A Line In The Sand
When do we say enough is enough? I haven’t been an activist for long, in lay terms, I’m “new to the party”. Never in my wildest dreams, did I think I would be marching and carrying signs in protest of our government, but here I am, about to turn 70 and I’m angry and upset with what I see happening in our state, and in the vitriol of those who dissent.
California’s legislature has been overrun by politicians who no longer represent the best interest of the State, choosing, instead, to represent and protect the intruders. Laws are being modified to benefit the intruders at all levels; yet, our homeless and our veterans are being ignored. For me this is a travesty. They, above all deserve our help and assistance, but our state government continues to allocate more and more resources to the illegals invading our land.
Obviously, we must take a stand and have our voices heard, but, how much is too much? To what degree am I comfortable in civil aggressive engagement?
Where do we draw the line?
Do we do as they do, or do we do as we do?
Let me share what prompted this self-examination.
A week or so ago, I attended a Town Hall in Ontario to hear from local and state representatives. Addressing the masses were Assemblyman (52) Freddie Rodriguez, Assemblywoman (47) Eloise Gomez Reyes, California State Attorney General Xavier Becerra, Senator (20) Connie Leyva and Assemblywoman (48) Blanca Rubio. Unfortunately, the audience never had a chance to hear what they had to say, or to ask questions.
As I sat there, people I have marched with and protested with, started acting as the liberal protesters act; yelling and screaming, shoving cameras into people’s faces and interrupting the speakers at every turn. I felt as though I had entered an alternative universe.
That kind of aggressiveness I expect from the other side; they have been shouting and shutting down Republican and Conservative speakers up and down the state. Why not give them a taste of their own medicine? Why not let them feel the frustration we feel when nothing gets accomplished and when all our efforts fall to the wayside.
Then, I thought: have we let our fears and frustration overrule our logic? Will we cease to make progress and could we lose the respect we had fought so hard for. But, if respect results in loss after loss, what have we accomplished? The trashing of our President and all of us who follow him seems to be a never-ending attack, but we forge on, day in and day out.
I found that I was angry at the bold “in your face”
aggressiveness our side was doing. it was foreign and uncomfortable to me. So, I got up to leave. At that moment, the meeting was abruptly cancelled. It was at that point I boiled over and my emotions spewed forth.
I spoke to others in our group and said, “this is not what I want to be a part of.” Several other members were feeling the same frustration I was; others were justifying the antics as necessary. “Time for them to know we will no longer go quietly into the back of the room and remain silent.” I knew what they were saying and could not totally disagree, but still it was too confrontational for me.
So, where do we draw the line? When did we become the aggressor? There must be some form of dialogue where both sides have a voice. If speakers are silenced, what have we learned? Whose rights supersede the others? The right to speak, the right to be heard, the right to hear.
Conversely, it is so appalling to hear the braggadocio of the left, of the illegal. One man who was on camera, stated “we’ve been infiltrating your government for years, one office at a time. We now have a super majority and once California is secured, we will move on to Arizona, Nevada and Texas. We are patient, and will accept whatever time it takes get OUR LAND back.”
Those statements angered me to the core, but here again, are we going to allow anger to dictate our actions?There can’t be a resolution if we can’t have a civil debate.
Nothing was accomplished that evening. Everyone walked away feeling frustrated. I, for one would have liked to have gotten the speakers on record stating where they stand on healthcare, immigration, SB54, SB6, etc. Why they feel they don’t have to uphold the Constitution of the State of California. Why do they choose to ignore our laws? Unfortunately, because of the actions of a few, we will never know, we didn’t have the chance to ask.
There are far more questions than there are answers.
If we can’t talk with each other, then all is lost. There must be civility, there should be some amount of respect or the hatred will only grow and fester. We must explore the problems and come together to save our state. But, can we? Or, do we no longer share mutual views on what is good for the State and its Citizens? Do we differ so significantly on upholding our laws where the rights of citizens come first.
If there is friction between our own party, then how can we fight to gain seats in the Assembly and State Senate, on our school boards and city councils. We can’t afford to let any more progressive socialists into office, and the only way we can stop the influx of progressives is to find that mutual ground where we can all work together, in a forceful and dignified manner.
Perhaps, Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best. “There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither politic nor popular, but he must take it because his conscience tells him it is right.”
In the final analysis, I know that I do not want to be a part of what I witnessed the other night.
Each of us, must recognize our limitations and acknowledge what we are willing to do; thus, it is our conscience that will individually decide where the line in the sand will be drawn.
Judi Neal, President MVRC
FROM MY PERSPECTIVE
By Carolyn Gonzales
In every journey, there is a beginning and an end; in life, the journey begins upon birth, and ends with the last breath taken. Unlike journeys taken for pleasure, or in some cases journeys that result in disappointment, in life’s journey there is no additional time to redo at the end, for the end is the end.”
My friends, life is not merely a journey, it is a constant state of change, of great accomplishments, of evolving outlooks, and of shortcomings and failures. Each day life gives us a new beginning, if we so chose to take it, or it can be a continuance of what has been, the choice is ours, each day, each hour, each minute.
So, what does this have to do with politics? Politics are ever changing; most politics have a base not just on policy, or principle, but a base that is highly emotionally charged – and that complexity is the impetus of avoidance.
It is ironic that those who believe so strongly in one party or the other, actually can have friends who believe quite the opposite.
So volatile is this subject, that many people have tacit agreements that in their social or family interactions, politics are taboo – politics will not be discussed for fear of creating dissension and anger – yet, it is politics that will dictate the kind of nation in which we live, the state and the cities. Something that so impacts our lives, we avoid discussing among our friends and family.
Would it not be better if we could indulge in open dialogue; hearing both sides and working together for the good of our Country. Even those whose careers are steeped in politics, choose instead to ban together under a party umbrella, forsaking their oath of office to serve and protect the people of United States, or abide by the Constitution.
Childish and petty actions, yet these same men and woman demand to be “respected” as they engage in playground pouting and stubbornness.
This past week we saw the epitome of those playground antics. A highly qualified judicial candidate for the Supreme Court was confirmed on Friday. But, to do so, the Senate of the United States chose to use the nuclear option, changing the rules of the vote from a 2/3 vote majority to a simple majority vote.
Changing the parameters was not “such a big deal” since a similar change was made for the appointment of Federal District Judges under the leadership of Harry Reid and the Democrat party; so now that the Republicans are in majority, it is tit for tat.
Changes have been made in our Senate, not because they are better policies, but because the two parties are more focused on playground governance than acting as responsible mature adults.
Politics – the topic that should be discussed around dinner tables, and social events, and between opposing parties – impacts our society and nation too severely to avoid honest dialogue. But, until American politicians chose to act as adults and not imitate the immaturity of children, politics will remain the secret in the closet.
Newly confirmed Supreme Court Judge Neil Gorsuch should have been confirmed with a 60 vote threshold; he warranted that confirmation. Those Senators who chose stubbornness over governance should take their place among the fools of history who serve to satisfy their ego, over honoring their oath and commitment to the United States of America.
Congratulations, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.
|Supreme Court Justice
ADDITIONAL BILLS OF INTEREST
SB 6 Legal Aid for Illegals – De Leon – Dodd – Rendon OPPOSE
This bill would require the department to either contract with qualified nonprofit legal services organizations, or contract with a nonprofit agency to administer funding to nonprofit legal services organization subcontractors, to provide legal services to individuals in removal proceedings who are not otherwise entitled to legal representation under an existing local, state, or federal program. The bill would prohibit funds provided under one of those contracts from being used to provide legal services to an individual who has been convicted of, or who is currently appealing a conviction for, a violent felony
SB 18 Bill of Rights for Children and Youth in California – Pan OPPOSE
This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to expand and codify the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California to establish a comprehensive framework that governs the rights of all children and youth in California, outlines the research-based essential needs of California’s children, and establishes standards relating to the health, safety, well-being, early childhood and educational opportunities, and familial supports necessary for all children to succeed. The bill would declare the intent of the Legislature, by January 1, 2022, to enact legislation for the purpose of ensuring that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.
SB 54 Sanctuary State – De Leon PASSED
This bill would, among other things, things and subject to exceptions, prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies, including school police and security departments, from using resources to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes, as specified. The bill would require, within 3 months after the effective date of the bill, the Attorney General, in consultation with the appropriate stakeholders, to publish model policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible for use by those entities for those purposes. The bill would require all public schools, public libraries, health facilities operated by the state or a political subdivision of the state, and courthouses to implement the model policy, or an equivalent policy. The bill would state that all other organizations and entities that provide services related to physical or mental health and wellness, education, or access to justice, including the University of California, are encouraged to adopt the model policy. The bill would require a law enforcement agency that chooses to participate in a joint law enforcement task force, as defined, to submit a report every 6 months to the Department of Justice, as specified. The bill would require the Attorney General,within 14 months after the effective date of the bill, and twice a year thereafter, to report on the types and frequency of joint law enforcement task forces, and other information, as specified, and to post those reports on the Attorney General’s Internet Web site. The bill would require the Board of Parole Hearings or the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, as applicable, to United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement of the scheduled release on parole or post-release community supervision, or rerelease following a period of confinement pursuant to a parole revocation without a new commitment, of all persons confined to state prison serving a current term for the conviction of a violent or serious felony, or who has a prior conviction for a violent or serious felony.
SB 231 Storm Water Parcel Tax – Hertzberg OPPOSE
This bill would define the term “sewer” for these purposes. The bill would also make findings and declarations relating to the definition of the term “sewer” for these purposes.
SB 320 On Campus Abortion Clinic – Leyva OPPOSE
This bill would require on-campus student health insurance plans offered by California University, the California Community Colleges and the University of California to include coverage of the abortion pill, which can be taken up to 10 weeks after a woman’s last period. The bill would not cover surgical abortions.
SB 562 California Healthcare Act – Lara / Atkins OPPOSE
The California Legislature has introduced the Californians for a Healthy California Act (Senate Bill 562) to recognize, for the first time, that health care is a right for all residents. With Healthy California, every California resident will have one health plan and more choice. No more plan-switching or guesswork when insurance rates or plans change. No more out of control co-pays and high deductibles. And no more decisions made in secret by health insurance companies about what’s covered and how much it costs.
SB 640 Retailer User / Consumption Tax – Hertzberg OPPOSE
This bill would make legislative findings regarding responding to pending proposals for federal tax reform and California’s tax climate and would state that the intent of the bill is to make 3 changes to taxation within the state, including broadening the tax base by imposing a modest sales tax on services. This bill would also establish the Retail Sales Tax on Services Fund in the State Treasury and state the intent of the Legislature that moneys in the fund would be appropriated to, among other purposes, provide tax relief to middle- and low-income Californians to offset the effect of a sales tax on services.
AB 757 Conceal Carry Authorization – Melendez SUPPORT
This bill would define “good cause” for these purposes to include self-defense, defending the life of another, or preventing crime in which human life is threatened, and would provide procedural guidelines to the issuing authority on determining the presence or absence of “good cause.” The bill would make other technical, non-substantive changes.
YOUR GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES
Representative Judy Chu (D) Congressional District 27
(202) 225-5464 Fax (202) 225-5467
415 W. Foothill Blvd. #122, Claremont, CA 91711
(909) 625-5394 Fax (909) 399-0198
Representative Pete Aguilar, (D) Congressional District 31
(202) 225-3201 Fax (202) 226-6962
685 E.Carnegie Drive, #100, San Bernardino, CA 92408
(909) 890-4445 Fax (909) 890-9643
Representative Grace J. Napolitano (D) Congressional District 32
Assemblyman Chris Holden
415 W. Foothill Blvd.#124, Claremont, CA 91711
(909) 624-7826 Fax (626) 2548
(Note: This is a work in progress. The format and content will change as we review and find the proper place in which to place this information. However, this edition will serve to present an idea of what we would like to have available for our members. There are many other districts the Club represents, those other districts will be included in the next newsletter.
Judi Neal (909) 305-3717
St. Ambrose Episcopal Church
830 W. Bonita Ave,
Claremont, CA 91711
(Southwest corner of Bonita/Mountain)
Meeting and Dinner
(Dinner: Corned Beef & Cabbage)
Attendance Only – No Dinner
Social: 5:30p.m.; Dinner 6:00p.m
Speakers Begin 7:00p.m.
UPDATES ON CALIFORNIA LAW!!
There are some very important bills being considered in the CA Legislature, and Bills that have recently passed into law. Bills you should be aware of, as they will affect our privacy, our parental rights, and a huge increase in taxes!!
CA SB18: Loss of Parental Rights
“SB18 is a law that forces parents to adhere to and comply with the government’s definition of what is “appropriate” practice when it comes to raising children. Failure to comply with “appropriate” practices, including going against “evidence-based” medical recommendations, can put parents at risk of losing their children.” Health, Parental Rights Privacy April 1, 2017
SB640: Expanding Taxable Services
SB 640 by Hertzberg would force you to pay a sales tax on your divorce proceedings, shoe repair, tax preparation by a CPA. In total, Hertzberg-claiming to be a moderate Democrat, wants to raise $123 Billion in NEW taxes every year. Imagine if he was a liberal, this bill more than doubles the tax burden on Californians and upon passage throws the State into a Depression, bypassing a recession. Stephen Frank, March 29, 2017, Citizens Journal
And the most important of all SB54: The California Sanctuary State Bill!
You don’t want to miss this meeting!
MAYOR, PRO TEM
WEST COVINA CITY COUNCIL
Mike was elected six times to the West Covina Unified School District Board of Education. He currently serves on the West Covina Audit Committee and the San Gabriel Valley Mosquito Vector Control Board.
He is a founding Board member of the California Virtual L.A. High School. He is a past-President of the nationally recognized East San Gabriel Valley Regional Occupational Program/Technical College, where he served 18 years as a Board Member.
In 1996, Mike was appointd to a four year term on the California Library Services Board; he is a Life Member of the Friends of the West Covina Library. He was awarded the Samuel Adams Leadership Award from the Washington, D.C. based Local Government Council in 1997.
In 1998, the City of West Covina Unsuccessfully sued Mike over his opposition to a multi-million dollar tax increase. The tax failed, and that effort save individual homeowners hundreds of dollars.
Mike has coauthored arguments against unnecessary tax increases at the State and Local level.
Mike graduated from UCLA with a degree in Political Science and served as district chair of their alumni scholarship program. He has been Chief of Staff to two state legislators, a county supervisor and a partner in several businesses.
He has appeared on numerous radio and television programs providing commentary on political issues including the John an dKen Show, the Laura Ingram Show, The Roger Hedgecock Show, Fox News, The Los Angeles Business Journal and other papers.
EVENTS COMING SOON
AM590 is proud to present its 4th Annual Unite IE Conservative Conference on Sunday, April 30th, 2017 at the Riverside Convention Center.
Join Dennis Prager, Larry Elder, and Hugh Hewitt (along with Jennifer Horn and Donald Dix of the “Jen & Don” show), for a lively discussion about
President Donald Trump’s
First 100 Days.
for an updated list of speakers
VIP tickets ($81) include:
Lunch from 11:30am – 1pm
Event: 1:30pm – 4:00pm
General Admission Tickets
Event 1:30 -4:00 p.m. ($39)
For any questions or concerns, please contact us at: (818)662-3782
We look forward to seeing you!
KNOW WHO IS
ON YOUR BEHALF
AMERICAN CENTER FOR
LAW AND JUSTICE (ACLJ)
American Center For Law and Justice was founded by Jay Sekulow, who is the Chief Counsel of the ACLJ.
ACLJ, was founded in 1990 with the mandate to protect religious and constitutional freedoms, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) engages legal, legislative, and cultural issues by implementing an effective strategy of advocacy, education, and litigation that includes representing clients before the Supreme Court of the United States and international tribunals around the globe.
As ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow continued to build his legal and legislative team, the ACLJ experienced tremendous success in litigating cases at all levels of the judiciary – from the federal district court level to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Over the last two decades, Sekulow has appeared before the Supreme Court of the United States on numerous occasions, successfully arguing precedent-setting cases before the high Court: Protecting the free speech rights of pro-life demonstrators. Safeguarding the constitutional rights of religious groups to have equal access to public facilities. Ensuring that public school students could form and participate in religious organizations, including Bible clubs, on campus.
Guaranteeing that minors could participate in the political process by protecting their free speech rights in the political setting.
This organization has works on behalf of the conservative effort. If you would like to know more about this wonderful organization, please log on to their website at: https://aclj.org.
If you would like to donate, you can do so on the website.
The Mountain View Republican Club makes every effort to bring to its members, speakers who are knowledgeable on a variety of topics. It does so solely with the intent of broadening its members knowledge. Some topics may be controversial, and there may be differences of opinions, however, the Mt. View Republican Club will not censor information that is relative to today’s headlines, or political conversations.
If a member finds any speaker objectionable, please contact Carolyn Gonzales, (626) 224-1169.
MOUNTAIN VIEWREPUBLICAN CLUB BOARD
Carolyn L. Gonzales
Newsletter & Notices