Mountain Views News Saturday, March 29, 2014
B5OPINION
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 HaysPaul CarpenterStuart Tolchin
Kim Clymer-KelleyChristopher NyergesPeter Dills
Hail Hamilton
Rich Johnson
Merri Jill Finstrom
Lori KoopRev. James SnyderTina Paul
Mary CarneyKatie HopkinsDeanne Davis
Despina ArouzmanGreg WelbornRenee Quenell
Ben Show
Sean KaydenMarc Garlett
Mountain Views News
has been adjudicated asa newspaper of GeneralCirculation for the County
of Los Angeles in CourtCase number GS004724:
for the City of SierraMadre; in Court Case
GS005940 and for the
City of Monrovia in CourtCase No. GS006989 and
is published every Saturday
at 55 W. Sierra MadreBlvd., No. 302, Sierra
Madre, California, 91024.
All contents are copyrighted
and may not bereproduced without the
express written consent ofthe publisher. All rights
reserved. All submissions
to this newspaper becomethe property of the Mountain
Views News and maybe published in part or
whole.
Opinions and viewsexpressed by the writersprinted in this paper donot necessarily expressthe views and opinionsof the publisher or staffof the Mountain Views
News.
Mountain Views News is
wholly owned by GraceLorraine Publications,
Inc. and reserves the rightto refuse publication ofadvertisements 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
OUT TO PASTOR
A Weekly Religion Column by Rev. James Snyder
HOWARD Hays As I See ItLEFT TURN / RIGHT TURN
GREG WelbornVLADIMIR PUTIN TAKES
CENTER STAGE
A WONDERFUL CHOCOLATE FANTASY
Predator Vs. Alien was one of
those movies that only the diehards
really could appreciate. I don’t know
if it’s become a cult classic, but in the
entertainment world, that’s where
it’s stuck. In the real world, we have
our own version of the movie: Putin
Vs. Obama. No chance that this will
become the focus of just a small cultish
minority; the fact that it’s being played
out on the world stage (still!!) means
we all have to watch yet another
installment of this movie franchise.
In response to Putin’s response to
Obama’s response to Putin’s response
to… you get the idea, President Obama
just couldn’t let the dead horse of his
foreign policy and world view die in
peace. He had to beat that poor old nag
one more time. He rose to the occasion
at the G-7 conference to instruct us
that, “The United States does not view
Europe as a battleground between East
and West, nor do we see the situation
in Ukraine as a zero-sum game. That’s
the kind of thinking that should have
ended with the cold war.” For those
with a good memory, these comments
echo Obama’s UN speech several years
ago in which he told us, “no one nation
can or should try to dominate another
nation.”
That’s the alien speaking. Alien, not
in his appearance or origin (I’m not
one of the “birthers” still questioning
where Barack was born), but alien in
his total ignorance of how the world
really works and the true nature of
human kind. Intellectual and moral
aliens react to international relations,
crises and confrontations as they think
the world “should” be, rather than as
the world really is.
This is the realm of liberal ignorance
and arrogance. They do not really
know human nature, but they don’t
care. Because they want human
nature to be a certain way, they simply
assume – or command – that it be
the way they want it, and then move
forward with policy prescriptions that
appear eminently logical to nobody
but them. Once they’ve granted the
assumption – no matter how out of
touch it is – their logic compels them
to absurd conclusions.
Certainly, the way liberals see the
word is unique from how predators see
it, and Putin is a predator. This doesn’t
make Putin unique, by the way. The
world is full of predators and full of
people who are rightfully wary of them.
Most of Eastern Europe understands
the ways of the predator, since they’ve
lived in proximity to, and suffered
under the many periodic spasms of,
various Russian predators. Eastern
Europe has been, and continues to be,
Russia. No speech
or pronouncementfrom the White
House or The
Hague will change
that.
Perhaps
President Obama
was unaware of Putin’s escalation
of his territorial claims, believing
that Putin had been thwarted by
earlier comparisons to 19th Century
plutocrats. In a speech last week, Putin
went beyond the claims of Russian
kinship with Crimea and leveled some
historical contempt on those early
Russian communists who “added
large sections of the historical south
of Russia to the Republic of Ukraine”.
Putin no longer simply begrudges
the Ukraine its Crimean territory; he
begrudges Ukraine its independent
existence.
Obama’s response was to get pissy and
further rile Putin with the accusation
of leading “nothing but a regional
power” - once again demonstrating
just how alien an understanding
of human nature is to him. Does
Obama believe such a comment will
force Putin to cower, to rethink his
predatory actions of the last several
weeks? Most of us – whether educated
at Harvard or lacking a high school
degree – understand human nature
enough to realize how fool hearty such
bluster is.
President Obama and most of those
with leftward tilts in their world view
want human nature to be different
than it is, want the world to be different
than it is, and want America to be able
to act differently than it has to. They
are blind to reality.
The reality of human and foreign
affairs alike is that someone has to
enforce a world order of some sort.
Liberals seek unity and peace between
predators and prey, putting their
hope into the thoroughly corrupt
U.N. Conservatives understand that
The U.S. must enforce a peaceful
world order for the alternative is
a world devoured bite by bite by
predators. Furthermore, the existence
of predators is not an alien concept
to Conservatives because it’s been
the norm of human history from the
beginning.
About the author: Gregory J.
Welborn is a freelance writer and has
spoken to several civic and religious
organizations on cultural and moral
issues. He lives in the Los Angeles
area with his wife and 3 children and
is active in the community. He can be
reached gregwelborn2@gmail.com
“A conspiracy is nothing
but a secret agreement of
a number of men for the
pursuance of policies which
they dare not admit in public”
- Mark Twain
I wrote two weeks ago
on the new “Cosmos” series
with Neil deGrasse Tyson; a
welcome antidote to the trend
of treating science as “belief ”,
and faith- (or media-) based
belief as a legitimate “other side” to a “debate”.
The trend encourages simply accepting what
we’re told, avoiding consideration of facts, and
going with whatever conspiracy theory we find
most engaging.
I’ve used examples of policymakers
dismissing global warming as a “hoax”, and
the characterization of minimum wage and
overtime laws as “job-killers” – while facts
show otherwise. What’s most troubling is how
this dismissal of science in favor of “belief ” in
imagined conspiracies affects our health.
A report this month from the University of
Chicago shows that nearly half of us believe
some medical conspiracy theory – unsupported
by science. One-in-five believes cellphones are
linked to cancer, with an additional 40% not sure
whether the government is involved in covering
it up. 12% believe the Ford and Rockefeller
Foundations are involved with Monsanto in
“Agenda 21” – using genetically modified foods
for population control. 46% aren’t sure either
way.
Another 12% (or are they the same folks?)
believe the CIA intentionally infected African
Americans with the HIV virus under the guise
of hepatitis inoculations. 37% think it may have
happened.
One-in-five believes the government and
medical community are conspiring to hide the
link between childhood vaccines and autism.
36% aren’t sure.
Researchers found that those buying into these
conspiracies are more likely to eat organic foods.
They are less likely to get annual check-ups, use
sunscreen, see the dentist or get a flu shot.
Those likely to give Jenny McCarthy credence
over the medical community are more likely to
endanger their own kids and others by forgoing
vaccinations, contributing to outbreaks of
diseases that, thanks to science, had hardly been
seen over the past twenty years.
The Centers for Disease Control reports the
131 cases of measles in the U.S. in 2008, double
the national average over previous years, was
“largely among school-age children who were
eligible for vaccinations but whose parents chose
not to have them vaccinated.” The Journal of
the AMA says unvaccinated kids are 35 times
more likely to contract the disease. The largest
outbreak so far this year has been among 58
unvaccinated members of an Orthodox Jewish
community in Brooklyn.
The CDC says more cases of pertussis
(whooping cough) were reported in 2012 than in
any year since 1955. A 2010 California epidemic
led to the hospitalization of 455 infants, with 10
deaths.
The AMA Journal reports that incidence of
the disease is twice as high in states that make
it easier for parents to get exemptions from
vaccination requirements for their kids, because
of religion or “personal belief ”.
(In the meantime, scientists are finding real
links between autism and air pollution and other
environmental toxins.)
Court this past week, Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby,
throws the question of allowing beliefs to guide
healthcare decisions in an ominous direction.
It’s not about a patient’s beliefs determining
treatment, but rather, if she’s a woman, having
those determinations made according to the
faith and beliefs of her employer.
Initial arguments seemed straightforward;
imaginings of a Jehovah’s Witness employer
who objects to providing coverage for blood
transfusions on religious grounds, Scientologists
objecting to psychiatric care, not to mention
Christian Scientists objecting to most
everything. It was pointed out that no employer
is required to provide health coverage, anyway.
Employers could instead pay an additional tax,
and employees could find insurance options for
themselves on their state exchanges.
Then, Justice Anthony Kennedy threw in
another bizarre consideration: What about
abortion? It’s true; abortion coverage is banned
under the Affordable Care Act, but this case is
about contraception – specifically “emergency”,
Plan B, “morning-after” and IUD contraception
– that prevents ovulation, and doesn’t go after
fertilized eggs.
According to the faith and beliefs of the Hobby
Lobby owners, however, life begins at conception.
The scientific and medical communities might
call these procedures contraception but, if
only according to the faith and beliefs of these
particular employers, it’s abortion – and that’s
banned under the ACA.
The decision is expected sometime in June.
The real “conspiracy” behind this matter,
however, has little to do with faith or healthcare
decisions.
The establishment of corporate “personhood”
has been pursued by our oligarchs for over a
hundred years. In the early 1800s, corporate
books were open to the public. By mid-century,
outside access to accounting records was
limited to the Secretary of State in the state of
incorporation. By early in the next century, even
this was closed off – by asserting a corporation’s
“constitutional” right to protection against
“unreasonable search and seizure”, the same
right as a person’s.
In the 1970s, courts heard more claims of
a corporation’s “freedom of speech” as applied
to misleading ads, objections to labeling
requirements, media consolidation, etc. (Dow
Chemical lost in the 1980s, however, when the
court ruled the EPA inspectors flying over its
chemical plant didn’t violate a “right to privacy”).
Corporations have fought to appropriate for
themselves rights established by the Founding
Fathers for the benefit of We the People. Their
biggest victory came a few years ago with the
“Citizens United” decision, bestowing First
Amendment blessings on corporations seeking
to buy our elections for corporate interests.
The conspiracy here is to further two
fundamental goals: hobbling the Affordable
Care Act and further establishing corporate
“personhood” – this time by asserting
corporations are entitled to their own religious
convictions.
The identities of conspirators filing rafts of
amicus briefs with the court are no secret - from
the Koch Brothers and their front groups on
down.
This has nothing to do with religious
conviction or women’s health, but since the true
goals are those they “dare not admit in public”,
they’ll continue pretending it does.
Within the confines
of our blissful
domicile, an ongoing
controversy has all
but come to an end. I
like it when things are
solved and I happen to be right. This time
I was right. After all, if it is on TV it must
be right!
Controversies are not really that bad unless
somebody is a sore loser. Nobody likes a
whiner or a sore loser. Of course, I have
come close many times to be a sore loser.
Fortunately, I have chosen to be just a loser.
It makes for quietness in the home, if you
know what I mean.
For as long as the Gracious Mistress of
the Parsonage and Yours Truly have been
married the one reoc-curring controversy
is in the state of chocolate in our home.
According to one side, chocolate is bad and
shall not be brought into this house.
The other side, and I am not stating exactly
which side I am on, says the chocolate is
delightful and wonderful and should be a
regular consumption item in the house.
No matter how eloquently I presented my
case, the house rules were simply this; no
chocolate in our mansion.
This has caused me a great deal of pain in
trying to smuggle in the delicacy without
getting caught. Ap-parently, someone in
our house can smell chocolate 13 blocks
down the street.
I tried some experimental strategy in this
area. On my wife's birthday, I would always
get her a chocolate cake with chocolate
icing and then have 13 candles on it. For
several years, all she could focus on were
the 13 candles. I love it when a plan comes
together.
Finally, she caught on and that plan had to
be trashed.
One of the busiest times around the
parsonage is Thanksgiving. All of the
family in the area comes in for a delicious
dinner as well as several friends who have
nowhere else to go. On these occasions, I go
out of my way and order a large chocolate
cake with chocolate icing with a miniature
turkey on the top. Eve-rybody is focused on
that miniature turkey.
After a few years someone in the house
caught on to my plan, kept the turkey,
but threw out everything underneath thatturkey. As she was doing so, she looked at
me with one of those looks.
Back to the drawing board again.
I did have some reprieve when the
grandchildren were visiting. Everybodyknows grandchildren love chocolate and
need chocolate to boost their energy level.
For some reason, Grandma knew exactly
when the children had consumed chocolate
of any amount.
"You do not have chocolate," grandma
would scowl at the grandchildren, "do
you?"
As all good grandchildren do, they looked
at grandma with chocolate all over their
phase and said as cute as possible, "Oh,
no grandma." It took a lot of practice for
me to get them to that point of thespian
excellence. I usually awarded them with
another piece of chocolate, of course
behind grandma's back.
I cannot tell all of the pain and agony I
have gone through in this area of chocolate.
Then, some medical research geek solved
all of my problems in this area of chocolate.
According to some medical research, there
is something in dark chocolate that is
beneficial to our health. I do not know the
details, but that is all I needed to know to
bring my case to our home.
I knew I had to present this in a manner
that would be irresistible to my wife. She
is big on healthy eating. Every time we eat
there is so much green on my plate that I am
not sure if I am eating grass or what! She
calls them vegetables; I have other names
for them, which cannot be published.
I knew I had to make the initial presentation
a great presentation. Chocolate just wouldnot do and I needed to come up with some
kind of medical name. Then it suddenly
struck me. I knew exactly how I could
present it.
I purchased some special chocolate, dark
chocolate that is, to bring home and
make the presentation. As soon as I got
into the house, the question reverberated
throughout the halls.
"You do not have chocolate, do you?"
It was the question I was waiting for. I have
heard this question for as long as we have
been married. I never knew quite how to
deal with that question, until now.
"No, my dear," I said parsing my words
very carefully, "this is Medical Chocolate."
I presented it to her with the biggest smile I
could slap on my face.
Before she could respond to that
presentation, I began explaining to her
all of the medical and health benefits to
chocolate. I quoted the doctor who claimed
chocolate had some mysterious and
wonderful medicinal properties unnoticed
before now.
It is hard to argue with a doctor even one on
TV. Before she could respond, I presented
her with a piece of this ravishingly delicious
dark chocolate.
I was rather proud of myself and I was
reminded of what old King Solomon said
in the Old Testament. "Where the word of
a king is, there is power: and who may say
unto him, What doest thou?" (Ecclesias-tes
8:4).
Not every word is good and trustworthy;
but every word of God can be trusted and
has the power to lift me up into the heavens
and delightful worship and praise.
Rev. James L. Snyder is pastor of the Family
of God Fellowship, PO Box 831313, Ocala,
FL 34483. E-mail jamessnyder2@att.net.
For a person
like myself
who was
reared in a
very large
city, life in a
small town is
really quite
w o n d e r f u l .
That is, until
except at
election time when you happen to be the
editor of the local newspaper!
Elections in this Sierra Madre remind me
of the challenge of choosing which friends
will be on your dodge ball team as a child.
No matter who you choose, someone is
going to be unhappy, and so it is with the
endorsements of the Mountain Views News
for this April 8th City Council election.
Earlier this week I announced via social
media that the paper endorsed Candidates
Gene Goss, Noah Green and Rachelle
Arizmendi for the 3 vacant council seats.
This was done after careful consideration of
their backgrounds, stated positions during
the campaign and their demonstrated
commitment to the City of Sierra Madre.
After all, this election isn’t about any one
individual, it’s about the future of our town.
I want to say however, that I applaud all
four candidates for having the courage to step
forward. Because of the amount of public
scrutiny, vitriol and mean-spiritedness
that comes along with praise and support,
stepping up to the plate takes a lot of courage.
The endorsement of the Mountain Views
News is not solely dependent upon my
assessment of the candidates, but also
the influence of others in Sierra Madre.
Ultimately, the decision is based primarily
on what we feel is best for the City of Sierra
Madre.
The decision is also a reflection of who
we feel will put the needs and concerns of
the residents of Sierra Madre first. Those
endorsed appear to have the commitment
to work together as part of a team that
represents the entire city, not just a circle of
friends.
GENE GOSS, whom I have known
personally through his involvement in
community activities around town, says it
best on his website, “Sierra Madreans expect
that the City Government’s budget should be
managed like their own budgets—responsible,
transparent and efficient. As we work to
preserve essential city services, especially
public safety and water, I intend to watch every
penny of our tax dollars with the utmost fiscal
responsibility. He gets it! He is a man with
strong convictions, has extensive knowledgeof American governance through his
professional career, and knows the difference
between ‘theory’ and ‘practice’. He is vested
in this community and will put keeping our
independent village’s character first.
NOAH GREEN, about whom I’ve heard
some criticism, is a competent young
attorney who has lived in Sierra Madre for
just a few years. Many think it is too soon
for him to run for counsel. However, in
that short time Noah has become involved
in numerous activities, demonstrating his
understanding of one of the things that keeps
this town vibrant, volunteerism! It is one
thing to always complain about what should
be done … and quite another to be willing to
do something.
Noah has been active on both the Creative
Arts and Chamber of Commerce boards,
served on the Utility Users Tax Oversight
Committee and is always looking for ways
to enhance the profile of the city without
compromising Sierra Madre’s village
character. He has articulated specifics during
his campaign that indicate his ability to
come up with solutions rather than sound
bites, including a focus on reducing the city’s
expenditures on legal fees.
Green is a strong person, having persevered
a gruesome attack on his personal life by
an invader of his wife’s Facebook page.
Clearly Noah is seen as a strong leader for
our community or there wouldn’t have been
such an effort by ‘the blog’ to distract us from
talking about what he has to offer
As a member of Sierra Madre’s City Council,
he will use that same strength to stand up for
what is in the best interest of the community.
I have no doubt that he will use his
professional background and commitment
to the city to work with the ‘team’ that sets
the policies for our future. He’s also smart,
and well qualified. Should we care if he
sunbathes in a hammock? No! Should we
care whether or not he will put Sierra Madre
first, absolutely!
RACHELLE ARIZMENDI is another
strong professional candidate who
understands the need to be involved. As a
member of the town’s Community Services
Commission, she has made independent
decisions based what she believed was in the
best interest of the city. Her campaign has
been characterized as having been influenced
by outside funding, but as it turns out, she has
personally invested into her quest to sit on the
town’s council. Why? Well, as she mentioned
in her response to the Mountain Views News
editorial questions, “I am running for City
Council to help maintain and enhance the
quality of life in our neighborhoods.” Like the
other two candidates, she shares a concern
for how the city manages development issues.
Although she is not a supporter of Measure
UUT, she has committed to supporting the
measure if it passes. She will also be a good
member of the city’s leadership team.
All in all, the question is, who will be
committed to putting the needs of all Sierra
Madreans first? Who will stand up for what
they believe is the right thing to do? Who
will not pander to special interests? Who
will represent you and your neighbor’s best
interest? T
he evidence provided during this campaign
leads me to believe the answer is clear,
GENE GOSS, NOAH GREEN and
RACHELLE ARIZMENDI FOR
SIERRA MADRE CITY COUNCIL.
SUSAN Henderson WH0’S BEST
FOR SIERRA MADRE?
Mountain Views News
Mission Statement
The traditions of
community newspapers
and the
concerns of our readers
are this newspaper’s
top priorities. We
support a prosperouscommunity of well-
informed citizens.
We hold in highregard the values
of the exceptionalquality of life in our
community, includingthe magnificence of
our natural resources.
Integrity will be our
guide.
the battleground between the West and The matter argued before the Supreme
Mountain Views News 80 W Sierra Madre Blvd. No. 327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Office: 626.355.2737 Fax: 626.609.3285 Email: editor@mtnviewsnews.com Website: www.mtnviewsnews.com
|