Saturday, July 26, 2008


A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER: We were going to leave it alone- after all we don’t live in Honolulu and don’t even know who the heck Chrystn Eads is other than “an aide to Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann” much less where exactly the 24th House district is.

We were happy just to have the legislature rid of an obstructionist party hack and go-fer like House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell, whose resignation was a well placed cog in Tuesday’s vaudevillian amateur hour.

Yes, we enjoyed laughing about the dance of the headless chickens that apparently was staged at 4:30 filing deadline when Eads was allowed to submit her paperwork at ten-to-five, even though the deadline is apparently pretty strict, according to state law.

But now for another kick in the face we find out in this morning’s Honolulu Advertiser’s “breaking news” that another wrinkle- heck, let’s call it a bend, fold, spindle and mutilation- has been added and apparently Eads “was told yesterday that her paperwork was voided because it was incomplete.” according to the article.

And- get this- even though there was no actual official “filing” since it was “voided”, the County Clerk is apparently going to allow “the party's House District 24 council (to) name (a) replacement, although others believe it will come from top party officials and insiders.”

In case anyone was wondering the law, according to the article says "in cases of withdrawal, death or disqualification of a party candidate after filing, the vacancy may be filled by the party. The party must notify the chief elections officer 72 hours after the vacancy occurs.”

So let’s get this straight. They are saying that she didn’t get in her papers in time so there was no official filing. Yet the Democratic Party is going to be allowed to name a “replacement” because she was disqualified after filing. But if indeed she legally “filed” – a prerequisite for a “replacement” how is she being disqualified?

Talk about having your cake and eating it too. It’s like being kicked out of a club you’re not a member of.

Actually we’d been considering the case for a couple of days and it seems that if the procedures do not allow for a looser deadline based on the fact that she was there 40 minutes before the deadline but could not get her papers until a few minutes before the cut-off time, there’s something wrong- something inherently exploitable by anyone bent on taking advantage of it..

If indeed this strict policy is in effect then it leaves it wide open for allowing the Clerk and/or the Clerk’s office’s employees a wide latitude for- ahem, shall we say- “directed incompetence”.

Seems like they’re actually allowed- heck, maybe encouraged- to screw someone they don’t want to see on the ballot if they’re coming in at the last minute.

How? Well like by having no one at the counter. “Sorry we’re all out to lunch- be back at 4:31” Or like by taking their sweet little time serving someone else filing papers. Or by notifying another candidate for the office who has already filed and letting dozens of his or her supporters jam the office with requests for some of the other multiple services the Clerk’s office provides.

When one goes to vote on election day and gets there just at the closing deadline, if there is a line the doors close behind them, not in their face. It prevents any potential mischief or shenanigans

But apparently, according to their policy it’s ok for the Clerk to play these little games.

While no one in the press has suggested this was the case with Eads, who knows? Those in attendance- and seemingly it was practically a media luncheon according to multitudinous accounts- haven’t been especially forthcoming with their observations as to exactly why it too almost 40 minutes to “serve” Eads.

With all the press and observers you’d think someone would have brought this up, especially if indeed there was any intentional delays preventing her from filing on time.

Whatever happens from here, the way the situation played out makes the label of Keystone Kops that’s been thrown about in the Honolulu press quite charitable.


Correction: It appears we interpreted the vagaries of the “breaking news” without reading the published article. Apparently what was reported was that the given reason for the “party replacement was not Eads’ non-filing, but Caldwell’s supposed withdrawal- although there are similar problems there too. We regret the error.


Anonymous said...


if all you are going to do is re-hash the newspapers, maybe at least read them carefully?

Anonymous said...

wow... here is someone doesn't know much about the people that they are criticizing and can't get the facts (as reported) straight. Can I get a refund for the five minutes of my life that I wasted reading your blog?