Beavah

Yah, Hal_Crawford, I think there's a substantial difference between da Libertarian Party in the U.S. (which is a pretty fringe group), and the libertarian sentiments of classic conservatives that SR540 and some others are talkin' about. Ron Paul probably skirted da edges, because he had Libertarian Party roots. But he also expressed some of da pragmatic sensibilities of traditional conservatives. What was interestin' to me was how much Dr. Paul captured the hearts of many young people of the internet/digital generation. Not exactly da crowd for modern-style big government "conservatives." Beavah

Yah, if we're talkin' Turkey, they also have a small but proud national scouting organization, which has connections with and follows da democratic traditions of their military. http://www.tif.org.tr/eng/home.html B

Does he fill General McChrystal's request for troops, or does he let Osama and the Taliban win? Yah, I reckon da decision to send our young people into harm's way is the toughest decision any president has to make, eh? I think it's a shame that our forces in Afghanistan were so under-supported and overstretched for the past 6 years that the situation on the ground has deteriorated so badly. I know I'm old fashioned, especially in these days of "neocons", but I still believe that war is a last resort... and that when yeh hit that last resort, and we're puttin' our kids on the line, we give 'em every resource and support they need to achieve total victory. And then bring 'em home, and support the vets with everything they need and deserve to recover from da horror that all war is. All that havin' been said, I'm a realist, eh? I don't think there is such a thing as "victory" in Afghanistan. The Taliban aren't the Germans. There's no central government, no army. They're just a bunch of mountain tribes that share some tom-fool feudal Islamic beliefs. Yeh can't fight beliefs with guns. Da Afghan central "government" exists in Kabul. Sort of. There are no real roads in Afghanistan, no real communications. And the place is big. Imagine a small, corrupt, mayor-Daley government in Chicago with no roads between Chicago and the Rocky Mountains. There aren't enough people in Chicago to police the Rocky Mountains even if they could get there. What does victory even look like? To bring da authority of the Afghan central government to the tribal mountains, yeh need to build a road infrastructure equal to buildin' all of the roads in the U.S. between Chicago, New Orleans, and the Rocky Mountains. And then yeh need about 100 years of economic and social development to break down tribal beliefs. But are we really ready to pour a couple trillion dollars of development money into Afghanistan to achieve that victory? Especially when da country has no significant resources besides opium poppies, and is completely land-locked so yeh can't develop exports well at all ... at least not without another trillion in building rail lines through other hostile countries. What's the alternative? If da central Afghan government can't control da tribal areas, our men and women are deployed in the mountains to keep up a low-grade war of attrition for the next 100 years? We nuke all da tribal areas until the mountains of the Afghan - Pakistani border are uninhabitable? It's a choice I wouldn't wish on anybody. No defined enemy. No defined friend. No defined victory point, and anything short of that completely undefined victory point is goin' to be viewed as "letting the Taliban win." We simply can't afford the cost of nation-building in a remote desert steppe backwater. And I don't think yeh put our kids in harms way if yeh can't afford to support 'em to victory. So I think we've got to let go of this "letting the Taliban win" notion. We can support a temporary, well-supported "surge", but only if there's a point where we declare victory and exit. And that point can't be when there's a stable Afghanistan free of tribal Islamists, or our great-great-grandkids will still be dyin' on the slopes of foreign mountains. Anybody seein' this differently? What am I missing? Right now, it sure looks like we're tryin' to duplicate da Soviet experience in Afghanistan... and they had quite a few more troops on the ground than McCrystal is proposin'. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, it's your Scoutmaster who determines who is eligible to sign for requirements, eh? I think it was kind of another troop to let your scout attend and to help him out, but just like BSA summer camp they should not have been signin' his book without the OK of the boy's SM. And it sounds like they didn't. So I'd tell the boy's dad that since official, paid BSA camp staff aren't supposed to sign for those requirements, the same applies to another troop, and that's why they didn't sign his book. Great that he learned stuff, and that should help him next meetin' / campout when you test the lad. Beavah

Yah, I gotta admit I'm old fashioned enough to not particularly care for da president showin' up on comedy shows. Even when national politics is a laugh-or-you'll-cry sorta thing. Da thing is, the lines are so blurred right now. MSNBC and FoxNews are nothin' more than political entertainment, eh? Almost like pornography, they exist just to rile up your emotions. I can't say I see it fittin' with my view of the Office of the President to participate in either of those media outlets. At least da comedy acts like the Daily Show aren't that bad. Oh, for the days of Walter Cronkite, eh? Beavah

Yah, Calico, I appreciate how yeh consistently take da boys' side on these issues. It is true that sometimes, in some places, adults can put up too many obstacles. But to my mind, you're throwin' out da baby with da bathwater. Adult Association is part of Scoutin'. I'd say more than part, even. More like "central." We put up obstacles to lads gettin' merit badges all the time, and rightly so. Camps typically put minimum ages on some badges like Shotgun or shootin' sports or BSA Lifeguard. That's partly because of da need to allocate limited resources, and partly out of the need to guarantee the scout a good experience, eh? Same with units. Sendin' a lad off who is way too immature for a badge leads to a bad experience for other kids who want to work hard, and can really sour a Merit Badge Counselor. Losing a Merit Badge Counselor hurts da whole program. Sendin' a lad off to do a badge he's ill prepared for also does the kid no favors. In these days of spoon-fed schools, the shock of failure can be too much for some lads, and leave them lost and discouraged. For others it can be the right message, too. But yeh have to leave that judgment to the Scoutmaster who knows the boys the best. And, too, we all recognize that many "Merit Badge Midway" and other such stuff isn't always in keeping with da BSA policy on merit badges, and good Scoutmasters sometimes have to say "no" to such opportunities if they want their boys to get the most out of their Scoutin' experience. Havin' mom or dad counsel a whole mess of the boy's required badges for Eagle also falls in this category. Yeh say "no", because that's what adults do when it's in the best interest of the boy and the program. So the point is that da Scoutmaster, in takin' care of his scouts and giving 'em the best program possible does sometimes act as "gatekeeper" or "quality control officer" or whatever yeh want to call it. And he/she should. In fact, he or she must if we care about da kids. Proper readin' of the BSA program materials allows for that. Beavah

The kids in my tropp WITH EXTREMNELY RARE EXCEPTION don't have it on their radar screen to look up and call MBC's from outside the troop. As I noted without MB Colleges and Summer camps we would rarely have anyone make Star. Yah, hmmmm.... I'm left thinkin' "Whose fault is that?" Certainly not the boys'. Boys will put anything on their radar screen that we help 'em put there, I reckon. And it does seem to me like most small communities have all kinds of folks with lots of talent who can be approached and asked to counsel a badge. Da mayor or other town employee for Citizenship in the Community. The magistrate and that great fellow from da VFW for Citizenship in da Nation. The World History teacher at the high school for Citizenship in the World. Dr. Smith or Nurse Jones for First Aid. The retired fire chief for Emergency Preparedness. And on and on. Small towns are a wealth of resources, and helpin' kids connect with da great folks in their town has nothin' but upside for the kids, the town, and Scouting. Usin' parents or some 16-year-old at camp when yeh have better resources in the community is just deprivin' the lads of the real experience of a Merit Badge. And what's more, it also overloads da SM, eh? So da overloaded SM has to run a "class" in an area that really isn't his core competence. Seems like it'd be easier and less of a load to get da CC to recruit a bunch of MBC's from the community, and the boys would get more out of it. That's just a thought from afar though, eh? Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, I'm with Eamonn, eh? All this notion of votin' and such makes me squirm a bit. In most troops, both da committee members and the scouters are parents of boys in the program. It makes no sense and will cause nothin' but hard feelings and ill will if yeh only let some parents "vote" on issues, and exclude other parents from havin' a say just because they're doin' more work (as SM or ASM). So if that's your setup, yeh have to let da SM and da ASMs participate fully in Committee deliberations and votes, out of fundamental fairness. This kind of committee usually proceeds by consensus, until a few parents get somethin' stuck in their craw or just make a nuisance of themselves, then yeh get a bunch of emotional voting. In some troops, da Chartered Org. is more involved, and the committee functions more closely to the BSA model as a board of directors representin' the chartered org's influence. In that kind of setup, da SM is ex officio and reports to the committee without havin' a vote. But that kind of committee isn't votin' on what time the backpack outing is leaving, eh? They stay out of the program side completely. Their job is to approve da annual plan and budget, secure and pay for big equipment items, recruit and select leaders, set trainin' requirements and stuff like that. This kind of committee votes on their stuff. In still other troops, the Chartered Org. is involved only through da COR, and the committee functions more like a Cub Scout committee, where committee members work on program support stuff like Eamonn describes. They stay out of program decisions which are left to da SM, and instead get tasked support jobs by the CC or SM. Bigger picture stuff like budgets and leader selection are handled by the COR/CC/SM triumverate (or one of 'em as "king"). This kind of committee never votes. So fighterpilot, da real answer to your question just depends, eh? How is your unit set up? Beavah

Yah, it might just be my background, eh? But I really hate all da pseudo-legal "contract" baloney people do with kids. Raisin' kids isn't part of contract law. And most of these silly "contracts" are imposed by da side with the power (the adult), and so don't comport to legal contracts at all. So just terrible all around. Poor child raisin' and poor legalism. I think Eamonn has da right of it, eh. Yeh have to think about this project as a long-term one, Buffalo Skipper. What you're talkin' about in terms of self-directed, independent patrols and able-to-plan-from-scratch youth leadership is a goal for 2012 or 2013. Heck, most adult scouters can't get there and do a good job in their first couple of years. So your goal for this year is just to get 'em from where they're at to a couple steps further. Begin with da small things centered around camping skills, eh? Can they cook their own meals with no help? Can they cook tasty meals usin' a bunch of different techniques? If not, then start there with some fun, solid cookin' instruction. Can they plan their own meals? How 'bout for backpacking? Yeh have to get them truly independent in da basics first. Cooking, navigation & timing, safety, camping in weather, all that stuff. Maybe that's the job for this year, eh? And as an adult, you keep supportin' the other stuff. Then maybe next year yeh work on them planning individual outings. Then maybe the next year yeh work on them selecting new and creative outings and setting up a calendar. Now that's not sayin' that you aren't havin' 'em participate in planning and decisions along the way, eh? But you're also not letting 'em sink. Maybe they're at da "G" as in "Guide" for cookin' and meal planning, but only at da "D" for "Demonstrate" when it comes to calendaring. If that's where they're at, then your job in EDGE is to meet 'em there. Yeh just have to remember that your goal is to keep 'em moving along until you can Enable 'em to do it on their own down the road. Rome wasn't built in a day. Same deal with kids and scout programs. Beavah

Is body composition an issue that needs the attention of Scouting? If yes, who in Scouting needs to be targetted Cubs, Scouts, Scouters...? Yes, for Scouters and Cubs, IMO. But I don't know what yeh do about it program-wise. National is tryin' the ham-handed weight chart thing for adults, but only for high adventure bases and trips (and I reckon there's no way to enforce it on trips). Problem is we only have the lads once a week, eh? Once a week for a few minutes durin' a meeting isn't enough for a real fitness / activity program if they're not gettin' it elsewhere. Maybe we should say as a cub scout yeh have to participate in a recreational sport as well? Same problem with adults, eh? We're a small part of their life, and our more rounded fellows have developed a lifetime of habits that are hard to break. Yeh can't do that in a round table a month. They need a real, regular, multiple-times-a-week fitness program and some diet changes, eh? Maybe we establish a partnership with Weight Watchers and da YMCA? Anybody over da recommended weight chart can get discount memberships to both, with "camperships" available? Beavah

At $100 an hour, that should lighten you wallet a bit. Yah, da attorneys in your state must come pretty cheap there, J-in-KC . If a person willfully and intentionally affects another person in a negative way, is not abuse ? Yep, that's correct. What da specific definition is in your state I can't say without knowin' your state, but I can assure you that does not meet da legal definition of abuse in any state. The fact the they are volunteers is irrelavent. Nope, it's very relevant. In most states, child abuse can only be committed by a parent or legal guardian. It's because of that special relationship between parent and child that we set up special, confidential reporting and investigation offices under CPS rather than law enforcement. "Abuse" done by anybody else is da regular crime of sexual battery or somethin' similar, and there's no such thing as "mental battery." So what yeh have in this case is a poor district volunteer, or you havin' a poor relationship with your district volunteers, or both. That's a shame, eh? It's a poor example to da kids, and poor service. Might not be in keepin' with da Scout Oath and Law on all the adults' part. But it's not a criminal offense in da Land of the Free, and neither CPS nor law enforcement are goin' to spend more time on it than it takes to chuckle and roll their eyes. Yah, best to be honest and just deal with it on the basis of poor quality service. You'd like to see better service. So yeh do that through your COR, and helpin' recruit good volunteers for your district. That's assumin' you're the SM. If you're the parent in this little dust-up, yeh let your son work through it, eh? With da help of his SM and CC/COR when and if they feel it's appropriate. Beavah

The real reason for the loss of civility is that this boils down to a fight for the country...These are the heart of the country and they do not want socialism/fascism/communism that the left is determined to achieve. Yah, vol, did yeh really mean to write this in a public forum? In case yeh forgot, fascism and communism are diametrically opposed, and both are different from socialism. So da notion that the left is tryin' to achieve all three is just nonsensical. So all this really says is "I hate these people for no articulate reason and I want to fight them." That's not conservative. It's not in keepin' with da Scout Oath and Law. It ain't even American. It's just shameful. And therefore I'm sure it's not what you intended. Honestly, I think a lot of this squalkin' is just because we older adults haven't gotten used to modern communications. Where before we had the calm, reasoned, articulate analysis of Walter Cronkite for an hour in the evening, now we can tune in da folks we agree with and who hype us up 24/7/365. We didn't grow up with this 24-hour-instant-spin stuff and internet flame wars and da like, so we haven't developed the same kind of skeptical filters on it that hopefully our grandkids will have. We still treat it like it's actually News rather than entertainment by da verbal version of professional wrestlers. Bodes well for our future though. From what I see these days, by and large, the kids are more polite, courteous, and respectful than da folks my age. When can any of us remember that? Beavah

Yah, cheffy, it's your signature, eh? It's your responsibility and honor and your word. Yeh should put it down on paper only when you believe you can give your word. If yeh can no longer give your word that this fellow merits the award of Eagle Scout, then you should not sign. Yeh don't need us or a DAC or anybody else to tell you that. Maybe if the lad had cared enough about Scoutin' and being an Eagle, he would have finished up his paperwork and other requirements rather than gettin' in trouble with the law. As to the dad wanting it to "look good for the judge", just think for a minute about that, eh? He's earnin' Eagle after his arrest. How does that make Scouting look to the judge? How does that make your troop look to your community when yeh show up in the paper under the headline "Local criminal awarded Eagle Scout". Your word is your bond. It's your honor. Don't give it if yeh don't mean it. Yeh won't be doing either the boy or Scouting any favors. Beavah

Yah, thanks for takin' the few minutes to read and get da facts straight, DanKroh. Would that some of our right & left wing commentators and news outlets take the time to do that. I just don't get it myself. Reporting used to be an honorable profession, and service to da public. Now it's just an entertainment venue playin' to the prejudices of segments of da population. I reckon that President Obama's willingness to incorporate large aspects of Romney's and McCain's health care plans, his willingness to tick off da ACLU and gay rights groups by balancing security and moral issues with political ones are all reasonable signs. And while I disagree with some aspects of his plans in all areas, I'm glad that he's continuin' to pursue things like financial regulatory reform even though Congress and the banks seem to be hopin' it will all be forgotten as da bailouts fade in folks' memories. Maybe he's not "moderate" to folks way out on the right, but I'm an old-school conservative and da neo-cons apparently consider me a communist. Beavah

Yah, I've been very frustrated at how slow da Obama administration and this congress have been at rollin' back some of the abuses of the Bush administration. Elements of the Patriot Act bein' a prime example. But there's good reason to be slow and thoughtful about this stuff, eh? Not bein' slow and thoughtful was what caused much of da foolishness. This particular element of da Patriot Act doesn't bother me as much, eh? It calls for warrants for wiretaps at least, and reflects modern communications trends. I think da act does need specific protections for others usin' that equipment so the courts don't have to sort that out. If yeh authorize a roving wiretap on the coffee shop wifi that a drug dealer uses, the use of other people's data who also happen to be in da coffee shop is expressly off-limits with mandatory-delete rules, and criminal penalties to da law enforcement folks who violate that. I don't think any of us want the government to be able to store and access our data because we happened to grab a cup o'joe in da same place as some "person of interest." I reckon the willingness to listen to law enforcement and work on the issue shows Obama is at heart a moderate in many things. He wants da system to work and be fair - law enforcement to get what it needs, while makin' sure protections are in place. I can live with that without bein' indignant. Beavah

We use ballots and a ballot box to enhance the message. Yah, I like this idea, eh? Seems like if yeh have the lads go one at a time to da ballot box to fill out their ballot, there's less of the peer pressure/group think thing goin' on than if they vote while sittin' with the rest of da gang. Wonder if yeh could enhance it even more by makin' 'em promise when they submitted the ballot that they've chosen the person who would do their best for the whole troop. Makin' that promise sometimes gets kids to think about what they're really doin' when they vote. Beavah

Yah, I see da problem in two areas. 1) Leaders. I gotta say our adult leaders at all levels are tippin' da scales well above where they should. I think dat's a real program problem at the Boy Scout and especially Venturing levels (though Venturing leaders seem to be doin' a bit better than the boy scouters). It's a program problem because the adults limit the program. When they're well rounded, their troops tend to do little more than "plop" campin' next to the trailer. I think they also tend to put more activity restrictions on the lads even when plop campin' - not trusting boys to do things that they personally find more challengin'. 2) Cub Scouts. I think da cub program draws from a bigger pool of kids and is much less active physically. So we see more obese cubs than we do Boy Scouts. I haven't really paid that much attention to it, but my guess is that we lose those kids when they hit boy scouting, because they can't keep up with peers on more active/outdoorsy adventures. Given what ntrog8r and others are sayin', I wonder if that isn't a part of the webelos to scouts transition issue. I'm not sure how yeh really address da leaders issue, eh? Losin' weight is a hard thing, and keepin' it off harder without really changin' your lifestyle. I'm sorta in favor of da health requirements idea, though da BMI tables are wrong-headed. But if we push too hard, we'll lose too many volunteers. Seems like we could do somethin' better at the cub levels, though. Makin' that program more active, and makin' fitness goals more a part of cub advancement seems like it would be a good thing. Beavah

Yah, what Oak Tree said, eh? District folks are volunters, just like unit folks. Often district folks are also scouters in other troops. They have their own lives and schedules and commitments. Sometimes, if they've been in a long while without relief, they can get slow and disengaged. Solution might be to get some fresh folks from your troop to volunteer at da district . Whatever this is, it is not child abuse. Child abuse, both mental and physical, has a very specific meaning in da laws of your state. To falsely accuse someone of child abuse is defamation (aka slander or libel). Not only is it not in keepin' with da oath and law, it's somethin' that provides them with a legal cause of action against you. So yeh need to stop repeatin' that nonsense, it's just plain wrong. I reckon despite how poor their communication has been, take da feedback about your involvement as a gift, eh? Yeh might find a different style gets yeh better results. More flies with honey than vinegar, eh? Better yet, have someone else in your unit who is good at that sort of thing handle it for you. Now, to push for some new blood on your district advancement committee, da magic person to talk to is your COR, eh? He/she is your voting member at the district committee. Annual meetings for districts where new officers and committee chairs and such are approved are usually a month or so before da council annual meetin'. Your COR needs to go to those monthly district committee meetings and start havin' some conversations with folks. And participate in the nominatin' process and da votes on positions. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Democracy in action. I would have been very interested in crossing over to the Dark Side under Kudu's advice and select the best leaders for the key positions fo the troop. But with the current guidelines of the SM and Scout Handbooks, I feel that we would somehow no longer be BSA scouts and instead some vision of Buffalo Skipper scouts. I am just not willing to cross that line (yet). Yah, well, then you and your boys and your program are goin' to feel some significant pain. And yep, yeh might lose some good kids and recruits. Elections are like learnin' to light a stove or learnin' to swim. Boys who have no experience with elections that really "count" aren't yet ready to handle that responsibility on their own, any more than you'd let a patrol of new scouts go camping by themselves. The lads need to see what good leadership is first, eh? They need to see how things should be, so they can identify what it takes to be good, and quickly recognize poor leadership and choices when they come their way. There are lots of ways of doing that. Sometimes yeh can select folks. Sometimes yeh can put requirements on candidates for rank, or age, or prior adult approval. Yeh can also do it by asking questions of candidates after each speech, to defuse da joke candidates. "How many outings have you helped run this past year?" "What are your first steps going to be for this year's XXX trip?" If yeh didn't prepare your guys for an election by helpin' 'em to see what a good youth run troop is first, and then helpin' 'em to see how to look at people for their strengths and choose 'em for positions, and then help 'em see how to do that with an election process, and then coach that election process then all yeh did was set 'em up for failure. Same as throwin' a new swimmer into the deep end and hopin' he lives. Da books are guidelines, and describe a process that works for long-standing troops, not startups. Now, where do yeh go from here? You've allowed elections so you're stuck for a bit. I think yeh re-think your Green Bar trainin'. Yeh need to make it more challengin' and intensive. And yeh need to build in evaluations. Each month, collect evaluations from da patrols and other adults, and have a SM conference with your SPL and each Patrol Leader. Give 'em regular, thorough feedback - what you're seein', what other adults are seein', and most important, what their fellow scouts are seein'. Then yeh go from there, eh? Maybe with really blunt feedback they'll get it. Maybe they'll bail. Or maybe it'll let you make a switch faster so as to get your young program back on track before yeh run into too much difficulty. Down the road, when yeh have more years under your belt, and da kids have more experience knowing what "good" looks like and how to get there, yeh can give 'em more leash to let 'em fail. Beavah

This was not pre-meditated, he just let his emotions get to him. Yah, I don't get this. A four year old might have his emotions get to him and blurt something out in a public gathering. This was a grown man. Is he sufferin' from Tourettes or Alzheimers? Some other illness where he loses control? In that case, he has my sympathy. If not, let's not pretend that grown-ups aren't makin' a choice when they speak or shout out while sittin' in a public gallery. I send a Scout Salute to da representatives from both parties who want to hold the fellow accountable for the honor of their house of congress. Beavah

Yah, practical answer just depends on your district, eh? Most will take da advancement report or blue card no questions asked. The fellow is registered and presumably has been recently trained and done YPT and all that by virtue of bein' a counselor last year and a religious awards counselor this year. Remember, yeh don't have to be registered as an MBC to be a MBC, eh? Yeh can be registered as a MC, SM, or whatever. Only need district or council approval to counsel the badge. So I think this is a "no problem" thing most places. Just have da fellow call the DAC to let 'em know and then go for it. IMO always better for lads to finish up with the counselor they started with. Beavah

The boys were roughhousing around and someone got hurt. Yah, so if they were roughhousin' with their friends (equal-power-relationship companions) and one of their friends got hurt, I reckon that's plenty of lesson for 'em. Nobody wants to see a friend get hurt. They'll remember that for a long time. Probably remember it a lot better if a bunch of adults don't go jawin' at 'em about it. Anyway, if what you're describin' is right, then da incident had nothing at all to do with bullying, so doin' some bullying program is just an adult make-work thing. Da issue had to do with situational judgment of risk. So keep 'em in Scouting and have 'em work on safety and supervision plans for outings with younger kids, where they'll learn about those things. How do you let younger kids or kids your age have fun but make sure nobody gets hurt? Yah, still, just for a gut-check, if da lad they were "roughhousing" with was not a regular pal of theirs, or at least an equally-cool-in-school acquaintance, then he may well have been their victim. So ask yourself or your kids that. Were they good friends just roughhousin'? I think yeh owe it to yourself and your scouts to thoroughly rule out them bein' bullies to a weaker/shyer kid. Beavah

It started out as a game but another boy got hurt. These boys are good boys and I know that they did not intend for anyone to get hurt but it happened. Yah, I might be old fashioned, eh? But if what yeh say is true, this doesn't strike me as bullying. This strikes me as being kids. Kids are always roughhousing and playin' games with each other, and generally don't know when to put da brakes on until someone is crying. That someone is often their best buddy. So if that's what really went on, I think yeh don't have a bullying issue, you've just got a self control / knowing when to stop and change activity / anticipating consequences issue that's pretty typical. And a school district which did what a lot do these days, and overreacted with some zero-tolerance nonsense. Bullyin' to my mind is what Eagledad describes, eh? It's a longer-term thing that involves a power relationship... put downs, teasing, shoving, humiliatin' so as to emphasize that one kid is strong and another weak. That doesn't start as a game. And to my mind, those lads aren't "good boys." They're hurtin' boys acting out, perhaps. Sometimes little tyrants emulatin' older sibling or parent tyrants. Either way, not "good." So if that's what's goin' on, I think you've got to get da wool off your eyes and recognize it. Bullies are often very good at playin' innocent to naive adults, comin' up with excuses and such (and then sniggering behind your back when you buy 'em). I'd have your older boys have a conversation with the other lads in the troop and find out what's really goin' on. The boys usually know. Yeh might find this was a school overreaction and yeh need to just let it lie. Or yeh might find you have a bullying problem in your troop that yeh weren't aware of, or that these guys have been really mean to some kids at school. In the latter case, yeh respond like it's a serious discipline issue, eh? No lectures, talks, or anti-bullyin' program nonsense. And then, after da negative consequence, yeh look for long-term ways for the individual to grow into a servant leader, and be viewed as strong not because others are weak, but because he protects da weak. Beavah

Yah, da previous thread just made me curious. How many troops out there go out of their way to reserve pavilion sites when car camping? If your troop does that, what's the reasoning for it? Round about here, pavilion sites are rare and often expensive. I'd sort of expect troops to leave 'em to cub scouts and family campers and picnickers. Can't quite figure how havin' a premade building structure fits in with boy scouting. Yah, maybe occasionally if the outin' is focused on first aid instruction and you're expectin' a downpour, or you're doin' a family campout and yeh need to provide a space for da moms (and dads) who aren't outdoorsy. Otherwise, shouldn't the lads have the gear and ability to be outside in the rain, sun and wind? Ain't that part of the experience and fun? Beavah

Yah, Vol, I agree with you, eh? I wish in a lot of ways we would limit da donations to just folks in-district. The problem as I see it, though, is that my representative or senator may not be on a committee that directly affect me, eh? If I'm a physician, shouldn't I be able to have a say in who is sittin' on da committee on health, education, and labor? If I'm a small businessman, don't I as a voter have an interest in da races which may affect da Senate Small Business & Entrepreneurship committee? Those folks may affect me far more than my own elected officials. Beavah: let me know how much you donate and I'll giving a matching one to Wilson. Yah, a bit like da Democrats who went and applauded Bill Clinton after he had been impeached, eh? Even if they liked his policies or disagreed with da impeachment, what he did did not merit acclamation. They set da tone that honor didn't matter in the face of partisanship. Somethin' to expect from liberals, eh? But somethin' that should be anathema to folks with conservative values. I'll let yeh know as soon as I hear a Republican challenger has declared. Anyone worthwhile it will be $2300 (Mrs. Beavah doesn't go in for political donations, so dat's the limit ). Yeh have to decide what your own values are, eh? And whether Representative Wilson's actions are truly what yeh think conservative values and America stand for. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)