Loath as I am to pick a fight with or publicly criticize a professional journalist (God knows, we get enough grief from all directions—we’re too far left for the right and too far right for the left, and too everything for the centrists), I have to wonder if Baton Rouge Advocate columnist Dan Fagan has just flat out run out of subject matter or really believes what he writes.
In Thursday’s edition of The Advocate, Fagan seems to actually believe that Governor John Bel Edwards’s mandate that employees with contact with the public wear masks is an infringement upon our personal freedoms. (Read his full column HERE.)
“It’s not about masks,” he sniffs with all the appropriate indignity he can muster. “It’s about freedom,” something he said we had “before the government snatched it from us in broad daylight.”
Good grief.
He should be more offended at the rude manner in which Trump treated New Orleans nurse Sophia Thomas.
Personally, I’m far more offended by the fact that greedy legislators took their per diem pay for the 49 days they were not in session because of the shutdown. If some single black mom had taken a penny of welfare or food stamp payments to which she was not entitled, she would be instantly branded a welfare queen and demand would follow to tighten requirements for welfare recipients and to prosecute offenders. Perhaps Fagan should’ve addressed that little legislative swindle in his column.
What is he, the print edition of Rush Limbaugh? It’s no longer about what we cannot do, he writes, but “what we must do.”
Seriously? Does he understand that there have been 1.3 million confirmed cases in the U.S. as of today and 76,537 deaths attributed directly to the coronavirus so far—that we actually know about?
To put that in perspective, we lost 58,220 American lives in Vietnam and that was over a period of eight years, from 1965 to 1973. The first coronavirus death in the U.S. was on Feb. 26 of this year. Do the math.
Is he aware that 2,135 of those deaths have been right here in Louisiana?
And yes, influenza kills, too. For the six months from Oct. 1, 2019 through April 4, 2020, the Center for Disease Control’s best estimates are between 24,000 and 62,000 deaths from the flu.
Fagan bemoans the shaming of legislators for not wearing masks. Well, I’ve always said our legislators are better known for their avarice than for their common sense and that collectively, they are a few lagers shy of a six-pack.
In his rambling condemnation of what he perceives as an attack on his personal freedom, Fagan is careful to mention that Edwards is a Democrat, that Democrats oppose tort reform (which, of course, has everything to do with face masks), that State Rep. Mandie Landry, also a Democrat, shamed fellow legislators (the Republican ones, of course) for not wearing masks and besides, Landry, an attorney, represents abortion clinics…
To tell you the truth, Fagan’s wasn’t even something one could call circular logic. It was more like meandering logic. But if we’re going to play his game, I think it’s fair to speculate that there are most probably a few Republican lawyers who defend child molesters and ax murderers—or at least they would if a sufficient cash retainer was brought to the table.
But for the moment, let’s just stick to his main theme: freedom.
Do I not deserve the freedom to be presented a meal or any other commodity that I’m spending good money on without the fear that an infected employee may have sneezed on it? It seems only fair to me that I not be unnecessarily exposed by some careless individual who doesn’t really care about me or my family.
But, you say, if I’m that afraid, why don’t I just stay home?
Are you telling me you would impose your demands that I not leave my home? Isn’t that an infringement on the very freedom on which you based your silly argument to begin with?
In most circles, that would be deemed a double standard.
But bottom line is I respectfully disagree that a mandate for those serving the public to wear masks is tantamount to the government coming for my guns, my home, or my first-born or otherwise threatening my freedom.
It is simply an action taken for the greater good of the general public—sort of like restricting livestock in the city limits is a step toward protecting the general public. Like police patrols are for the protection of the public. Like requiring contractors, electricians, plumbers or airline pilots to have a license for their particular craft: you don’t want to expose the public to unnecessary risks.
Let’s leave the conspiracy theories to the experts—like Alex Jones—and let’s stick to informing, not roiling, the public.
There are legitimate concerns about which you can write—concerns like the shooting of innocent joggers, voter suppression and the wrongful convictions of far too many people, just for starters.
Louisiana Voice 
Fagan deserves no respect, and it’s disgraceful that the Advocate runs his tripe.
I agree.
“What is he, the print edition of Rush Limbaugh?” He would love that characterization – seriously.
Mr. Aswell, you deserve a Pulitzer prize! Thank you for all you do to shine a light into the darkest recesses of politics. May God bless and keep you and yours always!
Trump would call it the “Noble Prize”—and then insist that I return it.
Fagan never met a syllogism that led him to a logical conclusion.
Where is Fagan’s outrage at the governor and the legislature taking away women’s constitutional rights to privacy? To their basic human rights to make decisions regarding their OWN BODIES? To their right to make their own important decisions that affect their very lives, as in life or death, economics, ability to make a living, care for their children and other family, pursue education??? Why is he not, why has he not been loudly vocal against these transgressions led by Jeff Landry and the Republican majority in both houses of the legislature? God knows he’s certainly had many YEARS to do so.
Just because Fagan sits down with his computer and God, doesn’t make him a journalist. Good columnists rely on good sources and research. Good writing is good thinking. Fagan falls short on both accounts.
Not only is the gov’ment trying to make us wear masks in public, but they’re also requiring us to wear pants. What if we don’t want to wear pants? What if we don’t like wearing pants? Where’s our freedom?!
Excellent point Ha ha!
total agreement
Tom,
Was it a mandate or order, as opposed to urging?
I’m asking because I honestly don’t know.
It’s a mandate insofar as it applies to those serving the public.
Dear Dan Fagan:
Okay, Anarchist, why are you not screaming about our complete loss of freedom, because “the government” has been telling us what to do for some time (and not just Democrats). Government forces people to register the birth of our children and death of our loved ones; get a passport to travel internationally and a REAL ID to fly interstate; get drivers licenses, wear car seat belts and put kids in safety seats; buy auto insurance, get vehicle license plates, registration and annual inspections; get building permits for construction; get vaccinations in order to go to school; get professional licenses to work as a hairdresser or barber, plumber, electrician, etc. etc. etc. We have to adhere to speed limits and respect traffic lights; eat government-inspected food in restaurants forced to meet safety and cleanliness standards; adhere to fire safety standards at home and in commercial buildings; get background checks to buy guns, work as a teacher or day care worker; get hunting and fishing licenses; license your business, your boat and your dog; vaccinate and microchip your horses; PAY TAXES on income and purchases to pay for government to take all your freedom away…and and and.
I could go on forever but my head hurts from thinking of all the ways that government takes away my liberty, infringes on my freedom and generally makes my life as miserable as possible while trying to keep me safe. Hate that nanny state.
So, unless you have a better solution, I’ll wear my mask when I venture out in public to buy stuff, from the sanctuary of my home, where I like to be whether ordered to stay there or not. In fact, I’m going to stay close to home and mask up when out for a while after those temporary orders are lifted, because it’s common sense to prevent the spread of a dread disease.
As far as all those other freedom-killing requirements mentioned, those are permanent and won’t expire, so we will expect a jeremiad against them any day, with exhortations to your loyal readers to rebel against all this government intrusion. We expect you to do as you say and flout all the rules yourself, so when your bad self lands in a government-run jail, we will send thoughts and prayers (but not anything to eat, or a cell phone, because government calls those contraband). As a guest of the public, which should not be spending taxpayer dollars on gourmet cuisine for law breakers, you will surely enjoy prison fare.
Can’t wait for those columns to run in The Advocate.
Best regards –
earthmother
P.S. – thank the government for that nice First Amendment thingy that guarantees your freedom to express yourself and the media’s freedom to print or broadcast almost anything. But I have not found any government rules that regulate stupid. Oh, and you can still walk in the park. Just keep six feet from anyone also enjoying the great outdoors.
Apparently if it’s something that he agrees with it’s ok but if not, it’s snatching freedom from all of us – in broad daylight. At least that’s the way I perceive it.
The Narcissist loves attention. Fagan and Trump are now the Republican Party. I masked up and took my old (86) fellow Democrat a meal. He is taking care of his wife who has dementia. Alone! A fellow officer and pilot, He said as I handed the bag to him, ” I used to have some respect for some Republicans, but not now.” Love the first Amendment also, but love more the first words about not establishing a religion……agree with David Norwood, comment in Advocate, read Matthew 8 1-8. ron thompson
§31. Compensation of members
The compensation of the members of the legislature shall be equal to the rate allowable for per diem deduction under Section 162(h)(1)(B)(ii) of Title 26 of the United States Code for the location of the state capital during their attendance on that body.
Tom, above is the Title 24 provision relative to the per diem payments. The key phrase is “…for the location of the state capital during their attendance on that body.” How can you earn per diem if you were not in Baton Rouge?
So many excellent comments. Well done, people!
I too read the article and was shocked. I think the reason the Advocate runs this dribble is so they will appear as showing all sides and maybe, just maybe they have a contract with Fagan that hasn’t run out.
I can’t believe no one has yet reminded Fagan of the government overreach in requiring restaurant employees to wash their hands after using the restroom before returning to work.
Yes, at one time Jeff Sadow and Fagan were trying to outdo each other..These folks that yell the the loudest about “my Constitutional rights” have not even read the Constitution..they think that “Bill of Rights ” is someone named Bill who lives in a town called “Rights”. Of course they are led on by the President and the likes of Clay Higgins.