Doug at Poinography!, having looked at Hawaii County's website, asks "Is there a County with a more amateurish web presence?" Certainly within the 50th state, the answer is clearly "no." Maui, Kaua'i and Honolulu, while not spectacular, are at least adequate, while Hawaii County seems stuck in about 1994. The "copyright 2001" at the bottom is sad enough. It's not like there've been any advances in the internet since 2001, right?
OK, so we're clearly the lamest county in Hawaii, but can we compete on the national scene? Or will it be another Georgia vs UH wipeout? Well, Mississippi County, Arkansas (chosen because it's in the poorest congressional district) looks pretty bad (copyright 1997, but revised in 2006) but I think ours still looks lamer. Hancock County, Georgia is supposed to be the poorest county in Georgia, but even those inbred, no-teeth, cousin marrying hicks have a better looking website. Wikipedia says that the poorest county in the US is Buffalo County, South Dakota. They're apparently so poor that they don't even have a website, so there's least one county worse than Hawaii County (their population is only 2032, so we should probably be restrained in our victory dance).