Skip to content

Posts tagged ‘Linda Lingle’

Please share this important video!

Take the time to view this video and share it with your friends before the August 11th Republican primary. Be sure to vote, and please consider John Carroll when you chose the person you want representing you.

Carroll Calls On Supporters to Wage a Social Media Blitz.

We don’t have mainland PAC’s to run television ads about how great we are, but what we do have is people like you. We need your help now to get our message out.  I’ve prepared a simple flyer that can be sent via the internet by my supporters; downloaded and copied on your printers and posted in Facebook. I want you all to “like” it, to “resend” it, to “Twitter” it, to “Pin” it, and to send it to every single person on your email lists.   I need you to do all of those things for me in these final weeks of the campaign. Because Republicans need to know they still have a choice.

I’ve picked four of the best reasons why no real Republican should vote for Linda Lingle in the August 11th primary:

John Carroll is asking his friends to  send this message to everyone they know on the Internet.

1. Lingle renigged on the Taxpayer Protection Pledge she had signed by allowing the largest tax increase in the history of Hawaii; she allowed the rail excise tax surcharge.  I have signed the No New Tax pledge this year and Lingle has not.

2. Like many conservative Republicans, I am pro-life.  Lingle has always been pro-choice, and is soft on Obamacare.  While I view Obamacare to be an intrusion on the constitutional separation of Church and State, Mrs. Lingle see’s no such problem.

3. I think that the archaic Jones Act is the main reason that our economy in Hawaii suffers and our cost of living is 30% (at least) higher than it should be.  This old law protects Matson and A&B’s virtual monopoly on shipping to Hawaii, and drastically limits our ability to ship local products out and import the materials our businesses need to compete.  Lingle supports the Jones Act, and takes massive amounts of campaign contributions from A&B and Matson.  I have taken NO money from PAC’s, and will represent the peoples’ interests, not those of my big contributors.

4. And worst of all, Lingle has renounced the very principles of the Republican Party.  She can’t even bring herself to be called a Republican; choosing instead to label herself a “bipartisan.”  She has refused to debate her Republican rivals, and proceed to run against her assumed opponents in the General Election, where she sounds like a Democrat and supporter of President Obama.  She has so arrogantly assumed her victory in the Republican Primary that she has proceeded to throw our values and principles “under the bus.”  Stand up for what we Conservatives believe, and let Mrs. Lingle know that you are not sheep to be herded in line with her political ambitions.  Stand up for your beliefs, and stand with me!


Carroll Rips Lingle for Selling out Republicans on Jones Act

At a recent talk-story luncheon hosted by the Junior Chamber of Commerce of Honoulu (Young Professionals), John Carroll held aloft a copy of Linda Lingle’s speech to the Associated Builder’s and Contractors from July 10th. See the complete transcript in Hawaii Reporter –

“Mrs. Lingle is so confident that she will be rubber-stamped as the Republican candidate for the Senate, that she is already talking like a Democrat,” said her opponent in the primary, John Carroll. How can you stand in front of construction industry business owners and tell them they have to pay 25 to 30% more for materials because of the archaic Jones Act?”

Carroll further pointed out that Lingle’s lunge to the left was punctuated by her endorsement of President Obama’s pro-Jones Act position.

“She is no longer even running as a Republican ,” stated Carroll.

Carroll said that the Jones Act is a relic of the 1920’s, and that Mrs. Lingle speech supporting it touted equally old and irrelevant arguments. Carroll said that the Jones Act today simply maintains the virtual monopoly on shipping serving Hawaii, forcing up everyone’s cost of living by as much as 30%. He also said that it also cripples Hawaii’s economy because of its protectionist mandate. By refusing to allow free trade to Hawaii we are doomed to a non-competitive, stagnant economy because of cost of materials and shipping.

Carroll shot down Lingle’s argument about national security. He said the Department of Defense doesn’t even limit itself to domestic hulls when it deploys troops because of the exorbitant costs.

“This has nothing to do with national defense as it might have back in the 1930’s.” said Carroll. “Now it’s about paying off unions and protecting vested interests of the shipping monopolies that have a strangle hold on Hawaii.”

He took exception to Lingle’s statement that she would “study” the problem if elected.

“Lingle has eight years as governor to study the problem,” said Carroll. “We don’t need more studies we need this law repealed or an exemption for Hawaii.”

Carroll added, “Linda had an opportunity to do something about this damaging law, and instead took money from A&B and Matson…and helped hold it in place. Lingle already sold out the Republican Party and now she’s sold out every single resident of the State.”

Read more about John Carroll’s position on the Jones Act:

Carroll Would Vote to Repeal “ObamaCare”

While Lingle sidestepped the question of whether she would vote to repeal the federal health care law, many in her party have not, directly attacking the law as a prime example of government overreach under Obama.

John Carroll, an attorney and former state lawmaker running against Lingle in the Republican primary, would repeal the law and return all health care decisions back to the states. He said requiring people to buy health insurance is unconstitutional. He also thinks individuals and religious organizations should be able to practice their religion free of government interference, such as federal mandates for birth control coverage.

Why Lingle Defends the Jones Act

Linda Lingle continues to defend the Jones Act.  This old maritime law protects the shipping monopoly enjoyed by the select few who can service Hawaii, like Matson and (until very recently) their parent company Alexander & Baldwin. These archaic restrictions raise the costs of all imported items such as food and raw materials and Hawaii’s cost of living by as much as 30% or more.  Look no further than the public campaign contribution reports to understand why Linda Lingle, during her eight years as Governor,  would steadfastly protect such an unfair monopoly preying on Hawaii’s people.


“When it comes to backing gubernatorial candidates, according to recent filings, Alexander & Baldwin Inc. executives are for Linda Lingle.”

                                                                                   Pacific Business News, August 12, 2001


This brings to mind the old saw: “You dance with them that brung ya.” It also should tend to remind the voters that large campaign war chests come at a price, and that price is paid by the residents of Hawaii when their elected officials bow to their corporate patrons and ignore the negative impact to their constituents.

Lingle Flip Flops on Rail?

“Lingle’s views on rail have changed over the years. As governor in 2003, she proposed a light rail transit system and an elevated highway to ease west side traffic congestion. In her State of the State address in 2005, she said she was a supporter of mass transit on Oahu and offered to work with then-Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann on a solution. Later that summer, she let a bill authorizing the City Council to add a general-excise tax surcharge for rail become law without her signature.”

“John Carroll, Lingle’s opponent in the Republican primary, strongly opposes the rail project. The attorney and former stage lawmaker said the project is too expensive for Honolulu and its scale and design inappropriate for Hawaii.”

“Carroll said Lingle reneged on her 2002 pledge to Americans for Tax Reform not to raise taxes as governor when she let the authorization for the rail surcharge become law without her signature.”

Honolulu StarAdvertiser 2/26/12

We’ll Take Our “Friends” Over Lingle’s “Likes”

Carroll: An open, friendly two-way conversation.

The Lingle campaign was crowing this morning about its Social Media campaign and the fact that they have over 1000 “likes” from “Hawaii and on the mainland.” That’s nice, but hardly indicates that their message of “Making the Issues the Heart of the Matter,” is catching on fire. Her competitor in the Republican primary, John Carroll, also has well over 1000 “Friends” on Facebook. This August we’ll see whether John’s “Friends” out-vote Linda’s “Likes.”

There are some interesting differences between how the two candidates present themselves on social media:

1. Facts vs Fluff. When John Carroll discusses how to fix Hawaii’s economy, he presents a well thought-out white paper document on why we need to get rid of the Jones Act, the single biggest impediment to growing Hawaii’s economy. Lingle makes a video and says her solution is to “restore

Lingle: If you "like" me you will fill out and submit this form.

confidence in government.” That’s it? What does that even mean?

2. John welcomes dialog. Lingle says that “Issues are the Heart of the Matter,” but refuses to debate. You can write comments and engage the candidate on John Carroll’s Facebook Pages and Website. On Lingle’s it is only she who speaks…you get to listen.

3. People first, or ME first? John’s approach is open, friendly and personal. Lingle, like any long-time bureaucrat, insists that you fill out a long boring form. The internet is supposed to be interactive not indoctrination. The first thing Lingle offers you is a pledge to vote for her, no matter what…shouldn’t we discuss the issues first?  Aren’t they the “Heart of the Matter?”

The difference is truly striking: John proposes a conversation to find out what you want; Lingle jumps right into “how she can USE you,” to get what she wants.

If Lingle truly believes that issues matter, she should publicly debate John Carroll and defend her positions. Instead she chooses to hide behind a one-way stream of one-sided messaging, bought and paid for primarily by mainland special interests.

If you want to respresent Hawaii’s people, Linda, you need to talk with them, not at them…or, they might stop “liking” you.

Lingle’s Bi-Partisan Message Hits a Sour Note

A beaming, "bi-partisan" Lingle pledges support to Obama's "Plan."

At a time when the U.S. Constitution is under attack, International policy is in disarray and Federal deficits spiral out of control…Linda Lingle wants to compromise with Liberals.  Bi-partisan cooperation may sound like a nice “touchy-feely” message to float out to a predominantly Democrat audience in Hawaii’s general election, but sounds like simple appeasement to Hawaii’s Republicans.  Lingle’s current television commercial chirps about her being “pledged to support President Obama’s plan.”  How exactly  is that supposed to sound to Republicans who want President Obama voted out of office, NOT cooperated with?


Lingle has charged Republican stalwarts who contested the questionable election of her former DBEDT Director, Ted Liu, to be the new Republican National Committeeman, with trying to split the party.  Many have charged Lingle with simply taking over the Party to use as her campaign organization and “cheating” to fix the Liu election (who won by one vote over Willis Lee after illegal proxies tallied in the back room.)


Star-Advertiser Excerpts (2/16/12):

“Several Republicans have challenged a close vote in January to elect Ted Liu, the former director of the state Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, over Willes Lee, a former party chairman. The challenges allege that the party improperly allowed proxy voting, among other things.”

“But the deeper issue is the private resentment among several Republicans to what they see as an effort by former Gov. Linda Lingle and her allies to control all aspects of the minority party.”

Blog comentors chimed in on the story:

“Lingle has historically used the Republican Party as her own personal campaign organization. The questionable, possibly fraudulent, vote to elect her old DBEDT head as the National Committeeman is par for the course. To push back on people who are just trying to keep things fair as trying to “split the party,” is insulting. The real split is between actual Republicans and Lingleites.”

“The Lingle group wants to avoid an open conflict with the dissident groups: the “movement conservatives around Sam Slom and the Grassroot Institute, the religious conservatives and the Ron Paul supporters. But neither are they willing to share power with them, even if it means, to put it indelicately, cheating.”

“In addition to the back room shenanigans, Lingle’s camp is also asking Republicans to “look the other way” on: her pro-choice stand, anti-school voucher position, promotion of the Akaka Bill, abandonment of the Taxpayer’s Protection Pledge, and enabling of the rail tax. It’s starting to add up to a lot to have to overlook.”

Carroll Addresses Smart Business Conference

Carroll being interviewed by Malia Zimmerman of

Last week John Carroll spoke to Sam Slom’s annual Smart Business Conference.  All four major candidates for the United States Senate race were invited to debate their qualifications, but only John Carroll and Ed Case took the time to attend.

Carroll considered bringing a pumpkin along to set on the podium to represent his elusive opponent, Linda Lingle, in the Republican primary.  Lingle has refused to debate or appear in any joint appearances with Carroll, and has refused to answer any specific questions directed toward her so far during this campaign.

Carroll identified several key issues that differentiate him from his rival Lingle.

      1. 1. Carroll is pro-life, Lingle is pro-choice. This puts her in direct opposition to the tens of thousands of individuals in Christian organizations who alone could dominate the election.
      2. Carroll has signed the Taxpayer’s Protection Pledge to not raise taxes. Lingle has refused. She signed it several years ago, but reneged and allowed the large rail tax surcharge to become law. Many in Hawaii’s small business community side with John against tax increases for rail.
      3. Another pro-small business (and cost of living) issue which Carroll is closely associated with is the elimination of the Jones Act, an archaic protectionist trade law that protects monopoly shipping in Hawaii and drives cost up for everyone. Lingle took no action to oppose this law during her 8 years as governor.
      4. Carroll has a strong gun owners rights position and has served as the HRA’s legal counsel for many years. Lingle has been hesitant on ‘right to carry,’ an issue important to many second amendment advocates.
      5. Carroll is opposed to the Akaka Bill, while Lingle openly advocated in favor of it. This provides for more governmental bureaucracy, race-based exclusionary policies and other regressive social policies. It is openly opposed by most conservatives.
      6. Carroll has agreed to debate, Lingle has refused any joint appearances and is basically taking the Republican nomination for granted.

Why it’s not OK to be a RINO.

BY JOHN CARROLL – There is a recent article by Josh Lederman in “The Hill” entitled “Former Gov. Lingle not running from RINO tag.”  In it, Mr. Lederman states, “For most Republican politicians, there is no smear more loathed, more insulting or more politically perilous than to be called a RINO — a Republican in Name Only. Not for Linda Lingle.”  He goes on to quote Lingle, “I’ve been called a RINO before, which I don’t mind.”

I disagree with Lingle’s cavalier dismissal of the label.  “RINO” implies fraud.

Does Linda Lingle see the Republican Party in Hawaii as something to be used as a base of operations from which to get elected rather than as a movement with cherished ideals to nurture and lead? The fact that she tolerates the term RINO is insulting to those of us who still think that the Republican Party, the party of Ronald Reagan, still stands for something, something considerably more important than personal political ambition.

While compromise and moderation has its place, so does standing up for what you truly believe in.  Lingle offers a grey, lukewarm set of principles that are designed to placate and absorb a vast, indifferent mass of voters.  She offers little for those who passionately believe in traditional conservative values and the core principles of our party platform.

I don’t need a focus group or a survey to tell me what I should say.  I don’t measure every word for its possible negative impact on marginal voters or contributor backlash.  I say what I believe.

1. My contributions from Alexander & Baldwin and Matson (of which I have none) don’t dissuade me from taking action against the archaic, protectionist Jones Act that drives up the cost of living for every family in Hawaii in order to profit a select few.

2. I’m not concerned about being called a Christian because I believe in the right to life.  The Bill of Rights guarantees all of us “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” and it does not put an age limit on it one way or the other.

3. I believe that the failure to follow settled environmental law left the Superferry vulnerable to its opponents.  The Lingle administration was just plain inept.  I would have followed the letter of the law and we would still have the Superferry.

4. I believe we are overtaxed in Hawaii, and if I had been governor, would not have allowed the largest tax increase in memory to slip through while I looked the other way,

5. I think that the Akaka Bill is based on the restoration of the concept of division by race that our constitution and decades of the civil rights movement have fought to abolish.  Individual Hawaiian’s would be better served by receiving their birthright homestead lands in fee and not doled out by a self-serving bureaucracy.

Those are five big differences between me and Linda Lingle.  They’re also five big differences between Linda Lingle and most real Republicans.

Lingle: “I’ve been called a RINO before…I don’t mind.”

Next year’s Republican  primary will not be a preemptory coronation of Linda Lingle in her quest for the U.S. Senate.  It should be a determination by Republicans as to what they really stand for, what they’re willing to fight for and what principles they wish to have represented in Washington, D.C. during the ongoing debate on our nation’s future.

A Republican In Name Only isn’t going to cut it.

%d bloggers like this: