Wednesday, July 23, 2014         


 Print   Email   Comment | View 38 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

He puhi wale nō na ka makani

For Saturday, March 9, 2013

Na Kekeha Solis


Synopsis: Some lawmakers want to decriminalize pakalōlō.


Welina e nā makamaka heluhelu mai ka puka 'ana mai a ka lā i Ha'eha'e a i kona welo 'ana i ka mole 'olu o Lehua. 'O ia po'o mana'o e kau a'ela i luna, he 'ōlelo no'eau ia no kahi kanaka e wala'au wale, 'a'ohe hana, 'o ia ho'i, 'a'ole i pa'a kēia 'ōlelo no'eau iā ia, “Ma ka hana ka 'ike.” A 'o ke kumu i koho 'ia ai ua 'ōlelo no'eau lā i po'o mana'o no kēia lā, no ka mea, 'o ia ka hana a nā luna kau kānāwai. I kēlā pule aku nei, ua ku'i ka lono no kahi pila e kama'ilio 'ia ana ma ke Kapikala, e ho'ēmi ana i ka ho'opa'i no ka loa'a 'ana o ka pakalōlō, 'o ia ho'i, inā he 'aunaki pakalōlō kāu, i kou wā e loa'a ai i ka māka'i, 'a'ole nō ka ho'opa'i he ho'opa'ahao. He uku kālā ka ho'opa'i. Ua hāpai 'ē 'ia a'e ia mana'o i ka makahiki 2011.

'O ka mea 'āpiki na'e, e nā makamaka heluhelu, 'o ka mea e kūkākūkā 'ia ana, he kanono maoli ka ho'opa'i, he $1,000 ia. Pohā ka lae! 'O ka makani wale nō paha ka mea e puhi ai.

Kainō he makemake ko nā luna kau kānāwai e hana pono i nā kānaka puni pakalōlō, eia kā, he hana 'ino 'i'o nō ia. 'Ehia lā kanaka puhi pakalōlō i nui loa ke kālā e uku ai i ia ho'opa'i ke loa'a pono i ka māka'i. A pehea lā e uku ai i ka lua o ka manawa? He $1,000, 'o ka hapalua like ia o ka uku ho'olimalima hale, inā he hale li'ili'i a he ke'ena noho li'ili'i paha.

Inā e 'ōlelo pū ana ia pila, 'a'ole e pilikia ke kanaka ke uku 'ole 'o ia i ka ho'opa'i, 'a'ohe hewa o ia. 'A'ole paha pēlā. A no laila, ua like paha nā luna kau kānāwai me ia mau ali'i o Ka'ū, 'o ka ho'oluhi wale i kānaka.

A no ke aha lā e pāpā 'ia nei, 'a'ole e puhi pakalōlō? 'Ehia lā kanaka i make i ka pakalōlō i kēia makahiki nei? I kēlā makahiki aku nei? 'Ehia lā kanaka i make i ka pakalōlō i nā makahiki he 'umi i hala? He kāka'ikahi paha. A pehea ka wai 'ona? 'Ehia lā kanaka i make i ka wai 'ona? He nui nō i make i ka pākela inu a ma nā alanui nō ho'i o kēia pae 'āina nei. 'A'ole na'e i pāpā 'ia ka inu wai 'ona. Inā i pāpā 'ia ka inu wai 'ona i nā makahiki i hala, inā 'a'ole i make ka nui o nā kānaka i ka pākela inu a i ke kanaka kalaiwa 'ona paha.

A pehea lā ka puhi paka 'ana? 'O ka paka, he mea ia i make ai nā kānaka he nui lehulehu, 'a'ole na'e i pāpā 'ia kona puhi 'ia 'ana iho. No ke aha lā?

'O ko 'oukou mea kākau, 'a'ole 'o ia puhi i ka pakalōlō. 'Eā, mai nō a poina ka 'ōlelo a kahiko, “I ka 'ōlelo nō ke ola; i ka 'ōlelo nō ka make.” He mea ia inoa e pau ai ka makemake e ho'ā'o. Akā, 'o ka po'e puni pakalōlō, no ke aha lākou e ho'oluhi hewa 'ia ai. E kū ka puhi pakalōlō i ke kānāwai, 'o ia ka mea e pono ai. E like a like kona kūlana ma ke kānāwai me ka wai 'ona a me ke kikaliki. 'A'ole ho'i e hihi, ua ho'opio 'ia iho ua pila nei ma ka Hale o nā Lunamaka'āinana. I kēia makahiki a'e paha kākou e 'ike hou ai i kahi pila, akā, e pau ka ho'opa'i no ia hana.

'O ia ihola kahi mana'o. Ke ho'i aku nei ke keiki o Mānoa, ua ahiahi. Ke aloha.


E ho'ouna 'ia mai na ā leka iā māua, 'o ia ho'i 'o Laiana Wong a me Kekeha Solis ma ka pahu leka uila ma lalo nei:

>> kwong@hawaii.edu
>> rsolis@hawaii.edu

a i ‘ole ia, ma ke kelepona:

>> 956-2627 (Laiana)
>> 956-2627 (Kekeha)

This column is coordinated by Kawaihuelani Center for Hawaiian Language at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa.

 Print   Email   Comment | View 38 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the 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 receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
DiverDave wrote:
Opium sales in the Kalakaua dynasty was made legal. Of course, the taking of a bribe to sell a Chinese business man and rice mill operator named Tong Kee, also known as "Aki",a license to sell Opium is yet another classic Kalakaua scandal. Tong Kee paid Kalakaua $71,000 in three installments. These were made at night, in gold, in a basket carried by Tong and accompanied by a baked pig. (sounds like something out of a mystery novel) But, Tong did not get the license that was sold to another man, Chun Lung, for $80,000. When Tong asked Kalakaua for his money back, Kalakaua said it was all gone. Tong blurted out the whole story in public, had a heart attack and died! However, after his estate brought a law suit against the King, he admitted he had taken the money but could not repay it because he was a quarter of a million dollars in debt. Tong's estate was finally reimbursed by the government. So came to an end yet another of the of many Kalakaua's disgraceful episodes.
on March 9,2013 | 10:01AM
holokanaka wrote:
america slaughtered millions of Indians, including woman and children. when the Indians were forced onto "reservation" then a disgraceful era came to and end. or did it?
on March 9,2013 | 12:53PM
DiverDave wrote:
holokanaka, You show keen insight into today's topic. NOT! LOL, falling on the floor laughing!
on March 9,2013 | 03:02PM
Ken_Conklin wrote:
That was a good history lesson Diver Dave. Today's Hawaiian activists seem very enthusiastic about Kalakaua and Liliuokalani, holding them up as role models. It's good to remember that both of those monarchs were corrupt, and both of them were in favor of licensing opium not only to make gobs of money to support their profligate lifestyles but also as a way to keep people hooked on drugs and feeling mellow so they wouldn't rise up to overthrow the monarchy. So it's no surprise to see today's Hawaiian activists supporting legalization of pot, perhaps hoping that harder drugs will also be legalized.

Liliuokalani pushed through three very controversial bills in January 1893, in the closing days of the legislature, shortly before she was overthrown: an opium license, a government-owned distillery, and a lottery to be run by a private corporation which would pay a fee to the monarchy of $500,000 per year -- an enormous amount of money back then. Drugs, booze, and gambling, all enthusiastically supported by Hawaii's last two monarchs.

The author of this week's column points out that booze is legal and has caused the death of lots of people, whereas pot has not had such terrible consequences. So if booze is legal, then why not pot? And after that? Who knows, maybe we'll get back to licensing opium again, just like back in the good old days of the Kingdom.

on March 9,2013 | 01:18PM
holokanaka wrote:
the reason the ha*le were upset with the Queen was not necessarily be cause of the bills she pushed but in fact because of her trying to restore some power to the Hawaiians that were taken by the illegal "bayonet constitution" by proposing a new constitution. yes Kalakaua lived a lavish lifestyle but he is not looked upon "enthusiasticaly" because of that but because he brought the Hula back which ofcourse the ha*le frowned upon and you know that konki. so why all this negativity about him. are you continuing the propaganda and brainwashing of your fellow ha*le heroes, the biggest criminal in the history of the Kingdom lorrin thursten? furthermore who introduced opium as a "receational" drug to China and why? was it your ha*le ancestors?
on March 9,2013 | 03:07PM
DiverDave wrote:
More keen insight!
on March 9,2013 | 05:55PM
Ken_Conklin wrote:
Holokanaka once again takes my real name and writes it in a ridiculous spelling intended to be abusive, so I shall henceforth call him/her by the name Holokukae. Holokukae continues to make irrelevant comments including personal attacks, thus showing his/her inability to focus on issues and discuss them intelligently. Too much pakalolo does that to you! The article, and my comment, are talking about Hawaii, not China. Talking about two monarchs who were heads of the government of the Hawaiian kungdom, not talking about Conklin and Conklin's ancestors. Grow up! I hope the editors of this newspaper pay attention to the comments on this column week after week, where they will see the garbage these columns generate, which often reflect the garbage in the columns themselves. The column is failing in its purpose of fostering the use of Hawaiian language, and instead is providing a forum for id-iots high on hateraide.
on March 10,2013 | 08:06AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
You started the abuse with names like mórón and ídíót, as well as your immature "red diaper dooper baby" insult under your other name DiverDave. Thus you have no place pointing fingers at others, KennyKKonklin. Since you obviously cannot take the heat, then you obviously should not start the fire. Nuff said.
on March 11,2013 | 11:25AM
DiverDave wrote:
"the article is NOT about the legalization of marijuana. It is about the DECRIMINALIZATION of it, which is different. Thus, 1) your statement that it is about legalization is inaccurate, proving you cannot read the article and have no business trying to pretend that you can and 2) your warped and incomplete history lesson is not only wrong but also completely irrelevant". I guess David Rogers was talking to himself when he said this quote to me below! David Rogers is simply not credible.
on March 11,2013 | 12:36PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Thanks for proving me right about you, Kenny. You decided to use DiverDave as a moniker to post your inane nonsense because you knew that you were shooting yourself in the foot with your immaturity, arrogance, narcissism, racism, and lack of true knowledge of the subjects you post about. Instead, you just made yourself appear worse. Again, one more time, you are living, breathing proof that highly educated does NOT mean highly intelligent.
on March 11,2013 | 09:26PM
DiverDave wrote:
More delusional thinking, Walter Murray Gibson.
on March 11,2013 | 10:34PM
holokanaka wrote:
"the column is failing in its purpose of fostering the use of Hawaiian language, and instead providing a forum for idiots high on hateraid" gee that thinking sounds somewhat familiar. that kind of sounds like the annexation thieves and your hero the biggest thief in the history of the Kingdom lorren thursten. I think it was a strategy to rid these Islands of any history of the Hawaiians. what do you think konki. are you continuing the mission of your hero?
on March 12,2013 | 09:43PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Queen Beatrix of The Netherlands oversaw the legalization of cannabis in her country, but the White Is Right racist named KennyKKonklin/DiaperDave does not mind because she is white.
on March 10,2013 | 03:54AM
Ken_Conklin wrote:
I guess Terii_Kelii is a pseudonym for Holokanaka. Terii_Kelii does the same thing as Holokanaka, twisting the spelling of my real name in order to be abusive. So I should call him/her TeriBurger. And TeriBurger does another thing the same as Holokanaka -- bringing up irrelevant topics like the Queen Bee of the Netherlands. Today's column, and my comment, are about Hawaii, not about the Netherlands. Maybe next we should talk about King Bugaboo of Lower Slobovia, which is the homeland of TeriBurger. So there! Wasn't that fun?
on March 10,2013 | 08:14AM
DiverDave wrote:
Ken, you know that David Rogers, aka Terii_Kelii, is nothing but a Walter Murray Gibson. For holokanaka, that only reads sovereignty kook fringe history, a white man Walter Gibson was Prime Minister of Hawaii during the Kalakaua dynasty who spoke against the U.S. and the white race, and hatched a imperial colonistic scheme with Kalakaua to bring other polynesian islands like Samoa into the Hawaiian fold. The new confederation was to be called Oceania and Kalakaua would be in charge over it. They decided gunboat diplomacy would be best to convince the other polynesians throughout the pacific to go along with their plan. So they bought a ship, renamed it Kaimiloa, armed it with cannons, hired a "professional" Captain, and because they needed a crew they simply went to the reform school and obtained young men and attempted to train them.They now had a "Navy" that would show Kalakaua's strength! The boat sailed off to sea, but never made it to Samoa. The Captain got drunk, the crew committed mutiny, and Kalakaua requested that the German Navy bring the ship back. It was so rediculous, the whole thing was like a Groucho Marx movie! The wormy ship was bought for $20,000, but Kalakaua spent another $50,000 in fitting her out, bringing the Kingdom ever closer to bankruptcy. So came to an end of yet another Kalakaua scandalous money wasting episode. Eventually, Gibson was put on a boat for San Francisco and told not to come back.
on March 10,2013 | 10:10AM
DiverDave wrote:
Then Ken, you have holokanaka that makes blatantly racist remarks like "Kalakaua lived a lavish lifestyle but he is not looked upon "enthusiasticaly" because of that but because he brought the Hula back which ofcourse the ha*le frowned upon". Firstly, the hula wasn't frowned on by all white people just the more religious who had no power to make any decisions about such matters, and the hula wasn't brought back by Kalakaua. Mark Twain speaks of attending a hula show in the 1860's. Most of Kalakaua's hula shows were private affairs down at his boat house, that included nude hula dancers, and ended in wild all night drunken orgys. Of course holokanaka totally disregards that Polynesian-Hawaiians rioted when Kalakaua came to office requiring the U.S. Navy to come ashore to stop the violence, and that his half sister Liliuokalani considered overthrowing his reign in order to take over herself. In holokanka's twisted racially biased mind it's all about the "ha*le".
on March 10,2013 | 10:49AM
DiverDave wrote:
Read: "The Last King of Paradise", by Eugene Burns. This is a well researched book on Kalakaua and gives many good accounts of his early years as a child.
on March 10,2013 | 12:43PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
I can explain it to you Kenny, but I cannot understand it for you. Here it goes again, just more simply so that even someone who lacks common sense can understand. I read all articles, AND I read the comments too. When I see articles about similar topics, and you do not comment on them, it is clear that you only come to this column to rape its presence with your own. You come to murder its content with your racism. You have never commented on other articles about drug legalization, just this one, because you are a racist against Hawaiians. That is why there are no KennyKKonklin/DiaperDave comments about Queen Beatrix anywhere. You do not care about attacking her because she is white. She is one of you. You attack brown skinned people only, because you are a racist. Your diatribes are not about drugs or independence or other such fronts: these are only the surface topics that you think mask your true intent. Your true intent is to oppress and demean and discriminate against people who are not white, and since you are in Hawai‘i, that means the Hawaiians, and nowwe find out the Samoans and Tongans as well.
on March 10,2013 | 06:40PM
DiverDave wrote:
Simply delusional David Kelly. I don't know about Ken, but I comment on many things relating to Hawaii's history, but also current events elsewhere in the paper. Sometimes keeping your mouth shut is the best policy, ask Faye Hanohano. You say I attack brown skin people and yet right above you is a discussion of you, Walter Murry Gibson. Is the best rebutal you have calling someone a "racist"?
on March 10,2013 | 06:48PM
DiverDave wrote:
Sorry about calling you Kelly instead of Rogers. I one knew a guy David Kelly and typed that. By the way, do you have any comment about Solis's Editorial, or do you just come here to call people bad names?
on March 10,2013 | 07:01PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
THAT is coming from you who calls people red diaper dooper babies and insults Kalakaua even though the article is about contemporary issues.
on March 10,2013 | 07:40PM
DiverDave wrote:
The article is about legalizing a drug in Hawaii. I only provided an historical perspective. Was there something I said that was historically incorrect?
on March 10,2013 | 09:02PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
You have no business talking about history when you cannot get your facts straight. You are no expert in Hawaiian history and the fact that you have no diploma in it proves it. You won't bait me into a discussion of history when you are nothing more than a mere hobbyist in the subject just so that you can use what little you know to be abusive. The US National Archives has proved you wrong already. I do not need to prove you wrong again. Furthermore, you bring up history in regards to a contemporary issue. Your lack of ability to discuss what is in the article betrays your true lack of knowledge of Hawaiian language AND Hawaiian culture, Kenny. AMATEUR. Now, go run off and deal with your own kind, like the Dutch. You're dismissed.
on March 11,2013 | 01:40AM
DiverDave wrote:
Darn, once again I thought you were going to actually make a comment about the article, and not an attack about me.
on March 11,2013 | 08:50AM
DiverDave wrote:
Oh, David Rogers, why do you keep calling me Kenny?
on March 11,2013 | 09:07AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
PS Kenny, the article is NOT about the legalization of marijuana. It is about the DECRIMINALIZATION of it, which is different. Thus, 1) your statement that it is about legalization is inaccurate, proving you cannot read the article and have no business trying to pretend that you can and 2) your warped and incomplete history lesson is not only wrong but also completely irrelevant.
on March 11,2013 | 11:23AM
DiverDave wrote:
But why are you a liar? I am not Kenny, my name is David, like yours David Rogers.
on March 11,2013 | 12:28PM
DiverDave wrote:
David Rogers said above,"Queen Beatrix of The Netherlands oversaw the legalization of cannabis in her country, but the White Is Right racist named KennyKKonklin/DiaperDave does not mind because she is white". Then David Rogers said to me: "the article is NOT about the legalization of marijuana. It is about the DECRIMINALIZATION of it, which is different. Thus, 1) your statement that it is about legalization is inaccurate, proving you cannot read the article and have no business trying to pretend that you can and 2) your warped and incomplete history lesson is not only wrong but also completely irrelevant. I guess by his own words David Rogers is irrevevant! But we all knew that already.
on March 11,2013 | 12:41PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Thanks for proving me right.
on March 11,2013 | 07:59PM
DiverDave wrote:
You have never been right Walter Murray Gibson. They will put you on a slow boat to San Francisco too. You're not the right color! Or did you lie again David Rogers?
on March 11,2013 | 09:30PM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
The only use you have on this planet is to fertilize a 4'x6' plot of grass. Please hurry up and get started on that. Mahalo.
on March 15,2013 | 12:54PM
holokanaka wrote:
I don't believe what I just read coming from a ha*le-"a imperialistic colonistic scheme"!!!! are you kidding joker. oh I know you were just making a joke. "firstly, the hula wasn'y frowned on by all white people just the more religious who had (no power) to make any decisions about such matters"!!!! religious people with no power??? gee wasn't lorren thursten from a missionary family? how about sanford dole? what religious people with no power got Kaahumanu to change to christian religion??? oh I know joker, you making another joke. you know something joker, I think you as an Indian is jeolous of the Hawaiians finding out the true legal history of these Islands and fighting for what is rightfully theirs and the Indians, maybe trying but uinfortunately not making much headway.
on March 12,2013 | 10:09PM
DiverDave wrote:
Read: "Hawaii's Royal Prime Minister, The Life and Times of Walter Murray Gibson", by Paul Bailey.
on March 10,2013 | 12:40PM
DiverDave wrote:
P.S. the boat was finally sold for 2 thousand eight hundred for salvage.
on March 10,2013 | 11:13PM
holokanaka wrote:
my computer was down. lot of rubbish here. my main reason for commenting to konki and joker is their obvious overall dislike of the Hawaiians. it pis*ses me off when all I see from them is critisizm and the usual lies/propaganda/brainwashing that has been going on in these Islands for over a hundred years. you two may state some particular incidents that happened in these Islands but do not address the substantive truths in regards to the true legal history here. "the article is talking about Hawaii not China". yes that is correct but I like to look at things as a whole. the opium was introduced into China by the british because an imbalance of trade with China and europe. that is what started all this opium problems. but you konki chose to blame only some Mo'i of these Islands you konki always like to put the white/ha*le on a pedestal as being superior but in fact has caused more misery on this planet than any other race eg-crusades, british in India, arpartheid, slaughter in South America, slaughter in america, how about the orient (China, Japan) polynesia etc. I am sure you have read Nation Within. can you dispute any of the substantial issues in that book? I would be surprised if you have not discussed these issues with the author of that book. after all I think both of you live in the same city-Kaneohe. this comment also applies to you joker. can you dispute the fact that there is no treaty of annexation and that these Islands are still a Sovereign Nation. question to konki and joker-the way you feel about the Hawaiians in these Hawaiian Islands, why do you two even live here? if all you two have to do is crticize the hawaiians you live a really sad life.
on March 12,2013 | 09:29PM
DiverDave wrote:
Unless you can be really honest about the past holokanaka, how can you go honestly into the future? What did I say about the Kalakaua dynasty, and his involvement in the opium drug trade, and his taking bribes that was incorrect? The common thread from your rant above is that all bad things came from the white race. That would make you a what?
on March 12,2013 | 09:43PM
holokanaka wrote:
I will agree with the involvement of Kalakaua with the opium trade and the bribes if you agree there is no treaty of annexation in the interest of "being really honest about the past". "that would make you a what?" I guess you are saying that I am a racist. ok, whatever. but tell me where I am incorrect in my "rant".
on March 13,2013 | 07:52AM
Terii_Kelii wrote:
Kenny would never admit he is wrong about anything. He is too narcissistic for that. That is why he hides behind his alternat moniker, DiaperCave, because deep down inside he knows he is wrong for saying the things he does, like calling people red diaper dooper babies. He naively thinks that he is being clever by doing so. Another incorrect assumption, though.....
on March 14,2013 | 09:21AM
Latest News/Updates