Political Radar


April 23rd, 2013

EMILY's List, which helps elect Democratic women who favor abortion rights, is eager to support U.S. Rep. Colleen Hanabusa's primary campaign against U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz.

Marcy Stech, national press secretary for EMILY's List, said the group does not endorse until after a candidate has formally declared. But she offered praise for Hanabusa:

Throughout her career, Colleen Hanabusa has always put the women and families of Hawaii first. Should she make her run official, the EMILY's List community would be thrilled to support another progressive woman leader from Hawaii in the U.S. Senate.

26 Responses to “`Thrilled'”

  1. Kolea:

    Emily's List loses credibility when they elevate gender above all else. Has it come to a point where only Hawaii's women deserve representation in Congress? Hawaii's voters have chosen women for 3 out of the 4 congressional seats.

    We need--and I include men in the "we"-- more women in Congress. They deserve representation proportionate to their presence in the community. Not through a quota system, but by building a society which does not discriminate and which allows both men and women equal opportunity to attain the skills and experience necessary to get elected to Congress and the Senate.

    I suggest Emily's List should butt out and make other Senate races a priority. Some place where a Democratic women can replace a fossilized, conservative man. Not here, where a notso progressive woman is seeking to defeat a pro-choice, pro-equality senator and Emily's List is supporting her merely because her opponent is a man, not because he has been anything but completely supportive on "women's issues."

    At what point can Emily's List be described as a "female chauvinist" organization? The charm of such an attitude escapes me.

  2. ohiaforest3400:

    Here, here, Kolea.

  3. Chicken Grease:

    What's with all the smoke and mirrors? Choose a side, ko', no make ho'o ma le ma le, however it's spelled.

    Ohia' -- it's "hear, hear." Can look it up, you no believe.

    Woooooow, Dems paint themselves into a corner, worshipping PC all these years . . . when the eventual inevitability of "he" vs. "she" on the Dem' ticket, they all deer's expression in front o'the headlights.

    Just saw David Chang on the HI News Now story on this turkey situation. Chang gaining some pounds, sheesh. Repubs better cover all bases going into the next 'lection, get in shape.

    # # #

  4. ohiaforest3400:

    I'm sure you're right, CG. Just spelling based on what I hear here, ha, ha, ha.

  5. Chicken Grease:

    Heh. That does make a Grease laugh. 😀

  6. Eric4Senate:

    Republicans are more than happy to expose these self serving people the door.
    Charles Djou showed the people of Hawaii what Representative of congress can do in the short time he was there. He actually communicated to the people and responded quickly to letters and mail. The Democrats still have not learned and are now left in chaos without Inouye. There dog eat dog mentality is really showing. Where are all those Democrats that we clamouring to be Inouye's replacement they should all be running for the seat.
    What an embarrassing moment that was to see them all line up before Inouye was even buried.
    I can't believe you dems are even shocked by the Emily's list feminazis. If they cared for wonmen they would be fighting against the Gosnells case where the abortion doctor killed a mother and several born girls in his clinic. They should be fighting abortions selected based on gender. No they want women to have mental and psychological problems and guilt from abortions let alone the risk of medical complicatons such as death.

  7. Kolea:


    How are Dems like "deer in the headlights"? Is the choice between Schatz and Hanabusa an easy one to make? Each has their pluses and minuses. Since they are both new to Washington, I want a better sense of where they stand on certain issues, like tax policy, anti-trust, banking regulation, budget priorities, civil liberties, foreign policy.

    I think we all know they want to "bring home the bacon" and encourage tourism. (I am somewhat uneasy that public debate does not allow loyal residents of Hawaii to question "pork barrel" spending or to cast doubts on the wisdom of ever-increasing tourism).

    I know both of them personally, have agreed and worked in concert with them at times and butted heads at others.

    As a self-confessed "progressive," I agree with them on what I PERCEIVE to be their positions on some federal issues and disagree on others. Both are too "centrist," too "pro-corporate," "pro-investor" in my mind. Neither are strong friends of working people. Both SEEM too uncritical of Obama, though you and I undoubtedly disagree on which issues the President is wrong.

    At this stage of the game, over a year out from the primary election, I think it is extremely reasonable for Democrats to be unsure which "side" to pick. I need to be courted, need to be convinced.

    Emily's List endorsement of Tulsi Gabbard over Mufi Hanneman was an example of the right way for them to intervene. Mufi was clearly "bad" on their issues. Despite a lifelong history of being "bad" on their issues, Tulsi had professed a complete change of heart and they accepted her commitment. I do support affirmative action for women candidates as a general proposition. But I do not see the virtue of having an all female congressional delegation, though I can see that narrow feminists might see that as a victory. I think it is preferable for our delegation to be more representative of the variety of Hawaii's people. And I think it is better for the Democratic Party as well.

    Since I assume the funds available to Emily's List are not unlimited, I suggest they need to engage in a kind of triage in deciding where to spend their money. There are a lot of other federal races where they can help a pro-choice, pro-equality woman candidate get elected to Congress. Schatz's views on women and equality represent a generational change we have been waiting for.

    And frankly, Hanabusa is not consistently pro-equality. She stymied the passage of civil unions while Senate President and opposes marriage equality for gays and lesbians. That said, I repeat, I am willing to be courted.

  8. Sayer:

    I just don't see that Schatz has much to offer in the Senate. He's not a strong leader. Colleen has shown more strength and intelligence in her career.

  9. ohiaforest3400:

    If I get in a scrap and have to choose a partner, it's Hanabusa all the way. I know that's a superficial take v.v. Kolea's thoughtful analysis, but there you have it.

  10. Goober:


    From a "carefree" point of view Emily's list is just like Craig's list.
    Just assumptions about someone and approximation on when.
    Based on what?

    Seems that one with a posterior motive
    got greased and laughs about it.

  11. Chicken Grease:

    Always appears when. Grease does.

    "A Grease and the Bean Stalk[er]" now available (apparently).

  12. Chicken Grease:

    April 24th, 2013 at 6:20 am


    How are Dems like "deer in the headlights"? Is the choice between Schatz and Hanabusa an easy one to make? . . .

    Well, no. That's why a Grease made the analogy.

    Think it's prudent to start filling Washington with X-geners; ergo, Schatz. Progressives aren't an automatic "good thing" as much as they purport themselves to be -- look at all those "connect both countries, puh-lease!" progressives in South Korea (yeah, great idea).

    Schatz is good there, you know? We need at least a balance (note to Emily).

  13. Ken:

    Hard choice.
    Schatz's failure to support true filibuster reform and his apperent go along to get along attitude weights heavily against him when a Senator from a safe D seat should be a leader for progressives not a follower for blue dogs.

    On the other hand Hanabusa's vote against net freedom by supporting CSIPA, an act that would facilliate the gutting of equal access on the net and the death knell for any 4th amendment rights in the cyber world is a huge stain against her. This coupled with her raw political oppurtunism seeking personal promotion no matter how much discord creates an atmosphere of distrust to any policy committment she may claim to have.
    As soon as she won her house seat she was testing the waters for a race for either Governor or Senator. This shows she is oblivious to the idea that she should decide where she feels she could best help the citizens of Hawaii and focus on that. Now it just looks like she is trolling for nothing more then a bigger office.

    So no matter who wins the progressive voters of Hawaii will lose.

  14. Goober:

    Seems that one got a bean up their posterior with no motive
    but to heckle. Always available.

  15. Chicken Grease:

    Nothing original. Can only leap frog and/or piggyback on others' comments. Candy available at the movie theatre.

  16. Chicken Grease:

    Can see if Hanabusa was doing a bang-up job. She should just stay in her office and improve. Would like to see her in "a" senatorial position (she might have to move out of state, yuk yuks), but, yeah, Schatz is the guy. Smart, x-Gen. Philosophy major. Don't need another lawyah in ofice. Think Hanabusa's got a ton of Hirono-as-a-Hawaii-Senator envy.

    We need balance. Not more "PC."

  17. Goober:

    "Nothing original. Can only leap frog and/or piggyback on others' comments. Candy available at the movie theatre."

    a grease-- it's "movie theater" Can look it up, you no believe.

  18. Goober:

    a grease-- it's "movie theater" Can look it up, you no believe.

  19. Goober:

    a grease should stay out of commenting and learn how to speak English
    and not chicken scratch, it calls comments. Nothing like a chicken
    that runs around with no head.

  20. Chicken Grease:

    April 24th, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    a grease-- it's "movie theater" Can look it up, you no believe.

    The American Heritage Dictionary (5th [most current] edition) states "theater or theatre" clearly; so, uh, wrong again . . . just like at the beginning of the year.

    All other dictionaries worth being dictionaries most probably allow for both spellings as well. But, a Grease'll let the rest of you look it up. After all, he's vindicted himself already.

    # # #

  21. Kolea:


    Not sure what you mean by "real filibuster reform." Schatz was one of 21 co-sponsors of the Udall, Merkley, Harkin resolution #4. What reso could he have supported which would have made you happy? If you share the information with me, I will press him on it.

  22. Goober:

    So what?

    Keep coming back for more dope, as in rope a.

  23. Goober:

    "All other dictionaries worth being dictionaries most probably allow for both spellings as well. But, a Grease'll let the rest of you look it up. After all, he's vindicted himself already.

    # # #"

    Shows how smart this chicken posterior really is. "vindicted"?

    "vindicated past participle, past tense of vin·di·cate (Verb)
    Clear (someone) of blame or suspicion.
    Show or prove to be right, reasonable, or justified."

    Makes itself look more and more foolish by coming back with more mistakes in its English spelling.

  24. Goober:

    Notice how a grease likes to indicate its comments. Admits that it is a him. "he's" as in he is "vidicted"? or he has "vindicted"? He should keep and stick to his native language of chicken scratch.

    Point out; show: "dotted lines indicate the margins".
    Be a sign or symptom of; strongly imply: "sales indicate a growing market".
    show - denote - point - signify - point out - designate

  25. Ken:

    Rather then hang tough Schatz rolled and voted for the sham reform that Reid presented. He should have refused to vote for it.
    If he had made it clear, with other progressives, that they would vote against the Reid surrender rather then participate in Kabuki of pretending to actually support true filibuster reform. Follow the Bernie Sanders model.
    His willingness to support a failed fiscal cliff resolution that gave away the ranch on the credit limit, the sequester and the budget shows a failed vision, dubios principles, and compromised political will.

  26. Especially Incognito:

    More like Karaoke.

Leave a Reply

By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the Star-Advertiser's TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.