packsaddle

Sno-Seal user for more than 30 years. Be careful with the oven warming, though. Rule of thumb, don't get the leather hotter than the animal that produced it did when it was alive. For a quick fix, a hair dryer is useful.

Thanks ozemu. Wearing my poppy, I think of all the good men that have died and are dying in battle. My great-grandfather was there in WWI. Here's a link for anyone to ponder: http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/flanders.htm

Hey, I just found this great Mencken quote. What a great sense of humor, gotta love 'im! "When a candidate for public office faces the voters he does not face men of sense; he faces a mob of men whose chief distinguishing mark is that they are quite incapable of weighing ideas, or even of comprehending any save the most elemental -- men whose whole thinking is done in terms of emotion, and whose dominant emotion is dread of what they cannot understand. So confronted, the candidate must either bark with the pack, or count himself lost. His one aim is to disarm suspicion, to arouse confidence in his orthodoxy, to avoid challenge. If he is a man of convictions, of enthusiasm, or self-respect, it is cruelly hard The larger the mob, the harder the test. In small areas, before small electorates, a first rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even a mob with him by the force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second or third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically the most devious and mediocre -- the man who can most adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." --H.L. Mencken, The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920

Adrianvs, I had to laugh. Your spelling error nearly spilled me out of my chair. Ahem, silicone is more likely to be found in, well, a popular implant item. But the irony is that (according to a little wisdom from Ol' Griz of "Jeremiah Johnson" fame) those puppies may look nice but they can be as cold and hard as the flint you describe. This will probably close the thread. I seek forgiveness and absolution.

OK, here is a way to resolve this. Get the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) for each chemical. You can download them or read them off the web. Here's a convenient site: http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/P6005.htm Read it carefully. Decide for yourself what the safe handling and use is. KMnO4 is a powerful oxidizer. I encourage you not to allow children to handle this stuff. Be careful.

Red Feather, I have edited my entire message because this topic is going the way of materials that can be dangerous. I suggest that we all be very careful of the ideas we plant in little heads. Send me a PM if you're still interested.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

OGE, I'm not angry with you, or what you said. Some of us simply are incorrigible and others are like moths to flames. You were expecting what? Again I see respondents dismissed through application of ridicule (the 'comic book' comment) or a term, "liberal" in this case, probably intended as pejorative. I now confess the following: I subscribe to "The Economist". I now note that when Rooster7 had the opportunity to rise above the comment flung by NJ, he chose the other option and used the identical tactic to reject NJ. What's the term for that, 'irony' perhaps? Hypocrisy? There is an entertaining column entitled, "There's a word for that" in the latest issue of "The Economist", November 6-12. It starts by quoting Mr. Bush's frequent statement, "There's a word for that", "It's called liberalism." This was the response Mr. Bush gave to nearly every terrible thing advocated by Mr. Kerry. Application of the term seems to have worked its magic in this case, though. But the article is a fairly entertaining explanation for the problem with such dismissals. If you can't find a copy of the print, there's also: http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/l/li/liberalism.html Unfortunately, "The Economist" requires payment for access to their full-feature web content. My point, as the broken record goes, is that we miss opportunities to interact constructively when we make such dismissals, ignoring the ideas. The word for the result of that is 'ignorance'.

Brace yourself, eamonn. Just wait until he DOES use all those buttons and you are just staring, clueless. Been there, done that. But I still know the slide rule...feet first unless...just kidding, good one River2K.

"Just 43% of the British believe their country made the right decision to use military force against Iraq, down sharply from 61% last May (2003)" This is quoted from a Pew Research Center report: http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=796 I have no idea why this won't show as a link. Although the most recent numbers seem to be from March 2004, it is unlikely that they have increased much since then. There are other interesting results in this report as well. Hunt, I agree with your idea about 'wedge issues' but I think you underestimated the importance of abortion as a deciding factor, at least from what I have noticed in our region. But your point is a good one, not much change is likely there. More likely in the tax code or corporate areas.

And I'm sure your embrace would be one of Christian love and forgiveness. I'm not certain of the authorship. I did note that there was no attribution. I believe, aside from content, it is important to note that it comes from our strongest ally and may represent a rather popular view in the rest of the world.

This semester, I just beat my class again in a contest to do a series of quick trig calculations. Their tool, a scientific calculator. My tool, a 37-year-old slide rule (accuracy beyond 3 places would have put them ahead). I say hold on to that compass...in case the batteries fail. BTW, some of them could hardly believe such an invention actually existed, much less sent a man to the moon (the slide rule, that is, not the compass.)

NJ, Laurie, my answer to your rhetorical question is that we didn't debate this stuff prior to the election because we 'knew' that such 'debate' would be unlikely to change a single person's view. We choose to debate now because we can do so safely, continuing to separate ourselves from the others without suffering consequences of responsibility, that is, the election's over and the guy is in now no matter what. It is trading one form of deception before the election for another one now. But these responses could be worse. I refer you to: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14832124&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=god-help-america-name_page.html Bon Apetite

Back from TDY, I was in a foreign country for the election. No names, please (but I was able to get a flu shot). During the days after, I was often politely queried about my feelings. I told them. It seemed to be a relief that I shared their feelings...that they could identify one American who seemed to be an exception to the stereotype they were forming. This bothers me some (but I'm glad I helped dispel the stereotype). These people who were our friends, are now fearful of us. That bothers me a lot. The election is over. Kerry is history. The Democrats, if they proceed as with past losses, will bury this crop of candidates with stakes through their hearts. This administration got the mandate it wanted and they now have a lock on every branch of our government. They can proceed unopposed to do everything they want. No excuses, there will be no others for them to blame because they are in complete control. We elected them. We have given our nod to every program on their agenda. And through that choice we are collectively responsible for everything that comes next. Game over. Get over it.

Eamonn, Oops, I guess I was a little cryptic. In the thread, "When did it not work?", the question of measurement of success came up. That was the 'original thread' of which I wrote. I've been on travel so I didn't notice all the 'stuff' that hit that thread until recently. But I noticed the question about success and responded a little late, questioning Bob White's answer to it. Bob responded and since that time there has been some more of the usual give and take. When I was a boy, scouting and my troop were the world. In retrospect, I know that the troop and the district were well-run and 'with-the-program'. We moved to this area and the troop had real problems. My son responded predictably, bored, less interested, etc. He made it to eagle years ago with some parental encouragement. The troop and the district were in bad shape, partly because they were not 'with-the-program'. Also partly because of some local issues with the CO and the community, that's another story. My main complaint is not aimed at you because I realize you are not the problem. My main complaint is merely a statement of frustration on behalf of the boys. It is and always has been that there is less chance of the troop getting it right if the district or the council provides neither the incentive (encouragement) nor the knowledge (training, perhaps). I have beat my head against this 'wall' for years. I think it is facile to speak the words about following the program with the expectation that those words alone are enough to solve problems for a unit that has never followed "the program". It also requires some help from the higher layers of the organization (not to mention some help from the community, but that's unrelated to the program). In that sense, a "measure" may provide little more than a confirmation of a unit's failure...when what they really need is the knowledge, incentives, and resources to succeed. Happy birthday though. I do sympathize about the glasses, keys, hat, wallet, belt, shirt tail, zipped fly, passport, plane ticket, travel orders...wait a minute - that's MY list!(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Placing myself at risk here, but you're all having too much fun. Back to the role model concept. I stated this publicly once while serving as cubmaster, "a father attempts to be a good role model for his son so that his son will also be a good father. But a daughter sees the father differently. There the father is a role model that may affect her choice of a husband, and hopefully a good choice also for a father. These, to me, are the most important role models a father can be." I then had a whole bunch of single moms bringing their boys to the pack. Today that pack is far more successful than any in the past years. It is run mostly by women. Fathers help out. I think to try to state differences other than biological ones is to tread on quicksand. I may placate my wife by nodding to her assertion that women are more organized. But she's comparing me to her female peers and for that comparison she's right. However, I doubt the comparison holds up outside that limited scope of one male and several highly efficient females. But I sure do enjoy the social events.

Sorry, I responded to that question in the original thread before I stumbled onto this one. I'm not sure it needs to be repeated here. Or maybe its time to let that one whimper into oblivion...

Back briefly from a TDY enforced hiatus... TrailPounder, your message about unemployed and the poor...Huh? I'm not sure what that was about. Then there was Bob White's answer to a direct question on how to measure success. "One real good way is self evaluation by comparing what you do, with what you are supposed to be doing." This one caught my attention and then it seemed that the thread became, ahem, distracted. My problem with that response is this: I can't see how such self-evaluation can realistically happen. Let's suppose that a troop is operating without being totally conscious of what they are supposed to be doing. In order to make the comparison, they would have to learn what they are supposed to be doing. To me, in that case, it would be simpler if, after learning the correct way, they just did it. Alternatively, if they are already doing it the way they are supposed to then, according to the argument, there will be no problems. And then the comparison seems pointless. I guess I would like to see a better objective measure if anyone can think of what it would be. Finally, to try to fit in with the morph the thread has taken, I guess I am guilty myself of casting aspersions at Bob White. I think back to that comment about the gom jabar. Sorry. But TP, you'll always be Ed Harris (John Glenn in 'The Right Stuff') to me.

Eamonn, I nearly fell out of my chair. Adrainvs, This just got interesting!

I did this once for Cit World and here is a suggestion. Take a look at the web sites for Italian citizenship. Here's an example: http://www.italiamerica.org/id72.htm Under certain circumstances, a person born in this country with Italian immigrant ancestors can be granted simultaneous Italian citizenship along with US citizenship. All that's required is their birth certificates and immigration papers and, of course, your own papers. This is really interesting stuff. The process of learning and understanding the details will instruct in many other aspects of how to become a citizen in another country, or this one for that matter.

I think most of our problems occur when we can't follow the program for lack of support from levels higher than the troop(s). The best example I know is the complete lack of a merit badge program in this district. There is no list of counselors, no coordinator (outside the troop level), and (with the exception of summer camp) the boys can't pursue MBs independently of the troop. Maybe this belongs in another thread too.

Aaawwww maaaan, the beret too?

Seen this done lots of times. No problems as far as I know.

Just a fine point. The better analogy might be: the homosexual male is to the teenage boy as the gay woman is to the teenage girl. A "gratuitous womanizer" has the gender thing all wrong. And I'm not sure how well 'gratuitous' works here either. 'Shameless' or 'avowed' might work a little better, but still not the best analogy. Nevertheless, I tend to agree with Hunt and NJ on all this (but everyone knew that already). Also (and this is for you 'Pounder) I state this sincerely, I trust our gay female friends completely with my daughter. They are caring and loving and I have no hesitation to let her spend time alone with them. Rather,it is a few sleazy young heterosexual men around here to whom I would feed a few .45 Cor-bons if I could do it legally (up close and personal, if possible). FYI, I use the term 'homo' quite often - applied as the genus, Homo (as in Homo sapiens). Sorry, I just can't help it. I seek absolution.

Bob White, I said, after qualification, YES. I do understand that the intent to do harm, etc. does not exist. In that respect my answer may not meet legal scrutiny. Instead I am trying to see it through the eyes of a boy who may miss an opportunity as well as the benefit of such recognition...because he sees the ordeal in terms identical to those of hazing. My dictionary defines ordeal: 1 : a primitive means used to determine guilt or innocence by submitting the accused to dangerous or painful tests believed to be under supernatural control 2 : a severe trial or experience When I went through the ordeal, way back when, it was clear to me that the ordeal was intended to simulate definition number 2. We slept under the stars with limited (or no) bed clothing, were not allowed to speak, ate practically nothing, and then worked all day in the blazing sun or rain with minimal breaks and food. Today, the candidates are no longer disqualified for speaking (we were) but most of the rest of the ordeal remains the same. What I observe here, during ordeals under the summer Southern sun, easily passes my test for definition number 2. In the eyes of a boy whose imagination has been working on this, I understand how he could dread such an experience. If he meets all other qualifications for this honor and recognition but, for dread of the ordeal, takes himself out of consideration, that is a shame. I submit that if the ordeal merely became a service project with good working conditions, most of the argument over this would go away. I think that camaraderie would not suffer and its just possible that with better conditions, the project would benefit as well. OGE, I must have missed something along the way, I'm not sure why you have reacted so strongly. I hope you can see that I am trying to be constructive here.

Oh, I don't know...maybe NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM.