firstpusk

Did I say that it wasn't a Customs Agent that made the arrest? FrankJ is not exactly right. The agent was doing his job and the Clinton administration was doing its job, also. An alert was on for that border as a result of intelligence shared by Jordan. The Clinton national security people were actually working on the issue of terrorism before millennium bombing. This is the opposite of the Bush administration that had finally scheduled their first high level meeting on terrorism until the week before 9/11.

"He's not the best, nor is he the worst. Bob W is right, each president faces different issues, they can't be graded as if they've all takes a the same test." Yes, each president faces a different test. But if this guy and his national security staff was told before he took office that terrorism was the big threat. He and his folks knew better. They dismantled or ignored everything the Clinton administration had put in place...until 9/11. "firstpusk says the Clinton admin "prevented the millenium bombing." If he is referring to the guy nabbed coming into Washington State from Canada -- the Clinton admin had nothing to do with that. Give credit where it is due: a Customs Agent who thought something looked fishy." Yes, a Customs Agent was responsible for the arrest and kudos to him for suspecting something was wrong. If you think the Clinton administration had nothing to do with it you have been listening to too much Rush Limbaugh or the like. There was an alert on that border as a result of a tip from Jordanian officials. This is exactly the kind of intelligence we are less likely to get because the manner in which this administration has abused relationships with friends all over the world. Bush may not be the worst, but anybody would be better.

CaveEagle, the one thing I would give Bush credit for was getting the UN inspectors back on the ground. They pretty much established what sensible people already knew. Saddam Hussein's programs were pretty much in shambles. The stockpiles of any significance were destroyed. Any informed reasonable person should not be surprised when no significant evidence of programs or stockpiles are found. This administration was lying from the start. There really wasn't any significant terrorists activity in Iraq before the war. If we wanted to find active al Qaeda terrorists, Pakistan would probably be much more fruitful. They continue to harbor them and actually set them up. They also have been selling nuclear secrets to rogue regimes. Oh. That's right I forgot. They are our ally. With friends like that. We shouldn't question the competence or honesty of our leadership when they lie to get us involved in an unnecessary war. This president dwelled on Iraq from day one and told the intelligence services to leave the Saudis alone. As I recall, there were no Iraqis involved in 9/11. I can't remember, were there fifteen...or was it sixteen Saudis involved in 9/11. The Clinton administration had an active program to find and root out al Qaeda. The work they did prevented the millennium bombing. According to this bunch, there was no reason to even schedule a meeting dealing with terrorism until after 9/11. We have stripped troops from the fight in Afganistan where there still is al Qaeda. Taken forces out of Korea, where there is a much more substantial threat including nuclear weapons. Speaking of nuclear weapons - was this the president that said he didn't care about nuclear non-proliferation early in his term. I don't know about worst president in the history of the US...but anybody would be better than him now.

"Empirical science, just like the BSA, takes a religous stance whether its adherents realize it or not." You are absolutely wrong on this. Empirical science takes no stand on religion. It is outside of the purview of science. Just as my view on the designated hitter rule does not impact my ability and opportunity as an internal auditor, the personal religious beliefs of a scientist are not germane to them being a scientist.

Adrianvs, science does not speak to the personal beliefs of a scientist. I have known scientists that were Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Budhist and atheist. It does not matter what they believe. It only matters that they are willing to assume that the world can be observed and something can be reasoned from those observations. It seems to me that you would probably have more than a few theorhetical physicist that would be comfortable as idealists. If you don't believe me, talk to one.

From the majority opinion of Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) "First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster 'an excessive government entanglement with religion.'"

In your opinion, can organizations which discriminate on the basis of non-theisitc ideology or creed receive federal funding? Every science-based organization is practicing de facto discrimination against idealists (religious or otherwise). If a science based organization made members sign a document stating that they believed in the objective reality of the physical world, then they would be discriminating against idealists in the same way that the BSA supposedly does against atheists. Can science based organizations receive federal funding in Merlyn World? Isn't discrimination based on creed prohibited as well? A lot of people are idealists. Should they not get the same protection as atheists? Science in not an ideology, it is a way of approaching and solving problem and answering questions. Science organizations dont concern themselves with the religious beliefs of their members or grantees. No one is asked to sign a form that they dont believe in God. There is no discrimination by science organizations that use public funds. Having worked at a large public research university for a number of years, I can assure you that no one is asked to sign a statement of faith or lack thereof. As a matter of fact, I went to church with a number of researchers over the years. The only "science" organizations that require a statement of faith that I know of are creationist. Those folks are discriminating. That is one reason that they should not receive government research grants. The other is what they do is not science.

I have lost several scouts over the years. It never gets any easier - though they are always with you. My condolences and prayers for the family, for you and the troop.

Zahnada, I snipped and pasted what I disagreed with in your post. I thought that you were indicating that a liberal could not even rationally consider an argument on FOX. I took offense at the comment. I see you were trying to express a different idea. Something more along the line of people's opinions are pretty set in this country. And probably something you didn't mention that the people are very split right now. I would strongly agree with both. I am a believer in this country and its values. I have faith that the people will eventually come around to the right point of view. There is a lot of strife right now - a lot of anger. I wish it could be another way and perhaps it will with time. That is not likely to happen in this election cycle or anytime soon thereafter.

Proper care and use of the dutch oven is lesson one. We do our own cooking a summer camp. The dutch oven is the key to several of the meals. The older boys are retrained each year and they train the younger ones. A watchful adult is there to see that the cooking and cleanup are handled properly. As I said before, you don't want to overheat the bottom of a DO. This is especially true when baking. DO cooking takes planning and patience. Those are two things we definitely want to instill in our scouts.

Put simply, foil is never necessary to cook in a dutch oven. It can stick to the food you are cooking and is wasteful because you throw it away. The dutch oven bakes just fine without foil. You need to learn how to control the temperature under the oven.

As I said - present a factual case and I will consider it. FOX rarely does anything of the sort. This is especially true when they are talking about Democrats. They will demonize them and actually call them the enemy - Not the opposition or the other party. O'Reilly did just that tonight. He also referred to those that complaining about the prisoner abuse scandall as "Bush haters". This should bring to points to mind for anyone that is fair minded. 1) Why does this network feel the need to characterize one party as "the enemy"? No Spin Zone, my eye! 2) If they cannot present news programming without such characterizations, how can they be objective in any meaningful way? Further, how can any honest person claim that what they are doing is objective? I have never heard any other network allow any reporter or other personality they employ label the subject of their reporting in such manner.

"Any Democrat watching Fox News will spit at the biased nature of the coverage and cry out that Fox is deceiving the world. They then won't believe anything Fox says. But they wouldn't believe that side of the story anyway." Excuse me, but that is a steaming pile of road apples. Present a factual case and I will consider the position for reasonableness. FOX does not try to do this. Instead, there is a consistent effort to mischaracterize the position of the opposition. And that is the key. FOX does not veiw the positions Democrats or liberals as someone they report. These positions are ones that are opposed or not presented at all.

The "Daily Show" is more accurate and informative than FOX news but probably not as funny.

"Is this clear? I think this is clear The liberal media and those simple-minded folks who like to put their politics ahead of their country will twist any story (even those that harm America) if it means regaining political power. The Bush agenda is to defend this country against despots. Those who say otherwise have either been asleep since 9/11 or simply have their own agenda" Corddry has you nailed. In the kingdom of the blind, everyone watches FOX news. Your stuff could be used on the Daily Show, too. You are funny and don't even know it.

I will occassionally use a pan in my DO but never foil. I can't stand it when a bit of aluminum gets on the dental work. I never understood how that got started. When it comes to pizza or any else baked in a DO, reduce the coals on the bottom and increase them on the top. I did a little experimentation to get it right. But since I got it right, I haven't had a bad pizza. DO cleaup is so easy that I see NO advantage to using foil.

You could start writing for FOX yourself - "bitter condemnation...the liberal mindset, often categorically deny the most evident truths, especially when they contradict their worldview...your defense of NPR approaches near Zombie-like behavior in that its a futile denial of the obvious. Please NPR is OBJECTIVE? Take another look and try it with your eyes open next time." Only the dialog from a recent "Daily Show" can sum up your post. Corddry: How does one report the facts in an unbiased way when the facts themselves are biased? Stewart: I'm sorry, Rob, did you say the facts are biased? Corddry: That's right Jon. From the names of our fallen soldiers to the gradual withdrawal of our allies to the growing insurgency, it's become all too clear that facts in Iraq have an anti-Bush agenda.

FScouter is correct about NPR. Their news coverage is not liberal, it is objective. FOX is a bad joke and not journalism on any level. If you want accurate in-depth news coverage, listen to NPR. If you want mean-spirited right-wing editorial, watch FOX.

"I read it on the Fox News website." Darn leftists...

Hard to tell the root of the problem without knowing the exact nature of the conflict. I would sit the two of them down and talk about the troop. What are the problems? The answer can't be the other guy. Instead we want to pinpoint areas of concern to be addressed. What are the priorities? Get both of them on the same page of which problem gets attacked first, second, etc. What are the resources? Get an understanding of what we have and what we need to get the job done. What needs to be done? It doesn't really matter who does it. What matters is that the actions taken address the problem identified. Once you get the two of them working on a shared/agreed agenda, a lot of the reason for the competition goes away. The important thing is training boy leaders. I would take this exercise very seriously. I would talk with both sets of parents with a goal of gaining support "at home" for working together and getting the job done. If you know the parents and think they can work with you, a meeting with you, the CC and them might be appropriate. This kind of conflict is extremely unhealthy for the organization and all involved. These boys are focusing on their personal rivalry to the detriment of the troop. Ask them to run the law on their behavior - think about how such behavior is untrustworthy, unloyal, etc.

"As for the references to Nazis and Saddam's regime, I don't want our country and our military held comparable to their standards at all." I agree and am a bit baffled by the "outrage at the outrage" position. I don't want Saddam Hussein to be the standard by which American conduct is judged. Just because the previous regime in Iraq was tremendously abusive does not mean we should look the other way when our people abuse. I thought we were there to teach about democracy.

The military is actively investigating the deaths 20 prisoners that have died in U.S. Military custody since the start of the of the war on terrorism. Two of these cases have been declared to be homocide. It is clear that the abuse does not reach the level of Hussein or the others tyrants you mentioned. It should not be downplayed either. My concern is the lowest level soldiers will pay for their crimes while the comanders, intelligence "contractors" and politicians walk away unscathed. There is at least one alleged murder in Abu Ghraib prison. Granted, it is asserted by one of those charged in the abuse cases. However, the details of this death are troubling in that the prisoner evidently was never registered at the prison. According to the guard, the prisoner was brought in tortured and interogated. He died as a result and was stored on ice till the next morning. Then an ambulance shows up to pick up the patient. An IV is inserted and he is transported to the hospital where evidently he would be pronounced dead. The Taguba report indicated that a male prisoner was sodomized "with a chemical light and perhaps a broomstick" and at least one guard had sex with a female prisoner. The report indicated a situation were the command simply failed to do its duty. The problems go higher than those charged. They go higher than Abu Grahaib.

Thanks. I couldn't ask more from you, Rooster.

"Firstpusk, I do believe; I was just insulted. Since I perceive it to be so, it must be true. Regardless, I expect a prompt apology. By any chance, did you help write your company's sexual harassment policy? Just being curious And BTW, I dont think you know my parents do you?" I am truly sorry that you feel that way. I don't think you intended to be insulting, but ScouterPaul perceived it that way. All my fellow scouters are a valuable resource and deserve respect for the commitment that they have for youth. No, I did not write the harrassment policy. Although I did recently start here and read and signed a copy. Since that day, I have tested for compliance with the policy. I have seen a number of complaints over the years at different places and can honestly say nearly all of them could have been avoided by empathy and common courtesy. No, I am pretty sure that I don't know your parents. However, they deserve a large measure of respect for raising a son who is so committed to the scouting program - just as ScouterPaul's do. Have a wonderful weekend.

Rooster, I guess we were brought up differently. I was taught that if something I said was perceived as an insult, I should apologize - even if no insult was intended. Your folks taught you to question their self-esteem. Have a nice weekend.(This message has been edited by firstpusk)