May 14, 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 despite possible error. In other words, the writer expresses his “belief,” knowing he could be in error. People may collaboratively approach the-objective-truth.

The Advocate:  See online at theadvocate.com/baton_rouge

Good Mother’s Day.

  

Our Views (Legislature not moved by DOTD reality). My model for civic professionalism is civil engineers: they are responsible for public-safety so many ways---like expanding Tiger Stadium without public risk. 

I relate, because chemical engineering made me acutely aware of ethical obligations to the public to not design reactor and shipping containers that could blow up, among four-five other obligations. I did not learn it as fidelity to the-objective-truth, but that’s the way it turned out.

When the legislature and administration continuously behave irresponsibly, the final outcome is failure, no matter what their intentions may be.

I wrote months ago that I was for a 20 cent gas tax dedicated to the purpose and well managed. My reason is to relieve workers of the reduction in life they suffer on parking lots intended to be roads.

Then the DOTD’s re-routing of traffic, because the La 1 bridge at Port Allen is unsafe, was announced. I thought, “How can DOTD be so negligent as to let this happen at the start of the Legislative session?” It’s as bad as someone reporting that Secretary Hillary Clinton had not followed the law a few months before the 2016 election. (The report did not lessen my zero potential to vote for her.)

However, I wanted to ignore the DOTD failure and encourage the gas-tax increase anyway. But it seems the DOTD budget has been grossly misused. The fact that a citizen cannot access the information is evidence of misuse.

Perhaps the only hope is a clean sweep of Louisiana governance: A new, people-sponsored constitution and new managers with civic morality rather than mystical hopes and people’s-pocket-picking.

To JT McQuitty: Curious study and conclusion. It makes a gas tax seem like a "sin" tax rather than an infrastructure tax.
 

Readers are encouraged to doubt “social science” studies. Too often the researcher sets out to prove an assumption and succeeds, but the assumption was a mirage. I doubt that “the average price of unleaded gasoline as a proxy for the proportion of leisure driving” holds up year to year and across the decades.

Despite the study, your points make sense: With high enough gas price, driving lessens, and savings in all costs of driving may result. Thus, taxing to pay for infrastructure and reduction in use logically go hand in hand.

Extensions of this theory are interesting, too. For example, we can only worry about global warming, because the cost of controlling the earth’s atmosphere is prohibitive, except in one regard: population growth. See scientificamerican.com/article/population-growth-climate-change/ .

Letters

  

N. O. perfect (Esman, May 12). Philip Frady Tolerance is one of the most overrated words in society.

Because I know I do not know the truth, I do not offer tolerance. I offer appreciation of the other party's willingness to express experiences and observations, especially if the person offers civic safety & security.

Once I understand that the other party is tolerating me, my psychological power as a human being kicks in, and I change the topic---to the weather, LSU sports, or such.

I now know that the people of New Orleans for five decades tolerated my person so as to pick my pocket. I am not at all interested in repeating my past support of picking my pocket.

Maybe you can enlighten me to my loss.

Charles Krauthammer column (King Trump) I thought Comey should go the minute he claimed Secretary Clinton was reckless with email but he would not prosecute her.

I bet candidate Trump felt the same way. However, the politically astute but immoral Obama administration built a defense that might save a Clinton presidency.

Also, the DNC’s failure to protect their digital systems from hacking was embarrassing to them, but they schemed to create a web of Trump involvement with the hacing.

Add that to Flynn lying to the vice president, and President Trump is in a situation no person would want.

However, President Trump handled it shortly after Comey confidently witnessed to his folly. Thank goodness.

That’s my opinion, and it seems closer to civic morality than your “troublesome priest” confusion with “the king.”

Jeff Sadow column (nursing homes). Thank you, Sadow for a thoughtful, readable column. And thanks to The Advocate, who motivated your writing. Is it too late for reform in this session?

Gov. John Bel Edwards could use a little reform, and I like your phrase “place the general interest above a special one.” It seems like with Edwards there is always something that comes before Louisiana’s No. 1: the people.

If most people acted for the general interest instead of praying for a special one and waiting for Edwards or other mysterious force to deliver, there might emerge some civic morality in the matter of nursing home owners vs the people staying in their homes.

The people may focus on the people rather than support expanding state budgets for profiteers.

   

George Will column. Yours is not the first commentary on “culture appropriation” I’ve read.

I don’t know why, but your presentation made me think of appropriating another culture’s hate. There are shocking hates, and I do not care to justify them. For example, consider Luke 14:26, ““If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.”

Once I read that, I made my final decision not to hate at all; anyone; ever. Since love, empathy, and passion are often unwanted, I seek to appreciate the other person. Not even a glance is needed: all it takes is civic safety & security to inspire appreciation. Beyond, there’s the possibility for civic collaboration.

McKinley quarterback killed (Page 1B).  Our loss is devastating. How can Baton Rouge go on?

W. T. Sherman (Page 1B).  How could Gov. John Bel Edwards have the gall to use his West Point tie to Sherman for a politically-loaded topic in a commencement speech?

  

Edwards is No. 1 for him in Louisiana, but I cannot wait until my exposure to him becomes a memory---filed right in there with David Duke, good grief.

Pat Smith rage (Page 2B).  How can Smith pretend that her proposal was anything but a strategy for democrat votes based on impersonal statistics?

I see no justification for voting for anything but the-objective-truth. Political vote swapping often turns bitter.

Angola arrest (Page 3B).  This seems like a bad hire rather than part of seeming systematic departmental crime.

Police reform (Page 1A) I appreciate the activist-biased research and writing by Andrea Gallo, Grace Toohey, and Emma Discher, but not The Advocate’s obfuscation/ignorance of the civic amorality of the EBRP public-discussion. The people of Baton Rouge are being victimized. Not once in the article is “Citizens: Obey police orders,” mentioned. However, that is the valid message. Also, recent increases in police murders is ignored. Civic-morality is not mentioned, but is talked-about in these parts.

Writers refer to a civic people as “taxpayers.” A civic people is beyond taxpayers; everyone is involved yet divided. “Civic” refers to citizens of humankind rather than citizens of a city. My estimate of the civic faction in the USA is 2/3 and for Baton Rouge perhaps 4/7. This super-majority of citizens, a civic people, is commonly, erroneously referred to as “we, the people.” That phrase is derived from the subject, “We the People of the United States” in the preamble to the constitution for the USA, a systematically neglected civic agreement. “We, the people” is a binary mix of a civic people and dissidents. Dissidents include people who are uninformed, people who are indolent to their own liberty/responsibility, criminals, evil people, and other people who neglect/oppose civic morality. Preserving freedom from oppression by dissidents is the purpose of civic governance; perhaps this is an old statement in new words and phrases.

Among the people who most neglect civic morality are ministers and minister-coalitions. From their power over believers in spiritual salvation---the hope for a good afterdeath---ministers construct schemes to influence power in public life. Politicians, perceiving priestly power over the people partner under the priests. Believers support the priest-politician partnership and help pick their own pockets. In modern language, this Chapter XI Machiavellianism seems "the eternal scam." Priest-coalitions babble “God,” each one promoting personal connection to their competitive omniscience and omnipotence---their "world view." Only a dreamer would imagine influencing reform. I am a dreamer.

The “amorality of EBRP public-discussion” has a long historical timeline, which starts before the code of Hammurabi and its acceptance of many forms of institutional slavery 3800 years ago. The Church missed the opportunity to oppose slavery when it canonized the Bible in 300-400 AD. As a result, today, the Biblical conflict is: which race is supreme? Did "The Word" and "God" originate in Africa? Does God intend for African-Americans to reign supreme? This is not a an idea that promises civic morality.

The route to today’s American amorality is through the Civil War's just civic-cause to settle “more erroneous religious beliefs,” the just civil rights acts of 1964-5, and the unjust rise of black power and black liberation theology in the late 1960s. The developments since then are covered by Saul Alinsky and the Rise of Amorality in American Politics by D. L. Adams (January 2010). See online at newenglishreview.org/DL_Adams/Saul_Alinsky_and_the_Rise_of_Amorality_in_American_Politics/ . Activists seem slaves of Alinsky-Marxist organizing (AMO).

In Baton Rouge, the coordinating AMO group seems to be Together Baton Rouge. See togetherbr.org/about, where the association with Alinsky’s IAF is taken for granted. See industrialareasfoundation.org/content/history for the report of Alinsky founding. AMO should be avoided like the plague, especially by recruits. Recruits are influenced to sacrifice life for chaos (see Adams).

I am a fiscal conservative and struggled five decades to understand individual-independence (Dona Bean), which is the civic-moral-exceptionalism that the preamble promises. The preamble emerged by votes of 2/3 of the people’s representatives at each step in the origination and ratification. I write every day to express the hope that 2/3 of the people will realize that they do not want to collaborate the power of their personal God; but almost everyone wants civic safety & security among the dissidents. Law enforcement is required: "Yes, officer," and immediate cooperation are required. Thereby, America may begin to deliver its civic promises to the world.

Apparently, dialogues on racism and church are popular, but history indicates circular stonewalling. However, civic-morality is possible in Baton Rouge. A theory for candid civic talk emerged from EBRP library meetings and is introduced at

promotethepreamble.blogspot.com/2017/04/voluntary-public-integrity.html .

Let Baton Rouge promote a discussion and reform to voluntary public-integrity.

  

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 is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.