Linglefacts.com

Okay, has anyone checked out this site yet? Apparently the GOP's pants are in such a bunch over this site that they're actually accusing the Democratic party of cybersquatting.

Well, let's see: it is clear that the Democratic party really is behind this, and I'm not surprised that the game has come to this level, but - cybersquatting? Hello?

Update: I finally saw the site, read through every allegation, and posted my general overview below. And, yes, you can tell that I lost my temper somewhere in there.

Comments

"it is clear that the Democratic party really is behind this"

The page says copyright by the Democratic Party. :)

What I thought was a bit peculiar was this morning's headline in the Star-Bulletin which said Lingle is the target of smears and threats. If they wanted me to feel sorry for her, they failed. All's fair in love, war ... and politics.

Well, the smear complaints are unrelated to the website. If the pix they showed on the TV news are authentic, the smears are pretty crude and obnoxious, not to say slimy and evil. "Haole Jew?" That was one of the hand-printed letters shown on the tube.

Now, Link, those letters (again, if they are authentic) are clearly a smear, and look like the product of someone who is up to no good... which makes whatever it is that's on the Democrat site look almost harmless by comparison.

(And, come on, it could've been worse. I'm no legal expert, but I think that if the URL had been, say, www.lindalinglemustdie.com, then there would have been a cyber-issue of some sort.)

All I know is, the dirtier it gets, the less interested I become, only because all I'm hearing from both parties are "neener neener" and nothing more. Really, I would rather sit through ten straight hours of beer commercials followed by ten more of Sleepland Tanya, if it means never having to see another campaign ad ever again.

I'm avoiding the TV for the same reason. I'm not interested in the ads at all- I don't think anyone has said anything worth listening to. It's all just nastiness, and watching it upsets me.

What interests me is just what this "cybersquatting" law says, and when was it passed?

Well now. Here it is. I gotta say, under section §481B-B "Cybersquatting and cyber piracy prohibited" the Democrats do come pretty close to the edge of the law. I think it depends on the definition of "bad faith."

Okay, I finally looked at it, and like I've said, nothing too life-threatening here.

"Questionable appointments to staff and boards"? "Hired attorney husband using county money"? "Favored developers over the environment"? Fairly valid points, some of which I'm sure the Republicans can challenge on their own. At the same time, these facts are already on public record, and suffice it to say that if you haven't been reading the papers or snooping around the Internet, it's definitely new to you.

That said, I still think is relatively tame compared to the actual racist smears and threats that I was discussing with Linkmeister earlier. Granted, it is public record, and there's reason for the Republican Party to be concerned, which I honestly think is a good thing. But again, it's not character assassination, and there are far worse things to say at this point, of which the rest of you can discuss.

Boy, another senior moment, thought for sure there were more comments here eariler today than now.

I think the Linkmeister raises an important point in that these types of laws are really open to interpretation, usually these things normally get sorted out with a couple of good test court cases.

In case anyone hasn't seen the new Lingle-Aiona ads yet, the Republican Party has already refuted one of the main claims put forth by the site - the question of Mainland money financing the Republican gubernatorial campaign. It's the one where the Lingle camp points out that Dan Inouye and Neil Abercrombie are getting more Mainland money for their campaigns than hers is.

And if anyone needs to look at any high-profile examples of "bad faith" (albeit bad faith that was not tested by Hawaii law, involving people who are not really politicians), one can look no further. (Also, here's more politically-motivated cybersquatting issues here.

So there.

Anyone see the Channel 9 "Eye on Hawaii" Segment last night about the environmental havoc and the subsequent economic damage to small boat owners and fisherfolk over at Ma'alea during Lingle's term as Mayor over there?

The interesting point to me, which I'd forgotten had I ever known it, was that Lingle barely won Maui in the 1998 gubernatorial campaign; as the reporter pointed out, one would have thought a successful Mayor might have won her county in a landslide(leave aside whether that was editorializing on the part of Channel 9 or not).

If Aiona ccould not manage on his personal finances making $80,000 + a year as a judge, does anyone really believe he has the fiscal knowledge for the state of Hawaii??
He should get a clue! Most residents here make less than half of what he made.

FWIW, Link, Hirono got the endorsement of the Sierra Club.

That was only a few weeks after they hosted a Lingle-Hirono debate (transcript here).

And Kea, the Advertiser had a good biography of Aiona in its Voter's Guide. It touches on the salary issue:

Most of the attention focused on his comments that his $86,780 salary was too low, a stance that got little sympathy at the time from Hawai'i's working families. Recently, Aiona shook his head at the memory. There were other, more personal, reasons, he said.

Grins. Regarding Aiona's memory, goes to show if you ever, ever, ever plan to run for public office, mind your tongue.

Post a Comment