Sunday, June 5, 2016
As you know, the local litmus test here at The Sierra Madre Tattler this election is whether or not a candidate supports the construction of the godawful 710 Tunnel. A project so environmentally hostile to the well-being of those human beings living in this part of the world that you'd figure opposition to it would be pretty much automatic.
As Ms. Carter-Henderson-Poole states above, "Act as if your life depends on it because in fact, the quality of your life does." In this instance that is certainly the case.
Which makes her support for tunnel devotees Judy Chu, Chris Holden and Kathryn Barger all the more puzzling. There are plenty of candidates available who do oppose the hole from hell, so why would anyone pick only those few who have stated they support it?
For the record, I don't know where Chris Chahanian stands on this matter. Even though the 710 Tunnel is among the most important local issues facing our region these days, there is nothing definitive about it on his campaign website. Just some vague references to "transportation," followed by a punt.
Chahanian is running against Anthony Portantino for CA State Senate here, a candidate who has made his opposition to the 710 Tunnel very clear. You'd hope Chahanian would have also taken a stand on this issue by now with the election just two days away.
Here's another thing. Who exactly is Susan's "editorial think tank?" None of her editorial page columnists even deign to write about local issues. It's all warmed over national nonsense. And when is the last time you have seen one of her supposed reporters write a news piece about anything having to do with Sierra Madre politics? That has been the exclusive purview of this paper's publisher for years now.
Besides, many Mountain Views News current events articles are press releases. With the possible exception of the docile Dean Lee I am not sure this paper even has a reporter.
You'd think Susan would show her readers a little respect and just admit the above endorsements were all made by her alone. And who knows, maybe even throw in a reason or two for making these selections while she is at it.
I'm not sure mysterious references to "central committees" really cuts it.
Posted by The Moderator at 4:00 AM