packsaddle

"But seriously, are the couch potatoes what we make of males or is it that they have given up on their dreams? Every little boy has dreams of great things, heroic things, honorable things and yet after due process of culture end up sitting on the couch watching football while the wife is abandoned and lonely 2 rooms away?" Dreams are just dreams if that's as far as someone decides to take it. Some of us don't give up and keep going for it. We don't make CP's out of boys, they do that to themselves. Great things don't have to be 'big' things. Honor isn't limited to things that lead to recognition by others and heroism can happen anytime, just not necessarily noticed by anyone else. Dreams are available to anyone at any age. But they are just dreams unless people take the initiative and pursue them. Most of the CP's I know are there on the couch by choice. And most CP wives I know understood what was in store for them. Time to live with the consequences of the mistake.

Vicki, where are you when we need you? The "hard-wiring" is a fact that cannot be denied, if for no other reason than the different reproductive roles. In terms of mores or inclinations, I am willing to entertain the possibility of innate male/female differences but I don't necessarily agree with the descriptions that you just gave. OK, I see a dichotomy in those descriptions. There seems to be a need to distinguish between the 'Rebel without a cause' at first and then 'nice guys'. Or perhaps the question is, can that rebel also be a nice guy? When I think of 'nice guys' I think of the character, Atticus Finch, or in real life, someone like Abraham Lincoln or Thomas Jefferson. And I admit that viewed from such a distance in time, those real persons may be almost as mythical as Finch. Considering what all those characters did, I'm thinking that the difference is between an outlook that embraces fairness and does not engage in self-destructive risk-taking for its own sake and an outlook which is willing to overlook ethical limits and enjoys the thrill of beating the odds for risk-taking. I could take issue with the second one by simple observation of males in this society...at any age. Given the option of heading out to the wilderness to do whatever and staying on the couch, drinking beer, eating chips and dip, and watching football, I think I'm on safe ground thinking that most males opt for food, comfort, and mindless entertainment. The third one...c'mon. We're pigs. We don't want a woman. We want lots of them. We don't really want anything else until the testosterone levels decline to the point that rational thought has a chance. Often by then it's too late. It's women who whip us into submission and preserve us until we're actually worth something. And I appreciate it. Women ARE in control. And I'm sorry to see males self-deluded into thinking otherwise.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Following up on what jblake47 wrote, I have also discovered that needle and thread work is lot easier if you take the pants off first. Less painful too.

Beavah, yeah I had the same reflex thought when I saw the OP a few days ago. The OP account is closed so I leave it to the rest of you guys to decide the fate of the discussion.

Beavah, while I tend to agree with your 'Jeremiah-like' apocalyptic assessment, I also caution myself by remembering that I am way out of my field when it comes to the labyrinthine world of the OMB. But I saw two words in the quote that you started with, words that could be interpreted in different ways: 'create' and 'money'. Without going into details, my puzzlement arises from having read many articles that seem to contradict what you said about that particular quote. Here's a short section of one example (http://www.dallasnews.com/business/columnists/cheryl-hall/20101109-What-is-Fed-s-QE2-6107.ece): The columnist called her contacts in the field to ask about the QE2. Start Quote "Three former high-ranking Fed insiders, two university business school deans and three investment fund managers answered the call. "The book has not been written whether QE2 is a good idea or a bad idea," said Sam Manning, general partner of the Blagden Fund in Dallas. "There are many highly educated, brilliant minds on both sides of the argument." But here are some basics about quantitative easing that just about everybody I talked with agreed on: Turning government bonds into circulating money is called monetizing the national debt. Quantitative easing is a euphemism for creating money out of thin air. In the vernacular, we call it "printing money," even though it really has nothing to do with the U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing. The way it's supposed to work is that the Fed buys securities in the open market, paying with a government "check." (That's how the money is created.) The sellers deposit those checks into their banks. The banks redeploy those deposits as loans to consumers and business. The money supply expands and, in turn, so does the economy. Or so the theory goes. The money supply hasn't increased over the last two years from the first round of quantitative easing. The trillion-plus the Fed paid for mortgage-backed securities is still sitting in vaults as bank reserves. "The system is clogged" is how Bob McTeer, former president of Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, described it. Loan demand from creditworthy borrowers remains weak. Banks are still smarting from previous bad loans. And they are leery of lending money so cheaply when higher rates may be in the offing. Almost no one thinks QE2 will send folks scurrying to the banks to borrow. "It is not as though you read the headline 'Fed to do $600 billion of QE2' and think, 'Oh, good, this will be good for our business,' " says Cece Smith, a retired venture capitalist and former chairman of the Dallas Fed bank. "They are not going to add jobs based upon interest rates being lower. They will add jobs based upon increased demand for their products or services." The likely - and intended - effect is inflation." End Quote Again, in one of the first bullets, there are two words, 'creating money', that were the focus of your reply, apparently in contradiction. The columnist claimed that this was one of the points that all of her respondents agreed on. And now, having thought about your reply, I'm confused (and that's ok because confusion is something I have come to accept as a general condition of life - I wish others were willing to be as honest about it). But if you'd clarify, or at least make an attempt, I'd appreciate it. P.S. keep in mind that I continue to share your sense of horrified fascination with regard to the way things are being managed by our elected and unelected officials. I guess I'm hoping I'm just too stupid to be able to see the genius of their intricate plans.

As you are about to learn, the Dremel doesn't really make it easier. It IS much quicker, however, to permanently inscribe a mistake, LOL. On the other hand, as I have demonstrated empirically on several occasions, you are less likely to push a super sharp cutting tool up underneath your thumbnail. Or into your palm. Or into the upper part of your knee. I like to carve patterns. And I like to fasten the hiking staff medallions that you can buy at the camp or at the shop. You can get ones that are customized for your particular camp or for different ranks and awards, or you can load the hiking staff with medallions that remind you of favorite trails or parks, etc. I use the carving tools to make insets of these medallions. It looks nicer than just nailing them over the outside. I found a naturally-carved staff out in the Beartooth Mountains several years ago. The top end of a lodgepole pine. Insect larvae had tunneled all over the staff just under the bark and I mean there wasn't a square centimeter that hadn't been patterned by them. But the wood was still solid underneath. Perfect. It is the most spectacular 'stick' I have. So depending on the type of wood, the grain, the placement of the limbs and twigs, or other imperfections, I like to just carve any design that seems to fit. Near the top I try to make a custom fit for my hand to hold the staff. This means actually taking a good walk with it to find the most natural place. Then I make a very fine pattern of grooves to help with the grip. Sometimes I make a circle of quasi-native American designs as a flourish. Those are easier than you might think. However, unless you are a quicker study than I am, if your time is short, faces and such are going to have to wait for another time. My favorite woods: Pacific madrone, sweetgum, some kinds of cherry, sourwood, and maple. The first two are super strong for their light weight. The others have decent grain. Stay away from oak or hickory. They are really strong but they're heavy and hard and the coarse grain is really hard to carve. If you want to get some decent carving tools you can find them in Atlanta at a place called Highland Hardware. They're online as well (highlandwoodworking.com). I could spend hours just browsing that place. Good luck and have fun.

"We don't get visits from anybody" I sympathize. But in my view, count your blessings. Ignore the FOS if you want to. If you feel like you're on your own, it's a rational feeling because you ARE. But if your unit is doing well, what more can you ask, really?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Muhahahahaha! So you are just now discovering the sinister world of subtle control by X-chromosomes.....

Me too!

Roll. Unless I have a serious need to 'vacate the premises' quickly in which case stuffing happens with rolling to take place later when there's time to do it right. To me this is a non-issue. The real issue is that I just can't seem to give up on old equipment that might still have a prayer of giving me one more good trip. So over the years I have a lot of it. That second point - Loyal. It was loyal to me....

Eagle732, if the executive office is any indication, the answer to your question will be 'Dilbert.'

Oooooohhhh, a multiple choice question. I like it. Answers: a. They don't have the cojones to do it (cowardice) b. They'd rather have the political ammunition (hypocrisy) c. They helped create the problem, DUH!!! (deception) d. all of the above

I'm guessing that 'skate' is a colloquialism for getting to a destination by putting in some effort at the beginning and allowing momentum and a balancing act to 'carry the day'. The only merit badges that we had a parent to sign off on was Family Life and one other. I would meet with the mom and inform her that "here are the requirements" and that this may be the last chance she ever has to get what she wants. I think it usually worked. At a BOR, the boys often would say it was the hardest one they had done. Oh, and there was one dad who was a supervisor for a textile mill who counseled Textiles MB for anyone who wanted. His son did that one (mine too). We had no one else anywhere to do it. BTW, from what I saw it was a pretty good MB in case anyone is interested. They learned a lot.

A means test would take care of that and move the system back toward its original 'safety net' intent.

I'm just back from a public venue that featured the national anthem and the contrast could not have been stronger. Not only did the symphony orchestra play the anthem but the conductor turned and coducted the entire audience as they sang it. And as far as I could tell every last one of us did sing it. Loudly. Standing in solemn respect. Like I said, quite a contrast to sports venues. Draw your own conclusions.

Vol, I think the political inertia is going against removing the troops. When Reagan created Central Command (and Bush later created Africa Command) the underlying motivations for doing this were with regard to the relationship between energy (oil) and national security (as it was all the way back to FDR and every President since has continued the strategy). Therefore, until we become energy-independent (and that's not going to happen within my children's lifetime) we're going to be mired in that tarbaby (this analogy has a nice literal component to it). And the troops, I fear, are going to be called to make even greater sacrifices. It's a Faustian bargain that we made when we agreed to protect 'the kingdom' back in 1945, in return for access to oil, when we adopted the Shah as our surrogate to provide security and then lost him to the Ayatollah, and when we sealed the deal in Desert Storm when we went into Kuwait to protect that same access to oil. There's just too much of this in order to remove the troops. I wonder sometimes, if there might even be an element of the Military Industrialist Complex that actually wants us NOT to 'get' bin Laden, as his presence and actions tend to guarantee more and more spending on the war machinery. Sometimes, I wonder if the ham-handed incompetence of the Bush administration, who knows, might actually have been carefully planned. We may never know for sure. But like I said before, I doubt we'll be able to outwit Mephisto in this version of the tale.

"At least yeh haven't lobbed any artillery my way for creating one of those dastardly eponymous threads." Not that the temptation didn't cross my mind. But I see that you enjoy tickling the tail of the dragon. I like that. It's fun to do (risky sometimes) as well as to watch (less risky). But yeah, the decision to reopen all those old threads wasn't all-that-well-thought-out. Although in comparison to what's going on in Egypt, for example, it's not that important and will take care of itself if no-one does anything.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" Karl Marx

Guilty as charged. Meds taken. I read the one up top on pinewood derby and the first post in it said something about not finding any other threads on the topic. So I brought a few back to life. Just a few. I got tired of reading through all the Pinewood titles. I suspect there are as many threads on Pinewood Derby as there have been on the membership policy, LOL. Edited part, if you wait a few more hours, things will be back to normal...24 hours for this one starting now.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Beavah, the question I have is what is the threshold that the treasury must cross with those bond purchases to trigger the catastrophe? Considering the element of psychology and human behavior that influences this, I wonder how close we are right now, and what will it take to collapse that house of cards? But man, once it starts...the last thing anyone will worry about is disability payments or some such nonsense. It could be cataclysmic. We can solve all this with the stroke of a pen. The debt commission had decent ideas but they didn't propose implementation as quickly as I would have liked. Remove the income cap for SS now. Means test. Now. Things like this would have almost no effect on the vast majority of Americans and those who were affected would be well-off enough not to be gravely harmed. OR, just let the entitlements run out and then terminate them. The idea of 'running the presses' to buy bonds is perhaps the cruelest management approach, not to mention dishonest. I'm not kidding myself, after decades of do-nothing management, we're not going to turn away from so many years of successful self-deceit. Party on! SA, we might even have to cut defense spending. Wow. We spend as much as the entire rest of the planet combined. http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp And we might have to cut it. Nope. That's a political third rail, like social security, right?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Greetings Semperfiscouter! and welcome to the forums. I rejuvenated just a few of the old PWD threads for you. (actually I skipped a bunch and only went back a couple of years) Most of the discussions occur in the Cub Scout section so if you'd like I can move this one for you. You might find some good insights in those old threads for the questions you've raised. I think many of us have confronted those situations and a few of us have some good ideas on it. Anyway, welcome.

this one was interesting too

this one was also popular

I skipped the one about South Park and the one about disqualification. Those were really popular too.

another page...