Mountain Views News          Saturday, August 14, 2010

8

OPINION

 Mountain Views News Saturday, August 14, 2010 

STUART Tolchin ..........On LIFE

HAIL Hamilton

My Turn

Mountain Views

News

Publisher/ Editor

Susan Henderson

City Editor

Dean Lee 

Sales

Patricia Colonello

626-355-2737 

626-818-2698

Art Director

Allison Kirkham

Production Assistant

Richard Garcia

Photography

Jacqueline Truong

Lina Johnson

Contributors

Teresa Baxter

Pat Birdsall

Bob Eklund

Howard Hays

Paul Carpenter

Stuart Tolchin

Kim Clymer-Kelley

Christopher Nyerges

Peter Dills 

Hail Hamilton 

Rich Johnson

Chris Bertrand

Mary Carney

La Quetta Shamblee

Glenn Lambdin

Greg Wellborn

Ralph McKnight

Trish Collins

Pat Ostrye

Editorial Cartoonist

Ann Cleaves

Webmaster

John Aveny 

 
Apparently 
no one reads 
the U.S. 
Constitution 
anymore? 
ACLU lawyers and amnesty activist haven’t 
read it. Attorney General Eric Holder 
hasn’t read it. Same goes for Federal Judge 
Susan R. Bolton. 

Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

 

 “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, 
other public Ministers and Consuls, and 
those in which a State shall be Party, the 
same supreme Court shall have original 
jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before 
mentioned, the supreme Court shall have 
appellate Jurisdiction.”

 “Original” jurisdiction means the 
power to conduct the “trial” of the case 
(as opposed to hearing an appeal from the 
judgment of a lower court). 

 In other words, Judge Bolton has 
absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction 
over the matter upon which she ruled. As 
the Constitution makes abundantly clear, 
only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue 
rulings that involve a state.

 This means that neither Bolton 
nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 
in San Francisco, to which the case is 
being appealed, have any legal standing 
whatsoever to rule on the issue.

 Yet Attorney General Holder filed 
the case in a court which is specifically 
stripped of jurisdiction to hear it!

 Counsel for the State of Arizona should 
consider:

 1. File a Petition for Removal before 
federal district court Judge Bolton 
demanding that the case be removed to the 
Supreme Court on the ground that under 
Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2, only the Supreme 
Court has jurisdiction to conduct the trial 
of this case.

 2. If Judge Bolton denies the Petition 
for Removal, file a Petition for Writ of 
Mandamus in the Supreme Court asking 
that court to order Judge Bolton to transfer 
the case to the Supreme Court.

 A Petition for Writ of Mandamus is an 
old common-law “extraordinary writ”: It 
asks a court to order a lower court or other 
public official to do something which it is 
its duty to do. In Kerr v. US District Court 
for Northern District of California (1976), 
the Supreme Court said, respecting the 
propriety of issuing writs of mandamus:

“...the fact still remains that “only 
exceptional circumstances amounting 
to a judicial ‘usurpation of power’ will 
justify the invocation of this extraordinary 
remedy....”

 When a federal district court judge 
presides over a case which the Constitution 
specifically prohibits her from hearing, 
and even issues a ruling enjoining the 
enforcement of a State Law then that 
federal district court judge usurps power. 
Thus, Judge Bolton is specifically stripped 
- by Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2 - of jurisdiction 
to preside over the case against the State of 
Arizona and against the Governor of the 
State of Arizona.

 Article IV, Sec. 4 requires the federal 
government to protect each of the States 
against invasion. Not only is the Obama 
administration refusing to perform this 
specific Constitutional duty - it seeks to 
prohibit the sovereign state of Arizona 
from defending itself! 

 Finally, Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 
says: “No State shall... engage in War, 
unless actually invaded, or in such 
imminent Danger as will not admit to 
delay.” 

 No one who is actually familiar with 
the crisis at the southern border can 
deny that Arizona is endangered by the 
relentless assault of lawless invaders who 
ignore our laws, inundate our schools and 
medical facilities with unpaid bills, and 
even endanger the very lives of citizens 
with criminal drug cartels that engage in 
kidnapping, murder, human trafficking, 
and other mayhem, including aiming 
.50 caliber machine guns and grenade 
launchers at U.S. border patrol officers 
from just across the Mexican border.

 

 The Constitution that forms the basis 
of the rule of law in this country says that 
Arizona has legal right to protect itself in 
the case of inaction or delay on the part of 
the federal government, including waging 
war in its own defense. 

 

 This, when coupled with the clear 
Constitutional mandate that only the 
Supreme Court hear cases involving the 
states, should be ample legal basis for 
attorneys representing Arizona to go after 
the federal government with a vengeance. 

CHANGE--Maybe It Will 
Be For The Better

Has Judge Bolton read the 
Constitution?

 Well, I’m back 
from Vacation and 
facing the return 
to my daily world 
of task and worry. 
You probably live 
in a similar world. 
There are so many things to do and 
our lives are filled with so much doubt 
and fear. Economically, times are 
tough. Our neighbors up the street 
can’t find work and have fallen behind 
in their rent and are threatened with 
homelessness. It seems like everyone 
I know has an upcoming appointment 
with a doctor and is secretly worried 
about some ache or condition and at 
the same time are trying to ignore the 
anxiety. 

 I think this is a time of great denial. 
We are filled with information that tells 
us we are on the road to destruction 
but we don’t want to hear about it. As I 
look around I see a population sporting 
tattoos and body piercings. College 
campuses are filled with students 
displaying their underwear as their 
pants threaten to fall completely to the 
ground. What’s going on? Somewhere 
I read an explanation of this behavior 
by the old rocker, Iggy Pop. He 
explained that the younger generation 
(which can include anyone who wants 
to be included) is saying that they are 
not afraid, they don’t mind a little pain, 
even court it. Who cares about the 
rest of the world? I am going to live 
my life unafraid. The dropping pants 
are a living allusion to the dropping of 
old taboos. I am sexual and I don’t care 
who knows it—or something like that.

 Yes, the world keeps changing and 
I don’t know where it’s heading. Some 
changes are positive. No matter what 
underlying attitudes still exist people, 
do not go around making obviously 
racist or sexist statements anymore. 
Same sex marriages are now tolerated, 
even though the commitments within 
different sex marriages seem to be 
disappearing. Everyone seems to 
be more aware of the benefits of a 
healthy diet and regular exercise, even 
though the rate of obesity continues 
to rise. Gender seems no longer to be 
determinative of the kind of life that 
will be led and, of course, there are Jews 
and women on the Supreme Court. 
Still, the overall outlook does not seem 
very positive.

 Right now it is not fashionable to 
trust our government. The overall 
rating of Congress seems to be at an 
all-time low and respected Democrats 
like Charles Rangel and Maxine Waters 
are being implicated in embarrassing 
scandals. Petty complaints over the 
appropriateness of Presidential-family 
vacations dominate the air waves while 
overwhelming problems of poverty and 
the continued absence of jobs remain 
unsolved. The sixty-fifth anniversary 
of the United States’ release of atomic 
bombs upon the Japanese cities of 
Hiroshima and Nagasaki remind 
us that no effective agreement for 
world nuclear disarmament has been 
achieved. 

 Environmental fears continue. 
Perhaps the BP Wells in the Gulf of 
Mexico no longer gush, but I think 
many of us fear that further great 
disasters are soon to appear. If we 
choose not to ignore these problems, 
where can we find any hope? Looking 
at pictures of the wedding my wife and 
I attended while we were on vacation, it 
came to me that Hope is all around us. 
I looked at the pictures of young three 
and four-year olds filled with the joy of 
their own existence. It really is possible 
to just be aware of every unique and 
precious moment and realize that it 
is just a spectacular miracle to be in a 
body and to be alive.

 Thinking about this I remember a 
conversation I heard on a tour bus 
that last week which took us to the 
unforgettable and absolutely awesome 
coast of Oregon. As I appreciated 
this sight (especially after the clouds 
cleared) I was told about a project 
involving a famous scientist who 
would combine his knowledge with the 
poetry of a child. The intention of the 
project was to communicate a fuller 
understanding of the privilege and 
responsibility of being alive in a way 
that could potentially reach everyone. 
Different modalities of art, music, 
dance, and theatre would be utilized. 
I really didn’t understand the specifics 
but what I overheard gave me some 
Hope. Hooray for children and hooray 
for scientific inquiry. Put together in 
the right way, maybe this energy can 
lift the fog that seems to cloud world 
vision and prevents the adoption of 
programs and policies that might really 
help us all live more rewarding lives. 
Furthermore, it all sounds like great 
fun of a kind that does not require a 
continued denial of the recognition 
of urgent problems. How can we all 
participate? Maybe the first step is to 
watch the way a three year old enjoys 
just running across a room; but let’s try 
to keep our pants on. I guess I’m just 
irreparably old-fashioned.

Mountain Views News 
has been adjudicated as 
a newspaper of General 
Circulation for the 
County of Los Angeles 
in Court Case number 
GS004724: for the City 
of Sierra Madre; in Court 
Case GS005940 and for 
the City of Monrovia in 
Court Case No. GS006989 
and is published every 
Saturday at 55 W. Sierra 
Madre Blvd., No. 302, 
Sierra Madre, California, 
91024. All contents are 
copyrighted and may not 
be reproduced without the 
express written consent of 
the publisher. All rights 
reserved. All submissions 
to this newspaper become 
the property of the 
Mountain Views News and 
may be published in part 
or whole. 

Opinions and views 
expressed by the writers 
printed in this paper do not 
necessarily express the views 
and opinions of the publisher 
or staff of the Mountain 
Views News. 

Mountain Views News is 
wholly owned by Grace 
Lorraine Publications, 
Inc. and reserves the right 
to refuse publication of 
advertisements and other 
materials submitted for 
publication. 

Letters to the editor and 
correspondence should be 
sent to: 

Mountain Views News

 80 W. Sierra Madre Bl. #327

Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024

Phone: 626-355-2737

Fax: 626-609-3285

email: 

mtnviewsnews@aol.com

Left Turn/Right Turn

GREG Welborn

The Mosque At Ground Zero

HOWARD Hays 

As I See It


If Ground Zero serves to unite this 
country again, it will not be because we 
finally build something there to take 
the place of the world trade center. It 
will be because it once again reminds 
us all of the great principles on which 
this country was founded. The current 
controversy over whether to allow a 
mosque to be built within blocks of this 
now-sacred American site has actually 
brought together serious thinkers on 
both the right and left to defend the legal 
and constitutional right of Imam Feisal 
Abdul Rauf to build an Islamic Center 
two blocks away from Ground Zero.

 There may be some in the Islamic 
communities oversees – perhaps many in 
fact – that find a sense of victory over the 
decrepit west if a Mosque is built before 
the towers are replaced. But they will 
miss the symbolism entirely. Yes, failure 
to replace the towers with something 
– anything – because of the conflicting 
self interests of a band of squabbling 
politicians shows up one of our 
weaknesses. But such weakness pales in 
comparison with the far more powerful 
strength implicit in our tradition of 
religious freedom.

 As a conservative writer, let me state 
unequivocally that Imam Fiesal Abdul 
Rauf should be granted the same property 
rights as anyone else on that block, in 
that city, in that state and in our nation. 
Assuming that he complies with all zoning 
requirements and safety regulations, 
there is no reason that he should be 
prevented from building an Islamic 
Center or an Islamic amusement park for 
that matter. I’ll defend the freedom of 
the property owner, regardless of his race, 
ethnicity, nationality, or religion. That’s 
what it means to be a conservative. We 
believe in limited government, expanded 
freedom and equal application of all laws.

 The bigger story here is the moral 
obligation of Imam Fiesal Abdul Rauf. 
Inasmuch as New York City Mayor, 
Michael Bloomberg has defended his 
right to build a mosque and more 
generally that major leaders of the 
Christian denominations in the U.S. and 
Europe have preached and practiced 
tolerance and dialogue, wouldn’t it seem 
appropriate for the good Imam to stand 
up publicly and defend Christian rights 
within the major Islamic cultures?

 A good case in point would be the 
efforts of the Vatican to support the 
efforts of a group of Saudis to build 
a mosque in Rome. It now stands as 
one of the most beautiful mosques in 
Europe. The expectation, of course, was 
that witnessing tolerance would beget 
tolerance in the Muslim world. Sadly, 
that has not been the case.

 The Saudis have not loosened their 
restrictions on Christian practices in 
their country; if anything, they have 
been stepped up. Christians around the 
Middle East are being persecuted with 
intensifying passion, not just by local 
radicals, but by the supposedly rational 
state authorities. There are ample cases of 
Christians being imprisoned for bringing 
bibles across borders, for daring to tell 
locals of the beauty of Christianity, and 
for simply admitting to being Christian. 

 It is always a good thing when we see 
the American constitution triumphant 
in defending 
the rights of 
association, 
petition and 
speech for 
unpopular 
minorities. 
Admittedly, we 
don’t expect much 
from neo-Nazis, so defending their 
right to march down the main street of 
a predominantly Jewish city in America 
is just something we do because we’re 
called to do it by our principles. But we 
should expect more from the esteemed 
Imam Fiesal Abdul Rauf. By all accounts, 
he’s an intelligent man, well educated 
and grounded by years of maturity and 
experience. 

 To be absolutely frank and honest, 
I want to see him unequivocally and 
very publicly advocate for the rights of 
embattled and imprisoned Christians in 
the Islamic world. If we are to believe 
that the mosque at Ground Zero is really 
just a heartfelt exercise of their religious 
freedoms, not the purposeful opening 
of another front in a religious war, then 
this is the bare minimum I would expect 
to see. American Muslims are the only 
ones who can credibly convince us 
of their intentions and of their moral 
principles. Whether they were born 
here or emigrated here, if they consider 
themselves Americans, then they need 
to stand up like the rest of us and defend 
the rights of those who don’t necessarily 
share their religious beliefs. 

 This has been, and remains, the great 
sticking point with most Americans. 
Many commentators will strive to use 
the mosque at Ground Zero controversy 
as evidence of the bias and bigotry of 
mainstream America. But they are 
wrong. Americans are a fair people. 
Excluding the lunatic fringe, which exists 
in all countries by the way, we are not 
bigots and harbor no hatred for people of 
other faiths or cultures. We do, however, 
expect fair play!! It galls many to be 
constantly expected to show tolerance 
and understanding – to allow others to do 
what is unpopular in our neighborhoods 
– without seeing the others extend that 
same tolerance and understanding to us.

 If we are to allow a mosque to be built at 
Ground Zero, or anywhere for that matter, 
then why shouldn’t we expect Muslims to 
allow Christians to build a church near 
the Dome of The Rock, or in Mecca, 
or anywhere else in the Middle East? 
Perhaps because our laws don’t apply in 
those countries, we’ll understand if that 
tolerance isn’t extended to Christians 
living there, but at the very, very least we 
expect Muslim Americans to stand up 
and criticize those Middle East countries 
for not extending tolerance.

 So the bottom line here is that the 
mosque at Ground Zero controversy 
is really about the silence on the part 
of the American Islamic community. 
When we see mass demonstrations of 
Muslims against the intolerance directed 
at Christians, there won’t be anymore 
mosque controversies. Until then, we 
ultimately will allow mosques to be built 
in America, but we will also continue to 
be disappointed in our Islamic neighbors.

 
Jerry Brown wonders how 
the Bell city manager could 
make $790,000 a year. Meg 
Whitman wonders how 
he could support himself 
on $790,000 a year. Greg 
Welborn looked overseas 
last week for an example of where economic 
policies might lead. I’ll go south of the border.

 Greg compares our taxation and living 
standards with those of Europe. I’ve discussed 
this very subject with European friends from 
France, Germany and The Netherlands. 
They’re not “rich”, but fairly middle-class 
private sector and public employees. We often 
talk when they’re visiting on vacation; they 
always seem to be enjoying weeks of vacation 
every year to travel the world or simply spend 
time with their families.

 They don’t have a problem buying a new 
car every few years, or the latest electronic 
gadgets for their homes. As young parents, 
they took advantage of generous maternity 
leave and child care provisions, and as they get 
older, can look forward to a secure retirement 
- with no worries of a 401(k) being decimated 
by Wall Street yahoos.

 Medical decisions are made between patient 
and doctor; not by an insurance company 
profiting from denials. There are no concerns 
of losing coverage when you really need it, or 
upon discovery of a pre-existing condition, 
or missed COBRA payment, or job change. 
The very notion of health care as commercial 
product is difficult for them to comprehend.

 Do they have complaints? They do. Would 
they trade their “model” for something akin 
to what we have here? That might get a laugh 
and a bemused, “Are you kidding?”

 What they describe recalls when I was a 
kid in the 1960s; middle-class, blue-collar 
families able to afford a nice place to live, a 
new car every couple years, family vacations, 
money put away for college and the security 
of a pension in retirement. Mom took us to 
the doctor, he’d send us a bill and we’d send 
him a check. A single middle-class income 
was usually enough for a family to get along 
just fine.

 What happened? Under Richard Nixon, 
we had the HMO Act of 1973. Decisions 
previously made between patient and doctor 
were abrogated to faceless boards, and non-
profit hospitals and medical facilities were 
transformed into for-profit corporate assets.

 One of Ronald Reagan’s first acts was 
disbanding the air traffic controllers’ union. 
Private sector union representation fell from 
about 20% at the time he took office to 7% 
today - and now the focus is on demonizing 
those government workers still enjoying union 
benefits. Reagan’s Office of Management and 
Budget Director, David Stockman, explained 
in a recent NY Times column how traditional 
“conservative” policy changed at that time 
from coupling tax cuts with budget cuts to 
“the delusion that the economy will outgrow 
the deficit if plied with enough tax cuts.” This 
“delusion” resulted in a tripling of the national 
debt under Reagan.

 Stockman points out that as this policy 
continued under George W. Bush, non-defense 
appropriations grew 65% ($260 billion to $420 
billion) from what they were when President 
Clinton left office. Though according to Greg 
it’s all Obama’s fault, Reagan’s OMB Director 
says, “This debt explosion has resulted not 
from big spending by the Democrats, but 
instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about 
three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine 
that deficits don’t matter if they result from 
tax cuts.” He adds that during the Wall Street-
driven, taxpayer-guaranteed boom years of 
2002-2006, two-thirds of the gains in national 
income went to the top 1% of Americans, 
while those in the lower 90% shared 12% of 
the gains. Regarding current Republican 
policy, economist Paul Krugman expresses 
bewilderment that “$30 billion in aid to the 
unemployed is unaffordable, but 20 times that 
amount in tax cuts for the rich doesn’t count.”

 Rather than involving economic policy, 
it could simply be a matter of having been 
bought off. Over a million dollars a day 
was spent lobbying congress against health 
care reform last year. 2,400 lobbyists were 
deployed against President Obama’s financial 
reform legislation. Last March, House 
Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) told 
fans from the American Bankers Association 
to ignore “those little punk staffers” when 
pressing lawmakers. In May, Senate Majority 
Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) slammed Minority 
Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for secretly 
meeting with 25 leading bankers and hedge 
fund managers to get his marching orders on 
financial reform. As Reid’s spokesman put it, 
“Republicans are making love to Wall Street 
while main street is getting screwed.”

 Because of a bill signed earlier this week 
by President Obama, 160,000 teachers 
throughout the country facing imminent 
layoffs will instead be returning to the 
classroom as the school year begins. Our 
Congressman David Dreier joined fellow 
Republicans in opposition. Their problem 
with the bill was that it would be paid for by 
lowering the cap on tax credits multi-national 
corporations are able to claim for foreign taxes 
paid, closing a loophole and also reducing 
an incentive for off-shoring jobs. (It’s a tax 
increase!) Those 160,000 teachers were to be 
sacrificed in order to maintain the profitability 
of sending American jobs overseas. 

 Rather than Europe, we could look to 
Mexico as an example of where economic 
policies can lead. Despite respectable 4.5% 
annual economic growth, third-world poverty 
pervades as President Felipe Calderon 
estimates Mexicans pay a 40% premium on 
everyday needs as a result of monopolies and 
wealth concentration. Or India, where ten 
individuals in a land of 1.2 billion control 10% 
of the economy. We can look in the mirror, 
with 10% of Americans earning 50% of the 
income, while 21% of our children live in 
poverty.

 There was one word in Greg’s column I 
found particularly revealing; he referred to 
our government as “they”, and later made 
the distinction between “us and them”. Our 
government exists to “promote the general 
welfare” of us all, not to protect the profits of 
a privileged few. Last time I checked, “they” 
don’t own it; it belongs to “We the People” - 
and it’s not for sale. 

Mountain Views 
News

Mission Statement

The traditions of 
the community 
newspaper and 
the concerns of 
our readers are 
this newspaper’s 
top priorities. We 
support a prosperous 
community of well-
informed citizens. 
We hold in high 
regard the values 
of the exceptional 
quality of life in our 
community, including 
the magnificence 
of our natural 
resources. Integrity 
will be our guide.