Although I agree with you to an extent that debates are about ‘theater’, I respectfully disagree with you that Ed Case tried to make the debate about age, image, good looks, vigor, etc. If Case’s answers had been muddled and obscure, lacking substance and full of false information, then you could possibly contend that Case felt he needed to rely primarily on his good looks and great vocabulary to debate Akaka. Yet, not only does Ed Case look good on camera, he was well-prepared, he understood each question and answered each question directly and with conviction. He showed himself to be a sharp, quick thinker and also someone who has given a great deal of thought to a diversity of issues, local, national and international.

If anything, Akaka and his campaign staff are the ones who are guilty of putting on political theater, not only in this debate but during this entire campaign. This is why I think so:

First, campaign spokeswoman Elisa Yadao and others dramatically played down expectations before the debate — casting Akaka in the role of a quiet teacher, not an arguer or great orator. Our expectations for Akaka’s performance were so low, he could have just stood there and smiled and people would have thought he did just great. (If Akaka is, in fact, a teacher, then he should have been much savvier at conveying his answers during the debate.)

Second is the whole issue of Akaka’s campaign in general — how it isn’t really Akaka’s campaign. Case has done almost 200 Talk Stories, getting into the neighborhoods and talking with and listening to constituents. When you see the Case campaign make statements to the press, it is Ed himself doing it. When do we every see Akaka himself on the news?

Finally, I would argue that it has been much, much more difficult for Ed Case to put on any kind of illusion about himself at all. Akaka is outspending Case, what, four to one? Akaka’s TV ads are professional, very well-done — perhaps the best-known one shows Akaka as a fervent, passionate orator. By contrast, Case has had to work much, much harder than Akaka to present any kind of image at all to the public. Plus, he’s been handicapped from the start by the fact that if he comes off TOO aggressive, people will automatically dislike him. If he comes off too meek, he’ll lose. Furthermore, Case has relied mostly on personal appearances on camera, while you see Akaka strictly through commercials. Think you’ll ever see Akaka signwaving or doing Talk Story’s? Watch TV. The Akaka camp are the ones who are really using the smoke and mirrors.

That’s my two cents.

Rachel

I don’t see the point in having discussions where trojanraider calls Frosty and Senator Akaka communists. Maybe these posts should be moderated? Or, if visitors know that they might be banned, perhaps they will make a bit more effort to be civil?

It’s up to you folks as to what kind of climate you want to foster here, but I do fear that the delicate balance necessary for human dialogue is threatened by the uncontrollable urge of the troll to play the provocateur. Surely political debate should rise to a higher level?

Your choice.

Frosty, you seem to be advocating trade barriers and protectionism. Another example . . . according to your logic, you would like to keep foreign automobile makers out of Hawaii because we do not directly regulate them. If that happened we would all be driving gas guzzling low quality american cars. Because of foreign competition from Japanese and German automakers (who were once our enemies in WW2) consumers have better selection and access to cars and it fores american manufacturers to produce higher quality cars for a lower cost.

Ed Case wants to make sure that American shipping lines are forced by foreign competition to provide Hawaii consumers with higher quality shipping services for a lower cost. If you believe like Ed Case does that American workers and businesss are the best in the world, then you would also believe the American shipping companies would be able to effectively compete against foreign shippers on an equal playing field without government protectionism that ends up costing Hawaii consumers more.

The Jones Act is bad for Hawaii and so is Dan Akaka who supports it!

Besides, the Jones Act doesn’t sanction monopoly; what it actually does is protect competition among American shippers from competition from foreign shippers. So your position (and Case’s) is that you want to open up competition in shipping to foreign shippers from Asia, Africa, etc. who are less well regulated by their home countries?

Bob Schacht

ECON 101 for frosty. Government regulations that stipulate that only American ships with American crews can port in Hawaii/US creates a barrier to entry for competitive firms. Typically, American ships are more expensive to purchase and American crews are more expensive to hire. Dan Akaka’s support of the Jones Act is making it more expensive for new/foreign companies to compete with the likes of Matson shipping. Less competition means higher costs which gets passed on to Hawaii consumers.

If you don’t believe in competitive markets then you and Dan Akaka are communists.

I want a representative who will stand up to the president and demand answeres. Case has not done this and he has gone along with GW way too often. Today we are flushing tons of money down the Iraq toilet and the only thing to show for it is pot holes in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Case calls this fiscal responsibility? I just don’t think so.

“Jones Act, it costs us more for everything that we buy because Dan Akaka is supporting a monopoly for hawaii shipping lines.”
~Does that mean you understand the Jones Act, or do you simply understand what Case has told you? I’ve spent a bit of time looking for information about the Jones Act and have, as of yet, been mostly unsuccessful with regards to the notion that it supports a monopoly in Hawaii. If you have sources aside from Case, please share.

“ANWR, Case is pro environment and against drilling in the arctic. Akaka is for destroying out wilderness.”
~ Seriously? “Akaka is for destroying our wilderness”? How about Akaka is for providing the indigenous people with some income from their land. I happen to disagree with the senator on this point, however, I am under no illusions that he wants to destroy the wilderness.

“NW Hawaiian Islands National Monument, because Case can work with both sides of the aisle he got the president to support his idea of protecting the NW hawaiian islands. Akaka was against Case’s legislation.”
~ This was a good thing Case did, there is no doubt about it. Do you know the Bill number? I’d be surprised is Akaka actually voted against this, but if you’ve checked how he voted on this measure, please send the link so I can see for myself.

“Alternative Minimum Tax, Case voted to save middle class working families from the burden of the AMT. Akaka voted to keep burdening hawaii families.”
~ Again, do you know the bill number? Can you show me the vote on this? Also, Case has voted in favor of the tax cuts for the richest Americans. If Case did indeed vote in yes on the AMT, then as far as I’m concerned, his vote on Bush’s tax cuts canceled out this vote. The of course there’s the bankruptcy bill, which only benefits banks and credit card companies.

“Immigration, Case supports defending out borders while allowing exceptions such as the children oh filipino WW2 vets to come to the US.”
~ http://www.akaka2006.org/issues/immigration

“Winning the War, Case knows it was a mistake to go to Iraq but he also knows it is a bigger mistake to let the region get out of control. If we cut and run like Dan Akaka wants to, then we will ahve a bigger war to fight very soon as the middle east situation deteriorates.”
~ I don’t even know where to begin….

“Balancing the Budget, Case supports balancing the budget and he is against raising the debt ceiling for the president and congress to continue putting us into trilions of dollars into debt.”
~ Balancing the budget is a good thing, I agree. But how does Case suggest we balance the budget while vote for tax cuts and supporting a war with no foreseeable end?

“Just a few of the many issues Ed Case has supported that Dan Akaka can’t even understand . . .”
~ I’m not completely sure you understand either.