So there’s quite a bit of buzz about the possibility that Barack Obama might visit his home town this campaign season.

Obviously, the campaign is not about to confirm such an idea. In fact, they have been careful not even to act as if they know Obama will be the Democratic Party nominee.

But assuming he is nominated, a visit to Hawaii might make sense. It would be a great opportunity to show and tell this part of his biography. Obama could use the occasion to talk again about diversity and what he learned growing up in Hawaii. He likely would also use the occasion to buff up his military/Asia/security cred with visits to top commanders and military facilities and a speech — as some have speculated — at Punchbowl National Memorial Cemetery where his grandfather is buried.

That’s the positive side. On the negative is the irreversible fact that Hawaii is a long way from any place else. Even the quickest visit would knock close to two days out of the campaign schedule, particularly if it involved an overnight stop.

That’s a lot of time in the pressure-cooker context of a national presidential campaign.

Obama’s campaign will undoubtedly refresh their memories of the first (and last) visit to Hawaii by a presidential candidate: Richard Nixon in 1960.

Hawaii and Alaska were brand new states that year and Nixon wanted to capitalize on that excitement by promising, during him nomination speech, that he would visit every one of the states during the campaign.

And so he did, including a stop in Hawaii where he gave one of his first post-convention speeches to a crowd at the Kahmehameha Shopping Center.

Hawaii loved it and very nearly gave its three electoral votes to Nixon. In the end, a series of recounts gave the votes to John Kennedy.

But commentators at the time wondered whether Nixon didn’t do himself more harm than good by trekking to remote Alaska and Hawaii when there were key swing states on the continent that should have had his undivided attention.

So a post-convention visit by Obama would be great. But it won’t happen if his handlers conclude he cannot afford the time. That decision cannot be made today.

Update (Monday):Sen Dan Akaka has emerged from his polite reticence to announce he, too, is endorsing Hawaii-born Barak Obama for president. He made the announcement Monday, which means all four high-profile elected superdelegates from Hawaii have made their choice. Three are for Obama while one, Sen, Daniel Inouye, remains loyal to Hillary Clinton.

Akaka said he is convinced Obama is the man to end the “plague” of partisan politics in America.

Also, while it didn’t make as big a news splash, Obama gained yet another superdelegate from Hawaii Monday when National Committeewoman Dolly Strazar also announced her vote for Obama. In a statement, Strazar said that while she held out on an uncommited stance as long as she could, he concluded it was time for the party to “pull together behind a single candidate.”

Strazar said she also likes the fact that Obama, who grew up in the Islands, instinctively knows the importance of “getting along” in a multicultural setting.These have been stressful days for Strazar, who has been fielding regular calls from both the Obama and Clinton camps as they scoured the nation for superdelegate votes.

Here’s what we said earlier on the superdelegate hunt in Hawaii: Read the rest of this entry »

The New York Times blog covering the Tuesday presidential primaries was commenting on the photo-op crowd behind Barack Obama as he declared victory in North Carolina.

It was, the blog noted, almost entirely middle-aged white ladies, the kind of voter normally found in Hillary Clinton’s corner. “Not an Abercrombie T-shirt among them,” the blog noted.

What!?! Has our Neil been such an influence that people notice when his fans aren’t crowding the Obama stage? Probably not. There was no explanation for the comment, but it most likely meant this was not a trendy crowd, no one was wearing Abercrombie & Fitch T-Shirts.

But make no mistake. Neil Abercrombie has been stumping hard for Obama, from the Iowa corn fields and on out. But a gossipy piece in the Washington Post suggests that the Obama camp is paying insufficient attention to his Hawaii friend.

In her BLOG, “The Sleuth,” Mary Ann Akers writes about a frustrated Abercrombie and his inability to get someone in the inner circle of the Obama campaign to pick up their end of the coconut wireless.

It makes for pretty funny reading. But Rep. Abercrombie should relax. It’s a good bet Obama will begin paying more attention to his Hawaii roots if and when the nomination is in hand.

Until that time, the Aloha spirit will have to take a  backseat to lunch bucket talk about making it in the tough political fields of the South Side of Chicago.

The State Senate’s rejection of high-profile UH regent Kitty Lagareta has produced  high-octane rhetoric from both sides.

Lagareta: The Legislature is trying to micro-manage the UH and lawmakers don’t like anyone who bucks their will.

Senate: The UH is struggling in many areas and the Regents are ultimate responsible.

All true. All true.

Over the years the Legislature has gone out of its way to tell the University how it should manage its affairs. Reluctantly, lawmakers gave the UH “autonomy” but that hasn’t stopped folks from trying to put their thumb in the academic pie where it isn’t wanted.

By the same token, the Regents are ultimately responsible for the UH and must answer to the folks who have to balance the state budget. And if the Senate’s advice and consent powers are to mean anything, it has to be able to refuse to consent from time-to-time.

So Senators have the right to reject anyone they want. But you can’t help wondering whether Lagareta’s in-your-face style and close association with Republican Gov. Linda Lingle didn’t have more than a little to do with the Senate’s decision to choose her particular appointment as the place to demonstrate their independence and concern about the state’s premier university.

When it comes to loyalty, you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who values it more highly than Sen. Daniel K. Inouye.

Inouye’s first point of reference is loyalty, whether it is dealing with his party, his political supporters, the U.S. Senate or his friends.

But when competing demands for loyalty occur, as they must, it is clear that Inouye puts personal relationships above all else. That’s the easy and understandable explanation for Inouye’s decision to host a pricey Washington D.C. fundraiser for his buddy and senate colleague Ted Stevens of Alaska, a Republican.

Ordinarily, Inouye makes almost a fetish of backing Democrats even when just about everyone else has taken a different path. That was the case, for instance, years ago when the dominant Democrats in the state were quietly, but obviously, behind Republican D.G. Andy” Anderson in his challenge to maverick Frank Fasi.

Fasi had done Inouye no particular favors over the years. And Anderson was more than acceptable to most of the party powers. But Inouye, stressing the importance of party loyalty, publicly backed Fasi.

So his support for Republican Stevens transcends even the bedrock principle of party loyalty. Inouye mght not say it, but in addition to friendship, there is another key to his wanting Stevens back. The two work closely together, watching each other’s back and helping the other whenever possible. They split votes on occasional party-line litmus test issues, but day-to-day work cooperatively.

From Inouye’s perspective, Stevens is more than a pal. He is on many occasions a reliable “third vote” for Hawaii in the Senate.

Reason enough to want him back there.