Fasi has experience Honolulu needs

Traffic and infrastructure problems have crippled Honolulu's ability to function as business center and tourist destination. Poor leadership and an absence of vision within the county government have precipitated most of Honolulu's problems.

Duke Bainum and Mufi Hannemann have been fixtures in the county government. While they project nice appearances as candidates, voters should select the candidate best able to fix Honolulu's problems. Since the Neal Blaisdell administration, no mayor has accomplished as much as Frank Fasi.

Fasi has been discounted as too old for the job, but age should be placed in context. Senator Inouye is 80 years old; Senator Akaka is similar in age. Fasi remains as sharp as ever and offers more than any other candidate: unrivaled knowledge and experience. Fasi also offers voters his strong commitment and willingness to effectuate sensible change. I encourage voters to make a practical decision and support Frank Fasi.

Bainum has spent too much to win

Duke Bainum likes to use campaign management as a guide to how the respective candidates would run city finances. During the TV debate he criticized Mufi Hannemann, asking "How can he run the city if he can't control his own campaign finances?" This begs the question, what does Duke's campaign management style tell us about where he would take the city?

Bainum has set a new record in campaign spending, almost $3 million to acquire a $112,000 a year job. Two-thirds of his operational budget is "loaned," so he's running nearly a $2 million deficit. He's also bypassed the local economy by shipping more than $1.3 million off island to mainland campaign "experts." That's only in the last 18 months. Imagine what he would do to Honolulu in four years.

Hannemann conducts above board campaign

I have received flyers in the mail, seen commercials on TV and heard radio campaign commercials from Duke Bainum saying that Mufi Hannemann should stop his negative campaigning.

What negative campaigning is he talking about? The voting public couldn't care less about what may have happened more than 20 years ago. What we care about is right here, right now. The Campaign Spending Commission said there were no illegalities in Hannemann's campaign fund raising and monies improperly donated were reimbursed accordingly.

Mufi can't 'parrot' Duke's principles

Mufi Hannemann has gone from attacking to whining. In the Star-Bulletin's Sept. 2 article, he claims Duke Bainum is parroting him. That would be a long battle if it weren't so pitiful. Bainum has shown over and over that he is his own man, a person who has convictions and sticks to them. That's something Hannemann will never be able to "parrot."

Kaneshiro can clean up city's problems

Keith Kaneshiro received the unanimous endorsement of the Oahu Board of the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers. This unusual overwhelming endorsement reflects a deep rank-and-file dissatisfaction with the prosecutor's office under incumbent Peter Carlisle.

Isn't it newsworthy that a major law enforcement organization accuses the prosecutor's office of being uncooperative and inadequately protecting public safety? If the media would do its job, then voters would understand why this community must change the leadership at the prosecutor's office and elect Kaneshiro as prosecuting attorney.

Hannemann brings people together

I hope my fellow voters see through the pricey packaging of Duke Bainum's glossy ad campaign and vote for the truth instead. Hannemann knows how to bring people together -- and not just "special interest groups," as Bainum keeps repeating. Hannemann can talk to big and small businesses, to unions, to private owners, to city, state, national and international governments.

Hannemann has a great plan for Honolulu, where he was born and raised. He may not have the family wealth to pay for more and slicker ads, but he has the best interests of the people of Hawaii in his heart and mind. That is priceless.

Carlisle does his all to achieve justice

As the father of a former Hawaii resident, I would like to speak out on Honolulu's election for prosecuting attorney. My interest in island news and politics has been keen since my daughter, Dana Ambrose, moved to Hawaii in 1999.

Because of the circumstances surrounding her tragic death in a manslaughter DUI accident, I developed a personal relationship with one of the candidates, Peter Carlisle.

Dana's case was so morally and socially significant, Carlisle chose to try it himself. Some would not agree that the city's highest prosecuting attorney should try a case. It smacks of grandstanding, taking over the spotlight, they would say. But in matters of this importance, as in Dana's case, you bring all the resources to the spotlight. That is what Peter did.

He recognized that the implications and justice in that case were not only for Dana, but for all residents and visitors in Hawaii. I feel -- and so should all of Hawaii -- that the city's highest prosecuting attorney should be free to try a case, no matter how high the profile, especially when it means justice for all of us.

I am privileged to know Peter Carlisle and comforted to know that he is Honolulu's prosecuting attorney.