4th of July

232 years ago today, the United States of America had declared independence.

It was the start of the greatest nation in history.

Unfortunately, there's some haters out there, even in the USA

Haters like Jeremiah Wright and Tobin Jones{my # 1 critic at UH-Manoa}. Nevermind that the USA gave Wright an opportunity to (voluntarily) join the Marines, and become a prominent and relatively wealthy minister!

Nevermind that the USA gave Jones an opportunity to go to college, receive a communications degree and be financially well off enough to travel to 26 states that he likes to brag about. (though he could be exaggerating to give himself a sense of "false sophistication" to rub it in his enemies faces)

In Mexico, there's no self-hatred, no embarrassment of being Mexican, nor any preacher screaming "god damn Mexico", even though Mexico has the same history of bloody conquests, slavery, and oppression like the USA! They recognize their history, but it doesn't stop them from having pride in their country!

Despite the stereotypes perpetuated by Jeremiah Wright and Tobin Jones, many African-Americans don't appreciate the anti-US animosity that comes from Wright or Jones! They love the USA and the opportunity it brings them!

Here's Walter Williams, an African-American economist, expressing disagreement of the pessimists  http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4217

 

Here’s my question for you: What are we to make of people who preach pessimism and doom to people — telling them that they’re poor because others are rich or telling blacks that they’ll never make it because of societal racism? What are we to make of politicians, media pundits and college professors who preach the politics of envy — telling people lies that the rich became rich off the backs of the poor? I grew up poor in a housing project in North Philadelphia, and those weren’t the lessons prevalent a half-century ago

Every nation has flaws!

But if so many people are interested in representing their neighborhoods, their schools, their  cities, their states, their coasts (or regions), then we can extend that in also representing our country!

Some say Europeans aren't into national pride, but that's nonsense! Europeans scream national pride at soccer games. So do Latin Americans, Africans, Asians, Middle Easterners, Pacific Islanders and everyone else. Even the Canadians scream their national pride at hockey games!

So ignore the haters like Tobin Jones and Jeremiah Wright! Be proud of the USA!

Light rail and Property Confiscation

Earlier this month, I wrote a letter to the Honolulu Advertiser about the possibility of people's property being confiscated to make room for the rail project. It was NEVER a major topic of discussion when the City Council was debating over whether we should build the rail system. The City Council approved the rail project WITHOUT discussing whether it's a good idea to force people off their property to make room for the rail.



Here is my letter to the Honolulu Advertiser



http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080608/OPINION02/806080331/-1/BACKISSUES

Property issue should have been addressed


Last Sunday's article on the possibility of people's property being confiscated to make room for the rail project addressed an issue that should have been addressed long before the City Council voted to approve rail.


I have previously written letters, as have others, warning about the possibility of people being forced off their land to make room for the light rail. I also wrote letters to the mayor and my City Council representative on this issue.


However, we have been ignored by nearly everyone.


I'm not against the idea of a rail system. I am against the idea of people's property being confiscated to make way for light rail (or any other project), and it's a shame very few have addressed this issue.



Pablo Wegesend

Honolulu

Now, here is the Honolulu Advertiser addressing the possible land confiscation to make room for rail.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080601/NEWS09/806010355/-1/BACKISSUES



A few weeks later, the Honolulu Advertiser mentioned about the Banana Patch neighborhood in Pearl City that might be demolished to make room for rail

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080616/NEWS09/806160345/-1/BACKISSUES

A corner of old Hawai'i sandwiched between highways in West O'ahu will be converted into a park-and-ride lot based on the city's current plan for its new commuter rail line.

Located near the intersection of Kamehameha and Farrington highways, the tiny Banana Patch neighborhood is a rural oasis that so far has withstood encroaching urban development.

Families still live without county water, street lights or sidewalks in the 20-acre triangle between Leeward Community College, the Pearl Highlands Center and two 43-story high-rises. The Banana Patch encompasses about a dozen homes, a church and a trucking company.

At least six of the families may need to move to make way for a park-and-ride facility planned by the city as part of its $3.7 billion commuter rail system.

The proposed Pearl Highlands park-and-ride has been identified as a key way to funnel North Shore and Central O'ahu commuters onto the rail system. Commuters along the H-2 Freeway could drive to the lot, park and take the train to work, avoiding the congested H-1 Freeway.

Sixty-one-year-old property owner Sam Alipio has lived on a 1-acre lot in the Banana Patch his entire life. He calls it "the place that time forgot" and is not too pleased about being moved out.

"I'm kind of upset. I don't want them to use my property," Alipio said. "We're comfortable here. A lot of people say, 'Hey how can you live there?' Well, that's the way I was brought up."

And here is the City & County's arrogant attitude towards the idea of (gasp) notifying people that their property would be confiscated to make way for rail.

While the city has held numerous information briefings on the rail project, it should do more to notify property owners that they may be affected, said City Council member Gary Okino, who represents Pearl City, including the Banana Patch neighborhood.

"I think the city feels that's enough notice. If you live in the vicinity, it's up to you to find out if your property is affected," Okino said. "To me they should be proactive, and they should notify the property owners."

And here is KSSK's Larry Price on this issue!

http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/therightprice_article/stealing_land_for_the_rail_plan/

---

Too bad those articles weren't written before the City Council approved light rail. It might've changed the discussion. Even the majority of the rail opponents didn't address the possible land confiscation.

I did a few years back and you can read it at

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?e801cca5-cbf2-4882-8a14-9a57607c7340

An excerpt from my editorial

They'll build it in locations where real people have their homes and businesses. It could be your home or your business that will be confiscated by the government through eminent domain. Your whole way of life will be ruined, all because of the utopian fantasies of others. It wouldn't matter if the government gives you the full monetary value of your property when they confiscate it. Your home is more than its monetary value; it's your memories, your way of life and a lot of other things that money can't buy.

------

I also remember writing an editorial at the Hawaii Reporter against the idea of building an expanded UH West Oahu campus

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?10953863-82d7-4492-aa59-fdfd7286e091


However, since then, I have changed my mind, because I'm thinking, if UH West Oahu reduces the traffic jams on the H-1, then there's less need for rail transit, and less worry about possible land confiscation to make way for light rail! UH West-Oahu will still be highly expensive, but it's better than having people forced off their land to make way for rail!

My editorial on Rod Tam

As I mentioned in the previous post, at a city council meeting on the construction of UH-West Oahu campus, Councilman Rod Tam referred to illegal aliens as "wetbacks". Tam later claimed he didn't know the word "wetbacks" is commonly used to insult Mexican-Americans.

I have written an editorial that have been published in the Hawaii Reporter and the Honolulu Star Bulletin

The Hawaii Reporter version

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/storyPrint.aspx?9f8be17f-3cfe-40c5-8eed-9cdf4e72a86d

----

Star Bulletin version

http://starbulletin.com/2008/06/10/editorial/commentary2.html

---

They're actually the same editorial, though edited slightly differently by the 2 outlets.

Here is the original versions as I written it myself, though I color-coded some sentences on this blog!

---

Last year, bounty hunter Dog Chapman was recorded using the N-word. He later claimed that he didn't know the N-word was offensive to African-Americans.

This year, city councilman Rod Tam used the word "wetback" at a city council meeting, in references to illegal aliens. Tam claimed that he didn't know that the word "wetback" was considered offensive to Mexican-Americans.

The word "wetback" was originally used to mock Mexican immigrants who swam the Rio Grande into the U.S. However, the word is commonly used by anti-Mexican racists to insult and threaten anyone of Mexican ancestry, even those whose parents and grandparents are born in the U.S

It is similar to the history of the word "haole". The word was originally used to refer to "foreigners". Being that the first foreign people to arrive in Hawaii were of European ancestry, it was later used to refer to all those with European ancestry. While some local Euorpean-Americans refer to themselves as "haole", the word is also used by anti-white racists to insult and threaten anyone with European ancestry, even those whose parents and grandparents were born in Hawaii.

It doesn't look good for Hawaii, a state that likes to call itself a "paradise of racial tolerance", to have two prominent individuals to display such ignorance on racial issues,especially when it comes to ethnic groups that don't have as many members here.
--
Hawaii has the highest percentage in this country of multi-racial people (including me, a Mexican-Puerto Rican-Spanish- Portuguese- German), and inter-racial marriages (like my brother's marriage to a Korean woman).

Hawaii also never had the large-scale violent racial riots that have devastated many major U.S. cities like Los Angeles, Miami, Detroit, or Cincinnati.

However, that doesn't mean that Hawaii is immune to it's residents having negative stereotypes and ignorance of cultural groups that are new or uncommon here!
While the conflicts between Native Hawaiians and European-Americans have been well documented, an under-reported racial conflict occuring in many low-income urban Honolulu communities and schools involve Polynesians, Micronesians and Asian immigrants. Some of those conflicts have ranged from mockery of each other's speech patterns to violent gang fights!

For many of those immigrants, this is the first time they're expreriencing diversity. The old-Hawaii plantation history is irrelevant to them, because their families weren't in Hawaii in the old plantation days! The insecurity of being in someplace new, the humiliation of being mocked by others, and the need to defend their honor, all contribute to the current-day conflicts in urban Honolulu.

The fame of Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for the President of the United States of America, has exposed the isolation some African-Americans feel in Hawaii. While Obama's life in Hawaii wasn't exposed to the level of hate that was prominent in places like Alabama or Mississippi, he still feel stereotyped or misunderstood growing up here!

My experience as a local boy, born and raised in Hawaii, has many similarities to Obama's upbringing. The difference was that Obama is of African and European ancestry (with the African side being more visible), I am of Latin American and European ancestry (with the Latin American side being more visible). Also, unlike Obama, I am a public school graduate (McKinley c/o 99)

Because I look more like the typical Mexican, everyone assumes I'm from somewhere, despite Hawaii being the only place I ever lived in. Some even refused to believe when I mentioned being born & raised in Hawaii. Usually, I'm stereotyped as being from California, Mexico or Puerto Rico.

Some even said I look "Middle Eastern". While many Latin Americans and Middle Eatern people have light-brown skin(like me), their cultures are very different from each other.

Coincidentally, the day after I learned of Tam's use of the word "wetback", a lady at a bus stop wanted to ask me about what buses pass by. But before she even asked about the buses, she asked if I "speak English".

This reminds me of back when I was in middle school (Kawananakoa, the so-called safe option of Honolulu middle schools), some local Asians assumed I was "foreign". Not only did I "not look local", I had a tendency to mumble when I talk. If a Hawaiian, local Asian or a European-American was mumbling, people would just consider it "mumbling". But because I "dont look local", I was stereotyped as being "foreign". The big irony is if those local Asians were sent to Idaho or Mississippi, they would be the ones stereotyped as "foreign".

Those same local Asians were surprised when I expressed an above-average level of intellect! Maybe because I wasn't Asian!

Some people express shock when I mention that my family eats kalua pork, shoyu chicken, saimin, and other popular local food. Why are people shocked when a Latin American familyadjust to Hawaii culture the same way so many Asians and Samoans adjusted to Hawaii culture?
Now some are expressing shock that many Latinos in Hawaii are demanding respect. Some are expressing shock that we refuse to be soft doormats when being humiliated! How dare we stand up for ourselves?

Some say "it's just words".

To those who say "it's just words" -- would you call your mother a "whore"? Was that "just words"?
Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I don't intend to sound like a "victim". I just want to inform the people of Hawaii what it's like to be a Latino in Hawaii.

Despite being part of a cultural minority, I consider Hawaii my home. I was born & raised in Hawaii. Hawaii has a great climate, great culture, great music, great food and many great people! I am a UH alumni, and a UH Rainbow/Warrior/Wahine fan and represent the UH green to the minute I die! 

I hope the Latinos from outside Hawaii don't get scared off by the Rod Tam controversy and I will welcome any Latino to join in the cultural diversity of Hawaii!

Who you're calling wetback, Rod Tam?

City Councilman Rod Tam, at a zoning meeting, expressed concerns about the use of illegal aliens in building the West Oahu campus of the University of Hawaii.

However, he referred to illegal aliens as "wetbacks"

http://www.hawaiireporter.com/storyPrint.aspx?fb0e8250-c179-4448-9d74-dff1ce1d537b

1) Tam claimed that he didn't know that the word "wetback" was considered offensive to Mexican-Americans.

That reminds me of Dog Chapman, who caught using the N-word, claimed that he didn't know the N-word was offensive to African-Americans.

It doesn't look good for Hawaii, a state that likes to call itself a "paradise of racial tolerance", to have two prominent individuals to display such ignorance on racial issues, especially when it comes to ethnic groups that don't have as many members here.

2)The word "wetback" was originally used to mock Mexican immigrants who swam the Rio Grande into the U.S. However, the word is commonly used by anti-Mexican racists to insult and threaten anyone of Mexican ancestry, even those whose parents and grandparents are born in the U.S

It is similar to the history of the word "haole". The word was originally used to refer to "foreigners". Being that the first foreign people to arrive in Hawaii were of European ancestry, it was later used to refer to all those with European ancestry. While some local Euorpean-Americans refer to themselves as "haole", the word is also used by anti-white racists to insult and threaten anyone with European ancestry, even those whose parents and grandparents were born in Hawaii.

3) Before the "wetback controversy, Rod Tam was known as the "snack and a nap guy"

This was due to his proposal, back when he was a state legislator, for the state government to subsidize snacks for state workers, and to subsidize paid nap time for state workers.

Tam's proposal was heavily ridiculed, and it never went any further in the state legislator.

So, anytime Tam said anything ridiculous or controversial, the jokes about the "snacks and nap" come up again!

So, if Elizabeth Hata-Watanabe (a popular Mexican-Japanese woman who owns the O-Lounge nightclub, a prominent community fundraiser, and recently named by Honolulu Advertiser as "Mom of the Year") was to move Rod Tam's district and run for office -- Tam's political career would be over. Then Rod Tam would have plenty of time to enjoy his snacks and nap!

4) I sent an editorial on this to the major newspapers! It has more commentary, and I'll link to it if published!

Why hate on tattoos?

A few weeks ago, Midweek ( a popular weekly publication in Hawaii) had an article on Natasha Kai, a member of the USA women's soccer team, who is from Oahu's North Shore.

http://www.midweek.com/content/story/midweek_coverstory/natasha_kai/

-----------

About a week later, a very lame letter was published in Midweek, complaining about Kai's tattoos.

http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/lte_article/letters_to_the_editor863/
(see 2nd letter from top)

Auwe to tats
Natasha Kai is obviously a very talented soccer player. But with all of those tattoos defacing her body, auwe, what a terrible example for young girls who looks up to her.

Helen Yu
Kaimuki

------

I thought Helen Yu's letter was such a lame personal attack, displaying cultural ignorance, shallowness and pettiness

Here's what I sent to Midweek

http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/lte_article/letters_to_the_editor864/



Natasha’s tats
This is in response to Helen Yu’s letter complaining about Team USA soccer player Natasha Kai’s tattoos. Helen Yu complains that those tattoos are “defacing her body” and that they are a “terrible example for young girls who look up to her.”

Helen Yu, where do you think you are? (this was edited out of Midweek's published version of my letter)

Ms. Yu is in Hawaii, which is a part of Polynesia. It is a traditional Polynesian custom to have tattoos in various parts of the body. The tattoos on Natasha Kai are Polynesian-designed tattoos.

Hawaii is also a part of the United States of America, a nation that prizes individual freedom. People can choose if they want to decorate their bodies with tattoos.

If you don’t like tattoos, then don’t get one.

I don’t have any tattoos, nor am I connected to the tattoo industry in any way. I am just tired of people who have a hateful attitude toward things they don’t understand

PabloWegesend Honolulu

--------

And here's another letter, making another good ignored by the Helen Yu's of the world - tattoos doesn't make you a bad person


A good example

I don’t see how you can say that Natasha Kai is a “terrible example” due to her tattoos. With all the different ways that people can set bad examples (smoking, drugs, violence, gambling, etc.), I fail to see how having tattoos makes her a “terrible example.”

If you’ve read the article, you would have seen that Kai shows great focus as well as perseverance as shown as how, after having “everything go wrong,” she didn’t stay frustrated and give up on soccer. Instead, as she put it, “pulled her head out of her butt and realized she’s not going to waste her talent.”

Having dedication, focus and perseverance? What a terrible example to set for young girls. Just disgusting!

The article also shows that she has strong family ties. She has tattoos of her siblings’ names, as well as two nephews. She also has tattoos of her parents’ names. This also shows that her tattoos have a deep meaning to her.

Closeness with her family? Just horrible. We can’t have our young girls following her example.

If I ever have a daughter, and tattoos are the worst of my worries, I would be a very happy father.

Jared T. Hanaoka Honolulu

Say No to Bob Barr

My decision to vote for the next President has just gotten a lot easier.

While I have supported the Libertarian Party for the last 8 years, I cannot support it's current presidential nominee Bob Barr

1) Barr was a former Republican, and an extreme right-wing Republican. He was one of the main reasons I never became a Republican, even during the days I was inaccurately conisdered "the campus conservative" at UH! ( I was called a "campus conservative" for openly criticizing the Radical Left)

During his Republican days, Barr was openly aligned with the Religious Right, and wanted to either ban or severely restrict - abortion, birth control ,sex ed, same-sex marriage.


He wanted to impeach Bill Clinton over his lying about the Lewinsky affair, but guess what? Bob Barr had several affairs of his own. There's even some juicy details on it, which you can find on your own.

Barr, despite demanding bans on abortion, approved of his wife getting an abortion. Some even said he ordered her to get an abortion!

Bob Barr was a hard-core believer on the War on Drugs, which irritates many Libertarians. While most politicians in the Democratic and Republican Party supported the government's militaristic War on Drugs, Barr went further than most!

In the controversy over legalizing medical marijuana, Barr demonized those who publicly expressed that marijuana has helped them deal with symptoms of AIDS, MS, and cancer.

While marijuana has side effects (lung problems, hallucinations, impaired judgement), it is also known to be good at reducing nausea, body aches, and other ailments. Adults should have the freedom to smoke marijuana, though it shouldn't be sold to minors!

Bob Barr had made speeches to pro-segregationist groups, and was known to pander to such people! And Bob Barr is still siding with the anti-immigration fanatics!

Bob Barr also wanted the US military to ban the practice of the religion called Wicca amongst it's members!

Bob Barr represents everything that kept me from being a Republican!


2) While Barr become more aligned with the liberal ACLU within the last few years on civil liberties, Barr was one of the strongest supporter of the Main Violation of Civil Liberties by the Federal Government --- it's militaristic War on Drugs!

Libertarians like Harry Browne (1996/2000 Libertarian presidential candidate) understood the militaristic war on drugs encourages government abuse of power.

Bob Barr, however, publicly demonized those with such concerns.

While drug use should be discouraged, the militaristic war on drugs is a civil liberties nightmare.

Here's an example:

Someone who you don't get along with can falsely accuse you of using drugs. But the police isn't just going to ask nicely to search. Nope, the drug policy (advocated by Barr) is to use no-knock raids, in which SWAT teams violently enter your home. These no-knock raids rarely even get violent drug kingpins. They ended up violating innocent, non-violent people who have no connection to the drug trade!

The militaristic War on Drugs encourages unwarranted spying, unwarranted searching, racial profilling (where police targets young males of African-American and Latino ancestry driving a nice car, with the racist assumption that they're "drug dealers")

I remembered an article in the Source magazine mentioning a nightclub bouncer violently grabbing a young male, suspected of putting "drugs" in his mouth. It turned out to be just a breath mint!

3) Now that Bob Barr is the Libertarian nominee, it risks having a reputation for being the party of "conservatives who think the Republican Party isn't right-wing enough"

But what appealed me to the Libertarian Party in 2000, was that it horrified the Religious Right as well as go against the socialist, gun-phobic Left.

I disagreed with the Libertarian's reluctance to support the fight against Al Quaida in Afghanistan, and I felt Saddam Hussein was also a threat to world peace.

Now Bob Barr's nomination makes me really distanced from the Libertarian Party.

So I either 1) learn about other minor candidates or 2) choose between Barack Obama & John McCain.

Ethanol and Other Energy News

1) I remember a few years, there was a writer on the University of Hawaii's newspaper (Ka Leo http://www.kaleo.org/ ) who several articles on the benefits of having cars run on vegetable oil.

I thought that if that could work, we wouldn't need any more petroleum.

However, the problem with having things run on vegetable oil, corn-based ethanol, or any energy source made from food is that it reduces the food supply available.

And the lessening amount of food supply had lead to higher prices of food.

Corn-based ethanol has led to increased price of corn. That has made tortillas more expensive, making many in Mexico very angry!

Also, some farmers have switched to crops more likely to be used for ethanol, which dwindled the supply of other plants like rice. Which caused rice prices to spike, leading to protests and riots in Haiti, Vietnam and the Phillipines.

Being that food is a priority for human life, I believe that crops ought to be used for food production first, before being used for other uses.

So, this ethanol trend has got to be reduced.

I'm one of those people who don't think banning things are a good idea, and than banning things make good rhetoric, but rarely lead to intended consequences.

However, the US governments need to stop subsidizing ethanol production. That might mean a few votes lost in farm states like Iowa or Wisconsin, which probably why Obama & McCain haven't talked much about cutting off ethanol subsidies.

Also, certain state governments need to stop requiring that cars, boats, etc run on ethanol.

2) What are our other energy options

Solar is fine if we have the sun all the time. Though I still remember March 2006 when it was raining nearly every day in Hawaii, and certain public housing projects that were reliant on solar heaters didn't have warm water!

Wind power sounds great if there's wind all the time. But we'll have to clear tons of land just to make enough windmills to power an urban area!

Nuclear energy, while it doesn't release tons of carbon dioxide like oil/coal/natural gas, produces radioactive waste that can be dangerous if not stored property.

While most nuclear reactors in the world never had the Chernobly meltdown, they are still vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Which is why I'm not so fond of having nuclear power plants in Hawaii!

So that leaves us with petroleum. While it is not ideal, it's the best energy source we got for now.

3) In 2001, President George W Bush proposed allowing some oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska.

At the time, some said it would've taken 7 years until oil would come and be ready for consumer use.

It's 7 years, and still no oil drilling.

Some US environmental activists don't want offshore oil drilling!

Yet, it is done in Norway, Great Britain and other European nations without major pollution.

While the US gets most of the oil from Canada and Mexico, it is still too dependent on autocratic regimes in the Middle East and Venezuela for oil. It doesn't look good when President Bush has to beg Saudi Arabia's officials to pump more oil!

The demand for oil and food has increased partially due to the economic rise of China and India, the 2 most populated nations in the world!

The US needs to start drilling more in Alaska, as well as offshore of California, Texas, Louisiana and Florida! We need to drill for our own oil instead of depending on others!

And we need to reserve our crops for food instead of fuel!

4) This reminds, back in the early 1800's, a lot of the oil used for lights and lanterns came from dead whales.

However, the expanded use of petroleum meant lower demand for whale hunts. So petroleum probably saved the whales (though it might've killed some in oil spills)

Hopefully, we find a cleaner source that is as efficient as petroleum soon.