Endorsement a disappointment

I am disappointed with your non-endorsement of Neil Abercrombie ("Vote Hannemann and Aiona on to the general," Star-Advertiser, Sept. 5).

Your endorsement leaves me with a feeling that you are now in the pocket of the high-financed group that has loads of special interests.

If the mayor is a super executive, why did he leave the office with the trash episode still a problem, the sewer system in disarray and resisted over his tenure, the roads still not repaired and city employees on furlough?

Have you talked to the grassroots of the community? You must believe that the buck stops with the underlings and not with the person in charge.

All Hannemann all the time

The dual endorsements of Kirk Caldwell and Mufi Hannemann by the Star-Advertiser editorial staff would be history-making should voters follow the proposed endorsements.

For the first time in history, the governor of Hawaii would have appointed the acting mayor of the City and County of Honolulu. In effect, since then-mayor Hannemann chose someone who most closely followed his ideals on how the city should be run, and even more important, how rail should become the most important aspect of our community, he will have control over not only the state but the city and county.

If you liked how Hannemann ran the city, you will love how he runs everything.

Not enough said about Aiona

Turning the page in Sunday’s Insight section, my eyes immediately fell on the "Vote Hannemann and Aiona on to the general" editorial.

But, alas, the only reference to Duke Aiona in almost three columns of the half-page article was "In that contest" (referencing John Carroll, the other Republican candidate), "… former judge Aiona, lieutenant governor for the past eight years, is the clear choice to move on to the general election."

That’s all we get in the way of "character and credentials" for Aiona? Versus almost three columns for Hannemann?

Well, we certainly know where the Star-Advertiser stands, don’t we? Your headline was very misleading. More appropriately would be "Vote Hannemann on to Washington Place."

Endorsements were helpful

I am pleased that the Star-Advertiser continues the journalism tradition of endorsing political candidates. The cynical may believe that the candidate you support is the one not to vote for. But I think it is an additional way of thinking about candidates.

The Star-Advertiser and I agree on only one of the candidates, but your endorsements gave me ammunition to think about the campaign.

Stadium needs water fountains

Water, water everywhere but none to drink at Aloha Stadium.

You can buy an overpriced $7 beer or a $2.50 soft drink or even a $2.25 plastic bottle, but nowhere could I find a working water fountain.

I paid $50 to see a game, only to have my water bottle taken away at the gate. Sorry, no food or water. Of course, I felt safer. But for those who think they think for us, get with it. Free water, please.

Founders embraced religion

I can no longer stand idly by while people ignorant of the facts incorrectly impose the false metaphor of "separation of church and state" in the argument over the role of religion in government ("Religious extremists have hijacked GOP," Letters, Sept. 5).

This metaphor was born of a very liberal interpretation of original intent in a 1947 Supreme Court decision (Everson v. Board of Education), so many years after the founders drafted our Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

A quick study of our founding documents and supporting correspondence between the founders actually bears out the truth — that it was their intent to limit government’s ability to interfere in the establishment and free practice of religion — not to keep religion out of government.

So I challenge anyone out there to come up with a citation from any of our founding documents supporting this misconception of separation, and further say unapologetically "God bless Jonah Kaauwai."