Phil Beaver works to establish opinion when
the-objective-truth has not been discovered. He seeks to refine his opinion by
listening when people share experiences and observations. The comment box below
invites readers to write.
Note 1: I often dash
words in phrases in order to express and preserve an idea. For example, frank-objectivity
represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth despite possible
error. In other words, a person expresses his “belief,” knowing he or she could
be in error. People may collaboratively approach the-objective-truth. Note 2: It is important to note "civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for the people more than for the city.
A personal paraphrase
of the preamble by & for Phil Beaver: We the willing people of nine of
the thirteen United States commit to and trust in the purpose and goals
stated herein --- integrity, justice, collaboration, defense, prosperity,
liberty, and perpetuity --- and to cultivate limited services by the USA, beginning
on June 21, 1788.
Composing their own paraphrase, citizens may consider the actual preamble
and perceive whether they are willing or dissident toward its agreement.
The caption’s OK, but the text switched glories, even slighting the series MVP, George
Springer.
“Also known as
the national pastime of the United States, Baseball is the most popular sport
in the country.” See therichest.com/sports/most-popular-sports-in-america/.
"Our Views" seems un-American disregard for the national game---like
taking a knee.
This press expresses freedom from subscribers. In this case,
The Advocate did not represent this subscriber. For five decades, I have paid
the full bill each time The Advocate perceives increasing my subscription rate
is wise: I don’t.
The Advocate’s
failure to let Houston and Texas have their victory---their comparison to
Louisiana victories---misrepresents me. I already look elsewhere when I want to
understand what The Advocate chooses to publish or comprehend opinionated
“articles” they ought to object to. The editors’ inability to consider others,
such as Houston and Texas, more than anything else, may drive my subscription
to its end.
It’s tragic, too, because as far as I can tell, The Advocate
has a relatively unique opportunity. There’s a world of liberal-democratic,
even socialist, bias, empowered by international news conglomerates. The
singularly owned The Advocate has the opportunity to be a leader in free and
responsible defense of American republicanism---the rule of statutory law.
The American dream that is offered in the agreement stated
in the preamble is civic morality, and a civic people are on the ineluctable
march to justice. The march has been in regression for the past five decades,
and the facts are only now being recognized as the abuse of posterity---the
nation’s children. Perhaps the ascension from the nadir of injustice has begun:
use of the preamble’s goals will be established.
The Advocate is experiencing the stern of a slow ship of
inertia pull away, but it is not too late to jump on board and make way to the helm.
Today’s thought, Christopher
Simon and sponsors
“How do you pray?”
Only personal gullibility and civic hubris would empower a
writer and his sponsors to so intrude on the privacy of a person’s mind and
body. Humility is a good remedy for pride, gullibility, and hubris.
I also thought of bullying, but it does not apply. Only the
gullible can be bullied, and humans have equal access to humility.
Disclaimers
respecting “news” articles---apologies in the absence of a responsible press
ksl.com/?sid=46192180&nid=757
by Seth Borenstein, Associated Press
The facts of a) a cooling universe, b) Earth’s atmosphere in
gradually-cooling yet cycling temperatures has been clear, for example, from
the last 10 million years of data. See joannenova.com.au/2010/02/the-big-picture-65-million-years-of-temperature-swings/.
The fact of heat accumulation in Earth’s atmosphere due to
habitation and industrialization has been clear for decades. See climatecentral.org/gallery/graphics/co2-and-rising-global-temperatures.
Also, see climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/why-did-earth%E2%80%99s-surface-temperature-stop-rising-past-decade
for attention to heat accumulation in the oceans. However, “warming mostly
man-made” is media hyperbole if not mendacity, in this case by the Associated
Press: the forces that cause global cooling have not stopped and attention to
overpopulation could be resumed; the NYT reported it 23 years ago. See nytimes.com/1994/09/08/news/08iht-birth.html.
The valid questions are 1) when and at what global
temperature will cooling resume and 2) what, practically, should the people do
about global warming. These are the two questions that President Trump
expresses, in his language. It’s fair to try to understand his message, but to
miss-interpret Trump for personal ambition begs woe.
The only economically sustainable proposal I have
encountered is procreation control, which seems politically impossible. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_population_planning.
Procreation control to reduce carbon emissions seems a morally wrongful idea.
As readers may know, I advocate procreation licensing in
order to lessen the abuse of ova and children. Collaborating to establish that most
procreations are by bonded spouses who can and intend to appreciate their
children and grandchildren is civic morality---required for public integrity. A
procreation license may lessen the rate of abortion for fun.
The media have generated a lot of ink with their question
that expresses an opinionated concern rather than news: “Will President Trump
block global warming reports?” See, for example, nytimes.com/2017/08/07/climate/climate-change-drastic-warming-trump.html.
Nothing Trump said or did would lead a person of integrity to pose such as
question.
Writers for the media are fabricators, and I see no evidence
of journalism under the First Amendment to the constitution for the USA. The
people may amend the First Amendment to foster establishment of a free and responsible
press.
pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-says-hes-disappointed-with-justice-department
by Associated Press
Talk about switch and bait! This “article” is about the rule
of law vs Brazile-opinion.
“Brazile alleges she found ‘proof’
that the 2016 Democratic primary was rigged in Clinton’s favor. Brazile writes
that she believes no laws were violated, but that a fundraising agreement ‘looked
unethical.’”
Could the Associate Press be colluding with the DNC to
persuade the public to agree with Brazile’s law opinion? Does the press think
they can manipulate the judiciary? even the Supreme Court? The record says that’s how they think: Among the four branches of USA government, the
press is number one.
chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-bowe-bergdahl-sentencing-20171103-story.html
by Jonathan Drew and AP
The “complete and total disgrace” seems that the Army hired
Bergdahl after the Coast Guard rejected him for psychological reasons. See theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_3037822e-b8ff-11e7-86c9-77f5af6fd3ec.html
.
Letters
Errant judge (Johnson) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_24f605f0-c00e-11e7-ad0d-fbe160f6c37e.html)
I wrote in this
forum several times that a civic people’s first responders, investigators,
jailers and DA’s are sandwiched between first the civic dissidents and criminals
and second the judicial system of lawyers and judges. Donald Johnson offers
opinion about policy making, public fear against crime, smart excluding tough,
and risk prediction that supports my claim. It’s almost like he assets, “Let me
illustrate an errant judge.”
Johnson
egregiously points to public opinion established by “social
science data collection projects . . .” His
arguments seem blind opposition to the case against social science in Oren Cass’s
“Policy-Based Evidence Making,” nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/policy-based-evidence-making.
Cass establishes that errant or egregious policy makers purchase statistics
designed to support their policy.
The other
arguments are too transparently wrong to belabor: The public fears crime
committed by criminals; the people’s first responders, investigators, jailers
and DA’s are far more informed about tough smartness than judges understand
smart toughness; and no one can exonerate a criminal without a crime being
committed---in other words, a judge cannot release a criminal based on future
evidence.
A civic people
may protect first responders, investigators, jailers and DA’s from dissidents, criminals
and errant judges and thereby protect the people.
Political propriety (Perilloux)
(theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_4ba41894-c00f-11e7-9909-3f1378252e13.html)
Perilloux
admirably supports General Kelly’s appeal for compromise. Perilloux also
supports a view of the Civil War as unjustifiable in comparison with England’s
parallel end of Atlantic slave trade with Africa and earlier abolition of
slavery. However, Perilloux misses a few distinctions about America, the people
and the nation. And General Kelly is mistaken to ignore collaboration rather
than compromise as the opportunity our generation has to establish a better future.
A citizen
may use documents to learn the real history. The kingdom of England was founded,
under religion-politics power, in 927 AD or 1090 years ago. Colonial America
existed from 1607 until 13 free and independent, named states ratified the 1783
Treaty of Paris on January 14, 1784. Nine of the states established the USA,
under the people in their states, on June 21, 1788.
The USA began operating on
March 4, 1789 with only 10 of 13 states; and by May, 1789, erroneously
re-established American colonial practices of 1) factional-Protestantism
(American theism let’s call it) and 2) Blackstone (English) common law. The
Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791 by ten of 14 states, Vermont
having been added to the then joined 3 dissident states from the original 13. Thus,
the USA, established in 1788, has been struggling for 228 years to overcome English opinion.
British colonists, at least between 1720 until 1763,
wrote to British leaders, both parliament and church, negotiating relief from
their enslavement and the placement of African slaves in this land. By 1765,
the tone changed from request to demand, and 1774, 13 British colonies changed
their style to states. In 1776, they declared war for independence. The
religious factions who had been urging an end to the African slave trade and
for emancipation of the slaves, such as Quakers, continued to lobby for
abolition. America differed from England by the fact that 20% of inhabitants
here were African slaves.
Fast forward to 1860 and the election of Abraham
Lincoln as president. One is constrained to ask with all of the sensible
arguments Perilloux presented, how could Civil War have happened? I perceive
three problems: 1) the concepts of subjugation or compromise for dominant
opinion instead of collaboration based on the-objective-truth, 2) a politically
astute but morally flawed Abraham Lincoln, and 3) theism, in particular,
Christianity, especially Catholicism and Protestantism, specifically American
theism.
Taking these points in reverse order, the importance of religion
is stated after a Perilloux-like list of complaints in the CSA’s declaration of
secession: “. . . public
opinion at the North has invested a great political error with the sanction of more
erroneous religious belief.” This statement came in Decmeber, 1860.
On March 4, 1861, Abraham Lincoln, aware
that only 7 states were planning war against the other 27 states, perhaps taunted the religious
fervor:
“Why should there not be a patient
confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal
hope in the world? In our present differences, is either party without faith of
being in the right? If the Almighty Ruler of Nations, with His eternal truth
and justice, be on your side of the North, or on yours of the South, that truth
and that justice will surely prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal of
the American people.”
The theist’s ear can easily interpret Lincoln’s politics as
Christian, whereas the 2017 view can easily discern military power as “the Almighty
Ruler of Nations.” Nevertheless, on their "erroneous religious beliefs," they fired on a higher military power among their own people.
I have no objections to believers
using religion to help their lives. However, it is past time for theists to
accept that the attainable common good is mutual, comprehensive safety and
security so that each person may responsibly pursue the happiness they want.
That goal is available in the USA more than in England, because it is offered
by the civic agreement in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. The
civic people may iteratively collaborate for justice using the-objective-truth rather
than conflicting for dominant opinion or, lately, using social science to
fabricate evidence for opinionated policy. In a civic culture there will always
be dissidents and criminals, so justice requires civic work by the people who
want justice.
We are here,
and we have a unique agreement with which to collaborate: the preamble.
The-objective-truth prevails universally.
To Charles
Kane: Stay alert for A Civic People of
America's next EBRP library meeting (or other public venue) and come to
collaborate for an achievable better future.
There you can and may speak the
collaborative statement of your choice, like, for example, “In private, I
practice atheism (or theism or specific religion or private religion---whatever
you choose to say), but in public I want mutual, comprehensive safety and
security founded on the-objective-truth and that’s why I came to the meeting.”
You could say,
"“In private and in public, Phil Beaver is a hypocrite. However, I want
mutual, comprehensive safety and security founded on the-objective-truth so I
came to the meeting anyway.”
I discovered
that AP reported Trump won vs Clinton in 84% of counties.
Columns. (The
fiction/non-fiction comments gallery for readers)
Indictments (Cal Thomas)
(baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-op-1104-cal-thomas-20171102-story.html)
“There is also the matter of
leaks from the grand jury. Not surprisingly, the details of the indictments
matched the leak to CNN. Those leaks are felonies and the leakers should be
prosecuted.”
FBI next (Byron York) washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-after-trump-dossier-revelation-fbi-is-next/article/2638540
“In recent months, Nunes has
been trying to force the FBI to reveal just what it did in the dossier matter.
The intel chairman issued a subpoena to the FBI on Aug. 24, and in the time
since, not a single document has been produced to the committee. The FBI and
the Justice Department have spent most of that time talking about possibly
complying with this or that part of the subpoena. But so far — nothing.”
So far in 2017, it seems to
me York is creating a record. That makes me think of journaling or journalism
or a journalist.
Very (Clarence Page) (thetowntalk.com/story/opinion/columnists/2017/11/02/trumps-blame-game-wearing-very-thin/823049001/)
What reader’s
value did Page see in the word “very” for thin?
Nevertheless, I am glad for the information that “Papadopoulos
secretly pleaded guilty.” I understand secrecy
in private matters, but not in Mueller’s “very” public charade.
Phil Beaver does not “know”
the-indisputable-facts. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth of which
most is undiscovered and some is understood. He is agent for A Civic People of
the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at
promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment