packsaddle

pchadbo, swimming against the current is the story of my life. If you REALLY want to see an example of this, check the thread on Political Trends. At least I know I'm headed upstream. Everyone else is just letting the current take them. Me, it's been my life's philosophy to "Spawn til you die". http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LFo7S89pOzg/Thnq9sr746I/AAAAAAAACUU/3jzplPmIAOY/s640/spawn.jpg My favorite t-shirt design of all time.

Lisabob, your observations are astute as usual. I really feel for Romney. He's an honest, honorable guy being whipped back and forth in the turbulence of Republican politics. I guess some of us criticize this as flip-flopping. To anyone who's ever tried to swim through the swift current of a river, this is little more than taking advantage of every short-term opportunity to find the safest passage. The last thing we want in turbulence like that is some monolithic hulk that's going to wrap itself around the next rock around the bend. Callooh! Callay!, I accept that you're not passionate about Romney. But when I read what you write, I see passion for your ideas. Anyway, I think in this case poor Horatius is simply confused as to which side he's supposed to defend from. Poor Romney seems to be 'catching it' from within as well as without. I will say this: if Romney loses this it won't be due to the strength of reasoning on the part of the Democrats nor will it be because of the superior skills and plan of action on the part of Obama. Like ghjim wrote, this is for the Republicans to lose and if that's what happens the responsibility will lie squarely at the feet of the Tea Party. And while reasonable persons would recognize this fairly easily, the Tea Party will likely point the finger at the rest of the Republicans and then continue their 'loose cannon' approach to politics. I guess in a sense, because the Republican party CAN'T seem to bring itself to repudiate these guys, the Tea Party might just be right.

Wow, I didn't see all that coming...Trevorum, when Astroturf and band aids, etc. become erroneously employed as symbols of mass murder/suicide at the hands of a religious cult, I'll vigorously defend those brands as well. Unkiewill, exception noted. You don't suppose the Flavor Aid people might be the ones who started this...cleverly using KoolAid's superior name recognition against itself? I taste conspiracy!

It's between you and the boy. The parents are free to make any noise they want but you control your signature. That's that. I'm the MB counselor for Env. Science and some of the other nature-related badges. I am fair with them and I don't sign until I'm satisfied that they actually understand the ideas. Some of them have to work a little harder than others. Some of the boys try to avoid me because the word is out that they can get the badges without doing all the work if they do them at summer camp. That's beyond my control.

If they're members of these forums, yep, that's right.

Therefore all persons in these forums who have never been married also should be virgins. If they are divorced or widowed, they should be celibate. Yep, seems totally realistic to me.

You guys are BRUTAL! No, I'm not talking about Moosetracker or ghjim, or Beavah...YOU guys are like creampuffs. Big, fluffy, airfilled wads of empty calories. No, I'm talking about the self-proclaimed 'conservatives' who are letting me play the part of Horatius at the bridge. C'mon fellas, where the heck are you? Help me defend Romney. I'm being buried in creampuffs and there's only so many of those things I can eat. They're wearing me down with adipose tissue! Edit: Ghjim, that plan would have had a chance if Obama had really put his shoulder into getting it passed. He didn't. He essentially abandoned it and left Simpson and Bowles hung out to dry, kind of like the so-called 'conservatives' are hanging ME out to dry with my support for Romney. Edit Part Two: Am I really on scouter.com or is this some kind of contrary universe I got stuffed into during a mini-rapture? Of all people, here I am defending the Republican nominee and everyone who bothers to post seems to be in support of the Democrat. What the heck is going on here?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

In my never-ending crusade to redeem the good name of KoolAid: if you guys are making reference to the Jonestown tragedy, Jim Jones made his followers drink a beverage called Flavor Aid, NOT KoolAid. I'd appreciate it if someday we can all get this right. Otherwise if you WEREN'T making such reference...nevermind.

That aspect distresses me as well. But remember how Romney turned the Olympics around. And he's obviously a very shrewd businessman. I credit his current woes to the run-up to the nomination. He took on political nonsense baggage that is, I fear, going to torpedo his success. I have no doubt that once in office he will take the objective, pragmatic approach that needs to be taken...and ignore the crazies in his party. But they are taking a terrible toll on his campaign right now. His choice of Paul Ryan is symptomatic of this. I almost fell out of my chair when he made that choice. That was truly a Faustian bargain. Trouble is, I have my doubts that it did what it was supposed to do..and that was to placate the extreme elements of his party. I suspect that they still have their doubts....and the relative silence in these forums on the part of persons whom I thought would have supported Romney is evidence of that, I think. Again, if I was a conspiracy theorist and if I thought the Tea Party had brains enough to do it, I'd think this was all by design in order to make sure there IS no plan for the future. If you think this is far-fetched, think about it every time Ryan makes the statements he makes to AARP meetings, unapologetically. There's a reason he does those things. It's as if they WANT to fail. Romney is a good guy. He's pragmatic. He's not afraid to speak the inconvenient truth (even if it hurts him politically). I think he'll do a good job if we'll just put him in office. Ryan, I'll just have to hold my nose.

OGE, you may be correct that Obama is going to win. But there's still time for that rare event to intrude on what we think is inevitable. I'm not bent out of shape over this race because I don't really see either one of the candidates having much control over the fate of the nation. I just see Romney as the better businessman (aka manager) while Obama has not come through on some important promises he made at the beginning. To me, my relatively low expectations for the future will tend to make it easier for whoever comes out on top to meet my expectations. But Obama has already failed me in some issues and Romney's obvious willingness to change with circumstances and needs means that I can't take his promises seriously, like I did with Obama. Romney is not a 'true believer' for conservative issues the way Obama IS a 'true believer' for liberal issues. To me that makes Romney more realistic about his approach. If the business outlook of measuring everything in terms of dollars and profit is dispassionate and uncaring, then I embrace it as the American Way. It is the basis of the American economic system and I feel like it's time to give it a chance at government as well. Moosetracker, you and Callooh! Callay! both seem to be 'way out there' in terms of ideology and passion. I sincerely hope that neither of you burns up on re-entry.

You might want to look over the other thread on 'jumping ship' as well. They're discussing some related things. Your son could also talk to his friends and find out about other troops through the 'grapevine'. (I've never understood that particular metaphor, if that's what it is, other than being the subject of a really great 'oldie goldie') Otherwise your district guys can give you a list of troops in the area. Better yet, go to a roundtable meeting and ask there. Some of the scoutmasters and others will be in attendance and they'll be glad to discuss the possibilities.

I know this is probably 'before-your-time' but you guys might want to refer to what I like to think of as the 'Ed-Merlyn' Show from a few years back. (to take this even further back, that's a [clever?] play off the idea of the Ed Sullivan Show) Wouldn't it be nicer to discuss the thread topic rather than each other? Callooh! Callay!, since you seem to be a passionate critic of things liberal, help me out with my support for Romney. Please bring to the discussion what you think the positive aspects of his Presidency will be.

Moosetracker, the 'secret weapon', if there is such a thing - it really isn't much of a secret - is the Tea Party and the thoughtless, idiotic ideas they promote. This is Romney's biggest impediment and the salvation of Obama's political future. I'll repeat this quote from another thread on 'Bullying Professor'. It comes from emeritus professor Dutch from UWGB as he was watching the 2008 Beijing Olympics opening ceremony: "While the Chinese were unrolling an LED screen the size of a soccer field at the Beijing Olympic opening ceremony, we were groveling before people who want to see Obama's birth certificate and still insist the earth is 10,000 years old. I watched the opening ceremony and contrasted it with the sorry spectacle of the 2008 Presidential election and thought, they are going to mop the floor with us." Dutch's response was close to mine. He was talking about the Tea Party, actually only a small part of the Tea Party which seems to run the whole thing. I know this part of it well because I live among them in the South. So I strongly sympathize with Romney's dilemma. He loses no matter what. If he deviates even a little bit from the appearance of a passionate belief of the Tea Party nonsense he loses those wavering votes who are already suspicious of him. If he comes on strong for that same appearance of passionate belief he alienates the majority of reasonable people who are still undecided. It's an impossible position that he's in. There was nothing factually incorrect about the claims he made in the video released by Mother Jones. They were calculated to keep the 'conservative' base in place. Yes, he has many faces. Do you think that Obama only presents ONE face? Do you think Obama is completely consistent with the promises he makes? Well we don't have to worry about that last question because he didn't keep them in the first place. End of discussion. Romney is a known quantity if only to know that we can EXPECT him to change his mind once he's in office, and do what he thinks is best. We'll KNOW that there are no constraints because he's already demonstrated his willingness to ignore them. Look, Romney is the Republican candidate for two reasons. First, he outspent his opponents. Second, in comparison to his opponents, he looked like a person who offered a sober, consistent, reasoned approach to government. If his opponents had also had sober, consistent, reasoned approaches to government, he'd have had some competition. But the strength of the Tea Party insured THAT was NOT going to happen. Quite a while back, Beavah wrung his hands trying to figure out what the 'plan' is for the Tea Party and I consistently responded that the plan is NOT to have a plan. Think about that. In that respect, Romney is the logical choice. I just heard Joe Scarborough state straight up that Romney "has no plan" for the next four years. Romney's candidacy makes perfect sense if you accept that the Tea Party is in control of the Republican Party. There is no plan. There's not supposed to be one. The thing I don't get about the Tea Party is why don't they realize that Obama doesn't really have one either? Edit to clarify: In case that sounded like luke-warm support for Romney, I really meant the above to explain the 'secret weapon' that was mentioned. Far from BEING the secret weapon, if anything Romney is the victim of it. I still think Romney (sans 'secret weapon') is a superior manager who can deal with real problems in a dispassionate, rational manner, and once he's elected will ignore the Tea Party for all the right reasons.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

JMHawkins, the arguments that we should convince persons with reasoning are just fine. And they seem to be acceptable to most of us if the issues are about things like charitable donations to BSA from corporations. But those arguments sometimes shift into the realm of 'hypocrisy' when the issues are of 'morality', when we resort instead to 'force' of law rather than convincing others with reasoning. The 'reasoned argument' as a way to change minds or behavior seems to be a 'pick-and-choose' approach rather than a consistently-followed principle.

If this person becomes a volunteer leader, I suggest that you make it very clear what her RESPONSIBILITIES are and what AUTHORITY, if any, comes with them. Make sure the chain of command is clear and where she occurs in it. And then....don't back away from what you just made clear.

About that link: Dutch is retired now...a real loss for uwgb and the students.

I have to admit, Romney hasn't exactly covered himself with political glory lately. Yet, you have to credit him with being honest about what he thinks...how in the heck he decided to saddle himself with a liar like Ryan I'll never understand. So the latest trend seems to be going for Obama. I'm not worried. I'm convinced that the gap will close before the election although I concede it will be close. Not that it's going to make much difference, given what I think Romney will REALLY do if elected, I still think he'll defeat Obama.

I'm going to take a wild stab at a guess that Sailingpj is writing 'tongue-in-cheek'. Or am I wrong? Anyways, I really like Steven Dutch, especially this nugget from elsewhere on his website: "While the Chinese were unrolling an LED screen the size of a soccer field at the Beijing Olympic opening ceremony, we were groveling before people who want to see Obama's birth certificate and still insist the earth is 10,000 years old. I watched the opening ceremony and contrasted it with the sorry spectacle of the 2008 Presidential election and thought, they are going to mop the floor with us." Sailingpj, if you were my advisee I'd already have read you the 'riot act'. The ONLY person who has the true responsibility for determining your educational strategies and finding out about things is...YOU. Your advisers can look over your shoulder, so-to-speak, but it's ultimately on YOU to make the smart decisions and take the responsibility for your own life. Don't even think about laying off any of that responsibility onto other persons unless they just put you in handcuffs and led you to prison...even then, YOU probably made the fateful decisions.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Bumper stickers around here more often involve "cold dead fingers" and such. But the campaigns haven't produce many stickers that I've noticed. The lack of interest is amazing when you consider how 'red' this area is. But the thing I have REALLY noticed is that I seem to be the only person in these threads to stand up for Romney in a debate situation. I was surprised a short while ago during my discussion about Romney's management skills with Beavah...when I felt I was hung out to dry by all the people in these threads who used to make noises as if they're conservative or something. What gives? Why did you just walk away and leave Romney twisting in the breeze?

See, Eamonn...and you thought we disagree on things, lol. I agree completely with what you just wrote, right down to and especially including the rap music part (for which I add, the term 'song' is grossly misapplied..no melody... no music, really, either). Fella, I can say with complete confidence, that whatever it is you're getting paid, it isn't enough.

Fred, I've read Merlyn for quite a while now. He's very open about his identity and his motivations. His communication tone and style is indeed offensive to many in this forum and I suspect that the memory of his exchanges with evmori cause some of us to cringe as they read these words. But he's part of the reality of the world in which BSA exists. He's effective in the sense that he brings that reality to these discussions and he defends his ideas vigorously. The only thoughts I have for you and others who feel the same way is that if you think Merlyn's here only to provoke promote the kinds of destructive interactions you describe, the best way to disarm him is not to respond to him. Personally, because of my liking of the cub scouts back when I was CM, I find it useful, whenever I'm tempted to think badly of someone, to think of them as a cub scout (which Merlyn was once). I note that I sometimes fail at this exercise. But when I succeed that makes it a little easier to see the little kid in someone and to imagine the emotions and thoughts that are being expressed in what they write today. It makes it easier for me to think of the human beings that are behind the various nicknames I read here, and the fact that every one of them, Merlyn included, has feelings and a sense of justice and morality, and yes, a sense of humor. We just don't always agree all the time. So I guess in as much as Merlyn might provide the opportunity for us to squabble over various issues, the responsibility for the squabbling is mostly on us superannuated cub scouts. Once in a while the den mother is there in order to redirect all that youthful exuberance.

I agree with WAKWIB. In my experience this and some of the other training experiences have been superficial and ineffective. I personally felt like all the exercise was meant to do was to check a box on a form somewhere, perhaps in order to cover someone's backside. This unit is small enough that leaders can get to know each boy. I can observe them during most any activity and I know them well enough to detect if one of them is troubled about something. I can tell if there's a change in mood or some other 'tell'. I think this is one way to detect problems...to really know the boys. As for what BSA has done with their list, I think we should fess up if we did something wrong, pay whatever price society exacts, and do better in the future. AZMike has asked a good question for discussion though. It will be good to see the responses.

"Republican?", he sputtered, lol. Or as Dr. Smith used to exclaim in 'Lost in Space', "Oh, the pain!" Seriously, thanks guys for the good words. All I was doing was trying to cool things down a bit. I didn't have a dog in that fight but it looked like some good people were getting pretty hot. I really would like for these games of tag to be played a little more nicely. So I pulled the plug for a while. I'm actually surprised at how mild the responses were. Besides there's nothing anyone in these forums can say that can come close to comparing to the wrath of my wife. Eamonn, You know well, I've been there (intemperate responses) myself but I guess I've mellowed over the years. Plus some recent things make threads like that seem less significant. You and I agree a lot more than you might think. I wish everyone well...so play nicely. Please.

That is outstanding! Tell him to keep a journal. It will be a great thing to look back on later in his life.

Eagledad, you're up for the next time in that case. JM, Partly for the camaraderie but also partly we are here to argue. I've written this many times now but it bears repetition: I learn far more from persons who disagree with me than I do from those who 'know' the same stuff I 'know'. Now that doesn't necessarily make the process easy, painless, or pretty. But if someone has better reasoning than I have, I want to benefit from their thoughts even if I have to admit I'm wrong. But there are constructive ways to argue and destructive ways. And when it gets personal, it gets destructive. Beavah and I agree on a few things and one of them is that it helps to attack the idea, not the person. To be sure, some people are so attached to the idea that they take it personally when the idea is attacked. That's when things can spiral out of control. But around the campfire, the rest of us ought to be able to 'moderate' those interactions if needed.