This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Vetting Christie

The rumor is flying that Chris Christie will get in the race. Once in, all stakeholders will begin supercharged vetting. So, I’m jumping in now.

Gov. Chris Christie has signed a bill advocates NJ Anti-bullying bill say gives New Jersey the toughest anti-bullying law in the nation. It defines bullying as “any gesture, any written, verbal or physical act . . . that is reasonably perceived as being motivated . . . by any actual or perceived characteristic” of a person. Administrators who do not investigate reported incidents of bullying would be disciplined, while students who bully could be suspended or expelled. School employees would also be required to report all incidents they learn of, whether they took place in or outside of school. (My emphasis)  "All schools must employ an anti-bullying specialist to carry out these investigations and all incidents must be logged with an anti-bullying bureaucracy in Trenton. (10/3/2011 National Review p. 12)

To me this criminalizing childhood behavior smacks of the nanny state on steroids.

When our then Democrat representative Cullie Tarlton, rammed through the North Carolina General
Assembly his anti-bullying law, I confronted him with “Are you trying to turn all children into sissies?” He pushed back saying: “You don’t understand, bullying these days is not like the bullying you and I knew as children.”

Maybe some of our readers can clarify for me how things are different now. I confess I don’t have any children in school as all four of my grandchildren were home schooled. So, I only have my own childhood to draw from.

In my case, I was the runt of the litter–one of the smallest kids in my classes. As a result, I was prime target for the bully. Unfortunately for the bully, my father had taught me, “If he is your size, beat him up. If he is bigger than you, grab whatever you can and cold cock him with it.”

Needless to say, it did not take long for bullies to get the message. Then, by high school, my ability to take a punch gave me the nickname of Sturmovik, the Russian plane that was so armored we wondered how it could fly.

So, back to vetting Christie. When he signed this, did he remember being the fat kid who was picked on and didn’t fight back? (If so, than by not learning to fight, he missed the best preparation of all for being president.)

Or, more ominous, is he really another closet liberal–a sheep in wolf’s clothing?


NewGuy said...

Blogger: “You don’t understand, bullying these days is not like the bullying you and I knew as children.”

Maybe some of our readers can clarify for me how things are different now. I confess I don’t have any children in school as all four of my grandchildren were home schooled. So, I only have my own childhood to draw from.

Blogger, I would also like to hear from someone closer to the present day school situation than I am. I recently had a discussion with a young conservative that I have the greatest respect for. He pretty much told me the same is a LOT different now than it was in my day. Some kids are out of control - discipline is non existent. Teachers hands are tied by administrators fearful of lawsuits, etc. Much of the "common sense" has been replaced with the kind of nonsense policy papers and "zero tollerance" crap that takes away any discretion from teachers and adminstrators and results in the suspension of kindergarten kids for drawing a picture of a gun, or of junior high school girls who give an aspirin or Midol to a friend!

I would very much appreciate hearing from someone close to the situation....maybe someone like "Tired Teacher" who, at one time, provided us with some valuable insight into another school related topic.

Exactly WHAT is different in the schools today from what was there 30 years ago?

NewGuy said...

I should add that I would assume that the Watauga schools are likely a lot different than the situations being experienced in larger cities in New Jersey......

Blogger said...

New Guy are you saying that if the situation in the schools is bad enough, you would not be troubled with such laws or people who make such laws?

NewGuy said...

No...Not saying that at all!! I am just pleading ignorance to what the situation in these schools actually is. And, I would really like to know. As I said, a person for whom I have the GREATEST possible respect...and who is a Reagan conservative to the bone - told me that I just did not understand the situation in the schools today. Our discussion - at the time - was about the 'trend' to have 2 teachers, or a teacher and an assistant, in a class of 22-26 kids! When you and I went to school, Blogger, we had one teacher and, at least in my school, between 25 and 30 kids per class. If you acted up you got sent to the principals office and it entailed - at a minimum - a phone call to your parents and a few days in "detention" ..."kept after school" we called it then.

I am just at a loss to know what the real situation is in today's schools....what PROMPTS such involvement at the state level? What's going on that we have to have policeman in our schools "School resource officers" they are called. And, most of all...what is behind these issues? the cause?

I expect that - if the situation in New Jersey is such that they feel there are laws necessary to keep kids from picking on each other - then the problems are much deeper than what you and I experienced in our youth. And NO, I don't think legislation is the answer to problems of pre-adolescents! I would however, like to have a better understanding about today's world in grade, jr high and high schools!

When we were kids and had a fight on school property..."coach" - or a big male teacher ...would pick us up by the in each hand....and lay down the law to us. Usually we ended up shaking hands and becoming friends, most of this stuff was with your friends to begin with...

It's just a coincidence but yesterday...when I was researching something else...I came across your posting about the discussion/correspondence exchange you had had with Cullie several years back. Funny you should bring this matter up the very next day.

At least New Jersey is targeting EVERYONE...unlike Cullie's version where he was legislating which particular kids you couldn't pick on!

Blogger said...

NewGuy, I expect that it was the Cullie thing that has made me react so strongly to the New Jersey law. I had been looking forward to Christie getting in. We are still looking for someone who is authentic and has charisma. He is both. But I have a problem with someone claiming to be a conservative who is willing to sign a law that says: “School employees would also be required to report all incidents they learn of, whether they took place in or outside of school. (My emphasis) And “Administrators who do not investigate reported incidents of bullying would be disciplined, while students who bully could be suspended or expelled?” And, the reports go into a computer in the Capitol.

Your kid calls another kid a name. Now a "school safety team" rules on it. Do they come and take your kid off in handcuffs? Does he have a record? This is nuts!

I am as put off by what Christie has been willing to do as those on our blog who are unyielding on their second amendment.

Blogger said...

And here are conservatives with a different problem with the law Social Conservatives

Blogger said...

By the way, this all happened in January. Thus it only becomes a problem if Christie runs.

Wolf's Head said...

Bullying is only a problem when people are trained to be passive and non violent.

Beating the s**t out of a bully not only stops them from bullying that person, but others as well.

This nanny state micro control of behavior must stop.

Besides, Christie is a Yankee politician, and they have no concept of liberty.

Wolf's Head said...

Bt the way Blogger, here is what OUR democrap gov'ner is saying:

Guy and I have talked for years wondering when the dems would get around to suspending elections, and now our own Bev Perdue is starting the ball rolling.

NewGuy said...

It looks like Governor Bev has figured out that Obama is going to drag the ticket down and the best chance the Dems have to retain the senate is to skip next years elections!

Sarkazein said...

When I was a kid, you could give up in a fight. Now, you get your head kicked in and stomped until you go comatose. And I'm talking about the girls.

There is a disrespect for life (OK to kill the most innocent) and a lack of fear of punishment. All caused by liberalism. I would say it is a much bigger problem today.

When you see a video of a young adult male roundhouse punching a 90 year old woman for he Social Security money, you know things have changed. When you see a video of 50 kids (organized Chicagoans) stomping on a kid because he's not a homey, you know things are different. They don't even mind having videos made of the event.

I'd say, back in the day there was a black eye and /or a bloody nose... now its a drive-by.

Anonymous said...

guy faulkes said...

People that like to bully others are indeed more violent than they used to be. This is because they have been protected from retribution from their victims by the school systems. As the Wolf said, getting the crap beaten out of them by their intended victims would have straightened them out. However, the right of self defense for our children has been abolished by the school system.

Knowing they could get away with bullying just encouraged these people to increase their efforts to more extreme levels.

When I was a kid the principle had some boxing gloves that were used to correct bullying. The bully and his intended victim were taken to the gym and made to go at it. Oh, for the golden days of yesteryear!

Those that have been brought up without having to suffer the consequence for their actions think they have no limits. This is why Sark is correct.

I will also tell you of a fairly recent thing that happened concerning bullying. I had a friend whose child was being bullied on the school bus. After a couple of calls to the principle's office after which nothing was done, he went into the office for a meeting. The principle said that he was trying and that it was not a very serious situation because my friend's child had only been slapped a few times. My friend slapped the principal out of his chair, asked him if that was a serious situation, and told him to call the police because he thought the resulting news articles about the double standard would make for good reading. The police were not called and somehow the bullying on the bus was stopped.

As for the Wolf's other posts, as we have discussed, it was only a matter of time for this to happen. First they will bring up suspending elections and claim it is a joke to get the idea started. Then it will become a serious proposal.

Johnny Rico said...

Blogger and New Guy,

This is one of the best topics and posts I've seen on this blog. Great job. As NewGuy says, something is different these days in schools. I don't believe the bullying is different, but the manner in which things are dealt with. A lack of corporal punishment is perhaps the single greatest event leading to outright civil unrest in schools. They try to Riddlin the students into being calm enough to listen to basic instructions, but we all knew feeding kids narcotics was never the answer. Then they tried time out - a concept as laughable as it is sad. And now they want to legislate behavior.

Chris Christie, like Rick Perry is a big government advocate who will take your rights away as quickly as Hussein Obama. For some odd reason, some voters took a liking to Christie after he told a women to shut up at a town hall meeting. That shows me nothing except that perhaps he is a bully and in need of the recieving end of the nanny state legislation he is such a fan of.

Increasingly we need a true conservative. The current plight of our country puts our liberty at great risk. Politicians will use perilous times to rob liberty. Look at FDR in the depression - we are still living with the madness he gave us. Hussein Obamacare is another one.

Anti-bullying laws are a band-aid on a gushing wound that won't go away until basic,fundamental, proven action is taken. Same for our country.

Johnny Rico

PS Unemployment benefit extension is the reason we don't have an outcry against illegal aliens in this country. End the extensions so Americans will demand that illegal aliens will be deported. Sorry to get a bit off topic.

Johnny Rico said...

And Wolf's Head has a good approach to bullying. Teaching kids self defense is a great tactic. The Brazilian Ju Jitsu family of Gracies actually has an anti-bullying camp dedicated to teaching kids how to deal with, physically, bullies.

The head-stomping tactics prevalent in the African American community is indeed serious. How do you teach a kid to fight 30 animals intent on total destruction? Different set of anti bullying tactics must be used - aware of surroundings, large groups, and an exit strategy. Then singling one bully out at a later date for some "extra attention". Mostly what we as adults (the non sheeple) look out for. When I lived in the big city I made sure to dodge large gatherings of blacks hanging on the street corner. Just common sense. I had an exit strategy if it came to that. As a female, I understand the value of soft vs hard power very well. Our children should be taught the same as well. We have allowed the liberal socialist sheep to dictate laws allowing rude, dangerous bahavior to take place and we must adapt to that environemnt. I kind of liked walking the streets of Chicago when I lived there - of course, I carried a Glock with 17 rounds if things really got harry.

Kids are pretty smart for the most part, and giving them survival skills to not just get through life, but come out as a winner are important. Teaching kids to fight back, where appropriate, is something lost on parents. And a "revenge hit" is even more appropriate but needed very badly.

Nothing has solved more of the world's problems than the use of raw, naked force. Kids understand force, adults understand force, animals understand force. Nature understands force. Nature vs nurture. We are failing miserably on the nurture part.

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

And I meant to say "a revenge hit is even more inappropriate by today's standards, but needed very badly.

Making someone pay for a past transgression is an attention getter for sure. Isolating a bully at a later date and exacting a bit of revenge, justice, and fairness is indeed a tactic our kids should be taught. A true anti-bullying campaign based personal responsibility.

Fascinating post Blogger, fascinating.

Johnny Rico

No Compromise said...

When I read that Christie supported the assault-weapons ban, I quit reading, because I knew immediately that there was no way in hell I would vote for him, regardless of what his other views are.

Sarkazein said...

No Compromise- If it were down to Christie and Obama, who doesn't know which end of the barrel the round comes out and has conspired in the murder of a Federal agent, which one would you vote for?

guy faulkes said...

I do not know about No Compromise, Sark, but my answer would be neither one. I am supporting no liberal lite establishment candidate.

You guys can decide which liberal will ruin the country, in that event. I will write in someone, not vote for President, or vote third party if one is available for a conservative candidate.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- You may luck out, as predicted a long time ago, Obama may not be in the next election and you may be able to vote for a Democrat.

guy faulkes said...

"you may be able to vote for a Democrat."

Only if he is a conservative. I do not care about party. I care about ideology.

I really do think Fast and Furious will bring down the Obama Presidency if he is re-elected, but I do not think it will happen before 2012, Sark. Do you think he will be forced out by the Democrats, and do you not think any replacement might be even more liberal than is Obama.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- I do not think Obama will be the Democrat nominee for President. Of course I thought that in 2008 also.
This could also cause the Faulkes Syndrome-- Liberals end up with two or three "3rd Parties" and Conservatives end up with two or three "3rd Parties" combined with the two or three "3rd Parties" all ready existing and the candidate of the Transvestites for Gun Confiscation Party wins with 9% of the vote.

NewGuy said...

As to Christie as a nominee.....He has said so many times that he will DEFINITELY not run. And, I give him credit for that. If he reversed himself and did enter the race, I would think less of him for flip flopping.

With respect to the other issue...the bullying and the school problems. I have been thinking a lot about this and I wonder how much of it could logically be attributed to the decline of the traditional two parent household?

I don't recall but two of my childhood friends who grew up with a 'single parent'. In both cases, their moms were widowed.

Now, it's pretty much a 'normal' thing! Hillary said "it takes a village"...I always thought, "No. It takes parents!"

guy faulkes said...

Sark, I do not know if you were attempting to be facetious or not, but what you say could very well be true, and it would be a good thing. It is always better to support something than settle for that which does not adhere to your principals.

Obama may be forced to pull a Lyndon Johnson and not run.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- It is a little bit facetious and a little bit of European history.
It is what I like about the two Party system. The primaries rule out the 9%'ers :

Having scored at least 1% in a general election (or at least 5 MPs):
Italian Revolutionary Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Rivoluzionario Italiano)
Italian Labour Party (Partito Operaio Italiano)
Radical Party (Partito Radicale)
Constitutional Democratic Party (Partito Democratico Costituzionale)
Democratic Liberal Party (Partito Liberale Democratico)
Independent Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Indipendente)
Reform Democratic Party (Partito Democratico Riformista)
Party of Combatants (Partito dei Combattenti)
Economic Party (Partito Economico)
Party of Italian Peasants (Partito dei Contadini Italiani)
Italian Social Democratic Party (Partito Democratico Sociale Italiano)
Italian Reform Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Riformista Italiano)
Communist Party of Italy (Partito Comunista d'Italia)
Italian People's Party (old) (Partito Popolare Italiano)
United Socialist Party (old) (Partito Socialista Unitario)
Fascist National Party (Partito Nazionale Fascista)
Labour Democratic Party (Partito Democratico del Lavoro)
Action Party (Partito d'Azione)
Uomo Qualunque Front (Fronte dell'Uomo Qualunque)
Italian Socialist Workers' Party (Partito Socialista dei Lavoratori Italiani)
United Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Unitario)
Socialist Autonomy (Autonomia Socialista)
National Democratic Alliance (Alleanza Democratica Nazionale)
People's Unity (Unità Popolare)
Monarchist National Party (Partito Nazionale Monarchico)
People's Monarchist Party (Partito Monarchico Popolare)
Unified Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Unificato)
Italian Socialist Party of Proletarian Unity (Partito Socialista di Unità Proletaria)
Italian Democratic Party of Monarchist Unity (Partito Democratico Italiano di Unità Monarchica)
National Right (Destra Nazionale)
Proletarian Unity Party (Partito di Unità Proletaria)
Radical Party (Partito Radicale)
Rainbow Greens (Verdi Arcobaleno)
Green Lists (Liste Verdi)
Italian Communist Party (Partito Comunista Italiano)

This is about half of Italy's political Parties.

Sarkazein said...

Today's bullying story

guy faulkes said...

Sark, it would appear that in order to get elected in a country with that many parties, a candidate would have to be acceptable to a large number of them in order to be elected. I do not see much difference in this and the primary system as far as practicality goes.

We just divide our parties in half, call them Democrat or Republican, have the preliminaries, and then go for the main event.