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, July 24, 2012

V ent Page XLIX - The "Forty Niner" Vent Page

Our 49th VENT PAGE honoring the "Forty-Niners" who went west in search of California gold! Some of the most interesting times in our American history - fur trappers had the west pretty much to themselves until the discovery of gold at Sutters Mill signaled the start of the great western migration. Around 300,000 people rushed to the area between present day Sacramento and Reno Nevada in a 6 year period- this, in a nation of around 23 million people. About half came overland...half by sea to the then small port of San Freancisco.

What better icon for our 49th vent page thread? Allthough you aren't likely to find much gold among the vent page posts, you often can find a small gem or two!

Whenever the number of posts on a vent page make it cumbersome to navigate, a new vent page is started. This is number FORTY-SEVEN  in our series!

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!!

1949 was also a watershed year for the American Automobile industry - and in particular Ford Motor Company who introduced their first truly new model since before WWII. This 49 Ford pictured is serial number 1 - the first 1949 Ford produced. It still looks good!

67 comments:

guyf aulkes said...

i see we have heard form LPOV in both his identities. I think we should get rid of both comments.

USS Rodger Young said...

nonymouse coward pov,

You mean like Watauga Watch does?

USS Rodger Young said...

nonymouse coward povs,

ABC, one of your favorite stations, said the Colorado shooter was a Tea Party member before the gun even cooled. Sort of like you did with Jared Laughtner in the Gabby Giffords shooting. When will you fringe left liberal retards learn to keep your well worn pie-holes shut?

Since the fringe left media is so silent on Holmes, it makes me wonder if he too is a fringe left, OWS protesting, Obama supporter - like you.

LOL

That ought to give you libertards something to think about.

USS Rodger Young

USS Rodger Young said...

Some tough questions on the gun control thread for the liberal cowards to run from. LOL!!!!!

USS Rodger Young said...

Read this article in American Thinker:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/where_there_are_sheep_wolves_will_always_thrive.html

USS Rodger Young said...

Any liberals want a shot at the title this evening?

USS Rodger Young said...

Freedom oriented conservatives don't fear your words pov (notice lower case). They fear your stupidity might catch if they stoop to your low, low level. You actually do represent a nightmare to conservatives, however this nightmare is far from what you think it is.

When God fearing Conservatives have children, they hope against hope said children don't turn out like you. In other words, a spoiled, arrogant, unruly child who doesn't value things like an education, freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, etc. It's quite evident you didn't value any of these either. This may be your idiot parents failing to instill discipline in a fledgling pov (notice lower case again), or it may have been some outlier gene. At any rate, you're truly frightening for new parents!

Your sentence structure belies someone who did very poorly in school. I find it funny that you yap and babble about education in this nation when you, yourself, failed to even take advantage of what was offered. Typical liberal - can't see the forest for the trees.

I know this probably hurt a bit pov, but occasionally even idiots need a reality check. You're not the brightest individual in the world. You have not produced even one blog entry that gave other readers a reason to think or mull a question. You're incapable of that. Perhaps it's not really your fault, but that line of thinking is hard to accept by those enthralled by personal responsibility. Go to the library and read something for a change. LOL!!!!

USS Rodger Young

USS Rodger Young said...

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as teh law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If 'Thou shalt not covet' and 'Thou shalt not steal' were not commandmants from Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free."

-John Adams


Blogger, the covetous zoning laws of Boone, NC fit well into Adam's quote, don't you think? I thought of you when I came across this last night during my nightly study session. Our founders, who included God in nearly everything (we are a Christian nation) had such a unique way of telling us future malingerers how absolutely wrong we usually are.

Dan Soucke, good job on trying to protect individuals from a unit of government thinks of individual property rights as nebulous and subject to interpretation.

guy faulkes said...

Anonymous/ LPOV, you know why your posts are removed. You offered to quit if asked. You were asked because of your repetitive La La La La La tactics along with trying to hijack threads and did not quit so you are being held to your promise.

Your problem is that there were at least three of you using LPOV. One made a promise you all are being held to uphold. If you are trying to post under Anonymous instead of LPOV, then you should change your La La La La La tactic and your writing style. It is to easy to determine who you are when you do not do this.

Excellent posts, Rodger.

Anonymous said...

This makes me ashamed to be an American when the spouse of a hero is denied any benefits.

http://eclectablog.com/2012/07/astronaut-and-physicist-sally-ride-passed-away-this-week-her-partner-to-receive-no-federal-benefits.html

Sarkazein said...

Anonymole wrote- ""we love the Constitution"

Read the First again, you will see it doesn't say anyone has to be published or listened to. You would be violating my rights by forcing me to read or to publish.

Just like the man on the soap box in the old town square... no one had to supply him with a soap box or was anyone forced to stand there and listen to him.

I don't like your perverted understanding of the US Constitution.

guy faulkes said...

Anonymous/LPOV, I want you to make original comments RELATIVE to the thread instead of repeating the same thing over and over and over. I want you to stop denying your obvious attempt to post under Anonymous instead of LPOV.

As for getting rid of your comments under either identity, may I refer you to the first post on this thread. I cannot remove your drivel, but I can ask that it be removed.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, I didn't think you or Michelle Obama were proud to be an American anyway.

Anonymous said...

The charge of this site being censored is stupid when you compare it to the Watch. They run away from comments against early voting with yellow water running down their legs.

Anonymous said...

The first amendment does not require anyone to provide a forum for people to post to. Anyone can start their own blog or post where they are welcomed but Blogger and Newguy are not required to let every idiot post whatever they want to on their site. They also are not required to provide guns to someone because the second amendment gives them the right to bear arms.

But, if you think that a privately maintained blog such as this should be required to provide you with a soapbox, then call your friends in the Justice department and tell them your 1st amendment rights are being violated. Holder might just agree with you!

Anonymous said...

Here's a thought...anonymous POV, why don't you two boycott the site? That will show them that they can't decide what posts of yours they will allow!

Sarkazein said...

Anonymole- You are the one that brought up the First.

"Anonymous said...
The first amendment does not require anyone to provide a forum for people to post to. Anyone can start their own blog or post where they are welcomed but Blogger and Newguy are not required to let every idiot post whatever they want to on their site. They also are not required to provide guns to someone because the second amendment gives them the right to bear arms.

But, if you think that a privately maintained blog such as this should be required to provide you with a soapbox, then call your friends in the Justice department and tell them your 1st amendment rights are being violated. Holder might just agree with you!

July 25, 2012 2:53 PM"

Yeah, what this Anonymous said.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous 4:05pm- Anonymole knows who he is. He's the one thinking the First Amendment forces one to publish and listen to (read) his inane comments.

Anonymous 2:53 wrote the same thing I did only better. So I copied his.

Pick A NAME! said...

A better question might be why can't the anonymous posters select a posting ID? That would not only make it easier to respond to a particular "anonymous" but would also allow readers to differentiate one "anonymous" poster from another.

Sometimes when two "anons" get going, it looks like a fool talking to himself!

Sarkazein said...

What a complete and total idiot. If you don't believe me, read Anonymous's 4:26 comment. What an ass. What a complete and total ass. An anonymous ass at that!

Anonymous said...

"Pick A NAME!", not meant as a shout just a quote.

Your screen name here is just as Anon as mine. It no more tells me about you then mine does.

My suggestion was to help with those who can not add the time posted to a post as well as the name.

If you do not like my suggestion no one is forcing you to use it "Pick A NAME!"

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous Whatever 0.0- You, as a typical liberal, expect others to change to accommodate your inability to pick a screen name. Yours is a true disability, because it has been explained to you on numerous threads and you still can't grasp it.

From this point on, I will rarely reply to Anonymouses.
Maybe there could be a thread where only Anonymouses comment. It will, just like another commenter wrote, look like one person commenting to themselves.

Pick A NAME! said...

When one has a 'screen name' their is a certain continuity to their posting and others can follow their position through successive posts.

When several people are all posting as "anonymous" then it is difficult, if not impossible, to differentiate one "anon" from another.

Yes, this ID I am using is just as anonymous as any other - but at least everyone can see which of the prior posts are attributable to the same ID.

Naturally,in their ongoing efforts to disrupt this blog, some troll will start posting using other peoples established ID's.

NewGuy said...

Sark, I have pretty much adopted the position of not responding to anything from anonymous posters. (Mike D. was the first to do this to my knowledge, I just followed suit).

I have made an exception from time to time - generally when I sense that an "anon" might be new to the board and could be developed into a "regular" poster... and, I am sure, on some other occasions as well.

For the most part however, I have found that it is seldom productive to attempt an exchange with anonymous posters and I rarely do so anymore.

NewGuy said...

Thumbs down to the Watauga Democrat who, in their recent editorial, bemoaned the low local turnout in the recent runoff primary, without once mentioning their part in discouraging voters.
http://www2.wataugademocrat.com/Editorial/story/Our-View-1-whopping-light-bill-and-guess-who-pays-id-008501

The Democrat had erroneously reported right up until election day, that voters were not eligible to vote in the runoff if they hadn't voted in the earlier primaries. Thanks to our article

http://wataugarepubs.blogspot.com/2012/07/primary-runoff-election-update.html

they did issue a last minute correction on their web site and reporter Anna Oakes was nice enough to post her appreciation to our thread on the topic.

Of course, the Democrat did not mention us in their "correction".

Anonymous said...

Hello Sark 7:12 pm. I hate to be disappointing to you but i am no more a liberal then you.

I am a non affiliated individual i choose to support the topics i believe in and not to support ones i do not.

My condolences for your assumptions.

Sarkazein said...

This is a good sign for Conservatives. Liberals are starting to be embarrassed about being Liberals again.
Several Liberals commenting on this blog have recently displayed their shame with a denial of the Liberal brand. Obama's legacy can now include Liberals going back into the closet. Their politics won't change, but at least they are again suffering their own self-wrought humiliation.

Sarkazein said...

Most to embarrassed to pick a screen name as they waller in their own shame.

guy faulkes said...

Sark, this is not a new phenomena. They went from liberal to progressive and now seem to be going back to liberal as the stigma of their poor policies follow them regardless of the name they choose.

This is analogous to using Anonymous for a blog name. If you make an original comment that is on topic, one can address the comment no matter what the name. If you use Anonymous to try to hide the fact you are LPOV, it eventually catches up to you as your tactic of endlessly repeating the same drivel instead of addressing the rebuttals to that drivel and your writing style will expose you and off you go.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- WOW, that Anonymous is just plain stupid. I could teach my dog to read the funny papers before Anonymous could ever understand what has been said over and over about a screen name. And he wants it repeated... that is stupidity no matter how you slice it.

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous- SIT!

Sarkazein said...

y WYNTON HALL 26 Jul 2012, 6:24 AM
Those wondering why the Department of Justice has refused to go after Jon Corzine for the vaporization of $1.6 billion in MF Global client funds need look no further than the documents uncovered by the Government Accountability Institute that reveal that the now-defunct MF Global was a client of Attorney General Eric Holder and Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer’s former law firm, Covington & Burling.///

USS Sheppard said...

Good 'ole Mitt, acing his London trip on day one.

"Mitt Romney is perhaps the only politician who could start a trip that was supposed to be a charm offensive by being utterly devoid of charm and mildly offensive." -The Telegraph (UK)

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:28 I made a typo. Why did thanking Sark offend you is what i meant to type.

guy faulkes said...

Anonymous/LPOV, I will post it one more time. Read it slowly and try to pay attention.

It does not matter what name you use. You expose your identity by your tactics, comments, and writing style.

There are several Anonymous posters that make substantive comments, whether I agree with them or not. You are not one of them.

However, as you attempt to hide in the crowd using Anonymous, it might be a good idea to only publish posts from people with a blog name. This would force you to at least do a small amount of thinking when you make a post, as you would go through names very quickly as you would be removed over and over.

Anonymous said...

GuyFalkes 2:03

Guy, so according to you anyone not posting with a fake screen name should be censored, is that your point?

I read the last two days of posts like the poster above said other then the names he mentioned the only other posts were by anon

So if left to you and the censors this blog would only be allowed to show posts by 6 people, and USRY accounting for over 75% of those posts.

I ask again is that what you want ?"

Sarkazein said...

Anonymous- SIT!!

Anonymous said...

Guy, if you are going to have Sark as your representative, you might want to reconsider if you want one word answers that are irrelevant to the question speaking for you.

guy faulkes said...

No, Anonymous/LPOV, anyone using the repetitive troll tactics you use should have his posts removed. Once again, your blog name does not matter.

How about it Blogger and New Guy?

guy faulkes said...

La La La La La from the dolt that says he cannot understand the answer to the same old question.

Yes your trolling should be censor just as it was when you posted as LPOV instead of Anonymous.

Nobody said...

Nonnymouse,

How long have you been posting here? What is your objection to choosing a screen name? Other than LPOV, censorship does not happen here the way it does on the watch. Occassionally my posts have been kicked out by the spam filter but blogger and new guy have retrieved them when I have asked. Quite a few more than six people post here including people who disagree with those who run the blog such as Happily Married, Jack,Gig (who was a great contributor until the amendent issue drove him away) and others. I have noticed that you rarely contribute anything but seem to enjoy harassing the blog operators and regular posters. If you are unhappy with how this blog is run, start your own. Let us know the address and perhaps we'll drop by. Maybe LPOV will help you run it - only problem is that every one of his threads will be the same.

NewGuy said...

Nobody, you are correct in that we don't remove posts for their political content. We did decide, after a very long period of his continued efforts to disrupt the site, to remove LPOV's postings. It now appears that we may have him returning as an "anon" poster or, in the alternative, another adolescent personality with a case of arrested development.

At any rate, I think that Guy is correct. This "anon" has not intent to enter into any discussion on the various topics; clearly, his only intent is to harass the regular posters here and to disrupt the site.

Classic troll behavior.


At any rate, it's clear that he adds nothing to the conversation and I will just treat his posts as we do LPOVs.

NewGuy said...

OK, most of the trash has been removed.

And now, back to our regular programming.

guy faulkes said...

I would appreciate a thread honoring William Mast. He gave the citizens of Watauga County all he could give, as has his family.

Does anyone know how to make a contribution toward his family?

NewGuy said...

Done..

and, if I can find any info on contributions for his family...including his yet to be born child....I will certainly publicize it on the blog.

USS Rodger Young said...

This morning the headlines read that hussein obama was intent on pursuing gun control. He even said it himself in an address yesterday. This evening he has backpedaled saying he only wants to enforce current laws. To make matters even more confusing, he says he supports an assault weapons ban.

Isn't that pursuing more gun control?

Folks, just like health care, hussein obama has told you what he intends to do. He will pursue the goal of major gun control if re-elected. What does it take to wake the right up? The cards are on the table. In plain view.

Sarkazein said...

More gun control and less border control.

This President has made a mess of, or worsened everything he has touched. Big surprise... he's an amateur and a communist dictator wanna-bee.

Sarkazein said...

"We are all aware that the greatest threat to constitutionally-limited small government and personal liberty that we see active in politics in America today is President Obama. I mean, this guy is -- in n fact, we see him clearly. He is obsessed with controlling the distribution of income, the distribution of product, the behavior of people, the allocation of capital resources to goofy social causes that are inspired by bad science and bad finance," Fmr. Rep. Dick Armey (R-TX) of FreedomWorks said on CNN this morning.

"And I tell you, the grassroots activists across this country known as the Tea Party activists will work diligently for Romney because a 180-degree turn-around is a big change, and we will have removed what we perceive to be the biggest threat to our liberty in the history -- in our lifetime in the presidency of Barack Obama," he added.

Sarkazein said...

AMEN Brother!

USS Rodger Young said...

Went over to the Watch and they have 15 comments posted on the entire site. The idiot blog administrator for that site simply posts one liberal opinion after another and no one cares. 15 comments total for all the posts!!!!! What a bunch of idiots. I also see they didn't mention a word about Deputy Mast. What class liberals show.

USS Rodger Young said...

Sark,

hussein obama (notice lower case) is so radical, I actually believe Romney might have a shot. I hope hussein obama loses. My faith is shaken not in the president or Presidential candidate; I never put stock in a politician anyway, but in the poor showing of conservative America. hussein obama has hit every button one could imagine, yet the outcry is absent. The guy is set to come after guns now, and what was once a critical issue is merely another comment from the messiah.

Anonymous said...

If you took away the hater comments, how many would be left?

guy faulkes said...

"If you took away the hater comments, how many would be left?"

All of them but the La La La La La drivel of Anonymous/LPOV.

You said you would stop posting. Please do it.

guy faulkes said...

Read the post Opoib. the question to which I am replying is quoted as the first sentence. It was copied from the post above and was posted by Anonymous/LPOV, who is the same person.

Now, the question arises as to whether you are a new commenter or this person's third incarnation. If you are a new commenter, welcome.

;) said...

Same whore.

New dress.

guy faulkes said...

Now I guess we can reasonably say Opoib is not a new commentator, but is just another reincarnation of the dolt.

We are on this site are we not, dolt? Your question makes no sense, as usual.

Is there not a way to ban an IP address?

USS Rodger Young said...

It's starting. Same cast of goons trying to capitalize on a tradgedy to take your rights away. Read this:

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/240657-cybersecurity-bill-includes-gun-control-measure

USS Rodger Young said...

You need an assault weapon—
•1. to help continue the American tradition of citizen/soldier.
•2. for recreation.
•3. to collect military small arms.
•4. to get quick extra shots at more game while hunting.
•5. to get quick extra shots at the same game while hunting.
•6. for more fun plinking.
•7. to defend yourself against a street gang.
•8. to defend yourself against mob violence.
•9. to defend yourself against looters.
•10. to shoot in a Civilian Marksmanship Program competition.
•11. to shoot in an “Action Rifle” or “Practical Rifle” target match.
•12. to assist the police in an emergency (e.g. 1966 Texas Tower Sniper incident, citizens assisted with M1′s).
•13. to help defend the country from a foreign invasion.
•14. to help defend the country from an internal takeover.
•15. to help the firearms industry remain economically strong.
•16. to pay the federal tax on guns that goes to aid wildlife.
•17. to encourage further research into new firearm technology.
•18. to save time while shooting.
•19. to have increased reliability in functioning.
•20. to have a longer lasting firearm.
•21. to have a less costly/ more affordable firearm.
•22. to have an easier to manufacture firearm.
•23. to have an easier to repair firearm.
•24. to have an easier to take apart and clean firearm.
•25. to have a more versatile firearm.
•26. to own a highly weather resistant firearm.
•27. to appreciate the evolution of firearm technology.
•28. to defend your business.
•29. to defend your home.
•30. to defend your boat.
•31. to defend your camp.
•32. to defend your ranch.
•33. to defend your farm.
•34. to defend your family.
•35. to have reduced recoil when shooting.
•36. as an investment.
•37. as a military souvenir.
•38. as a hedge against inflation.
•39. because criminals statistically prefer revolvers over all other firearms.
•40. to have a more psychologically intimidating firearm. (often the mere presence of a firearm will stop a crime)
•41. to own a firearm least likely to be used in a crime. (less than 1% are assault firearms.)
•42. to own a firearm which purposely functions slower than other firearms thereby reducing recoil. (e.g. Remington 1100.)
•43. to own a firearm used in Olympic competition.
•44. to appreciate the mechanical genius of firearm designers.
•45. to have a firearm which uses external magazines.
•46. to shoot at the National Matches at Camp Perry.
•47. to reject anti-gun bias.
•48. to challenge “Big Brotherism”.

USS Rodger Young said...

49. to protect yourself against a pack of feral dogs.
•50. to own a firearm better for the physically handicapped.
•51. to save all firearms by not giving in to “salami” tactics.
•52. to do trick shooting (e.g. multiple aerial targets).
•53. to shoot military ammunition. (Inexpensive surplus)
•54. to be part of an armed populous, creating a tactical disadvantage for any potential enemies.
•55. to familiarize yourself with your country’s military rifle.
•56. to familiarize yourself with a foreign country’s military rifle.
•57. because they are interesting.
•58. to hang on your wall.
•59. to shoot clay targets.
•60. to shoot paper targets.
•61. to shoot Metallic Silhouettes.
•62. to exercise your constitutional rights.
•63. to exercise a natural right.
•64. to exercise a civil right.
•65. to exercise a fundamental right.
•66. to exercise an inalienable right.
•67. to exercise a human right.
•68. to defend yourself after a New York City-type blackout.
•69. to defend yourself against a Miami-type riot.
•70. to defend yourself after a St. Croix-type hurricane in which both officers and escaped prisoners have run amok.
•71. to avoid a “Tiananmen Square” in the U.S.
•72. to own a firearm in common use and therefore protected under the Heller decision.
•73. to protect livestock from predators.
•74. to show support for political ideals of the founding fathers.
•75. to own a firearm designed to wound rather than kill (according to the Dir. Of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory).
•76. to own a firearm not readily convertible to full automatic.
•77. to own a firearm with that “shoulder thingy that goes up.”
•78. to own a “state-of-the-art” firearm (e.g. FN SCAR).
•79. to own a “turn-of-the-century” firearm (e.g. Borchardt).
•80. which is more pleasant to shoot (lighter and less recoil).
•81. because all of your other firearms will be banned next.
•82. to own a firearm which is difficult to conceal.
•83. to own a firearm which the media glamorizes.
•84. to own a firearm which might be banned.
•85. to own a firearm which is banned.
•86. to own a firearm that is no frills and practical in design.
•87. to own on of the most mechanically-safe firearms. (e.g. Uzi).
•88. to own a firearm that is a “work of art”.
•89. to own a Valmet M-76 which the BATF says has no sporting use.
•90. to own a Valmet Hunter which the BATF says has sporting use.
•91. to own a firearm that made history (e.g. M-1 Carbine).
•92. to shoot a firearm that made history.
•93. to own a firearm that can be dropped and still function.
•94. to own a firearm that can be coated in mud and still function.
•95. to own a firearm that can be dunked in water and function.
•96. to own a firearm that can be frozen solid and still function.
•97. to own a firearm that can be buried in sand and still function.
•98. to be a prepared member of the unorganized militia as defined in the US Code (10 US Code Sect. 311 (a)).
•99. to distinguish between an object and its misuse.
•100.because you believe in freedom.
•101.if YOU say you need one. In America, an individual’s need should not be determined by the state. There are approximately 100 million firearm owners in the country. That’s 100 million more reasons for owning any firearm

Sarkazein said...

102. to tweak a liberal

USS Rodger Young said...

Cinemark theatres in Colorado is a gun free zone. Cinemark theatres bans firearms. In other words, they made that theatre a victim disarmament zone. Why doesn't the fringe left news media, or police, talk about how well Cinemark's gun policy worked against Mr. Holmes?

guy faulkes said...

Rodger, my hat is off to you as to your list.

USS Rodger Young said...

Rocky Marciano was the greatest heavyweight fighter ever. 49-0. Highest knockout ratio of any heavyweight in history.

USS Rodger Young said...

Bobby Jones was the greatest golfer in history. Only golfer to win the 4 majors; did it as an amateur.

Reader said...

http://www.news9.com/story/19105268/okc-dollar-general-manager-beats-serial-burglar-with-baseball-bat

Ping!! Listen to the sound of the bat hitting the robber.

NewGuy said...

*ping* !!!!!

Sarkazein said...

Reader- I watched the video first and thought they were describing a shoplifter. The manager hit him 5 times with the bat.... I thought wow tough town.