Mountain Views News          Saturday, August 8, 2015

Mountain Views News Saturday, August 8, 2015 OPINION14 
Mountain Views News Saturday, August 8, 2015 OPINION14 
TINA Dupuy


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 
Chris Leclerc 
Bob Eklund 
Howard HaysPaul CarpenterKim Clymer-KelleyChristopher NyergesPeter Dills 
Dr. Tina Paul 
Rich Johnson 
Merri Jill Finstrom 
Lori KoopRev. James SnyderTina Paul 
Mary CarneyKatie HopkinsDeanne Davis 
Despina ArouzmanGreg WelbornRenee Quenell 
Ben Show 
Sean KaydenMarc Garlett 
Pat Birdsall (retired) 
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 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. 
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 80 W. Sierra MadreBlvd., No. 327, 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 
abortion. These are not abortions, and declaring them as such smacks not only of anti-
science, but anti-sex. Specif-ically, anti-sex-without-consequences. 

It strikes me this isn’t just pro-life, it’s pro-dictating others’ lives. This week, formergovernor of Arkansas, presidential candidate and admitted statutory rapist Ted Nugent-
apologist Mike Huckabee said he wouldn’t rule out using federal troops to stop womenfrom exercising their constitutionally protected right to terminate their own pregnancies. 

Because nothing says freedom more than a martial-forced birth. 

But let’s just say I’m cynical. I grew up in the foster care system, so I’m very skepticalwhen people profess they care about the welfare of children, but not actual welfare. Pro-
lifers seem to revel in lamenting the fates of unwanted children, but are not holdingmarches at the steps of the Supreme Court to humanize foster care, reform adoption lawsor give public assistance to families in crisis. They’re not holding vigils and prayer circlesto increase funding to house abused or neglected children. Remember all those childrefugees at the Mexican border? They’re children, too. When I see a dead fetus placard Isee time not spent fundraising for scholarships for kids in the system. 

Where’s the heavily edited video exposing how macabre and horrible it is to grow up inthis country as a ward of the state? I’m still waiting. 

But let’s say I’ve misjudged the pro-life movement. Let’s say they’re not currently usingan activist’s hoax in hopes of sparking a moral panic alleging Planned Parenthood sellsbody parts. Let’s pretend abortion clinics haven’t been under constant “pro-life” terroristattacks or threats. Ignore all the bombings and harassment, and forget that Dr. GeorgeTiller wasn’t shot in the head while attending church. Let’s just take them at their word—
that they really believe every life is sacred and they really care about children. 

Then I welcome pro-lifers to join the anti-gun movement. There’s not as much raucousslut-shaming—but there are a lot of actual children dying. Pro-lifers can be more thanjust pro-birth. If it really is a moral conviction that life is sacred, then get out of women’sbirth canals and grow up. 

The U.S. has more guns and more gun deaths than any other country. Those who say gunsmake us safer have disregarded all data and common senseto make that claim. Just in 2013 we lost 11,000 Americans to 
gun homicides, 21,000 to gun suicides and 500 to accidents involving 
guns. We, as Americans, have decided kindergartenersgetting blown away in Sandy Hook is just the price of freedom,
yet just under half the country say they’re pro-life?! 

How is this possible? 

It’s time to branch out. Time to stop using junk science toscare women and time to start rallying against the real deathindustry in this country: Gun manufacturers. If pro-lifersare incensed and galvanized by the falsehood that PlannedParenthood profits off death as a non-profit organization, whyaren’t they furious arms dealers are legally immune to lawsuitsthanks to an act of Congress? Gun makers and dealers have noliability, all profit and don’t screen for cancer. 

So in case no one has offered it before now, pro-lifers, you’reinvited to champion for stricter guns laws. You’d be a welcomeaddition to those who know the Second Amendment states the 
militia is well-regulated and not wholly deregulated. 

Tina Dupuy is a nationally syndicated op-ed columnist, 
investigative journalist, award-winning writ-er, stand-upcomic, on-air commentator and wedge issue fan. Tina can bereached at tina-dupuy@yahoo.com. 

LEFT TURN/RIGHT TURN 
HOWARD Hays As I See It 

PRO-LIFE IS ANTI-GUN 


Let me get this out of the way: I don’t agree with thepro-life position on abortion for two reasons. Thefirst is if abortion is criminalized, all women of childbearing 
years legally be-come public incubators. Theability to bear children will mean being subjectedto special scrutiny by the government. If you believewomen are more than just transportation systems forwombs, abortion—love it or hate it—has to be legal.
Family planning, privacy and the right to keep personaldecisions personal are at the core of what we know aschoice. 

Second is that the pro-life movement is strangely alsoanti-birth control—conflating very ef-fective means 
of preventing pregnancy, like IUDs and Plan B, with


“This generation has 
altered the compositionof the atmosphere ona global scale throughradioactive materials 
and a steady increasein carbon dioxide from 
the burning of fossilfuels.” 

- President LyndonJohnson, February 1965 
As I write this, the bigstory is that Fox Newshas decided on the nine 

Republican candidates 
who’ll get to flank Donald Trump on stage Thursdaynight. I’ll be watching – for moments like eightyears ago, when the moderator asked for a show ofhands of candidates who didn’t believe in evolution. 
Nothing makes them squirm more than riskingtheir base by referring to science.

On stage Thursday night, Mike Huckabee was onewho raised his hand eight years ago. Last February,
Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) demurred when askedduring a London interview whether he acceptedevolution. The interviewer prefaced the question byexplaining it was asked “particularly of Republicanswho come to London”, then responded to Walker;
“Really? Any British politician, right or left wing,
they would laugh and say, ‘Yes, of course evolutionis true’.” 

Jeb Bush has said that although he acceptsevolution, he wasn’t sure students needed to; “I don’t 
think it should actually be part of the curriculum, tobe honest with you.”

There’s squeamishness about the science ofmedical research. Republicans in Congress arethreatening another government shutdown afterbeing punked by “gotcha” videos on PlannedParenthood – an organization annually providingpap tests and breast exams, contraceptive services,
and tests and treatments for HIV and sexuallytransmitted diseases primarily to low-incomewomen – 2.7 million served annually; one-in-fiveAmerican women at some point in their lives.

The shutdown is threatened unless governmentsupport for Planned Parenthood – a half-billiondollars a year, 40% of their budget – is ended. AsSen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) put it, “I simplycannot believe that in the year 2015, the UnitedStates Senate would be spending its time trying todefund women’s health care centers” 

Supposedly, the outrage isn’t about abortion

– which comprises 3% of Planned Parenthood’sservices and receives no government support,
anyway – but in donating fetal tissue for medicalresearch. This has been going on since approvedby a near-unanimous Senate vote (93-4) in 1993,
and has proved invaluable in researching diabetes,
Alzheimer’s, muscular dystrophy and other 
degenerative diseases.
Now even Republicans who backed it in 1993,
like Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), are aghast thatit continues. Trump is on board for the governmentshutdown in order to defund Planned Parenthood, 
as is Carly Fiorina (who complains “how extremeDemocrats are”). To Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) it“appears to be a criminal enterprise”. Jeb Bushsays he’s “not sure we need half a billion dollars forwomen’s health issues.” 

Meanwhile, President Obama addressed the real 
science and the real threat of carbon emissions 

from power plants. The science has been there sincePresident Johnson made his statement to Congressfifty years ago. The rules announced by the presidentwere made under the Clean Air Act, adopted in 1970under President Nixon. The science on greenhousegasses and climate change has been there for thirty 
years.

Campaigning against Al Gore in 2000, George

W. Bush promised, “We will require all powerplants to meet clean-air standards in order to reduceemissions of carbon dioxide”, though he reversedcourse once in office. Then a bipartisan effort inCongress, led in the Senate by John McCain (R-AZ)
and Joe Lieberman (D-CT), unsuccessfully soughtto pass legislation to limit emissions of carbondioxide and other greenhouse gasses.
Finally, a dozen states (including California)
went to the Supreme Court to get action. The Courtruled in 2007 the Environmental Protection Agencymust regulate emissions under the Clean Air Act,
provided it first determines they “may reasonablybe anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”
The EPA determined they did, so Bush ignored hisown EPA. Under President Obama, the EPA pickedup where the it was blocked under Bush.

Obama preferred that Congress act in coming upwith legislation on carbon emissions from powerplants (producing 40% of our carbon pollution).
Current candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
pushed a bipartisan effort to get something through,
but couldn’t get the sixty Senate votes needed. Thepresident realized that since Congress wouldn’t act,
under the 1970 Clean Air Act and the 2007 SupremeCourt ruling, he had to.

As for the science, to Rick Santorum climate 
change is a “beautifully concocted scheme”. TedCruz knocks the scientists (“alarmists”); “theydon’t like to look at the actual facts and the data”. 
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) doesn’t “believe” it; “Idon’t agree with the notion”. “Global warming is atotal . . . hoax”, says Trump, “created by and for theChinese.” 

While a 2013 report finds 97.1% of scientificpapers on the subject concluding that humans causeclimate change, Jeb Bush maintains that for “peopleto say the science is decided on this” is “intellectualarrogance”.
The science of evolution, healthcare and climate 
change might escape Republican candidates, butthey can do math - and they know the cost of acampaign. Fifteen months out from the election, theenergy industry has already chipped in $1.8 million

– 82% of it to their party.
Candidates appeared at another forum last 
weekend, making the pilgrimage to the KochBrothers’ “Freedom Partners” donor summit at 
Dana Point. Freshman Republican Senators werethere to thank the brothers for helping buy themcontrol of Congress. Presidential aspirants Walker,
Fiorina, Cruz, Bush and Rubio pledged fealty, andschmoozed with donors not unaccustomed to 
writing seven-and-eight-figure checks.

Whether grounding our students in scientificliteracy, medical research and reproductive carefor millions of low-income women, or addressingclimate change in what President Obama calls “ourmoment to get this right and leave something betterfor our kids”, it doesn’t stack up to going after apiece of the billion dollars the Koch Brothers havepledged for this election.

The Republican Party may be evolving, butperhaps not in the direction Darwin anticipated. 


WILL Durst - Raging Moderate 

A REPUBLICAN SWEET 16…PLUS 1 

Get to high ground everybody. Our nation is in dangerof being inundated by a candidate tsunami of 17 Republicans. 
The Sweet Sixteen and Never Been Kissed Plus 
One. Seventeen Shades of Grey. If they used a designatedpitcher they could split up into two teams and play softballagainst each other. No hardball allowed.

In an attempt to winnow the enormous aggregate down

to a manageable number, Fox News, host of the big first 
GOP presidential nomination debate, has declared only the top ten in an average ofrecent polls will be allowed to participate. Welcome to the Big Boys Table.
They also announced another earlier debate with everybody else. The little kids 
table. The consolation debate. The also-rans. The B-sides. Most at 3 percent or lessin polls with margin of errors of plus or minus 3 percent.

Accustomed to their constant whining about the media treating elections as horseraces, we think this is the perfect time to fuel their paranoia by handicapping the 
voluminous number of contending plugs. So here’s the morning Line on the 17dark horses of the apocalypse. And down the stretch they come!

MAKES THE BIG BOYS DEBATE 

Jeb Bush. 4-1. Deserving favorite. Best chance is to convince America he’s adopted.
Donald Trump. 6-1. Race would be over if his feet ran half as fast as his mouth. 
Scott Walker. 8-1. Strong finisher but may be carrying too much weight with both
Koch Brothers clinging to his saddle.
Marco Rubio. 10-1. The guy voted against a bill he co-sponsored. Could be own 
worst enemy.
Ted Cruz. 12-1. Likes to lead. Likes to lead loud. Also likes to box other horses 
right into rail.
Rand Paul. 30-1. Keeps spitting out bit in order to bite other horses. Comes from
stable comfortable with losing.
Chris Christie. 40-1. Enjoys the run but does it with all the grace of a tumbling
dumpster.
Rick Perry. 80-1. Lost some zip after donning blinders. New shoes don’t seem to
help either.
Mike Huckabee. 100-1. Tends to sag the more we see of him.
Ben Carson. 300-1. A black guy running for GOP nomination. Has about the same 
chance as a black guy would of running for the GOP nomination.


AT THE KIDS TABLE 

Rick Santorum. 500-1. Not old fashioned as much as he is Old Testament. His idea 
of progress is smelting a lighter alloy for the buckle on his hat.
Piyush “Bobby” Jindal. 500-1. Tends to shy away when bright lights switch on.
Needs at least three pile-ups on early turns to become a leader.
John Kasich. 500-1. Late entrant may have timed it perfectly. Or won’t make it onto 
track for post time. One or the other.
Lindsey Graham. 500-1. Always runs risk of disqualification for barking at officials. 
Still uses an abacus. 


Carly Fiorina. 1000-1. 
Only filly GOP interestedin is Barbara Bush. Not as 
a contestant, as a brood 
mare. 
George Pataki. 1000-1. 
This grisly warhorse wasput out to stud years ago. 
If he wins, be prepared for 
a stewards’ inquiry.
Jim Gilmore. 6000-1. Longest 
shot in a field of longish 
long shots. If he wins,
be prepared for stewardsto be shot. 

Will Durst is an award- winning, 
nationally acclaimed 
comic. Visit to willdurst.com 
to find about more about his 
new CD, “Elect to Laugh”
and calendar of personal 
appearances. 

MICHAEL Reagan Making Sense 
NO SALE, MR. OBAMA 

Did you catch President Obama’ssales speech for his Iranian nucleardeal at American University? 

My head is still spinning and I think 
I did something to my back trying tofollow the president’s arguments onWednesday afternoon. 

Basically, the president said if Congress 
doesn’t approve the treaty thathe, John Kerry and his State Department 
softball team made with the 
ayatollahs, three bad things are gonna 
happen. 

Iran will develop nuclear weapons ina hurry. 

There will be a new war in the Middle 
East. 

And the United States will lose its 
credibility as the global leader ofdiplomacy. 

You can argue that the same threebad things will happen, or are alreadyhappening, whether or not we signthe Iranian nuclear deal, but let’s not 
go there. 

Obama pulled out all the stops trying 
to persuade everyone that his baddeal is not only a good deal, it’s thebest deal with Iran we can ever hope 
to get. 

He ended his sales pitch by askingAmericans to contact their representatives 
in Washington to urge themto approve the Iranian deal. 

He said two years of negotiations“have achieved a detailed arrangement 
that permanently prohibitsIran from obtaining a nuclear weapon” 
and contains “the most comprehensive 
inspection and verificationregime ever negotiated to monitor anuclear program.” 

Republicans in the Senate and a fewDemocrats beg to differ with thepresident and his self-congratulatoryBS. They’d prefer to study the details 
of the deal – and maybe improvethem -- before they sign it. 

They also want to make sure the smiling 
Iranian despots in Tehran realizethat we have this thing called a Constitution 
and no treaty Obama and 
his team whips up can become lawuntil the Senate ratifies it. 

The president appeared at AmericanUniversity in Washington becausethat’s where John Kennedy gave his“Strategy of Peace” speech in 1963. 

JFK called for the U.S. and the Soviets 
to seek peaceful solutions to theCold War, which Obama noted was 
how it ultimately ended. 

Obama praisedKennedy and 
Ronald Reaganand quoted themabout the importance 
of seeking 
peace and the 
avoidance of war 


through diplomacy. 

He forgot to mention that Kennedyand Reagan also backed up their harddiplomacy with big military sticksand a willingness to swing them. 

Sometimes diplomacy – which 
Obama acts likes he invented in 2008 

– has to take a backseat to a militarysolution. 
In his speech Obama didn’t quotePrime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 
though he did point out thatIsrael’s leader strongly disagrees with 
the Iranian deal. 

That’s an understatement. As Netanyahu 
has said, “The nuclear deal withIran doesn’t block Iran’s path to the 
bomb. It actually paves Iran’s path tothe bomb.” 

The deal won’t bring peace or security 
for Israel or anyone else, Netanyahu 
said. 

It will “spark a nuclear arms race in 
the region. And it would feed Iran’sterrorism and aggression that would 
make war, perhaps the most horrificwar of all, far more likely.” 

President Obama expressed his deeprespect for Netanyahu, then said hewas wrong to be against the deal. 

Obama also expressed his love for 
Israel. Saying he’ll always see to it 
that America defends our loyal ally,
he insisted the deal he has crafted is 
“in America’s interests and Israel’s 
interests.” 

Deal or no deal, in the long run everyone 
knows Iran is as untrustworthy 
as any nation on the planet. 

Its leaders are responsible for destabilizing 
half the countries in theMiddle East and they’ve not even 
pretended to renounce their intentions 
to destroy the state of Israel. 

On Wednesday Obama boasted thathis nuclear deal with Iran could become 
one of our country’s greatestdiplomatic feats. 

Let’s hope not. 

Michael Reagan is the son of PresidentRonald Reagan, a political consultant,
and the author of “The New ReaganRevolution” 

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