January 17, 2017

Phil Beaver works to establish opinion only when the-indisputable-facts-of-reality have not been discovered. He seeks to refine his opinion by learning other people’s experiences and observations. The comment box below invites sharing facts, opinion, or concern. (I read, write, and listen to establish my opinion as I pursue the-objective-truth.)
Note:  I often connect words in a phrase with the dash in order to represent an idea. For example, frank-objectivity represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth without addressing possible error or attempting to balance the expression.

Our Views:  I see the policy and outreach part of CPEX as compatible with a civic culture and am trying to reach Jessica Kemp to discuss.

I do not have an MBA, so it doesn’t bother me not to perceive The Advocate’s business plan. People or a person quotes Kemp then follows with “but . . . “ IMO, “and” rather than “but” would be collaborative.

Today’s Thought (Dean). Dean’s thought may apply to the elect, according to John (6:37): “All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.” The corollary for lovable non-Christians is that they are not elect, which is OK respecting civic morality. I know nothing about religious morality.

Dean’s thought implies antinomianism, perhaps a notion that Christians are exempt from civic morality such as Moses' law. I doubt antinomianism is compatible with public-integrity.

If I may preach:

An article, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations, lists nearly 70 Christian factions. Another source mentions 217; see  hirr.hartsem.edu/research/fastfacts/fast_facts.html#denom .

If most people want Security, as I think at least 2/3 of inhabitants demonstrate (despite the factions), civic-justice cannot come from religion, race, politics or government. The Security that is required for justice with liberty must come from most persons in this place. In a civic culture, every real-no-harm Christianity may flourish along with all other real-no-harm religion and real-no-harm life-styles with no religion.

IMO, The Advocate may promote a civic culture anytime the business deems public-integrity a worthy goal. Perhaps this will happen when a civic people begin to look past religion, race, politics or government to mutually appreciate public-integrity as private-liberty-with-civic-morality.

Obama (Hebert). I appreciate your point. 

An opinion on Page A19 of today’s Wall Street Journal might drive your grade to F. It lists scandals: State Department email; giving guns to Mexican drug-lords; IRS delays on select non-profit applications; Benghazi; hacking; veteran’s affairs; prisoner swap; cash payment to Iran; and to top it off, media collaboration. I don’t know why beer with Prof. Gates and related behavior such as “lives matter”--duh---did not make the list.

Obama (Smith). “Only a fool or a liar . . . “ If I may choose, in your opinion I am a fool. However, I must caution you about judging me; I am an other.

DeVos (Rhein). I think being educated qualifies a person to influence decisions about how to educate children. 

I think my ideas are good, beginning with this. Instead of “training the workers we need,” coach each child to take responsibility for his or her three-decades transition. He or she may transform from feral-infant to civic-adult with the understanding and intent to live a full life of some 85 years duration. (See H. S. Overstreet's book, The Mature Mind, 1949 or better---let me know about the better book, please). To implement the idea, we need people who know how to communicate with children at the various stages in the transition---educators, civic practitioners, psychologists, administrators, economists and many more professionals. We do not need religion, race, politics, or government---those are all practices for adults rather than children.

Robert Samuelson column.   The brick-and-mortar businesses may survive by joining the online purchase and delivery system.

I cannot understand why a writer would compromise integrity (both wholeness and understanding) by sticking “would have been if Hillary Clinton . . .” into this column. He must be whining for an email.

David Ignatius column. IMO the-objective-truth on Russia is known. Foreign countries always try to influence each other. A modern tool is Internet bugging. National interest is served when business is run with awareness and protection against bugging. The Democratic National Committee failed in this regard. The affected parties regret it. The GOP did not share in the failures.

“Did the administration worry that the Russians would take additional steps to hurt Clinton and help Trump, and help disrupt balloting itself?” Uncle Sam, please do not care one whit for Mr. Ignatius’s heartfelt imagination. An exception: Let’s find out what Ignatius knows about existing balloting disruption that could be helped by foreigners, be they Russian or whomever.

Mr. Ignatius’ righteous indignation is shared today by Bret Stephens, WSJ, Page A17. Stephens lists other people’s failures that Trump promptly addresses. Stephens stabs Trump with the responsibility for the other party’s reform: “Mr. Trump’s genius for tearing things down will not be matched by an ability to build things up.” Writers like Stephens and failing officials will do well to take care of their own public-integrity: consider and enact any reform the writer or official may need.

Charles Krauthammer column.  After more than 8 years writing about Obama’s failures, Mr. K presents hope that we will not hear more egocentricity. “When your final statement is a reprise of your first, you have unwittingly confessed to being nothing more than a historical parenthesis.” 

DeVos for Education (Page 1A). From the online photo, “Democrats and rights activists also are raising concerns about how her conservative Christian beliefs and advocacy for family values might impact minority and LGBT students.” Are there no Christians in the Democratic Party and no Christians among rights activists? Is it not possible to be a Christian with civic morals---public-integrity? Does liberal democracy exclude Christians?

Trump coverage (Page 3A). I am not accustomed to the media making the case for the President-elect of the United States needing to win constituents. Normally, victory in 3084 of 3141 counties in the country (97%) would be sufficient, and perhaps it will be so, despite the press.

This a passionate point for me, because on October 3 an LSU Mass Communications professor made fun of my point that public opinion does not determine public policy in the USA: The USA is a republic under statutory law---despite efforts by the media and others to impose a liberal  democracy on the people. The professor’s tacit point seems that the media control public opinion and thereby are in charge of the people. I’m doing all I can to preserve liberty with factual justice.

Is it reasonable to object to Democrats like Lewis deciding not to attend the inauguration? I don’t think it is. Elected officials who make that choice should not expect national support. The nation wants Donald Trump to succeed. Also, I would like to read Lewis’s response to 1966 marcher James Meredith’s claim that the black race has overlooked responsibility and duty.

Monica Crowley’s withdrawal after disclosure of confirmed plagiarism is hallmark-Trump-style:  “You’re fired.” Abraham Lincoln could have used a little Trump decisiveness during 1861-1863. Lincoln was slow to fire generals who would not fight.

The remedy for all the media personnel and elected officials, foreign and domestic, who are receiving Trump’s candor is to acquire and practice integrity. That is, discover the-objective-truth and understand it; act according to the understanding; publicly promote the understanding; and be alert to change required by new discovery or new understanding of the past discovery . It seems self-evident that civic-morality is public-integrity. If so, what is social morality? How is it that Trump can do his work and still respond to attacking media and officials with corrections they cannot factually refute?

Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite, among others, should wake up. WW II ended 70 years ago. The Marshall Plan rebuilt parts of Europe that accepted the $12 billion given from 1948 until 1952. US troops have been there ever since. It’s past time for Europe to maintain Europe.

The Pledge of Respect (#BRrespect). This is to share the six statements we think work for a civic people of Baton Rouge rather than for subjugation to "respect":  “As a citizen of Baton Rouge, I commit myself to help create a better community by upholding these standards of [mutual appreciation]“:

1.       Both practice and appreciate civic behavior,

2.       Practice kindness,

3.       Be slow to object and quick to forgive,

4.       Serve without thought of recognition or personal gain,

5.       Be my best and give my best every day, and

6.       See beyond the past and look forward to the future.

We think the ideas below are eliminated by the goal mutual appreciation rather than respect:

1.       Return disrespect with respect.

2.       Honor others before myself.

3.       Give to someone who cannot give in return (seems redundant to Item 4 above).

Also, we think six standards is favorable as simpler than nine. We hope to iteratively collaborate on this, especially because respect as subjugation is being taught to Baton Rouge children.

Phil Beaver does not “know”. Phil trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth of which most is undiscovered and some is understood. Phil Beaver is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.

---