Mountain Views News          Saturday, November 15, 2014

B4

OPINION 

 Mountain Views-News Saturday, November 15, 2014 


Mountain 
Views

News

PUBLISHER/ EDITOR

Susan Henderson

CITY EDITOR

Dean Lee 

EAST VALLEY EDITOR

Joan Schmidt

BUSINESS EDITOR

LaQuetta Shamblee

PRODUCTION

Richard Garcia

SALES

Patricia Colonello

626-355-2737 

626-818-2698

WEBMASTER

John Aveny 

CONTRIBUTORS

CoCo Lasalle

Chris Leclerc

Bob Eklund

Howard Hays

Paul Carpenter

Kim Clymer-Kelley

Christopher Nyerges

Peter Dills 

Dr. Tina Paul

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

Marc Garlett

GUNS ON THE BALLOT: 

 VOTERS 1, NRA 0

Every once in a while something good happens, something that 
restores one's faith in humanity. So put your hands together for the 
voters of Washington state.

In the midst of the Republican midterm tsunami, 59 percent of 
them made history. They said "yes" to a state ballot measure that 
requires background checks for virtually all gun buyers. In other 
words, a lopsided majority of voters thumbed their noses at the 
gun-fetish lobby that equates freedom with unfettered bang bang.

This ballot win for gun safety reform - the first statewide referendum on guns since the 
2012 Sandy Hook slaughter - is politically significant. It proves that voters are willing to 
do what their spineless lawmakers have so shamelessly failed to do: Defy the NRA.

Even while Washington's voters were busy re-electing a Republican state senate, they 
defied the NRA by a margin of 18 percentage points. They summarily ignored the NRA's 
propaganda that the ballot measure was actually "a universal handgun registration 
scheme" promoted by "elitists." Propaganda like the seven-minute NRA ad which lied 
that the ballot measure was really about "collecting a database of gun owners" for the 
purpose of "confiscation."

The measure - officially known as Initiative 594 - didn't have a single syllable about gun 
registration. The measure simply says that if you want to weaponize yourself at a gun 
show, or on the Internet, or via other non-licensed sellers, you first need to be checked 
out, to ensure that you're not nuts or felonious. And by the way, this common-sense 
notion is not the province of "elitists." It's drawing support from 92 percent of Americans 
- including 92 percent of gun owners.

Most importantly, Washington state's balloting has opened the door for ballot bids 
elsewhere - perhaps starting with Nevada, Maine, and Oregon. As UCLA law professor 
Adam Winkler says, referring to last week's outcome, "I think it does represent a subtle 
shift. "What we're seeing is a renewed effort by gun control advocates to take this issue 
to the voters directly."

Six states (including Delaware) have gone the legislative route to expand background 
checks for virtually all buyers, but 21 states allow voters to OK laws via the ballot route. 
That's an expensive and labor-intensive proposition (TV ads for the couch potatoes, 
signature petitions to get on the ballot), but the gun safety reform movement finally 
has sufficient financing and grassroots heft - courtesy of Michael Bloomberg and his 
2.5-million member group - to match the NRA dollar for dollar in a ballot campaign.

Bloomberg spent $4 million in Washington state; the NRA, sensing defeat, spent barely 
half a million. It didn't even bother to boost the ballot counter-measure crafted by the 
gun fetishists - Initiative 590, which would've barred expanded background checks. The 
voters trounced it by a 10-point margin. Let's hear it for "state's rights."

What a stark contrast to our nation's capital. Nineteen months ago, in the aftermath of 
Sandy Hook, the cowering U. S. Senate refused to expand background checks via federal 
law - despite the polls which, at the time, showed 90 percent support for that policy. 
The chamber's refusal brought to mind (my mind, anyway) this old Mark Twain quip: 
"Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of Congress - but I repeat 
myself."

But if voters are willing on a state-by-state basis to defy the gun-fetish lobby, to end-run 
their quivering elected representatives, then hey, that's what I meant at the top about 
renewed faith in humanity.

And here's what an NRA spokesman said, prior to the vote tally in Washington state: 
"If (gun safety reform) is successful in this ballot initiative in Washington, we are very 
concerned that (it) will be replicated across the country and we will have ballot initiatives 
like this one....That is why we are so concerned."

The NRA is concerned... How often do we see that sentence?

DICK Polman

THE LONGEST DAY OF MY LIFE


Dr. James L. Snyder

I have known for a very long time that every day has 24 hours, every 
hour has 60 minutes and every minute has 60 seconds. I want to thank 
my first grade teacher for drilling this information into a rather thick 
skull. This information, along with a lot of other information, has 
helped me get through life up to this point.

 I also know every week has seven days except for the Beatles, who think there are “Eight 
Days a Week.” I am not sure how they got up to that point, but I have sometimes felt that way 
myself.

 Sometimes a day feels longer than the 24 hours allotted to it. Moreover, I think some hours 
that are much longer than the 60 minutes they are supposed to be limited to. 

 This past week, however, brought me to a new level of understanding. Although every day 
has 24 hours, I did experience a day that had at least one thousand hours to it; each hour an 
excruciating moment in time.

 It all began quite innocently enough. The Gracious Mistress of the Parsonage asked me a 
very simple question. I have been married long enough to know that there is no such thing as 
your wife asking a simple question. I guess in my old age I am beginning to forget a few things.

 My wife simply asked, “Is there any gas in your truck?”

 On the surface, it looked rather simple and in the moment and being caught off guard, as I 
usually am, I answered very listlessly, “Yes, the tank is full of gas.”

 Thinking this was the end of the conversation I began walking away. As I walked away, I 
heard the echo of my wife’s voice following me.

 “Would you mind,” she said, “if our granddaughter and I borrow your truck for today? We 
need to do some shopping across town.”

 This, as you may well guess, is wrong on several levels.

 First, why did they need my truck to go shopping? On the surface all I could see was $’s. How 
much shopping are you going to do if you need a truck?

 Second, the most important angle, is borrowing my truck! A man’s truck is a man’s truck. 
Need I say more? A real man does not borrow his truck out to anyone. There is something 
personal about a man’s truck. It is the only place where he can surround himself with silence 
and where he is “King of the road.”

 “I didn’t think you would mind,” she said as she reached for the keys to the truck. After some 
struggle, I finally surrendered the keys.

 “We will not be back for lunch,” she said as she raced towards the door, “so you are on your 
own for lunch.”

 Then, to add insult to injury she shouted, “And, you can use my car if you need to go 
somewhere.”

 That will be the day! I was tempted, just tempted for a moment, to drive her car around and 
use up all her gas. I toyed with the idea and jingled the keys in my hand and then I realized I 
would be the one to put the gas in her car.

 It certainly was a long day. Occasionally I glanced out the window to where my truck used to 
be parked. No truck. Sadness has its levels, if you know what I mean.

 Several hours after my granddaughter and wife left, I got a text. Now I know why men die 
before their wives. When I read the text my heart was about to attack me.

 It seems, how, I will never know, but there was a hole in my tire probably put there by some 
nail. And she needed to have the tire fixed and was just informing me that she was going to do 
that.

 My tire! A hole in my tire!

 The last time I drove my precious truck there was no hole in the tire. Everything was in good 
shape when I drove it last. But now that my wife is driving it, a hole suspiciously appears in my 
tire.

 If you have ever owned a truck, you know exactly what was taking place. That hole in the tire 
was my truck reaching out for me to come help it. I think my truck thought that if the tire was 
not working it would end this whole charade. Unbeknownst to my truck, my wife, undaunted 
by the situation, had my truck tire fixed.

 The hours struggled on and it seemed like an eternity. I ate my lunch in silence, staring out 
the window where my truck used to be parked; now an empty space.

 After one thousand hours of excruciating pain, I heard my truck pull into the driveway. As I 
gazed out the window, I saw the back of the truck piled high with “stuff. But there it was, safely 
in the driveway.

 Sometimes attachments can cause you a lot of anxiety. Only one attachment in my life worth 
all the anxiety in the world. That is my relationship with Jesus Christ. Sometimes I do have an 
anxious moment but then I turn to the Scripture.

 I have this marvelous promise. “Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed 
on thee: because he trusteth in thee” (Isaiah 26:3).

 When my mind is on the Lord, I don’t mind anything else in the world. 

 

Rev. James L. Snyder is pastor of the Family of God Fellowship, PO Box 831313, Ocala, FL 34483. 
He lives with his wife, Martha, in Silver Springs Shores. Call him at 1-866-552-2543 or e-mail 
jamessnyder2@att.net or website www.jamessnyderministries.com.

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 80 W. Sierra Madre 
Blvd., No. 327, 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 

HOWARD Hays As I See It

GREG Welborn


“Given a choice between a Republican and somebody who acts like a Republican, 
people will vote for the real Republican all the time.”

- Harry S Truman

ENVIRONMENTAL 
SHENANIGANS

 Last week’s column 
was written as polls were 
closing, but now there’s 
been time to take a look 
at some of the other mid-
term polling that’s come 
in.

 According to the 
National Election Pool, composed of the major 
networks and the Associated Press, 54% of 
Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the 
Democratic Party. 54% of Americans have an 
unfavorable opinion of the Republican Party, as 
well.

55% disapprove of President Obama’s 
job performance. 60% disapprove of the 
performance of the Republican leadership in 
Congress.

 53% of voters support abortion rights, and 
58% consider climate change to be a “serious 
problem”. A majority supports finding a way 
for those in the country illegally to stay.

 Our deficit has shrunk by 22% this past 
fiscal year, and now is a third of what it was 
when President Obama took office. We’ve had 
nine months of over-200,000 job creation, the 
longest such streak since the Clinton years, 
with 49 months of positive job growth being 
the longest streak since 1939, in what Peter Coll 
of the New Yorker calls “the fastest-growing 
economy in the industrialized world”. 

 But 70% of us feel the economy’s in bad 
shape, with two-thirds feeling it unfairly favors 
the wealthy. Though incomes grew an average 
10% between 2010 and 2013 for the wealthiest 
one-tenth of Americans, when adjusted for 
inflation they stagnated or dropped for the 
remaining 90%. In a Hart Research poll 
of voters in eleven “battleground” states, a 
plurality went with the Republican Senate 
candidate but only 29% felt Republicans “have 
a clear plan for creating jobs and strengthening 
the economy”. 

 By large majorities, voters in these states 
favor increased investment in education, 
closing corporate tax loopholes and raising 
taxes on the wealthy, enacting immigration 
reform with a path to citizenship and raising 
the minimum wage. They oppose weakening 
banking and Wall Street regulation, and cutting 
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

 According to Public Opinion Strategies, in 
2010 45% nation-wide saw their Congressional 
vote as a “message” against the Affordable Care 
Act. In 2014, that number was down to 28%, 
with 59% saying the ACA had nothing to do 
with their vote one way or the other.

 When given the opportunity to vote 
on issues directly, voters in four red states 
(Arkansas, Nebraska, Alaska and South 
Dakota) passed ballot measures increasing the 
minimum wage. According to a NY Times/
CBS poll last September, raising the federal 
minimum wage is supported by 70% of 
Americans.

 Voters in Colorado and South Dakota 
rejected “personhood” amendments to their 
states’ constitutions, which would’ve severely 
restricted (if not eliminated) access to abortion, 
contraception and reproductive services. 
When asked in a nation-wide Washington Post 
survey last month which party, Democratic or 
Republican, is “closer to your own opinion” on 
abortion, Democrats won out 48% to 33%.

 Washington State had two competing 
gun measures on the ballot; one, the “Protect 
Our Gun Rights Act” supported by the 
gun lobby, would’ve banned background 
checks on gun purchases outside a “uniform 
national standard”. The other would expand 
background checks to include non-licensed 
dealers, gun shows and over the internet. The 
gun lobby’s bill was rejected by 55% of the 
voters. The bill to expand background checks 
passed with 60% support, with Washington 
becoming the fifth state (after Colorado, 
Connecticut, Delaware and New York) to 
enact universal background checks since the 
Sandy Hook shootings of 2012. A Quinnipiac 
University poll earlier this year found 92% of 
Americans supporting expanded background 
checks – including 86% of Republicans.

 Alaska, Oregon and Washington D.C. 
legalized recreational pot use, and in California 
we reduced a number of non-violent offenses, 
in particular simple drug possession, from 
felonies to misdemeanors.

 Nationally, however, the poll that counted 
was of the 36.4% of eligible voters who bothered 
to vote – the lowest figure since 1942.

As most were still mulling the results, President 
Obama went to work and took major actions on 
three fronts:

 House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) 
warned President Obama would “poison the 
well” should he carry out his promise to take 
executive action on immigration reform during 
the lame duck session. The president reminded 
that he intends to take action because Congress 
hasn’t; the immigration bill passed in the Senate 
last year also had support in the House, but 
Speaker Boehner wouldn’t allow it to come to 
the floor for a vote - let alone a debate. Congress 
still has a chance to do their job and, the 
president said, “I’m eager to see what they have 
to offer.”

The president issued a statement urging the 
FCC to reclassify internet service providers to 
establish “net neutrality”; ensuring the giants 
(Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and Time Warner) 
can’t control what we access on the web, or 
extort payoffs from major sites for preferential 
treatment over struggling start-ups. It’s 
important, he said, to make sure “there are no 
toll roads on the information super highway.”

 “We agree with President Obama: 
Consumers should pick winners and losers 
on the Internet, not broadband gatekeepers” 
said Netflix on their Facebook page. Sen. Ted 
Cruz (R-TX) disagees; “’Net Neutrality’ is 
Obamacare for the Internet.”

The FCC received 4 million comments 
(crashing its website) in overwhelming support 
of the president on net neutrality. 

 President Obama reached a “game-
changer” agreement with China addressing 
climate change. Republicans have long 
derided efforts to limit greenhouse gasses 
as meaningless without the involvement of 
China, itself responsible for 30% of worldwide 
emissions. Now that the president has China 
on board in advance of next year’s treaty talks 
in Paris, (presumed) incoming Senate Majority 
Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) dismisses the 
breakthrough as part of a “War on Coal”.

The president acts while the other side 
complains, moving in the direction supported 
by the American people. They’ll support the 
president, too – more so than they will any 
Democrat who simply “acts like a Republican”.

President Obama’s policies lost big in the mid-term U.S. elections, so he 
decided to take them on a road show to China where he hopes to get a bit 
more mileage out of his quickly fading public image. The President chose 
not to press the Chinese to address North Korean human rights abuses, to 
help fight against ISIS or to remove their support for the mad Mullahs who 
still want a bomb in Iran. He chose instead to let the Chinese agree to a one-sided environmental 
accord which will not solve any of the world’s many pressing problems, does not require anything 
from China, but does allow the man, myth and legend of Barak Obama to look impressive back 
home.

 The environmental accord President Obama signed with Supreme Leader Xi Jinping is 
nonbinding and only elicits from China the promise “to intend to achieve the peaking of CO2 
emissions around 2030”. In other words, the agreement will not in any way impose a burden on 
the world’s second largest emitter of carbon dioxide, let alone rope India into the deal. But the 
agreement does allow the president to posture that he has accomplished a lofty goal of saving the 
world from the horrors of a big oil and big coal.

 If the only details of the agreement were vague promises, there wouldn’t be much harm in this 
global theatre. But the U.S. is reciprocating China’s vague promises with an actual commitment to 
cut U.S. emissions by as much as 28% below 2005 levels. As several economic analysts have pointed 
out, this implies doubling the pace of emission reductions below the level President Obama already 
set in 2009. To achieve this, the Obama EPA is readying its own tsunami of new regulations which 
will increase the burdens on U.S energy producers, reduce energy supplies and drive up the cost 
of electric power. All of these will hinder American economic growth and contribute to our still-
significant unemployment problem.

 For an example of the economic harm that will be done, we can look in our own backyard for an 
excellent representative example.

 The great recession of 2008-09 and the weak recovery since has been a national experience and 
a result of the liberal policy mix of the Obama administration. Consequently, the poverty rate 
among the nation’s 52 largest metropolitan areas increased 7%, with one-quarter of that increase 
occurring since the “recovery” began. But the increase in poverty has not been evenly felt across 
the country. Here in Los Angeles County, our poverty rate has increased 80% higher than the 
national average, according to Joel Kotkin at Chapman University. Right behind us is the Inland 
Empire. We now rank 47th out of 52 metropolitan areas.

 Los Angeles and the Inland Empire have historically been the most dependent of all California 
counties on manufacturing and logistics industries. They have thus been most susceptible to the 
effects of our state’s misguided environmental and land use policies. California has among the 
most draconian of environmental laws in the country, and the effect of those restrictions and taxes 
on energy production has hit manufacturing hardest. Countless are the companies who have 
moved their production facilities outside of California to states which have more realistic laws and 
reasonable energy costs. With the loss of production facilities has come the loss of decent jobs and 
opportunities for upward mobility. In a phrase: more poverty and less mobility.

 Just as there is competition among businesses, there is competition among counties, states and 
nations. If one county raises taxes, we should expect businesses to gradually relocate to counties 
with lower tax rates. If one state raises the regulatory burden or increases energy costs, we should 
expect businesses to gradually relocate to states with lower burdens and costs. And, if one country 
imposes greater hardship and restrictions than another country, we should expect businesses to 
gradually relocate facilities and jobs overseas.

 This is, as they say, not rocket science. The smaller the difference, or the longer the lead time 
to design, build and start a new production facility, the more gradual will be the transition. Be 
we shouldn’t mistake speed for direction. The unmistakable direction for Southern California 
primarily, and all of California generally, has been backwards: from the state of opportunity to the 
state of desolation – all because of terribly misguided Liberal environmental policies. 

 If President Obama has his way, the U.S. will abide by the reductions in energy use to which 
he has committed in this most recent agreement with China. The rest of the world – and most 
specifically China – will not abide by these rules and regulations. The cost of manufacturing 
and transporting goods in America will rise above the costs in countries that have not signed 
this agreement, and will rise above the costs in China which won’t lift a finger to enforce one 
sentence in this agreement. To believe that China will actually move to meet its vague promises 
in this environmental agreement is to believe that China will willingly commit their citizenry to 
their current poor economic living standard. This is absurd. China’s survival as a nation and 
more importantly, the Communist Party’s survival as a ruling party, depend on economic growth, 
which depends on cheap and abundant energy. They will not do anything to impede that.

 President Obama has put himself back on the front page – has made himself appear relevant to 
the world again – but he has not solved a single significant world problem. The more dangerous 
aspect of the president’s actions in China is that he has saddled America with yet another burden 
to impoverish the masses. Those he claims to care most about will pay the greatest burden should 
this Chinese-American energy pact actually be enforced.

 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@gma/5l.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. 

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