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, November 1, 2011

Vent Page XXVIII, Go For It

VENT PAGES are handy for posting of off-topic posts, rants, raves, rages, etc which might not be appropriate on other threads where adults are having serious discussions. Childish rant? Need to call another poster a name? Just feel like spouting off? Or even if you have something to say and there doesn't seem to be any other logical place to say it....THIS PAGE IS FOR YOU!

48 comments:

Blogger said...

Someone asked for a new page. Also, they wanted to begin with Herman Cain. It is a dangerous world isn’t it? Once, we had one of those hostile women types as a new member of our faculty. I did not like her and I felt she was bad for our students.

Anyway, in an attempt at trying to be friendly, I made the mistake of saying, “You look nice today.” With eyes blazing and nostrils flaring, she roared “What do you mean by that!!” Seeing danger coming, I said, “well you were so dressed up, I thought you might be job hunting today.” Then I hauled my rear end out of there at full speed.

Sarkazein said...

Nawlyuns is back, thank you America!

Jack said...

New Campaign Poster

Sarkazein said...

He never was even accused of groping was he? The cartoonist must have been thinking of Clinton or Obama from his Chicago coke and limo (Larry Sinclair) days.

guy faulkes said...

Thank you Jack for providing an example of the irrelevance of the left.

Fox news is saying there is a rumor that this was a joint effort between a Republican primary opponent and Politico. If so it would beinteresting to see which Republican it is.

Perry and Bauchman werre mentioned as the establishment pendants seem to think they would have the most to gain by Cain losing support. In my opinion, one could add Romney as Cain is the most likely person to defeat him.

Blogger, it is interesting that in the case of a charge of sexual harassment or domestic violence, one is apparently considered guilty until proven innocent. Even then one is many times still considered guilty.

Sarkazein said...

If it gets too bad, the charges of sexual harassment against Mr Cain, he'll have to run as a Democrat if he wants to get elected.

Sarkazein said...

My guess is, if it was a another Republican involved against Mr Cain, it was Gov Perry. Just a guess. Or it could have been the RNC (the Republican National Committee not the Republican National Convention Jack)

Blogger said...

Around the time women were first pushing back against workplace harassment, my wife, my daughter and I gave a presentation on the subject. The occasion was boss-secretary lunch. My daughter presented the research including the mounting costs to industry from an increasing number of legal actions. My wife presented the psychological damage done to women, whether they resisted, went along, or fought back.

It was an uncomfortable situation, as the secretaries had invited their bosses. At the same time, we knew that many of these managers had no idea of what was coming down the road at them. We felt giving this heads up was more for them than for the ladies.

Then right in the middle of our talk, one woman whose boss was not with her, yelled out “Hey, my boss can harass me any time he wants!” And there you have it.

Blogger said...

Actually, the clumsy way Cain dealt with something he knew ten days ahead of time was coming, bothers me more than anything. It certainly doesn't instill confidence.

Sarkazein said...

For me, sexual harassment was in reverse in my younger days. The only reason I minded it is because I would blush ALOT. Then the attention was brought to the blush... which of course made the blush increase.

OHH if only I knew then what I know now. But the last thing I would have thought of doing is suing. If I would have sued it it would have been my fair skinned Anglo-Saxon ancestors.

Sarkazein said...

Glen Beck called it right at the beginning of the Communist revolution AKA Occupy Wall Street. He said it would turn VIOLENT and it has. These are the people Pelosi, Obama, and the Hollywood weirdos support.

Sarkazein said...

"Officials with the revamped ACORN office in New York -- operating as New York Communities for Change -- have fired staff, shredded reams of documents and told workers to blame disgruntled ex-employees for leaking information in an effort to explain away a FoxNews.com report last week on the group’s involvement in Occupy Wall Street protests, according to sources."- Right-Wing Propaganda.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/03/acorn-officials-scramble-firing-workers-and-shredding-documents-after-exposed/#ixzz1cjpjxE2f

guy faulkes said...

I found this interesting just as I find it interesting that so many apparently would feel better if Cain had given the issue more spin. I would prefer a politician that told the truth or at least lied poorly.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/11/04/republicans-cain-allegations/

Wolf's Head said...

Remember, remember the 5th of November
The Gun Powder Treason and Plot
I know of no reason
why the Gun Powder Treason
should ever be forgot!

Happy Guy Fawkes Day to Brother Guy!

guy faulkes said...

Thank you, Wolf, The real incident aside, Was that not a great movie?

guy faulkes said...

He was getting old and paunchy and his hair was falling fast,
And he sat around the Legion, telling stories of the past.

Of a war that he once fought in and the deeds that he had done,
In his exploits with his buddies, they were heroes, every one.

And 'tho sometimes to his neighbors his tales became a joke,
All his buddies listened quietly for they knew whereof he spoke.

But we'll hear his tales no longer, for old Bob has passed away,
And the worlds a little poorer for a Soldier died today.

He won't be mourned by many, just his children and his wife.
For he lived an ordinary, very quiet sort of life.

He held a job and raised a family, going quietly on his way;
And the world won't note his passing, 'tho a Soldier died today.

When politicians leave this earth, their bodies lie in state,
While thousands note their passing, and proclaim that they were great.

Papers tell of their life stories from the time that they were young
But the passing of a Soldier, goes unnoticed, and unsung.

Is the greatest contribution to the welfare of our land,
Someone who breaks his promise and cons his fellow man?

Or the ordinary fellow who in times of war and strife,
Goes off to serve his country and offers up his life?

The politician's stipend and the style in which he lives,
Are often disproportionate, to the service that he gives.

While the ordinary Soldier, who offered up his all,
Is paid off with a medal and perhaps a pension, small.

It is not the politicians with their compromise and ploys,
Who won for us the freedom that our country now enjoys.

Should you find yourself in danger, with your enemies at hand,
Would you really want some cop-out, with his ever waffling stand?

Or would you want a Soldier-- his home, his country, his kin,
Just a common Soldier, who would fight until the end?

He was just a common Soldier, and his ranks are growing thin,
But his presence should remind us we may need his like again.

For when countries are in conflict, we find the Soldier's part
Is to clean up all the troubles that the politicians start.

If we cannot do him honor while he's here to hear the praise,
Then at least let's give him homage at the ending of his days.

Perhaps just a simple headline in the paper that might say:
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."
(Author Unknown)

Anonymous said...

Just wanted everybody to know the Watch is still censoring posts that invalidate Willimson's opinion.

Blogger said...

RE: Charlotte and DNC: "On the same day the DNC was scrambling to prove how pro-local business they are, it was revealed who they awarded the work that had been denied to John Monteith’s shop. The work went to a company called Hargrove Inc, a shop that boasts its work force of more than 3,000 union personnel and hails from the union bastion of the Washington D.C. metro area. They work with the biggest names in the union market. From the Teamsters, to the Carpenters Union, union favoritism seems to be a very important reason Hargrove was selected. From today's Red State

Mike D. said...

Anonymous,

Mine are still not being censored, and many of mine are refutations and criticism of J.W..

Again, maybe you're doing it wrong?

Anonymous said...

Mine was a link to an article about the organization that took ACRON's place shredding documents to try to keep proof they were behind OWS from being discovered. What is wrong with that, MIkeD, Also, you are pretty liberal, so maybe that is why you get through.

Sarkazein said...

MikeD- Liberals love middle-of-the-roaders. They know they are harmless and help keep the status-quo while they plan for the US Constitution's demise.

Sarkazein said...

"Microphones accidently left on after G20 meeting pick up private conversation between US, French presidents. Sarkozy admits he 'can't stand' Israeli premier. Obama: You're fed up with him? I have to deal with him every day!"- the news

These two pinheads don't have missiles flying into their civilian areas everyday. An open mic? What idiots.

guy faulkes said...

If this does not work, google afterburner three and one half days

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAOrT0OcHh0

Anonymous said...

There is finally conclusive evidence that Osama bin Laden and Muammar Gaddafi are dead.

Friday, they both registered as democrats to vote in Chicago

They are expected to vote early and often.

guy faulkes said...

Well, I see the dolt is back and wrong as usual.

guy faulkes said...

Does anyone have an opinion concerning Holder's inept testimony before the Senate committee? I think he is on the way out. The question is whether Obama can be tied to the Fast and Furious scandal also and if it will bring him down before the election.

Sarkazein said...

Impatiently waiting Blogger's opinion on Mr Cain's veracity.

Blogger said...

Sarkazein said.. "Impatiently waiting Blogger's opinion on Mr Cain's veracity."

Thanks for asking, but I am sure my response will disappoint you. In my guts, I wish Cain would just fade away. I get a queasy feeling that something just is not ringing true about him and I go with those people who believe that if he had won some previous offices, he would have been well vetted by now.

However, saying that, I feel ashamed of myself that I am willing to throw a man overboard on such flimsy evidence. However, I will commit myself with this. I do believe that if the women can pull off a joint press conference like they are planning, then he is toast. Following is a thoughtful article from a prominent conservative.
GOP and Cain

Sarkazein said...

Blogger- Excellant point about Mr Cain being vetted more previously if he had held other Offices. I liked the fact that he hadn't held political Office and would be less of a politician. But, the lack of vetting is true.
If he had won his Senate primary, it might of happened. But not on the scale of a Presidential campaign.
My gut feeling is the stories are about half true. He has to have had an aggressive personality to get where he did in the business world. He probably was aggressive in his attempts to seduce women. At one time in recent corporate history, that was not considered such a bad thing. Not considering the moral aspect of course. But, making all those passes with so few completions makes it something else entirely.

guy faulkes said...

John Wayne was correct about liberals then and he remains correct to this day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btvSE6tVHzQ&feature=related

Sarkazein said...

Purposeful

Sarkazein said...

Tub-a-Goo's lake house. Just one of the 99%'ers.

Sarkazein said...

"A poll conducted by the group Greenberg Quinlan Rosner found that 52.3 percent of Americans rate Netanyahu positively, compared to 51.5 percent for Obama," reports Israel Today Magazine. "The results of the poll were enthusiastically discussed on Israel's Channel 10 News on Thursday."- the news

Sarkazein said...

Another Obama donor gets big $$$$$ on a bogus deal from us. Our treasury is being looted. We are donating money to Obama's re-election.

guy faulkes said...

Cain and Obama - a double standard.

http://conservativetalk.org/2011/11/07/obama-accused-of-sexual-harassment-at-harvard-law-review/

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- Your link ties into MANY rumors about Obama and Rahm regarding their nitelife in Chicago.

guy faulkes said...

I do not know if there is any substance to the allegations about Obama, just as no one knows if there is any substance to the allegations about Cain, but it is clearly evident there is a major difference in how the media treats them.

guy faulkes said...

If the rules are followed as to recusion, it looks like ther will be only eight judges when the Supreme court hears Obamacare.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/kagan-tribe-day-obamacare-passed-i-hear-they-have-votes-larry-simply-amazing

Jack said...

Scalia and Thomas as well.

guy faulkes said...

Jack, do you see no difference in attending a fund raising event and applauding a law on which you are supposed to be ruling.

If you are true to form, probably not.

Jack said...

I'm no legal ethics expert, but if you accept one premise, you should probably accept both.

If all they did was attend a fundraiser, then no big deal. But, unfortunately, Justices Scalia and Thomas were wined and dined by ACA opponents, including the law firm that will both arguing against the law. Plus, they were guests of honor. Kinda sketchy.

I understand the argument that Justice Kagan should recuse herself. And through the same thought-process, I understand the argument that Justices Scalia and Thomas should recuse themselves as well.

All in all though, I don't believe any of them should be recused based on past behaviors. I think they can set aside personal beliefs and apply Constitutional analysis without bias.

Blogger said...

Jack 28 USC 455, a Supreme Court justice must recuse anytime he has “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he “served in governmental employment."

Kagan said in her onfirmation for her position that as Solicitor General that she did not work on Obamacare. If that is found not to be true, by law she much recuse herself.

The other justice do not fit the legal definition.

Jack said...

Well, everyone has a personal opinion. But that doesn't mean that one cannot separate that opinion from his professional work. I trust that all nine Justices can do just that, even Scalia.

But if you accept that Kagan should be recused because she had an opinion, then you should believe that Scalia and Thomas should be recused for being privately courted by the very lawyers that will be presenting the anti-ACA argument in front of them.

But I don't. Let 'em stay.

Jack said...

"The other justice do not fit the legal definition."

Well, if you read 28 U.S.C. § 455, Scalia and/or Thomas could fit into the following categories:

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding

(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding

(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding


Personally, I think it's all political/partisan jibber-jabber. Nothing of substance from either side. Let 'em be.

guy faulkes said...

As I thought, Jack cannot get past his liberal religion taught to him by his political masters.

Sarkazein said...

Kagan may act as the typical liberal. Just like Holder, Clinton, Chu, Reno, Rangle... there will have to be massive pressure from the MSM if she is to recuse herself.
It is funny to watch and read the scum on the Left trying to draw comparisons. Like Jack for instance... if Thomas previously read the Obama-care bill then he should have to recuse himself. If Scalia had dinner in the same room with anyone who has fought Obama-care, he should have to recuse.

Blogger said...

Jack, First of all, thank you for the substantive comments you make on this blog. They elevate the discussion. As to recusing, I will now have to go with my own experience. I have served on many local, state, and national boards. On each of them I had to fill out and sign conflict of interest statements. The one time I had to recuse was when I was reviewing the state plans of North Carolina for the US Department of Health and Human Services. The reason was that I had sat on another board which had some input into the NC plan.

Times I did not recuse myself were on local boards which were ruling on matters which might have been construed as helping either me or my wife financially. I always made sure that neither of us was in the same business as the board was ruling on. Otherwise, I would not have served.

I read the law as saying if you had input or if you or someone involved with you stood to benefit, then one must recuse himself. The only justice that fits the description will be Kagan if she had anything to do with crafting the legislation. Applying the law to every normal event in judges’ lives would make it impossible for them to do their job.

Sarkazein said...

Another high crime by Obama- bribery