Obama will actually vote to "help" Hawaii split from the US.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SectionEight
So now there is NO native hawaiians left but they want freedom for natives?
Like I said earlier, just a social free govt check program. What you think that check will be spent on is different from what the evidence shows. Never once did a gvt. welfare check get somebody out of poverty, it just kept them there.


sir, have you read the bill? The main reason for this is to continue the apologies that the US govt owes. The main reward from this bill is more Hawaiian govt, and less land restrictions by the US govt.

Not some welfare check as you say.




posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32
Because the bill is not intended to help Hawaii split from the US. You take a mess up of words from Akaka, who has since explained himself, and keep using it against him. Thats not really fair is it? Have you ever messed up what you were trying to explain? Im sure you have, we all have.


Gee, I wonder why? Why in the world would he say it if it wasn't true? The fact is he said it, than got back lash for it and now is trying to say he didn't mean it.


Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
reply to post by Dronetek
 


The media hasn't touched this in relation to Obama because it is a non-issue. This is a matter of what is right. If anything, media attention on this story would shine light on Obama in a positive way.


So as always, its only an issue when its a Republican? Why in the world did the media (CNN, ABC & MSNBC) spend 2 days accusing Palin of wanting Alaska to split from the US?

This is the problem at the core of media bias. The media and lots of democrats, have one standard for Republicans and another for themselves.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by Dronetek]



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Dronetek
 


One can't slip up and speak faster than a thought in their head? For all you know he was assuming people were thinking that while he was talking.

I for one think Sean Hannity would have attacked this if there was something to attack.

With this line of thinking , I could pinpoint Bush planning 9/11 on his speaking screw ups. But it doesnt mean Im right.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


Making a statement of "this is the first step in succession from the US" is not a slip of the tongue or misstatement., There is no way you could rearrange that statement to mean something else.

He knew what he was saying and meant it.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by Dronetek]



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Considering European nations were pressured most of this century to release control over all their colonies, most of which were less distant from the nations in question then Hawaii is from any other part of the USofA, then I wonder why it would be any kind of problem for Hawaii to go solo.



[edit on 6/9/08 by thematrix]



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Well heres something that will END this thread

"Despite heavy lobbying against the bill by close associates of Sen. John McCain, he voted in favor of the bill"

Thats from YOUR article. McCain voted for bill

MCCain VOTED FOR THIS AS WELL.


DONE.
OVER.
FIN.

The End



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


I guess this is what happens when proper research is not done before trying to attack the other side.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
This thread has some important issues to discuss, namely the wrongs done to the native Hawaiian people by the colonial powers in the past.

This issue is contentious, keep it civil.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


Ok but the thread title should be changed to either Obama and McCain or the split should be taken out. Otherwise its spreads wrong information.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Section eight, you made a comment to the effect that never did a welfare check from the government help anyone out of poverty, it just kept them there. I would beg to differ....our government gives massive "welfare" checks to the oil industry, to the agricultural industry, and to the pharma industry, and they make massive profits off of it. Now, apparently, the government is giving massive "welfare" checks to failed bankers who are so bad at their jobs that they are destroying the american economy....and those bankers will then go on to use those checks to buy million dollar mansions and cars and yachts, and further their fortunes as well. And soon our government will be giving out "welfare" checks to the collapsing airlines and automakers industries, and these people will use those checks to live the life that you and i could only dream of. Further the amounts our governments give to these big business has now outstripped the amount of money actually going to the poor. Regardless, even if we WERE giving hawaii back to the hawaiians, this would not be our government handing out free checks to poor people, it would be GIVING BACK THAT WHICH ALREADY BELONGED TO THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. I think the hawaiians were doin just fine before we invaded, in fact, from what i have read, their existence back then was much closer to paradise than most other peoples on this earth, so how do we give them THAT back? We have stolen from them their national innocence, much as a child raped is forever damaged and loses something special, just as we did to the native americans, and in truth, no reparation, no amount of money can ever repay what we took from them, so the least we could do for them is everything.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by bknapple32
 

DONE.
OVER.
FIN.

The End

I guess this is what happens when proper research is not done before trying to attack the other side.


Not so fast...

He voted for the cloture vote, or as a courtesy because they knew it was dead.

www.hawaiireporter.com...

But Republicans played let’s make a deal with theirs, negotiating up until the very last minute. Organized in caucus beforehand, some Republicans who knew they would kill the cloture vote, cast their ballot in favor of the Akaka Bill because they either served on the Senate Appropriations Committee with Inouye, the co-chair, and wanted to show him the courtesy, or because they’d traded their vote with Inouye in previous sessions. Republican Sen. Jon Kyl, one of the biggest opponents of the bill, promised the Hawaii delegation he would not stand in the way of the cloture vote because of a previous deal he made, but he told them if it passed cloture, he’d be their toughest opponent.


[edit on 6-9-2008 by Dronetek]



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 02:13 PM
link   
well since most of the posters in this thread do not truly understand the intent of this bill, here you go:
H.R.505

[edit on 6-9-2008 by namehere]



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek

Not so fast...

He voted for the cloture vote, or as a courtesy because they knew it was dead.

www.hawaiireporter.com...

...
Republicans who knew they would kill the cloture vote, cast their ballot in favor of the Akaka Bill because they either served on the Senate Appropriations Committee with Inouye, the co-chair, and wanted to show him the courtesy, or because they’d traded their vote with Inouye in previous sessions.
...



Wait.. someone's opinion and mere speculation being paraded as fact?

... typical, all around.

Blogs, Opinions, Speculations... seems everyone has one and, for the most part, none have the essence of roses.

 



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 02:55 PM
link   
So you are either saying its politics as usual with mccain cause he vote for it for other reasons knowing it would be rejected. And obama vote for it because he actually believed it...


OR

they both vote for it.

Either way, it makes obama look fine and Mccain either equal to Obama or politcs as usual no change.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
Glad to see that the overt racism was removed from the posts.

Hawaii is unique. If you ever get the chance to go to the state capital, it is pretty neat. They have a palace sitting right next to the capital building that is out of the jurisdiction of the police. They still hold very dear their monarchy that the Europeans overturned when they decided to conquer those lands under threat of violence and with disease. Until people can get past the fact that it is somehow OK to conquer someone else's land, we are never going to mature as a people.


Don't just blame the "Europeans" for this, America and Americans hand a big hand in the overthrow of the monarchy too. The vast majority of the meddling in Hawaii since the the 19th century has been from the USA, not Europe.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
So Republicans were upset when Obama wanted the US to have 53 States... and now they are upset he wants 49??


I support this move...

Next is giving the States back to the Native American Indians and Mexicans of course...



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Dronetek
 


The Akaka Bill is not there to split Hawaii from the US, it's there for Hawaii to become a nation within a nation. It's there for the people of Hawaii to choose wether they want to be a part of it or not. It won't be a law it will be a choice. There are many Hawaiian advocate groups that want this to be done and if it passes then they can be a part of it, if not they don't have to. Why is there a pushing for an Akaka Bill, because some of the people of Hawaii are pushing for it and want it. The missionaries came to Hawaii, held Liliuokalani hostage in her own home and took over our Hawaiian kingdom. I do understand that without the movement of the missionaries we probably woulnd't have very much roads, homes and businesses. Queen Liliuokalani and King Kamehameha gave out acres and acres of land to the people of Hawaii, and now we have to purchase our land or go through the Hawaiian Homes organization to get land, I think thats crap. But yes, some Hawaiian were stupid enough to sell land or trade it for goods, but for most of the land, it was taken away from us, unlawfully. All in all the Akaka Bill is to help the Hawaiian people that want to be a part of it.



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
"The most serious incident occurred on February 10, 1843. Lord George Paulet of the Royal Navy warship HMS Carysfort entered Honolulu Harbor and captured the Honolulu fort, effectively gaining control of the town. Paulet demanded that King Kamehameha III abdicate and that the Hawaiian Islands be ceded to the British Crown. Under the guns of the frigate, Kamehameha stepped down, but lodged a formal protest with both the British government and Paulet's superior, Admiral Richard Thomas. Thomas repudiated Paulet's actions, and on July 31, 1843, restored the Hawaiian government. In his restoration speech, Kamehameha declared that "Ua mau ke ea o ka ʻāina i ka pono" (The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness), the motto of the future State of Hawaiʻi."

en.wikipedia.org...

It was the British that subjugated Hawaii initially. And later the Americans.

King Kamehameha's statues can still be found all over the island. He is still regarded as the hero of the Hawaiian people.

The longest highway in Hawaii is named after him. Kam highway... Kam for Kamehameha.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 6-9-2008 by Jay-in-AR]



posted on Sep, 6 2008 @ 04:44 PM
link   
Guys, its a moot point. Mccain voted for the SAME bill





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join