Newspaper editorials serve a valuable role in promoting community discussion through fact-based opinions of its editors. But when those opinions veer off course and jump to conclusions without knowing or reviewing the facts, editorials become a disservice to the public. Such is the case with the misguided Oct. 25 editorial, “;Lingle's attack on Obama is unfair and downright silly.”;

Gov. Linda Lingle made her comments in Colorado when asked by reporters about Sen. Barack Obama. She responded that she has never met him, and that most Hawaii residents had never heard of Obama before he declared his candidacy. She shared that the senator has never called to ask how he could help Hawaii, which seems odd given that most people in his position would make an attempt to help the state he talks so fondly about in his book and campaign.

Lingle did not question the fact that Sen. Obama grew up in Hawaii or has family here. She did question his comment that because he went to school in Hawaii he understands issues facing “;western”; states. She said this is a stretch given that “;western”; states have vastly different issues between themselves and they are certainly different from Hawaii's unique issues.

The governor clarified that while Obama spent part of his childhood here, his entire adult life has been on the mainland - the majority in Illinois, which is far from being a “;western”; state. As an adult, Obama has no first-hand knowledge or experience in Hawaii or any “;western”; state of running a business, owning a home, raising a family, voting, holding public office or grappling with day-to-day issues that “;western”; states' residents face. Sen. John McCain, on the other hand, has lived, worked, voted, raised his family in and represented Arizona for nearly three decades, and has a much better understanding and record of dealing with issues facing “;western”; states. The governor was not questioning Obama's birthplace, but rather his disingenuous attempt to make inroads with voters in “;western”; states.

Regarding the Akaka Bill, in 2005, as chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, McCain, after meeting with Lingle, was instrumental in moving the long-stalled bill out of committee, unanimously. Even though he personally disagreed with the measure, he listened to Lingle and was open to learning about the importance of the Akaka Bill to the people of Hawaii. He allowed the bill to move forward so it could be debated on the U.S. Senate floor.

  Regarding health care, the Wall Street Journal (”;Obama vs. his advisors - On health care they once liked McCain's principles,”; Oct. 25) said that McCain's plan “;seeks to remedy a distortion in the health care market that economists have spent decades begging politicians to fix: The tax code subsidizes insurance only if it is provided through employers. Individuals can't take the same tax deduction for buying insurance that businesses can. So McCain wants to 'spread the wealth' of these tax breaks to individuals of any income through a refundable tax credit, no matter where they get coverage. For people who stick with employer coverage under the McCain plan, the money employers take out of wages to pay for insurance would be taxed, but the new credit more than covers the bill. The people who decide to buy coverage on their own would see their wages rise. And everyone who joins the individual market - many of them uninsured now - would be equipped with new health dollars, instead of paying with after-tax income.”;

The Star-Bulletin's belief that McCain's health care plan would hurt Hawaii's health care system is not supported by facts.

  If the Star-Bulletin is concerned about how the candidates' plans could hurt Hawaii, it should scrutinize how Obama's tax plan would affect more than 20,000 small businesses. His plan would raise taxes on those making more than $250,000, which would have a devastating effect on Hawaii small businesses who claim their business earnings as personal income.

Finally, to assert that Lingle is “;dazzled”; by being asked to speak out for the leader she believes is best for our state and country is laughable. The governor is honored that others think she can contribute to help citizens understand the differences between the two candidates. This is a time-honored practice. Members of our congressional delegation campaign on the mainland, yet criticism is only launched against the governor.

It is understandable that the Star-Bulletin is excited to have someone who was born and went to school in Hawaii run for president. However, the newspaper has an obligation to base its editorial opinions on fact, rather than the euphoria of seeing a former Hawaii resident campaigning for our nation's highest and most important office.