February 5, 2018

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for responsible freedom more than for the city.

A personal paraphrase of the June 21, 1788 preamble:  We the civic citizens 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 to us by the USA. I am willing to collaborate with other citizens on this paraphrase, yet may settle on and would always preserve the original text.   

Our Views (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_10bb57ac-0767-11e8-ad49-23075c40763a.html)

The Advocate’s campaign to take money from my family and spend it on wasteful government is relentless.

Every government agency may work smart so as to show the people of Louisiana how well they are fulfilling the duty they accepted. However, influenced by The Advocate, managers feel justified to cry for more money.

I keep making the point that it is not only taxpayers who are hurt by The Advocate. Just look at what Gov. John Bel Edwards’ “the right thing to do” has done to Medicaid recipients who gained access to opioids!

  

The Advocate, please back off your campaign to help governments pick the people’s pockets---all the people rather than only taxpayers.

    

Today’s thought, G.E. Dean (Psalms 40:3 CJB), The Advocate, February 5, 2018, 5B.

"He put a new song in my mouth, a song of praise to our God. Many will look on in awe and put their trust in ADONAI.”

Dean says, “He did for me. He can do it for you.”

  

Some people profess that God is like them---personally awesome. A few people perceive God is omniscient and omnipotent and therefore chooses humility.

I think The Advocate misrepresents the people by publishing David (3000 year old musings) and Dean (temporal hubris based on his beliefs). The people have both the authority and the responsibility for human justice, and The Advocate should have recognized that by now.

It’s only my opinion, but I think the people want from each other civic morality rather than civil imposition; private liberty with civic morality; hope and comfort rather than coercion; safety and security for living, holding private any hope for the afterdeath.

Letters

Falsehoods (Lindner) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_b04482f8-079e-11e8-a22e-e3337e3e8cc8.html)

Lindner falsely equates Waguespack to Norquist.

Moreover, I oppose giving Gov. Edwards more money with which to harm people.

Procreation licensing (Tellis) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_9e9ee63e-07a2-11e8-8ba5-a7c8ad328eae.html)

  

To Elaine O. Coil: Tellis may not appreciate it, but The Advocate directed his concerns to adult satisfactions, attaching The Advocate’s graphic, “Woe of the working parent: how child care issues have impacted parent’s workforce participation.”

So, the actual motivation for La Act 3 is to help single women who insist on being mothers even though their boyfriends refuse to be fathers. The consequence of the adult nanny state that Louisiana fosters is widespread abuse of children. A civic people, including civic taxpayers, ought not allow it.

What’s needed is procreation licensing to constrain irresponsible procreation, much as a civic people constrain irresponsible vehicle driving. However, that does not help the children who are born into neglect and abuse.

We propose a program to recognize the child’s personhood, and readers are invited to Google “Child incentives brief” and choose the URL with “cipbr” to learn about the proposal.

Columns

Free enterprise (Froma Harrop) (spokesman.com/stories/2018/feb/03/froma-harrop-big-pharma-may-own-washington-but-it-/)

“Go forth and disrupt, we say.”
 
The novel collaboration by Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase is leveraging like my company does in offering retirees mercer.us/what-we-do/health-and-benefits/comprehensive-health-and-benefits-solutions.html.

  

To me, an ordinary citizen, living in the American republic, it’s free enterprise at work despite an overbearing government. To Harrop, a social democrat, it’s AMO disruption.

I oppose social democracy, liberal democracy, socialism, communism, communitarianism, and every form of coercion that opposes the American republic.

I don’t think Harrop understands the civic agreement that is offered in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. I think people who don’t understand the preamble should be constrained from voting. The person who opposes the agreement that is offered in the preamble ought to vote, but not the person who has not considered it.

Federal tax cuts cover Louisiana’s budget cliff (Melinda Deslatte) (heraldonline.com/news/business/article198086429.html)

  

“Some [elected] lawmakers . . . have suggested the [corporate tax cuts] in Washington could generate up to $400 million or $500 million annually.”

  

This says nothing about increased Louisiana revenues due to personal income gains from both employee raise and new jobs.

I hope elected legislators decline the special session Gov. Edwards would like.

  

News

John Kennedy fan (Bryn Stole) (theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/politics/article_58e43fea-08b0-11e8-b266-9b02fa3a2b64.html)

  

Kennedy’s desire to communicate with pithy statements is a practice I could mimic.

About a testy DC meeting: ““It was a very positive meeting. Nobody called anybody an ignorant slut or anything.” (crack from a SNL skit)

““love is the answer — but you ought to own a handgun just in case.”

David Vitter “a cross between Socrates and ‘Dirty Harry.”

wondering how lawmakers “made it through the birth canal” as Congress hurtled toward a government shutdown.

He’s “a free-range chicken that goes out on its own.”

“My job is to do what I think is right," Kennedy said.

Jindal’s budgets built on “gimmicks”

Kennedy contends that his tendency to speak his mind has cut both ways during his career, drawing ire even as the stacks of press clippings grow. His goal, Kennedy said, has always been to find a way to distill a policy or position down to a phrase his constituents can instantly comprehend.

GOP Sen. John McCain . . . “tougher than a boiled owl” . . . Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell . . . “tougher than a $3 steak.” The United States . . . “was founded by geniuses but is being run by idiots.”

. . . one proposal for the GOP’s tax plan . . . “rather drink weed killer” than back it. Later . . . “I may have to get drunk to vote for this bill”

“I don't know when they have time to make movies in Hollywood, because it looks like they're all busy molesting each other.” “all pigs”

“I’ve got a lot of enemies in politics, particularly at the state level. They just made one mistake — they let me live and I’ve learned how to survive,” Kennedy said.

And firing from the hip, the senator insisted, is what’s made a career in politics fun.

Anti-abortion (Ryan Foley) (washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/state-legislatures-see-flurry-of-activity-on-abortion-bills/2018/02/03/027d9086-08ea-11e8-aa61-f3391373867e_story.html&freshcontent=1)

  

“Ingrid Duran, director of state legislation at the National Right to Life Committee, said the model state laws drafted by her group are aimed at U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, a swing vote who wrote the court's 2007 opinion upholding a federal ban on a procedure critics call partial-birth abortion. She said the court could use similar reasoning to prohibit dilation and evacuation and noted it has never considered whether states have an interest in protecting fetuses from pain.” See nytimes.com/2007/04/18/us/18cnd-scotus.html.

Legislate procreation licensing in order to protect children from neglect and abuse. Also, focus legislation on children rather than “unborn children,” in other words, harming the woman to favor her fetus.

The deep state (Glenn Garvin) (miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article198038824.html)

  

“An ABC News/Washington Post poll last year showed that nearly half the people in America believe a Deep State — defined as “military, intelligence and government officials who try to secretly manipulate government policy” — is working behind the facade of the constitutional U.S. government.”

“It originated in the 1920s to describe the iron-fisted clique of security officials and gangsters who pulled the strings — bloodily, if necessary — of Turkey’s puppet civilian government. The first to apply it to the United States was Peter Dale Scott, a leftist University of California scholar, in his 2007 book “The Road to 9/11,” which wove a dark tapestry of covert conspiracy from events as diverse as the Kennedy assassination, Watergate and the Iran-contra scandal.”

“In 1961, more than four decades before Scott’s book, President Eisenhower warned the nation that “we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex.”

“In 1956, sociologist C. Wright Mills published a study called “The Power Elite,” which began: “The powers of ordinary men are circumscribed by the everyday worlds in which they live, yet even in these rounds of job, family and neighborhood they often seem driven by forces they can neither understand nor govern. . . . within a decade, most college political science departments were assigning their students reading from Mills’ book. Its influence extended well beyond U.S. borders: Fidel Castro was an enthusiastic reader, and his speeches cadged from it, though without giving credit.”

“Edward Snowden, the rogue National Security Agency subcontractor who spilled the secrets about the Xbox, told The Nation magazine: “There’s definitely a Deep State. Trust me, I’ve been there.”

Other forums

  

facebook.com/groups/qayyum110/?multi_permalinks=2062452144035528

  

I don't agree with this pithy statement. I am neither socialized nor civilized: I collaborate for a civic culture. "Civic" means citizens living so as to responsibly accommodate each other's private pursuit of personal preferences---in other words, private happiness---rather than the happiness a society or a civilization would impose.
 

I think the popular momentum for social morality, especially social democracy, ruins the people's potential to talk about how to establish statutory, human justice.

Again:

I don't understand your response. However, I assume you'd like to consider how I propose to collaborate for a better future that I perceive is achievable.

 

I think it is a matter of doing the work to find words and phrases that empower the collaboration most people would like to enjoy. For example, in a public meeting wherein "social morality," is commonly expressed, I raise my hand and if allowed to speak, assert that social morality is an erroneous objective: What people want is civic morality, wherein all the societies they would like to join may flourish.

 

You may perceive that these ideas are loaded. For example, "all the societies they would like to join" followed "civic morality," wherein societies that flourish are civic. Thus, a society of throat-cutters is sought out for annihilation.

The most important point I'd like you to consider is this: A civic culture divides citizens into two factional groups. There are civic citizens who collaborate in thought, words, and action according to the principle, First do not harm. The other group are dissidents to human justice. Statutory justice (written law and law enforcement) maintains order as these two groups co-exist. When actual harm by a dissident is discovered, the dissident is constrained by statutory justice and encouraged to reform.

Again: 

I appreciate your interest and would like to focus on one idea. Let's iteratively collaborate until the two of us come up with a phrase we both like to replace "social morality." 

Already, I proposed "civic morality" and defined "civic." So that is my Idea A. I propose that you consider my reasons for the choice of words, decide whether or not you agree with the need to change, and then work on either accepting my phrase or proposing an alternative, Idea B, that you think I may prefer to Idea A. If so, I will consider Idea B with full commitment. If you accept my phrase, it will not be your act of compromise or subjugation or cooperation: It will be because you perceive that Idea A serves your idea of a better way of living.

Google is powerfully helps us explore phrases, and "social morality" is defined by a few organizations to imply systematic rule making on the principle that all humans are "in life together." My theory does not follow the rule-making part. In my theory, the people are divided on statutory justice as civic vs dissidents. 

Statutory justice has two features that are not followed by extant statutory law. First, statutory law assumes the human individual is weak and must be controlled. Second, statutory law is based on dominant opinion. Statutory justice assumes first that the human individual, given two to three decades to develop, will gravitate toward comprehensive fidelity as the preferred basis for personal living; fidelity cannot be taught, but it can be coached. Second, statutory justices is based on the-objective-truth rather than dominant opinion.

Thus, civic morality flourishes on statutory justice, and together they empower private liberty with civic morality. With social morality, nether private liberty nor civic morality is possible.

Phil Beaver does not “know” the actual-reality. He trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. He is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.