 24, 2018
In Hawaii, we honor our kupuna who have acquired enough life experience to become family and community leaders as they embody our natural respect. Before you say, ok, but we don’t elect them as Governor of Hawaii, let’s pause together and consider the nearly 90 years of experience, of which almost 70 are here in Hawaii, that John Carroll brings to this 2018 gubernatorial campaign.
On August 21, 1959, when Hawaii became the 50th State of the Union, John Carroll had already been working for the people of Hawaii for 10 years. He is familiar with every Hawaii Governor since Statehood. His rating of each man and woman who has held the highest office in these islands will give insight into his urgent agenda for the road ahead when he takes the oath of office next December 3rd.
The following are John’s own recollections of each State of Hawaii Governor along with his explanations of what he will do differently. It may really surprise you whom he rates as the best and whom he rates as the worst Governor. This will give you a window into what to expect from John Carroll when you elect him our next Hawaii Governor.
William F. Quinn [Republican]
August 21, 1959 – December 3, 1962
[Hawaii Territorial Governor August 29, 1957 – August 21, 1959]
Bill Quinn was one of the very nicest people I’ve ever known. He was a good Catholic, good family man and very, very good Governor. We had an excellent economy at that time. Everybody was employed. There were no beggars, there were no homeless, nothing of that sort. He managed based on what I would call Republican principles. I was basically a fighter pilot and airline pilot during the time that he was in. I used to play volleyball with him and knew him from that basis and also knew a couple of his kids who were friends of mine. So the only thing I could say about him was that I think he was a very good Governor and I listened and heard him talk. He was a very good singer by the way and part of his political career was based on his ability to sing. All I can say about Bill Quinn was God bless him.
John A. Burns [Democrat]
December 3, 1962 – December 2, 1974
Governor Burns was a retired Police Captain. Very smart, nice guy. I knew him only as Governor. I did not know him other than that he was Governor when I was first running for politics. I was never in office while he was Governor other than possibly for a while after 1970. He was a reasonably decent Governor. The one thing that he did do which I will do quite differently is that he basically turned over all of the activity which was productive by the prisoners in the various prisons including in Kulani on Hawaii Island and Olinda on Maui as well as on Oahu. He did a disservice to the idea of rehabilitation vs. recidivism. He was endeared to the union leadership. The net effect of that was basically to eliminate hard labor and allow prisoners to play volleyball or handball or weight lift or just fool around and waste time. I think what he did was a terrible disservice. When he took office, one of the first things he did was to look at the prison system. Apparently the people who helped get him elected against Jimmy Kealoha were union leaders of both private and public sector unions. What he did was to take all of the printing, automobile repair, license plate construction; all of those things were taken out of the prison system and given to private sector interests. This basically ended up costing the tax payers a lot more money but endeared him totally to the union leadership. The thing that bothered me about it is that it left the prisoners who could be being rehabilitated with nothing to do. I think that was a terrible disservice and what I intend to do as Governor is to get hard labor put in as a major tenet of the law. If anybody is sent to jail for a misdemeanor or felony crime, it will be for hard labor. Prisoners could earn a small stipend of perhaps 50 cents per hour to earn and to build up a small bank account for accessing when they are released. I also intend to get the license plate production, printing and auto mechanics as well as stream cleanup and other types of work to be done by the prisoners into law. Nobody’s going to be sitting around cells wondering what to do as soon as they get out of jail. I think Burns did a very, very bad thing with respect to that particular issue. Other than that, he seemed to be a decent Governor.
George Ariyoshi [Democrat]
December 2, 1974 – December 1, 1986
When Governor Ariyoshi came into office in the early 1970s, I had been in the Hawaii State House of Representatives for two terms. I had worked well with Jean King, Tadao Beppu and other Democrat leaders. With George Ariyoshi’s help we were able to get passed all of the current environmental law that is on the books in this state. That goes for everything from monk seals and green sea turtles protection to clean water act and shoreline protection management act. Geothermal or other types of alternative energy use. I believe that Ariyoshi was an excellent Governor of all of the Governors I served under here or have been in office under their administration. I should say has he has really been the best and I include Lingle in that comment. The best thing that I know about him is that when we ended up my last term in office as a State Senator, we had over a 500 million dollar surplus and the state was in really good condition financially. I don’t remember any homelessness, jobless or anything of that sort so I would give George Ariyoshi an A+.
John D. Waihee III [Democrat]
December 1, 1986 – December 5, 1994
When Waihee came into office, I had known John as a first graduate of the Richardson Law School. I was a House Committee member involved with getting the new school put into being. I met him after a hearing in which he had submitted a document which was questionable. I asked him: why did you do this? His response was “we do what we have to do”. Later on when he became Governor, I never forgot that particular instance and I watched him go on to increase the cost of, or at least the numbers of, state employees by over 25%. The cost of government increased dramatically and the economy started to go downhill from that time. I consider Waihee probably the worst Governor that we ever had here other than, possibly, Lingle.
Benjamin J. Cayetano [Democrat]
December 5, 1994 – December 2, 2002
Ben Cayetano and I were friends in the State House and in the State Senate. We always got along well. I found him reasonably conservative. I thought he was a breath of fresh air after getting rid of Waihee and I worked well with Ben. By that time I was completely out of the political arena in terms of having anything to say about what was going on. Ben wrote a book in which he condemned me for getting single-member districts as opposed to multi-member districts. I did that through the U.S. Federal District Court. All in all, I think he was a decent Governor and reasonably conservative but not as conservative as I would have liked.
Linda Lingle [Republican]
December 2, 2002 – December 6, 2010
Linda Lingle was a very intelligent but totally self-oriented person. I had known her before she got elected and had actually helped her get elected. I had held signs for her, spoken on her behalf, things of that sort. I ended up running against her for the Governorship in 2002 on the basis of various things that she had not done as Party Chair. I believed at the time that she really was not a person who should be Governor. She was a very clever politician. She worked well with the unions but the things that she did I find totally destructive. The first one and the foremost in my mind is that she refused to even discuss the elimination of the shipping restrictions which are imposed on the state by the Jones Act. We had had as part of the Republican Party platform plank for years the fact that we do everything as a Republican Party to rid Hawaii of the Jones Act restrictions. She had that plank taken out as Party Chair about 2002 and continued on that course from that time on. In addition to that, she was basically a Democrat in Republican clothing. She was able, by working with the unions and giving them what they wanted, virtually to negate any other good that had been done in earlier years by Ariyoshi. I felt that Lingle was a disaster in terms of getting anything done positively for this state. We ended up with the homeless starting to come in. We ended up with higher taxation. The whole theory of Hawaiian homes issues were not resolved. Agriculture was in decline. Nothing that needed to be done was done. The reason that I am currently running for Governor is to correct the things that happened during the Lingle administration as well as Waihee’s.
Neil Abercrombie [Democrat]
December 6, 2010 – December 1, 2014
I knew Neil Abercrombie for several years before he was elected to the State House. Ultimately around 1972, I believe we were in the State House together. We then went on to the State Senate in 1978 where we again served together. I served only two years. He served four. As far as his political philosophy is concerned, on some issues such as environment we were closely aligned. On other issues that tend to be more socialistic or Marxist, we were totally opposed. I always considered Neil a friend. As Governor, I watched what he did pretty carefully. I think he was dealt a kind of a bad hand because he took it over from Lingle. Things had already deteriorated and he did not seem to have the ability to do much except talk. The ultimate result of his period in office was that he served only one term and agriculture, business, housing, homelessness, all of those things became worse during his tenure. I still consider him a friend but I would never vote for him for Governor.
David Y. Ige [Democrat]
December 1, 2014 – (December 3, 2018)
I met Governor Ige for the first time before his current term. We were both campaigning at the same time, he for Governor and myself for the United States Senate. He seemed to be a quiet gentle man who appeared intelligent. What I’ve known of him since that time is approximately the same. I believe that he has been dealt a very bad hand to deal with the Democrats who have run this state into the ground. We have no agriculture. We have high homelessness. We’ve got people living hand-to-hand mouth-to-mouth barely making it once a month. People have two or three jobs just to survive. The cost of living is 25% higher than any state in the union and higher than the highest states in the union and it is probably 100% higher than places like Alabama and Arkansas. The thing about Governor Ige is I think he’s a very good person. I think he’s trying to do the best that he can but he’s been given an almost impossible job. The changes that need to be made obviously are to get rid of the shipping restrictions, number one, to reduce the cost of government, reduce the taxation. Those are things that will never be done by any Democrat. I like Governor Ige and I’m sorry that he’s in the position that he is in. The only good part of this is that it makes a very clear-cut demarcation between what needs to be done and what’s been done. I will make that very clear in this campaign.
Looking at the 2018 Campaign
Now let’s turn a page from this review of the past & current gubernatorial administrations to look through John Carroll’s expert eyes at the other major hopefuls to replace Governor Ige in 2018. Following are his views on his Primary opponent and his potential General Election opponent to contrast his knowledge of governance with their track records.
Republican Candidate for Hawaii Governor
Well, first of all, she’s one of the most attractive candidates we’ve ever had here. If this were a beauty contest, I would not even think about entering it. Unfortunately, other than being a teacher and apparently a very nice person, she has almost no background to be Governor or perhaps anything else in terms of her business background and legislative background. She is the House Minority Leader, but a review of her history as a House member has been that she’s voted 92% with the Democrats and she’s offered no legislation that would indicate anything that would be helpful in terms of the economy, in terms of agriculture, in terms of reducing taxation. In addition to that, she has voted for things such as giving Driver Licenses to illegal aliens. She has voted or at least asked for a study regarding this so-called everybody-gets-paid-bill. In other words, a socialistic thing where everybody gets a certain amount of money so nobody can say that they’re unemployed. I just don’t see anything that she has authored as a legislator or stated in any speeches that would indicate capable leadership. In fact I see nothing other than failures if she should be elected Governor.
Democrat Candidate for Hawaii Governor
Colleen Hanabusa ~ I do not know her personally other than to have met her at various functions. I know that she’s bright. I know she’s an attorney. She’s totally the opposite of me on almost every issue I can think of. People don’t remember it, but I clearly remember that when Ed Case put in as a US House member a resolution to have the Jones Act either repealed or at least eliminated as far as Hawaii is concerned, she through Dan Inouye’s efforts got over $800,000 from Alexander & Baldwin and Matson and other connected groups to take Ed Case out and he’s been out ever since. It’s so remarkable that she’s as popular as she is given the fact that what she has done over the years has been nothing except take care of union or major business interests such as HECO and Matson and Alexander & Baldwin. She’s certainly bright, she’s certainly capable but she’s wrong-headed on virtually every subject matter that I can think of from taxation to business control to agriculture.
What Is Next for Hawaii?
Now that John Carroll has contrasted his own conservative views with those of past Hawaii Governors and current gubernatorial hopefuls of both major parties, let’s see what he has to offer in terms of his own positive vision for the next four years under his own administration.
John S. Carroll
Agenda for 2018-2022 as Hawaii Governor
My first interest in politics began in in high school when I heard about the grassroots landslide which kind of appealed to me. My dad was involved with the Manhattan Project and rehabilitation of Japanese chemical industries and things like that. There was always some talk about Republicans doing this or that and for the most part I tended to disagree with him as he was a very strong Democrat.
As far as my own personal involvement was concerned when I came back from law school, I was a Major in the Air National Guard and an attorney. I was asked to run against the U.S. House Democrats, Patsy Mink and Spark Matsunaga. I was asked to run as a running mate with Jimmy Kealoha who had been a Lieutenant Governor with Governor Quinn and former Mayor (Superintendent) of Hawaii County. He had run against Quinn. They had both lost to Governor Burns.
They needed to try to pick up at least one of the House seats. They had Jimmy but nobody else so they asked me to run basically as a sacrificial lamb. I did so thinking that I could win anyway. But the only thing that I won was that I ended up beating Jimmy Kealoha by about 5000 votes but of course came nowhere near beating Patsy Mink or Matsunaga.
With my appetite having been whetted, I then went on to run two more races which I lost. Then finally won my first race, which was for the State House of Representatives.
My diving, hunting and other outdoor activities had me very concerned about the environment. To make a long story short, I put in bills to protect the monk seal and the green sea turtle. I went on from there to introduce a large number of environmental-protection-oriented bills. None of them passed under my own name but check the standing committee reports and my name is on all of them. I’m very proud of that legacy of environmental law protection.
The challenge before us right now is really to rectify that chaos, the economic chaos that’s stated clearly in everyday life here. People are working two or three or four jobs just to get along. They’re living month to month with their paychecks. The education system here is terrible. Agriculture is almost non-existent. Homelessness is out of control. While we have a very low unemployment rate, the problem is there is just nothing for people to do and they quit looking for work and end up going on welfare.
I intend number one to get rid of the Jones Act restrictions to get shipping opened up worldwide. The Jones Act, by the way, totally violates the Commerce clause by being imposed on this state.
The basic rules as far as operating a business here need to be looked at very carefully. We are terribly overregulated. There are other issues such as Hawaiian homes distribution. 24,000+ qualified Native Hawaiians should have homeland grants. There is no homeland being given out to speak of by that commission. I intend to find out why that is happening. I want to get homelands in fee simple to each qualified Hawaiian. I intend to do that in the first two years that I am Governor.
Those are the major things that I have in my mind other than a forensic audit of the rail HART. We must know where every dime came from, to whom it went and if people have to go to jail, then so be it.
I am honored to be allowed to run for Governor and I’m definitely old enough to run.
Putting It All Together
As we conclude this excursion into the analytical mind and caring heart of John Carroll, let’s take a moment to ask a member of the generation that lived through World War II what he remembers about that date that will live in infamy, December 7th, 1941. John was just under 12 years old and living in scenic Marin County, just across the Golden Gate Bridge north of San Francisco.
John Carroll Devotes His Life to Service
I recall it was a Sunday morning and we had heard that Pearl Harbor had been bombed and I believe I was walking to church and thinking about what would happen, what we were gonna do about it. Why it even happened was kind of a mystery to me but my main thought was to get revenge. I started immediately to think I want to get into military and do something about this. I was an altar boy at that time.
A Purposeful Life
The war ended in 1945 when John Carroll was still just 15 years old, but he later fulfilled his dream while living in Hawaii. He became both a fighter pilot in the United States Air Force and a commercial pilot for Hawaiian Airlines. He has always kept trying until he accomplished his goals.
What Happens Next?
When you cast your secret ballot in the Republican Primary on August 11th and in the General Election on November 6th, your economic future may well outweigh your political party affiliation. Ask yourself whether or not making Hawaii affordable for Hawaii families once again is the number one factor in your choice of our next Hawaii Governor.
Will you vote for the best interests of your family or for a straight party line that has stagnated Hawaii’s economy?
It’s up to you.
The myth of overturning Roe v Wade
Many on the right are skeptical about opening up Roe v Wade insisting that overturning Roe v Wade will not serve Pro-Life causes because it will force the issue back on the states. In such scenarios, Alabama will be the safe haven for the unborn while New York becomes the importer for people who want to kill their babies. Even if this is the case, it is still a giant win for the pro-life side to enable entire states to ban abortion. But this is merely a literal overturn of Roe v Wade, not a practical one.
Take Brown v BOE as an example of a Supreme Court case that overturned a predecessor: Plessy v Ferguson. The Ferguson ruling maintain the theoretical notion that separate accommodations could be equal; therefore, private businesses must comply with the state’s discrimination policies. It’s a pretty bad ruling, comparable to Roe v Wade, which conjured out of nowhere a Constitutional right to an abortion. But Plessy v Ferguson was overturned by demonstrating that the black schools were inherently inferior to the white schools. So Plessy v Ferguson, was overturned by the parameters of its own ruling.
The Alabama bill defines an abortion as a murder by the practitioner. This is a different animal than what the Supreme Court has ruled on before. In this case we have multiple issues. The chief issue at play is when does personhood begin? The Supreme Court, in order to strike down the Alabama law would have to rule that an unborn child is not a person, again. Evidence has changed since the Casey ruling in biologically proving that an unborn is a human being, not a clump of cells. The pro-abortion arguments against moral personhood have gotten more extreme than viability. Arguing that a fetus is not a person is a losing argument as conception/implantation are the most logically defensible points of the transfer of moral personhood.
The next issue is who has the power to define personhood? Should the Supreme Court strike down the Alabama or the Georgia law, the Supreme Court, out of their own superfluous arrogance would, once again, assert their own jurisdiction in the realm of life. If the Supreme Court rules that a state can define where life begins, they will be denying the self-evident. But what if the Supreme Court rules that inalienable rights, in our founding documents, plainly recognize life begins at creation. In such ruling the Supreme Court would be taking a hint from the Divine, and could issue a sweeping ruling denouncing abortion everywhere.
A third issue at play: does a state have the power to write homicide statutes? The state’s ability to write criminal law is on the line in this court case to come. Alabama has placed steep penalties on the mob doctors who perform abortions. The Supreme Court, in upholding infanticide, would essentially be placing limits on the state’s ability to write criminal law as it relates to homicide. The anti-Constitutional implications of this is yet another power reserved to the states impressed upon, subject to overseeing by the federal government. This ruling would enable people who kill an unborn child and the mother to only be charged with one homicide, not two. Essentially, the law in New York will be the law of the land in a worst case scenario.
What if it fails
I would advocate that Alabama and Georgia ignore the Supreme Court, instead choosing to enforce the law which they pass. The Supreme Court does not have the power to enforce their rulings, by design. So let them try. If they do not recognize when life begins or recognize when life begins and still decree that Alabama must sanction murder, then the Supreme Court is not worth obeying.
When does personhood begin? Who has the power to define personhood? Does a state have the power to write homicide statutes? These three questions need answers, and a sweeping ruling is almost certain.
Why Tomi Lahren’s abortion view harms American conservatism
Democrats are unambiguous and united in their view of abortion. It wasn’t always this way. As recently as a decade ago, there were a good number of pro-life Democrats winning elections and expressing their views as pundits.
Today, they don’t exist.
Republicans aren’t so repulsed by the pro-abortion people in their midst. It’s understandable that as a party that’s less focused on individual issues, one can be a Republican without checking off all the various boxes. This is fine. What’s not fine is for breaks in the ranks of conservatives. There are certain things that must remain universal among those who claim to embrace conservatism, especially among those who speak for conservatives.
Fox Nation’s Tomi Lahren is one of them. She claims to be a conservative, but she’s pro-choice. That fact, by itself, is understandable because the issue is a polarizing one in which people can be swayed to one side based on personal experience. It’s not like taxes which warrant universal scorn from conservatives. There are gun-toting, tax-hating, pro-choice conservatives.
But there’s a bigger problem with Lahren’s perspective. She’s not just attacking the Alabama abortion bill and pro-life perspectives in general. She’s doing so with an argument that flies in the face of reality.
To those arguing with me over the Alabama ban, I am NOT saying life doesn’t matter I am asking you if you honestly think an all-out ban is going to stop abortion. Do you think government is the answer? Do you think it’s effective? Or does this ban just make you feel better?
— Tomi Lahren (@TomiLahren) May 19, 2019
Do we think government is the answer? No. In fact, one of the most appealing parts about the Alabama abortion bill is that it represents the first true opportunity for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. When it reaches the Supreme Court (and it almost certainly will) it gives us the first glimpse of how the current makeup of the court will react. In fact, the makeup of the court could actually be better if one of the left-leaning Justices retires soon.
Once Roe v. Wade is out of the way, we can finally express the truly conservative aspect of federalism that should have never been taken away – the states’ rights to determine their own healthcare laws.
If Tomi Lahren doesn’t like the abortion ban, that’s fine. Her choice. But to defend her choice by insinuating a challenge to Roe v. Wade is somehow an attack on limited-government tenets is false and harms conservatism.
Conservative Media, we need to blacklist Trump-Russia story and move on
To The Daily Wire, One America News, Washington Times, Blaze Media, and all others to the right of Fox News,
There was no collusion and no obstruction. It took over two years for this narrative to search under every stone and exhaust millions of dollars to, in the end, find nothing. The leftist media will not make many concessions, especially as it relates to obstruction for a crime that was not committed. We cannot as conservatives prove beyond an unreasonable doubt that Trump did not collude or obstruct. As Democrats in Congress keep the narrative on life support, the Conservative media needs to pull the plug.
The average American is fatigued by the Trump-Russia collusion/obstruction narrative. Meanwhile our effort is playing defense against a leftist narrative rather than reporting on issues both our base and the politically uninvolved care far more about. When the economy is strong and the border crisis is pressing, why is so much of our attention directed towards the soap opera clown show that takes place? Instead of countering this narrative, conservative media should starve the narrative of as much attention as possible.
An area which Conservatives have long failed, but have made great improvements towards, is controlling the narrative, the language and Overton Window of society. If we continue to counter the leftist narrative of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, we will continue to feed their power in controlling the narrative in the American political and cultural arena. Instead, let us make an effort to not only counter the narrative but set the narrative.
In our friendly rivalry as Conservative outlets, let us come together and collectively move on from the Trump-Russia story, discarding it as if it were a flat-earth conspiracy and move on.
Why Game of Thrones felt rushed
Graham Ledger: Democrats, mainstream media panicking over William Barr’s upcoming investigations
Carlson vs. Shapiro: A way forward
Sanctuary policies fail 14-year-old Ariana Funes-Diaz again as her suspected MS-13 murderers released a second time
Love is often a one-way street between Evangelical Christians and Jews (and that’s okay)
The rise of citizen journalists
Strait is the gate and narrow is the way: Churches, stop pushing a ‘wide gate’ doctrine
Did Jesus die exactly 1000 years after King David died?
The sons of God in Genesis 6 were not the sons of Seth (and Nephilim were really giants)
True inclusion is narrow and pure as Matthew 7 teaches
Jeremiah 23:5 – ‘a King shall reign and prosper’
Jude 1:21 – ‘in the love of God’
Proverbs 4:18 – ‘path of the just’
Exodus 20:8 – ‘the sabbath day’
Luke 5:31-32 – ‘sinners to repentance’
Culture and Religion1 day ago
Top 5 ‘assault weapon’ technologies that existed BEFORE the Constitution was written
Culture and Religion2 days ago
7 life lessons we can learn from Daniel’s example
Conspiracy Theory2 days ago
What does San Francisco Mayor London Breed have to hide about Jeff Adachi’s death?
Culture and Religion1 day ago
Naeem Fazal: Is Allah the same as Yahweh?
Culture and Religion2 days ago
We’re losing our culture because faux conservatives aren’t fighting for it!
Democrats2 days ago
Trump hits Biden on China connections
Democrats1 day ago
4 Retweets in an hour: Bill de Blasio’s campaign failed to materialize
Democrats21 hours ago
Democrats imperiled whether they impeach or not