Mountain Views News          Saturday, November 23, 2013

B8

OPINION

 Mountain Views News Saturday, November 23, 2013 


OUT TO PASTOR 

A Weekly Religion Column by Rev. James Snyder


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

Mountain 
Views

News

PUBLISHER/ EDITOR

Susan Henderson

CITY EDITOR

Dean Lee 

EAST VALLEY EDITOR

Joan Schmidt

BUSINESS EDITOR

LaQuetta Shamblee

SENIOR COMMUNITY 
EDITOR

Pat Birdsall

SALES

Patricia Colonello

626-355-2737 

626-818-2698

WEBMASTER

John Aveny 

CONTRIBUTORS

Chris Leclerc

Bob Eklund

Howard Hays

Paul Carpenter

Stuart Tolchin

Kim Clymer-Kelley

Christopher Nyerges

Peter Dills 

Hail Hamilton 

Rich Johnson

Merri Jill Finstrom

Lori Koop

Rev. James Snyder

Tina Paul

Mary Carney

Katie Hopkins

Deanne Davis

Despina Arouzman

Greg Welborn

Renee Quenell

Ben Show

Sean Kayden

Jasmine Kelsey Williams

LET THE HOLIDAY SEASON BEGIN

WHAT LITTLE I KNOW

 This is the time of the year holidays get into full steam. It begins 
with Halloween when people put on a scary face and ends with 
New Year’s day when people put on a new face. I could never figure 
out if the Halloween face was the New Year’s Day face,just that 
much older.

 I do not have much time for Halloween. Since the Gracious 
Mistress of the Parsonage has put me on a strict diet that does not 
include candy, what is the purpose of going out on Halloween night begging for candy?

 It seems rather interesting that our holiday season starts out with people going around 
door-to-door begging for candy and ends New Year’s Day making resolutions not to eat 
any more candy this year.

 I love all of the ingredients making up our holiday season, whether it is Halloween 
candy or Thanksgiving turkey or New Year’s Day pork and sauerkraut. These traditions 
that center on eating is right up my alley. If the alley is dark enough, my wife will not catch 
me in the act.

 One ingredient I really do not appreciate during the holiday season is all the grouches 
and complainers and sourpuss people that insist on trying to take the fun out of my 
holiday time.

 On the one hand, you have those who pretend they do not believe in God and yet 
during this time of the year they get all bent out of shape by the mere mention of God. 
They nervously say they do not believe in God and yet my belief in God threatens them 
somehow.

 If they really did not believe in God they would not care one way or the other if 
somebody was stupid enough to believe in God. They would just sit back in their rocking 
chair smiling at the poor fools who go through the holiday season thanking God and 
celebrating the birth of Jesus on Christmas day.

 For instance, I do not believe in the tooth fairy. I think it is the figment of someone’s 
imagination and nothing exists that in any way resembles the tooth fairy. Yet, it is not the 
center of my life to go around trying to prove there is no such thing as a tooth fairy. How 
do you explain to a child the money under his pillow after placing his extracted tooth 
there?

 Perhaps another illustration would be Halloween. I do not believe in ghosts, goblins 
and all of the stupidity invested in this kind of a holiday. Yet, my whole life is not focused 
around trying to disprove ghosts and goblins. If somebody wants to believe in ghosts and 
goblins, what is that to me?

 I do not believe there was ever such a creature as Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer. 
Somebody made that up to go along with the Christmas story. I do not think Santa Claus 
ever existed. Not all the stories I have read about Santa Claus has ever convinced me such 
a person existed.

 Yet, I do not spend the whole holiday season ranting and raving trying to disprove 
Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer and his master, St. Nicholas. If somebody wants to believe 
in Santa Claus and his reindeer and that Rudolph the red-nosed reindeer saved Christmas 
one year, what is that to me? I say let people indulge in these marvelous little fantasies.

 I cannot tell you how many years I sat on Santa Claus’s lap and to this day, nothing 
I asked for has ever come my way via Christmas. Yet, this Christmas I will take my 
grandchildren to the mall and have them sit on Santa Claus’s lap and tell him what they 
want for Christmas.

 Believing in the mall Santa Claus is pure fantasy.

 Yet, I am not going to picket the mall around Christmas time demanding they do away 
with the mall Santa Claus. After all, Santa Claus in the mall brings customers to the mall.

 Many fantasies I do not put any trust in, but I do not build my life around destroying 
these fantasies that other people enjoy.

 I do not recall how old I was when I found out that Santa Claus was just a fictional 
character that made Christmas something of a fantasy. Even though I discovered that 
Santa Claus was not real, I found myself as a father telling the Santa Claus story to my 
children and then later to my grandchildren.

 Some of these people attacking the holiday season, including the Christmas tree, are just 
indicating that somewhere along the line they have not grown up. If they do not believe 
in the holiday season, particularly Christmas, then let us who love the holiday season, 
especially Christmas, enjoy it.

 I advise those who do not enjoy the holiday season to go up to Western Pennsylvania, 
find Punxsutawney Phil and spend the winter with him. We will be sure to look for you 
come spring.

 I like how the apostle Paul put it. “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood 
as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things” (1 
Corinthians 13:10).

 Some people, I am not mentioning who, need to just grow up and stop acting so 
childish.

 I will celebrate the holiday season for the simple reason that God’s amazing grace has 
brought me through another year.

 Not unlike most writers I dislike writing about areas about which 
I know little. Disqualified from this category are the writers who 
review politics, extra-terrestrial life, sorcery, life after death, the 
internal emotional life of other people, and their own motivation. 
What I am subtly attempting to say is that nobody really knows 
anything, but that ignorance does not prevent vast multitudes of 
people from writing about matters about which they have little insight. Unfortunately, 
these groundless writings frequently have great influence upon readers who digest these 
materials and actually believe they are learning something.

 This mistaken belief in learning is one of the major points made in the book entitled The 
Black Swan: The Impact of the HIGHLY IMPROBABLE, authored by Nassim Nicholas 
Taleb. We are not talking John Grisham here. The book challenges one’s deepest core 
beliefs right from its very first chapter entitled, Umberto Eco’s anti-library.

 Umberto Eco is a great scholar and the author of one of my favorite books, Foucault’s 
Pendulum, together with other books like Name of the Rose (perhaps you saw the Sean 
Connery movie). I mention the Sean Connery movie mockingly because the whole 
point of the first chapter is that even when we are acquainted with a subject, we tend to 
remember the trivial and forget the substantial It’s not that we purposely misunderstand, 
but rather we tend to only capture new information within the arbitrary and artificial 
boxes we have already created. In discussing the contents of Umberto Eco’s huge library, 
Taleb maintains “that the studious examination of the past in the greatest of detail does not 
teach you much about the mind of History; it only gives you the illusion of understanding 
it.” According to his view, one learns more from the books that have not been read as 
opposed to the distortions that have been absorbed from the books that have been read. 
This kind of insight is the support he gives to his theories of “Black Swans”. These Black 
Swan phenomena demonstrate that what you don’t know is far more relevant than what 
you do know. What he calls a Black Swan is an event with the following three attributes:

 1) It lies outside the realm of regular expectations, because nothing in the past can 
convincingly point to its possibility. 

 2) It carries an extreme impact. 

 3) Despite its total unpredictability, human nature makes us concoct explanations for 
its occurrence after the fact, making it explainable and predictable.

 A suggested way of concretizing the phenomena is to picture life from the viewpoint of 
a turkey living on a ranch. It is the day preceding Thanksgiving and the turkey perceives 
nothing unusual. The rancher comes towards him and the turkey looks forward to being 
fed. After all, for every day of his life this rancher has acted kindly towards the turkey and 
has regularly fed him. This day is different; the rancher approaches the turkey and wrings 
his neck. After death the turkey has the perspective of the rancher and realizes that he 
should have known about Thanksgiving; it was all so predictable. Except for the fact that 
Thanksgiving was completely outside of the turkey’s life experience.

 All right, practically, what are the Black Swans in our own lives? And probably more 
importantly, what are the Black Swans that will occur in the near future that are now 
completely unexpected but, afterwards, will be seen as almost inevitable? Perhaps one 
of the first will be our own individual deaths. I know for me it’s almost impossible to 
imagine my own death. Really, how could the world go on without me? 

 Sierra Madre will lose its wonderful village like quality and will become the home 
of expensive housing projects. I refuse to imagine such a thing. Wait though; just look 
at last week’s issue of this paper and read the front page story about the lovely Mater 
Dolorosa Retreat Center contemplating a Housing Project. How about something even 
scarier? Imagine another Bush in the White House. Impossible; after the grandfather was 
the only elected President not re-elected in fifty years. After his brother was completely 
dishonored after serving eight frightening years; it could not happen. Please don’t let it 
happen!

 How about this? A Democratic woman elected President in 2016 who is not Hilary 
Clinton and who is an authentic Progressive. Have you ever heard of Elizabeth Warren?

 Right; maybe these examples are not exactly Black Swans. As Taleb tells us, you really 
can’t rely on the accuracy of anything you read. One thing I’m pretty sure of, though, 
is that all this talk of Black Swans will make some readers wonder how the phenomena 
ended up with that name. Perhaps that little bit of curiosity will encourage a few readers 
to actually pick up the book and start thinking more skeptically and thereby create a 
better world. Yes, I know. If this actually happens it will truly be a Black Swan.

 A GREAT THANKSGIVING and don’t be surprised to learn that turkey day is the 
birth date of both my children. Does that count as a Black Swan? 

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

TINA Dupuy

LIBS DOING WHAT LIBS DO

GREG Welborn

OBAMACARE AND MY FAMILY

 The week has been rich with potential 
topics for this week’s article, but it is one 
of the late breaking stories which has 
caught my focus because it so beautifully 
illustrates what liberals do when the world 
they actually experience doesn’t behave 
the way in which they imagine the world 
should behave. They change the subject, 
ignore the problem and hope it all just goes 
away.

 It’s been a very bad week for Liberals. 
Their signature transformational social 
legislation – Obamacare – is dying before 
their very eyes. They know it’s not just 
the website that’s a problem. They now 
realize that millions will lose coverage, 
millions more will experience sticker 
shock, and God knows how many multiple 
millions will see the quality of their 
healthcare deteriorate. They also realize 
the voting public is mad as hell at the 
lies and subterfuge which was heart and 
sole of this legislation. So, Liberals have 
decided to change the topic to something 
so arcane that most Americans will have to 
refocus away from Obamacare in order to 
understand the headlines.

 “The nuclear option” will commandeer 
the press’s collective attention for a couple 
of days, perhaps a week. It’s a scary term 
in the international context, but rather 
mundane, though no less important, when 
used with regard to the rules of debate 
and negotiation in the U.S. Senate. The 
U.S. Senate has been referred to as the 
greatest deliberative body in the world. It 
has earned that reputation in part because 
Senate rules were structured to protect 
the interests of the minority party and 
force the majority to make the strongest 
case possible when major legislation 
or significant appointments were to be 
made. If the minority party wanted to 
stop the majority, they had the ability to 
filibuster. This stopped the momentum of 
the Senate and forced the majority party to 
either negotiate better or compile a super 
majority to stop the filibuster. The Senate 
was meant to temper the momentary 
passions of the electorate with deliberative, 
even prolonged, debate.

 The filibuster was an elegant, even 
majestic, aspect of our form of government, 
and of our Senate in particular. Of course 
the Senate has the right to make its own 
rules, but for the longest time both parties, 
when they were in the majority and when 
they were in the minority, have respected 
the wisdom of this super majority rule. 
As recently as 2005, Harry Reid, then the 
minority leader, stated “the filibuster is far 
from a procedural gimmick. It’s part of the 
fabric of this institution we call the Senate.” 
He rightly reminded us that it has been in 
use in the Senate since 1790.

 So why did Harry Reid use a simple 
majority, party-line, vote to abolish the 
filibuster – to invoke the nuclear option? 
Because Liberals are looking for a victory – 
any victory – to change the news headlines 
and to rally the sinking morale of those 
with “D”s after their name. The Democrats 
control the Senate with a simple majority, 
but they no longer have 
the super majority to 
override the filibuster. 
They have thus been 
stymied of late by 
Republicans invoking 
the filibuster. By 
changing the rules, 
they now can override 
filibusters with a simple 
majority vote. They 
no longer have to dirty themselves with 
having to work hard to convince even a 
handful of the minority party’s members to 
end a filibuster. In affect, the filibuster is no 
longer an option. 

 The nature of the change itself is sure 
to command media attention. It already 
has. That’s good for them. Right now, 
any headline that doesn’t have the word 
Obamacare or healthcare in it is a good 
headline. Beyond the headlines, the rule 
change will allow Democrats to get some 
judicial appointments they otherwise 
wouldn’t get. The judiciary is one of the 
last refuges of Liberal power. Politically, 
liberalism is losing sway in the country. 
Governorships and state legislatures are 
turning conservative, and many predict the 
trend will soon impact the Senate itself. It 
is through liberal judges that Liberals have 
consistently been able to impose those 
rules and social changes they were unable 
to enact through democratic processes. So 
now they’ll get some of their judges; they’ll 
get some more successes; but it’s all going 
to be very short lived.

 Whether it’s 2014, 2016, or 2018, it is 
inevitable that a Republican majority will 
return. When it does, Democrats will 
rue the day they changed these rules. 
When Republicans return to power, they 
have already announced they will use 
the precedence set by Harry Reid in the 
confirmation process for Supreme Court 
nominees. What Harry Reid has done, 
and President Obama approved, is to 
weaken the moral authority of the United 
States Senate, introduce more volatility 
into our democracy and ultimately 
weaken the legacy of modern liberalism. 
When historians write of these years 
in American history, they will note – 
willingly or unwillingly – the disaster that 
is Obamacare, the damage done to the U.S. 
Senate and the almost unparalleled hubris 
of imposing major policy changes without 
first seeking the public’s overwhelming 
support. 

 The Obama administration has changed 
the subject and can pretend their problems 
are vanishing. We’ll talk about Senate rules 
for a couple of days as the press scrambles 
to fill their 24 hour news cycles, and we’ll 
hear a bit less about cancelled policies and 
skyrocketing premiums. But pretending 
this problem doesn’t exist is akin to 
opening an umbrella to stop the snow 
while ignoring the on-rushing avalanche. 
When reality hits, it’s not going to feel very 
good, but for right now, Libs are content to 
do what Libs do best.


My in-laws, 
whom I’ve written 
about in the past, 
are emblematic 
of the economic 
meltdown: 
They’re both 57 
years old—in the 
doughnut hole of 
being too young 
for Medicare, too old for the job market. 
They worked as middle management 
in businesses tangentially related to 
the housing industry. After the crash 
they were both laid off. They went on 
unemployment until it ran out. They’ve 
yet to find work. They didn’t benefit 
from the boom times, but the crash hit 
them hard. Their golden years have 
been fed to Goldman Sachs.

They’ve each been paying $1,000 a 
month for COBRA coverage (the only 
insurance that would cover them) since 
they’ve been unemployed. That’s $24,000 
annually. Their retirement savings have 
been going to their premiums. And that 
pricy COBRA coverage is set to run out 
January 1. People in other industrialized 
nations—all with universal health care 
and most single payer—can’t imagine 
how Americans accept this as a reality. 
My in-laws aren’t even sick and health 
care costs were going to bankrupt them.

But under the ACA—Obamacare—
they’re eligible for California’s primary 
public insurance program, Medi-
Cal. Because of Obamacare the state 
expanded eligibility to poor adults 
with no dependent children. And once 
they’re back on their feet, they cannot 
be denied coverage for preexisting 
conditions (which is basically being 
over 55). Also because of Obamacare.

Politics is not a football game. It’s not 
who’s up and who’s down and what 
quarter we’re in. You might not gather 
that from the reporting on the budget 
showdown, but the stakes are just 
slightly higher than whose approval 
rating could be affected.

New York Times: “With Shutdown 
Near, Talk Is of Who’s at Fault, Not of 
a Deal?” USA Today: “Blame Game 
for Impending Shutdown Plays On.” 
Washington Post: “Just One in Four 
Approve of Republicans Handling of 
Government Shutdown Standoff.”

Because what really matters is who 
will challenge Ted Cruz in his 2020 
presidential re-election campaign.

The House Republicans have voted to 
repeal Obamacare—the Affordable 
Care Act or ACA—42 times. The House 
GOP are lawmakers-in-name-only. 
They’ve been the leaders of the least 
productive Congress in the history of 
the institution. In this way Speaker 
John Boehner has already shut down 
the government. Now we’re just talking 
about degrees. James Lankford (R-OK) 
in an appearance on MSNBC’s “Up with 
Steve Kornacki” on Sunday morning 
said, “There are also people that are 
going to be negatively impacted by 
[Obamacare]. We want to fix that.”

They had 42 symbolic, go-nowhere 
votes to repeal the Affordable Care 
Act. Now Lankford tells the American 
public they just want to fix it…or shut 
the government down.

It’s a favorite GOP pastime to make up 
horror stories about Obamacare. In Ted 
Cruz’s meandering 21-hour talk-a-thon 
he used Sarah Palin’s 2009 Lie of the 
Year “death panels.” Tea party Freshman 
Congressman Tim Huelskamp 
tweeted on Sunday, “Because of a 
new #ObamaCare rule, Delno’s wife 
is prevented from receiving a much-
needed surgery. #DontFundIt.” I asked 
the congressman via Twitter which 
“rule” in Obamacare he was referring to.

He never answered. Because there isn’t 
one.

The GOP has used a fire hose of baloney 
to try to thwart a law (they often refer 
to it as a bill) passed after a grueling 
18-month debate in Congress, upheld 
by the Supreme Court and tested in 
a presidential re-election. Now the 
government is shut down: The Statue 
of Liberty, the symbol of American 
greatness is closed. The National 
Archives’ original copy of the U.S. 
Constitution is locked away. How very 
appropriate.

And for what? So that the House GOP 
can save us from having affordable 
health care? Yes.

“We’re very excited,” said Rep. Michele 
Bachmann (R-Minn.) last Saturday 
when it seemed inevitable the 
government would be shut down. “It’s 
exactly what we wanted, and we got it.”

Speaker Tip O’Neil said, “All politics is 
local.” But really all politics is personal. 
And nothing is more personal than 
health care.

And the Teapublicans want nothing 
more (and I mean NOTHING more) 
than to repeal health care reform that’s 
set to give more Americans private 
health insurance.

Beltway prattle within the paradigm 
of who’s winning and who’s 
losing doesn’t register the impact 
of affordable health care on the 
struggling working class. They’re 
not an abstract—they’re my family. 
Tina Dupuy is a nationally syndicated op-ed 
columnist, investigative journalist, award-
winning writer, stand-up comic, on-air 
commentator and wedge issue fan. Tina can 
be reached at tinadupuy@yahoo.com.

Mountain Views News

Mission Statement

The traditions of

community news-
papers 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.