April 4, 2017

Phil Beaver works to establish opinion when the-objective-truth has not been discovered. He seeks to refine his opinion by listening to other people’s experiences and observations. The comment box below invites readers to express facts, opinion, or concern, perhaps to share with people who may follow the blog.
Note:  I often connect words in a phrase with dashes in order to represent an idea. For example, frank-objectivity represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth without despite possible error. In other words, the writer expresses his “belief,” knowing he could be in error, in hopes of collaboratively approaching the-objective-truth. (By dashing “frank-objectivity,” a complex idea may be conveniently expressed in subsequent discussion.)

The Advocate:  See online at theadvocate.com/baton_rouge

Our Views. Tom, you are so much better informed than I am. I had no idea that of 20 cents/gal only 2.2 cents goes for roads. You’d think we could find the revenue-expenditure information, but I cannot.

 

I am upset with this "Our Views," by The Advocate. I will write my state representatives to ask for some means of constraining The Advocate's freedom to mislead readers: make a statutory statement that it's freedom-of-a-responsible-press, not freedom-of-the-press-to-lie-by-omission, for example.

 

Here's the statement that caught my attention: "It is not yet clear how the legislative pathway toward infrastructure improvements will work out, although the main source of funding is the gasoline tax. Today, total taxes are 38.4 cents per gallon, but only 20 cents of that are in state taxes, with 16 cents per gallon for rank-and-file projects.”

 

The reader is expected to know the omissions. (The other 18.4 cents is federal tax.) A journalist could call this bad writing and get away with that argument, but I cannot name a journalist. And besides, that's a bad excuse for the media to express.

 

A clue to the money is the statement that increasing the tax from 20 to 24 would generate $120 million. See http://revenue.louisiana.gov/Miscellaneous/TaskForceMeetingMaterials_20160318_LouisianaTaxStudy2015.pdf , bottom of page 14. The ratio 20/4 is 5, so current revenue seems $600 million/yr. But I don't trust the report, because of it source: The Louisiana Administration.

 

Perhaps my stupidity rests in not understanding The Advocate definitions of “infrastructure improvements” and “rank-and-file projects.” However, I cannot resolve the question by being smart: I need the data. In other words, I could not trust The Advocate’s explanation after my inquiry: Integrity comes in original expressions.

 

The problem begins with Louisiana’s non-transparency---secrecy---and seems exacerbated by The Advocate’s apparent cooperation. I should be able to go to a past Louisiana Budget report and find the information readily: How much gas-tax revenue and how much was spent on infrastructure?

I may guess that Louisiana currently spends $120 million on the Department of Transportation and $480 on transportation infrastructure. A 20 cent increase in state gas tax would generate another $600 million, increasing infrastructure funding to $1080 million, assuming the existing DOT could cover the infrastructure-expenditure management.

 

One other consideration: I think at 12,000 mi/yr, 18 mi/gal, I’m paying about $130/yr in state gas tax. I am retired and do not suffer much I-12 parking-in-drive-with-engine-on time. I’m willing to spend another $2.6/wk so that money is spent on relieving my working neighbors. However, if money is being misspent, as Tom claims, I want that corrected, too.

 

I do not regret the time I spent to understand my concerns and express them. I hope you read my tome and will correct the ignorance I expressed.

Our Views, April 3 (arts endowments). To Stephen Richard: Thanks for the thumb up and for receiving a silly anonymity.

Many people just don't realize they seem Alinsky-Marxist-organization (AMO) slaves. For example, Rule No. 5 enslaves them to ridicule neighbors rather than to think. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals#The_Rules .

 
What the unfortunate slaves don't realize is that students like me discounted skepticism, a skill a notch above ridicule, early in life.

Today’s thought, Jeremiah 7:8. In 7:5, 2600 years ago, Jeremiah initiated his premise, “If you really change your ways and your actions and deal with each other justly . . .” and segued to religion.

I commonly refer to mutually-just human connections as civic-morality, where private pursuits such as religion are kept private.*

But Dean is mysterious about truth and lies: What truth is to be loved? Like most clergy, Dean does not confront the most serious human error: gullibility. Thus, clergy miss the defense: humility. Humility eludes “the bankruptcy of lies.” There’s no greater appreciation for humility than when trying to address the truth.

In fact, “the truth” insufficiently expresses the challenge. I do not know the correct phrase, but I use “the-objective-truth” to express what-is and the object of discovery rather than what-may-be and the subject of imagination. Here are two illustrations to support my consideration. In physics**, we discovered that the earth is like a globe rather than flat. From physics, we know not to lie to another so that the other is not responding based on a lie: liars cannot communicate.

*(Just now, I am considering the switch to “mutual-justice” rather than “civic-morality.” A first test: private-liberty-with-mutual-justice seems less expressive than private-liberty-with-civic-justice. “Mutual” is less restrictive than “civic” when the two parties share a religion. We’ll see.)

** Herein, “physics” means energy, mass, and space-time from which everything on earth emerges, rather than the customary usage as a scientific study.

Letters

Victims of crimes (Evans). Civic Security, defined as broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, is critical for a possible better future. With Security, most people may live their unique life in pursuit of the happiness they perceive rather than struggle over dominant opinion; civic dissidents and criminals are still constrained from victimization.

It is wonderful that National Crime Victims’ Rights Week comes before the 2017 Legislature, which will feature many bills that would intentionally or not diminish Security.

This week, we saw reference to the Catholic Church’s opinion regarding the death penalty. It is past time for the Church, indeed every religious business, to adopt faith in the-objective-truth regarding souls. In other words, trust and commit to what the-power-that-is is doing or not doing with souls or not. No one knows if heinous crimes impact perpetrator’s souls, but everyone knows that murder ends the life of the victim. Legislators are responsible for defending life and have no authority to write laws based on religious speculation or superstition.

Important rather than religious opinion is the-objective-truth discoverable through DNA. When the perpetrator of heinous crime was at the crime scene at the time of the crime and to all required evidences is added DNA evidence, the statutory penalty should be delivered efficiently and expediently. For example, a man who sodomized then killed a boy should be executed immediately after conviction.

One other point that has been missing in reports-of-reform-proposals is both protection of mental-patients from criminals and separate, practical care for mentally-impaired criminals. How can a civic people save prison money and not reach out to this neglected portion of our citizens? Care for mental patients may be incorporated within prison reform.

Froma Harrop column. Harrop does not understand the preamble’s subject, a civic people in our states; nor its predicate, authorize; nor its object, the USA.
 
Further, she does not understand free enterprise. Some entrepreneurs will serve the emotional majority in California, and others will serve the practical majority in Arizona. However, the USA will not usurp the powers of the states nor the persons who live there.

 

However, the Civil War showed that the promises made in perpetuity when the states declared independence from England will be upheld by the USA. The CSA begged woe when they fired on the USA. Anyone who is influenced by Harrop’s war talk may consider that Harrop begs woe.

Charles Krauthammer column. Krauthammer’s premise that the USA is operating according to design is erroneous, IMO. Some of his claims are controversial. 

 

For example, I do not think it’s Trump’s populism that is contested by the system. I think the system is straining at the vote of the people: We demand change and give you President Trump, who demonstrated the ability to overcome the GOP, of whom only 40% would stand to say: He’s our candidate. We elected him because he is rational in his proposals for ending the dysfunction coming from first the GOP and second the USA. Trump is sincere rather than a demagogue.

 

Praising Putin is circumstantial and does not imply praise for Putin’s civic-morality or public-integrity.

 

The courts: The poor guys still are liberal democrats. They seem mistaken because they are erroneous. Gorsuch understands Gorsuch’s comment and it may be shame for the courts.

 

Trump actively returns power to the states, and it is his intent to do so. States that do not recognize the shift from federal budgets to states budgets will get hurt. However, the states are closer to the people’s civic collaboration and that’s where the discussions should occur. Obama did not want that: He wanted total control---tyranny.

 

The press was comprised of liberal democrats before Obama, did not change during the Obama administration, and have not changed now. There is nothing healthy about a press that lies to promote liberal democracy in in this republic. What’s great about Trump is that unlike George W. Bush, Trump rebukes media lies, sometimes pointing out that there are alternate lies the media could pursue. When they lie they are pursuing plays out, it’ll be labeled a failure to prove rather than a lie. But the people who voted for Trump will be reassured in their future vote for Trump.

 

Krauthammer’s understanding of Madison as not about virtue is controversial. In Federalist 10, Madison expresses preference for a republic rather than a democracy “. . . a small number of citizens elected by the rest . . . enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.” Are not justice and patriotism virtues for governance? In Federalist 51, about controlling federal departments, Madison wrote, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” About factions, he wrote,  

 

It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradually induced, by a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more powerful.

 

I think Krauthammer errs to think federal departmental “ambition counteracting ambition” can be applied to approve of citizens “faction counteracting faction.” Madison’s interest was justice to preserve liberty---a virtue. I think that is President Trump’s interest. I write to encourage people to establish private-liberty-with-civic-justice. Again, I think Krauthammer errs, not about Trump, but about Madison; and to refer to America as a democracy rather than a republic. Good grief: A US Senator represents over 19.2 million citizens whereas another Senator represents 0.3 million Wyomans.

 

Krauthammer used some interesting words. I think the two Americas “trope” refers to Americans reputed to be free and democratic judged wanton abroad. “Caudillo” implies military officer. “Vacuous” means lacking thought or intelligence.

 

Once again, to think the USA is exceptional for vacuous “the resistance,” seems strange before the age of Saul Alinsky’s rules, James H. Cone’s application of liberation theology, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO) started about 45 years ago. Indeed, the aim of AMO is vacuous.

Mark Ballard column April 2.  To Charles Malone: I sincerely think a grounds keeper should be paid an inflation-tracking living wage till age 70 plus be assigned a 401K that has enough annual contribution to provide for his or her retirement.

 

I also think the USA's GDP is sufficient to accommodate such a civic way of living.

 

I monitor for clues as to how to create a civic culture, and may have stumbled onto kernels online at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment-to-population_ratio . If population growth was monitored and influenced toward a relatively high labor force participation rate, say 90%, the demand for grounds keepers might be in balance with living wage & retirement.

Clarence Page column.  Page overlooks We the [Civic] People of the United States, where “civic” implies volunteering for selfish reasons to trust the preamble to the constitution for the USA, in President Trump’s inaugural address.

 

“Together, we will determine the course of America and the world for years to come. We will face challenges. We will confront hardships. But we will get the job done.”

 

Perhaps Page never took the preamble seriously and therefore perceives himself above us all in the image “Trump sink sounds attractive” and “they’ll sink along with him.”

 

Council on Aging realities (Page 1B). Some of the expressions reflect public-integrity. That’s what Baton Rougeans (and people in general) need. A civic people deliver justice.

For example, alleged victim Davis asserted, “This is definitely a human issue, not a race issue as we are also African Americans and we were taken advantage of by an African American."

 
(Does "humanity" hold if it's back offender on white victim?)

It is refreshing to see such candid assertion that civic-immorality by officials is not restricted to race. On the other hand, some black officials tacitly assert: It’s a question of political power. In other words, officials decide justice. Not so true: There’s statutory law. The Council on Aging is suspect.

But it’s also personal. When it’s black on black, dialogues on race still needs to reflect public-integrity, and I suggest starting with the civic agreement that is stated in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. When it was signed by 2/3 of states representatives in 1787, it was intended for all inhabitants who want the purpose and aims stated therein---for posterity. The 1/3 dissenters had their reasons, such as preference for “we the states” as the preamble's subject, and establishment of Protestant Christianity or at least theism. By 1860 it was white Christianity vs white Christianity, and that has evolved to black theology vs white church.

But there’s no place for church in civic-morality, because some people prefer and require privacy respecting their spiritual motivation and inspiration. Some people neither discount nor respond to other people’s ideas about soul and life after death: Hopes for good afterdeath is not a civic topic. If Mayor Broome will serve Baton Rouge, these two discoveries may become first principles: Neither race nor religion impacts civic-justice---public-integrity.

Mayor Broome is not alone, nor is the Metro-Council. First is the people of Baton Rouge.

As a father, I have a will that protects my children from predators. To this day, as adults, they know who their guardians are if my wife and I somehow perished in the same event. But the State of Louisiana should come to the aid of children who have been victimized by local government. The people who stand in support of the accused agency without all the facts in hand are shameless IMO.

Andrea Gallo, Charles Lussier, Patrick Dennis and The Advocate in this article seemed to contribute to public-integrity. Thank you.

55^th arrest (Page 2B). Policemen and other first responders have civil rights and should not be challenged to arrest one person 55 times. I'd like to see The Advocate publish the names of the lawyers and judges who empowered this man’s habits. The judges could be unelected in future.

Phil Beaver does not “know” the-indisputable-facts. 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.