eisely

At his New Hampshire pep rally for healthcare...oops I was supposed to say townhall...Obama himself held up the comparison of the US Postal Service to UPS and FedEx. Wow! It turns out the private sector is more efficient than the government. Our leader said so himself.

Actually that is somewhat of an unfair slam at the postal service. The real lesson from the comparison is that the postal service has always been a politically driven enterprise, and the politics is one of the things that makes it inefficient.

Let's see now, so far our leader has insulted doctors, voters, and now letter carriers. Who is he going to insult next -- the UAW?

We have heard Nancy Pelosi claim that people opposed to the radical health care change (change, not reform) legislation are somehow fraudulent "astroturf" people, not spontaneous grass roots objectors. The link below is to a want ad for true paid astroturf opportunities to support Obama.

http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/etc/1303066561.html

As I understand the history of the Weimar Republic and the extreme inflation in Germany in the 1920's it was the result of a conscious decision by the German government to print money to pay the reparations demanded in the Treaty of Versailles. The reparations amounts were denominated in Reichsmarks and the allies were making it difficult for the Germans to try to honor the commitment so the Germans just turned on the printing presses and handed over bales of money. Among other consequences, all the savings of the German citizenry denominated in their own currency were also rendered valueless.

There is something of a parallel to our own situation. A lot of US government debt is held by the Chinese and various interests in the middle east. If they were to all demand repayment at once, both they and we would be in a bind. One cannot rule out the US government doing something like what the Weimar Republic did and just print more money to discharge the US dollar denominated debt.

The ability of the US government to borrow will be constrained, probably in the next few years when foreign lenders decide to stop purchasing US debt. There is nothing inherently wrong with being a debtor nation. The US was a debtor nation until World War I when we helped finance the allies even as a neutral. Up until then we borrowed a lot money, mostly private borrowings, but it was used to invest. Now we borrow to consume. That is the difference. The Chinese in particular are willing to finance our consumption because we import their stuff. There will come a time in the not too distant future when they will say enough is enough already. They will want to be paid and that will mean a transfer of real goods and services out of the US. The only alternative is to allow our currency to collapse and we will then be just like Argentina. A deadbeat country run by Obamistas.

The habit of deficit spending began in the 30's under Roosevelt. Only in a few years since, and largely accidentally, have we have ever had a budget surplus. Clinton does deserve some credit for a budget surplus his last year in office, but the growing economy and republican majorities in both houses at that time might have had a teensy weensy itty little bit to do with that.

One of Bush's biggest blunders was not reining in the more spendthrift people in his own party. I don't think Bush ever vetoed a single piece of legislation in his entire eight years in office. This failure is one thing that turned true conservatives against him. Not that there were a lot of great choices out there.

One either believes that the Iraq war was a good idea or not. However, once committed the country has to be willing to spend what it takes to win. Putting that in the scale with the bailout of Government Motors is not a legitimate comparison.

There will be no end to adding to the federal debt under the Obama administration and the democratic majorities in both houses. I only hope my income inflates as rapidly as the rest of the economy. Of course I will also gain since my mortgage balance does not inflate. We ain't seen nothin yet.

Thus just in from the Wall Street Journal. The federal government is going to raise its own credit limit---again. All you voters better figure out how you are going to deal with the inflation that is coming down the pike at us all.

Washington -- U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner asked Congress to increase the $12.1 trillion debt limit on Friday, saying it is "critically important" that they act in the next two months.

Mr. Geithner, in a letter to U.S. lawmakers, said that the Treasury projects that the current debt limit could be reached as early mid-October. Increasing the limit is important to instilling confidence in global investors, Mr. Geithner said.

The Treasury didn't request a specific increase in the letter.

"It is critically important that Congress act before the limit is reached so that citizens and investors here and around the world can remain confident that the United States will always meet its obligations," Mr. Geithner said in a letter to lawmakers.

Mr. Geithner said the that it is "clearly a moment in our history" that requires support from both Democrats and Republicans for the increase.

"Congress has never failed to raise the debt limit when necessary," Mr. Geithner said.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said Thursday the federal government's budget deficit reached $1.3 trillion through the first ten months of fiscal 2009, on track to reach a record high of $1.8 trillion for the 12-month period.

Taking a wild guess, I would think you could do whatever you like. If you are convinced you will never need to sew another knot on your uniform, then center them.

The comparison to a wedding is apt in more than one way. Weddings should be joyous celebrations of the couple getting married. All too often the planning and execution of weddings become sources of acrimony as fixed ideas of one or more parents come into play or emotions from old woulds come pouring out. Just so with Eagle courts.

Our troop typically runs one ECOH each year and we have never had fewer than two boys being recognized at a single ECOH. One year we had so many eagles we did two ECOHs. The troop provides a fixed amount of funds per eagle and the parents are appointed as the committee to plan and execute the ECOH. If only because of the funding method, parents clearly have an incentive to collaborate.

I recall when our middle son got his eagle, there were four other eagles being recognized at the same time. I recall this one mom who insisted on using "her printer" to print the programs. When we were two weeks away from the date she still had not done anything. I made up the camera ready originals and another mom quietly stepped in to get the programs printed. Nothing was ever said or needed to be said, but this is the kind of thing that one needs to be prepared to deal with.

There's those words again, "Be Prepared!"

Where was Nancy Pelosi when the far left was referring to "Bu **** ler?"

I think dragging swastikas into the debate has created a great distraction. I also think that Limbaugh often does more harm to his causes than good. Having said all that, the passion that this health care nationalization effort has aroused is spontaneous and is based on real legitimate concerns. It is far too easy for the liberal politicians to dismiss protestors as fanatics. The mid term election in 2010 could get very interesting.

Actually "four words" is two words

AP has been floundering around trying to find ways to charge for its content. I understand that now if you quote more than four words from an AP story they will come afer you. So I have quoted from a story run this morning regarding the resignation of Mel Martinez from the United States Senate:

"...in...to...to...in...."

Wasn't that helpful?

Ed

Let's clarify. I don't think you mean to say that the troop and scoutmaster have absolutely nothing to say about the content and conduct of an eagle court. If an eagle court is organized as a troop function, then the troop leadership has a great deal to say about it, including the scheduling of it. While our troop gives great deference to the eagle and his parents, everybody understands that the troop cannot be expected to do things the leadership actually objects to.

If the eagle and his family want to organize their own private ceremony there is nothing to prevent them from doing so, but I don't think any scoutmaster would agree to simply show up and do as he or she is told without any discussion whatsoever.

Eagle courts are collaborative events. Nobody gets to simply dictate.

My concern is about BSA national, or anybody else, pulling up and relying on unsubstantiated derogatory information. Anybody who has been involved in any litigation or dispute with a neighbor could well have unsubstantiated derogatory information in these kinds of data bases that such a person may know nothing about. People will knowingly say nasty false things about other people as a way of getting back at them. Who at national or the council level has the experience and judgment to interpret these things?

Our troop went through a similar fiasco a few years ago. Scouting lost a dedicated competent volunteer over the way the council handled it.

The boy involved had not been active for about two years. He appeared to have met all the requirements except for his project. At least that is what the records said. He executed a project without any approvals and presented his eagle application and workbook for signatures. Neither the scoutmaster nor the committee chair would sign his eagle application, or the project workbook. He appealed to the council. Some one of the paid executives at the council promised that the council would not act without hearing the troop's side of the story. The next word the trooop got was the council had awarded the eagle and the troop leadership was never even given a chance to defend the decisions. The failure of the council staff to honor its commitment was the reason the one volunteer quit scouting altogether. Everybody recognized that the council would make its own decision, but to renege on a commitment to even hear the troop's side is extremely bad faith and very very unscoutlike.

So then the question arose as to whether the boy should be allowed to participate in an eagle court. We routinely have one eagle court per year with multiple eagles being recognized. The decision was to invite that family to participate. I honestly don't know of they did.

That is an excellent question. I will give national the benefit of the doubt and believe that it is a new procedure. Our national dues are also going up, probably in part to fund these additional checks. I actually have now had a chance to look at the relevant page on the form and note that, as a resident of California, I have some specific rights under California law, including the right to receive free copies of any such reports. When and if I ever sign the new form, you can bet that I will be checking that box. Living in the granola state occasionally has its advantages.

Not wishing to further spread false rumors, apparently BSA is not going to be doing credit checks. When I wrote my initial post I had not been able to locate a copy of the new adult application. When you read through what was pasted into the second post, credit checks are specifically excluded.

I was mislead by the wording on my own council's website. When I hear the phrase "consumer reports" I automatically think of credit reports rather than the other items. Even so, I am still somewhat leary of this degree of monitoring.

I don't object to these salaries as long as the organization is getting value commensurate with the compensation.

Thank you for clearing that up.

I was surfing our council web site for current information and noted the item in quotation marks below.

"The adult application now includes a separate Disclosure/Authorization Form. Signing this form means you give the BSA and the reporting agency permission to procure consumer reports on you for as long as you remain a volunteer. This form is required in order to process the application. While separate Disclosure/Authorization forms are available, we recommend that units destroy any old applications that do not include the Disclosure/Authorization Form and use only the current version."

Anybody heard of this credit check business before? I don't know why BSA feels the need to run any credit checks on ordinary volunteers. I accept the idea of doing criminal background checks, but this seems to be going a bit too far.(This message has been edited by eisely)

I am inclined to agree that summer camp should focus on offering MBs that are difficult to earn elsewhere. Having said that, if the customers want something else then summer camps should strive to offer what is being requested.

I agree with the other responses. Pairing up paddling partners has nothing to do with who shares a tent with whom. Basic safety is pairing up stronger more experienced paddlers with less strong and less experienced paddlers.

This can sometimes create problems with the trim of the canoes when loaded. Typically the senior paddler is in the stern. If that person is an adult or an older scout, the weight difference between the bow and stern paddlers can be 100 lbs or more. Since the stern paddler is closer to the stern than the bow paddler is to the bow, the effect of this weight difference is further accentuated. You can end up with the canoe trimmed noticeably down by the stern. Sometimes that does not matter, or even possibly be preferable. However I try to emphasize putting as much of the heavier gear forward of the mid ship thwart to try to offset this weight difference as much as possible.(This message has been edited by eisely)

There is a particular camp site in the Point Reyes National Sea Shore North of San Francisco that is infested with aggressive raccoons. They will even come up on your picnic table if your back is turned. Critters do learn, sometimes faster than humans learn.

There was a point made earlier about LNT principles. To me this would be reason enough to discourage, if not prohibit, single tenting. Another issue that arises when boys bring their own tents is bringing along the monster tent used for family car camping. This too was mentioned earlier. In discussing tents with parents I always point out that, not only is weight and bulk a problem, we often find ourselves in environments where the footprint of the tent is too big to fit in between the trees and rocks.

As others have commented, there is much that we do not know from the outside. I will venture to say that any injury that rises to the attention of the council will likely be known in the larger scouting community as well, regardless of fault.

For all we know the boy was doing something reckless without proper training and supervision. The fault of the adult leaders in such a situation is the failure to provide training and supervision, even if a boy injures himself through some fairly obviously stupid action. Even so, doing something reckless or stupid when the scout has not been trained cannot fairly be considered to misbehavior.

I can see how the adult leadership of a troop may feel embarrased and even angry if they are criticized from above in any aspect of their program. The apparent fact that a whole lot of training is going on suggests that there were issues with the unit's program. That still does not mean that the adults should take out their frustration on the scout.

In order for a troop committee member to wear a "trained strip" on their shirt, I would consider it necessary to have also completed the "troop committee challenge" training syllabus. I understand that this can be done on line.