Beavah

Yah funscout, I reckon they should be worried about da future, eh? Not because of Obama, though. They should be worried about the future because the Bush Bailout, Federal Reserve money-printing, unfunded wars and unfunded entitlements and financial deregulation have made a mess of things. All of us are goin' to be experiencing a higher cost of borrowing. That's what happens when yeh double the national debt. All of us are goin' to be experiencing a resumption of inflation of commodity prices, includin' oil. That's what happens when yeh print money and don't have an energy policy. Things are goin' to be tougher under Obama. We're all goin' to need to tighten our belts and sacrifice to undo the damage to our economy and interests that has been done. We should see some businesses that leveraged themselves too far in good times, or whose management failed to plan for changes of conditions, fail. IMO, they should be allowed to fail, because that's how capitalism and markets work. Bein' big, or bein' small, shouldn't get you a bailout, whether you're a bank, an auto maker, or a small business. We all should pay for the costs of infrastructure that makes our businesses possible - police and fire protection, roads to deliver supplies and finished products, education that gives us workers, soldiers that defend our liberties. It's goin' to be tough for a while. We just got hit by a financial Category 5 hurricane after we dismantled a bunch of our dikes because a few guys wanted to make a bundle of money buildin' houses on sand. And you-know-who has been runnin' FEMA. It's going to take a lot of effort to dig out, and a lot of sacrifice. It isn't goin' to be better under Obama, it's goin' to be worse. If Obama does his job, and more importantly if Congress and us citizens do our jobs, after 8 years of serious sacrifice we might have managed to leave our kids and grandkids a somewhat stronger nation, and one that's still free. That's a daunting job, for sure. One we might not be up for. It might be that after 2 years of pain da borrow-and-spend Republicans make a comeback, eager to bankrupt our children and sell off our businesses to avoid sacrifice even in time of war. Your friends are right to be worried. I think there's a chance that we're still da home of the Brave, though. I think Americans can rise to the occasion, face their fears and worries, role up their sleeves and grab a shovel. Pay for the services they get, instead of borrowin' from the Chinese. I think we can even get to an energy plan that leaves Venezuela and Iran choking on their oil. But not without sacrifice, and not without some pain. Beavah

Yah, I think there was something very telling about both of the speeches last night. The moment for me came when Senator McCain's audience several times booed at President-elect Obama's name. The look on McCain's face - a look of annoyance and anger as he raised his hand to try to silence and simultaneously disavow the crowd - was very telling. Men of honor truly cannot stomach the partisan ugliness that less than honorable politicians have used to divide us. I reckon it's a shame that in moments of personal ambition and weakness, Senator McCain and other Republican politicians allowed some of da neo-con radicals to set the tone for their campaign. I think it's even more of a shame that the Republican party which had earned my vote from Jerry Ford on (I never cared for Nixon) has stooped to such nonsense. And the true tragedy is that along da way we somehow managed to convince a few of our fellow Americans to believe in this nonsense. I reckon more than anything, this election is a repudiation of that, eh? All of us are loyal Americans, and most recognize the opposition as loyal Americans. We have disagreements over a few issues of policy, eh? Policy decisions are hard. They need all of our brains, liberal and conservative, workin' the problem. We need each other to argue with and challenge our assumptions, lest we do dumb things like deregulate banking, go to war with too few men over bad intel, or try to pass our wife's personal notion of health care reform without thinkin' through all da impacts. The opposition winning isn't a disaster. It ain't the end of America. It is America. It's the people sayin' "Whoa! You blew it!" and holdin' their representatives accountable. It's the people choosin', in the free market of ideas, a different idea for a bit. The only disaster would be the one Senator McCain became so visibly angry with, eh? Lettin' our passions paint the opposition as the enemy, to the detriment of the nation. Letting people become ugly about da thing the entire world stands in awe of - that we can have a bloodless transition of power, and that a minority, the son of an African exchange student, can become leader of the most powerful nation on Earth. More than anything, I reckon this election is a repudiation of that nasty approach. And my fellow Republicans better listen, or next time the opposition will get 60 seats in the senate. Patriots vote for their country and all their fellow countrymen, eh? Not for their party. I reckon Scouter Terry is right, too. Guerrilla wars and insurgencies and radical ideologies that cut across national boundaries can't be targeted well by bombs. But da power of elections? The example of this particular election? There's not a would-be-caliph in the world that isn't shaking in frustration and terror at America's embodiment of such a powerful idea. Beavah(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, I have to agree with BA on term limits, eh? Watched it a lot in state legislatures. Guys who've been in a long time get set in their ways, don't listen to new ideas. They've made their friends, and are "bought and paid for" by da lobbyists. Even worse at the federal level, where there's a lot more lobbyist and out-of-state money propping these fellows up. Lots of smart people with good values in the country, eh? No reason one person should stay around long enough to be Lord of the Realm, whatever the realm/committee should be. I reckon, though, that the reason the Democratic Congress has such low approval ratings is because the people wanted and expected them to stand up to and reverse George Bush's policies and errors, eh? That's what da election of 2006 was about. Instead, Reid and Pelosi have mostly rolled over on every issue. No courage at all. They've been in too long. They start to think that beltway and congress stuff matters more than representing the people. They worry about news cycles and perception rather than what's right. So core Republicans don't like Congress because it's Democrat-controlled. Democrats don't like 'em because they've been "do-nothings". All of us disapprove because of their caving in on the Bush bailout barbeque with Pork. Only thing that makes their approval ratings lower than Bush's is that the core Democrats are better at evaluating the performance of their guys than the core Republicans are at evaluating Bush Beavah

Yah, BA, I heard the radio interview differently than you I guess. To me, he's just making an academic argument. He's tryin' to defend some of the decisions of the Warren Court by arguin' they really weren't that radical. Then he turns it around to say that the Civil Rights Movement blew it by relying too much on the courts as opposed to legislation. Defending the Warren Court is fairly liberal; saying that litigation isn't always the proper way to pursue an agenda is downright conservative for an urban radio call-in show. Socialism involves public ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, eh? Bush's nationalization of the financial industry in recent months as well as propping up industry through taxpayer and national bank infusions is gettin' us the closest we've been to true socialism in quite a while. It's redistribution of wealth alright. As with many socialist states, it redistributes wealth from da taxpayer to those in power and their friends. As for carbon taxes, I'm a believer that industry and consumers should pay the real cost of production, includin' cost of damage to the environment. They shouldn't get a socialism-style bailout with the EPA Superfund cleanin' up their environmental mess at taxpayer expense, while they made millions degrading the environment. Same applies to global warming, clearcutting forests irresponsibly or any other issue. The price should get baked in to the cost of doin' business, not foibed off on the public. Thing is, in the case of global warmin', that principle must also apply to importers. No takin' factories to China in order to avoid carbon costs or other environmental regs. B

Yah, I see da news is just now reporting that Senator Obama's grandmother in Hawaii just passed away. What a profound sadness that she didn't quite live to see the boy she helped raise become President of the United States. What a bittersweet time this will make tomorrow's events for Obama. What a blessing that the man had the character to take off in the midst of the campaign to pay his respects. God bless the woman, who lived the ideals of family we all hold dear. May He welcome her Home.

Yah, BA, I hear yeh, eh? Though again, we have to admit that Senator McCain went on vacations to the private residence of a man actively engaged in monstrous fraud - a far closer relation than Obama to Ayers. That's a living room for weeks alone with the man, not living room for one night with a whole mess of other people. I really don't care about Ayers for two reasons, eh? First is that there's a big difference between an academic Marxist and a real-life Marxist. Academic Marxists are self-deceiving idealistic intellectuals, eh? They're mostly harmless. What they idealize is life on a kibbutz, eh? They're not Mao or Lenin. Second is that when people do grassroots politics, they meet in living rooms. Often just whoever has da biggest living room, which is usually not the living room of a young public advocacy attorney. Generally speakin' whoever is offering the living room ain't one of the leaders, they're a follower or wannabe. And I have to admit I've been in a lot of people's living rooms over the years even not doing grassroots politics. Some of them I didn't much care for. I've listened to the Obama radio show bit on the Warren Court. I agree with him, eh? The Warren Court stayed within constitutional bounds. It pushed the envelope in some unfortunate ways, but wasn't "radical." Just misguided, a product of da Civil Rights Movement and other groups over-using litigation. Obama was dead-on on that score. Struggles for changes in longstanding law belong in the legislature, not the courts. School busing was an absolute disaster. Roe v. Wade another example of misguided and divisive litigation. In that way, I reckon Obama is much, much more conservative than the Jesse Jackson militants, eh? Obama even has the nerve to tell black parents they need to step up and take responsibility for their kids. No wonder liberals like Jackson want to "castrate" him. I just don't see any of that as particularly scary. Some of it I find true to conservative values, though plenty of his positions I disagree with, eh? But they're not scary. I may be wrong and may have misjudged the man in the end, and I worry a bit about the excesses of a Democrat congress. I've been wrong in da past, especially given what Republican Congresses have done! Beavah

Yah, I think da problem with having a cabinet-level position for technology is that it means a Department of Technology. Which means funding for Department of Technology programs. And a regulatory role for the Department. And then the Department of Technology getting into which technologies the government should pick as "winners," and which should be regulated out of existence. Lots easier for a Microsoft to buy a regulator than succeed in da marketplace, eh? Blech. That having been said, I think da Bill Ayers thing is ridiculous. Obama was in 1st grade when Ayers was a radical. The man is now a college professor. Liberal yes, radical no. And serving on a board of directors for a foundation with a mess of other people in no way associates you with what their views are now, in the present, let alone what their views were 40 years ago. By contrast, Senator McCain was "palling around with" Bill Keating and accepting free vacations from the man while Keating was actively committing fraud which cost citizens and taxpayers billions of dollars. Not 40 years after Keating committed crimes and had reformed, while he was committing crimes. Even tried to protect da crook against regulators, while the crook was committing fraud. McCain was rebuked by the ethics committee and admitted to "errors in judgment". Yet McCain voted for banking deregulation and now we have a whole new class of Bill Keatings, eh? Still, I take Senator McCain at his word. But if yeh do that, then yeh really can't fault Senator Obama for being in the same room 4 times a year with a former hippie. There's a reason why da media hasn't pursued this story, eh? It's because there is no story. I dislike many government programs. As a conservative, I don't think bureaucracy does a very good job of things most of da time. Look at Frannie and Freddie, or the Department of Education, or the absurdity of unfunded state pension programs. I reckon Terry's right, though. Obama's going to be hamstrung after Bush's completely unfettered expansion of government and debt. Just tryin' to get us clear of the socialized banking system Bush has created would make for a worthy first term. There's not goin' to be room to expand programs, even with a reversion to the Clinton-era tax rates. The balance of things is puttin' me, like Terry, in a position where I'm votin' Obama this year. Yah, it's more a vote for moderation and against neo-con radicals than it is for Obama's positions. But after a horrific reprise of LBJ's "guns and butter", da biggest expansion of inept government ever, federalization of the National Guard, tempo of ops drivin' our men and women in uniform under, unitary executive malarkey, bizarre assaults on constitutional law, economic incompetence and a litany of other failures, I reckon da current crop of neo-cons who ran McCain's campaign into the ground should be nowhere near the oval office. Especially since throughout this campaign McCain has listened to those nitwits and followed their advice. I can wait four years until the Republican party returns to its senses or is replaced. Eight years if they run Palin in 2012. In the mean time, I'm content to vote for brains over experience. Tired of "experienced" old timers still fightin' the cold war or da baby boomer's culture war. Terry talks about it as "unseriousness", eh? I think it's worse, actually. From where I sit, da Republican party has become the anti-intelligence party. Schooling and brains and competence don't matter, just whether someone makes a good drinkin' buddy or fellow "hockey mom." Bah. Just like Scoutin', eh? There's natural consequences political parties have to learn from. Da natural consequence to incompetent governance is that yeh don't get to govern any more. No matter how much you whine about da media or money or whatever it is they're whinin' about these days. Beavah

Yah, I couldn't lay hands on my statistics stuff, eh? Got it around here somewhere. Suffice to say many of the other posters are right. Being married with kids doesn't reduce the risk of being a predator much if at all. One of our local branches of a major denomination employed a husband-wife team who were conductin' threesomes as youth ministers. Never with their own kids, mind, but others' kids were fair game. I think what's hard about really bad people is that they mimic the behaviors of really good people. There are a lot of really good people in Scouting and other youth work, eh? In a lot of ways, many of the very best scouters I've met were single folks or married-without-kids who had the time to give, and gave freely to all without payin' special attention to their own child. If we want to keep out da really bad people, we can't look at the things they do the same as really good people - give their time, show interest in each kid, etc. We have to look at what they do differently from really good people, like attempt to isolate youth, break down good habits and resistance rather than build 'em up. Interestingly, in da few sad cases I've been involved in, it was not parents who recognized a "creepy" adult who was harming kids, eh? It was one of these long-time no-kids-in-da-program fellows who caught the signals and took action. They had enough experience payin' attention to different children and havin' a sense for good relationships that they were able to recognize something that didn't feel right far more quickly. Beavah

Yah, I reckon it's patriotic to give proper equipment and body armor to our troops in the field, eh? I suspect it's also patriotic to give injured vets the best possible medical care we can. I confess I don't find it particularly patriotic to borrow money at interest from da likes of the Saudis and Chinese, knowing that all I'm doin' is helping fund Islamist schools or factories that take jobs away from Americans. Nobody likes paying taxes, and taxes shouldn't be so high that we're killing business. But is it patriotic to pay taxes? Is it somethin' I tell every First Class scout is part of his responsibility as a citizen. You betcha. B

Yah, in the parent thread ScoutMomSD said she found it "creepy" that adult men and women who do not have kids in the unit are involved in Scouting at any level. This gets into other issues, like whether scouters should be men, or da way GSUSA quietly discriminates against men, even dads, in unit leadership. Is there any merit to a notion that scouters should only be parents? Is there any downside? Is there a real downside to having non-parents as scouters? Increase in risk? Perception problems as ScoutMomSD describes? B

Yah, I've seen other Texas youth statutes that are also problematic for scouters, eh? One would think that since National is in Irving they'd at least make some effort to lobby to prevent overbroad definitions in statutes affecting scouting in da state. This is one of those cases where anybody who has the time to look this stuff up and tell you about it should be takin' the time to meet with the relevant department or legislators to fix the thing. As I read da statute, though, it applies only to a facility or property, eh? The statute is clearly intended for things like BSA or YMCA camp. Though da statute's definitions are overbroad (they would seem to apply even to a family with 6 kids who rented a cabin for a week), I can't believe this would be applied to a unit activity. Da licenses under the statute are for a whole year of operation, eh? I suppose with an overzealous agency they might squalk if you were usin', for example, LDS church grounds for the week with 100 kids from different units. Or if yeh rented a whole camp? Hard to say without lookin' up the regulations and talking to someone in the department that can speak to how they interpret this thing, eh? I doubt there's much case law on it. So if it were me for a single unit activity, I'd ignore the statute as bein' inapplicable. I'm not operating a facility for campers, I'm takin' kids camping. But I'm a bit of a curmudgeon about government intrusion and I'm capable of defendin' myself, eh? Plus given a fine of $5 to $1000 vs. a registration fee of $750 and costs of compliance that are much higher, seems like da fine is the way to go . First offense for a scout unit is bound to be much closer to $5 than $1000. If yeh want to be more formal and do your SE's job for him, call da office of the Attorney General of Texas, eh? Or meet with your local legislator and as them to call. Ask for the AG's opinion on whether the statute applies to a one-shot unit activity (or a family with 6 kids!). Of course, da easiest way to avoid the statute is to take your unit to a different state! Let New Mexico have the benefit of your tourist dollars if your own state doesn't want 'em. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, hmmm.... Not sure what is up with Tennessee? Seems likely that someone in da council scout shop really doesn't understand da rules, or someone in da state department of revenue doesn't understand the nature of the beast. Either way, this is somethin' that your SE should be instructed to fix, eh? That's why we have professionals, so they can sort out this stuff so da volunteers don't have to. If your SE ain't listenin', have your COR call da Council President. Back on topic, Option #1 is the best choice. Doesn't matter if the CO is a business, eh? If yeh choose a non-interest-bearing account at the bank, everything is fine. If yeh choose an interest-bearing account, then da CO is goin' to have to pay taxes on the interest earned. Option #2 is possible, since yeh can apply for a federal EIN in the unit's name as a voluntary association. This may be da way to go for a unit that is chartered by a "Friends of" group which is not separately incorporated. It does "put you on the radar" of the IRS, particularly if yeh use an interest-bearing account. Not a big deal if yeh don't take in more than $5K per year in gross receipts. Option #3 is done, but ain't recommended, just because it's easy for the person to abscond with the funds, eh? If it's an interest-bearing account, the person will have to declare the interest on his/her 1040 and pay tax on it. All this applies to a bank account only, eh? Doesn't have anything at all to do with being able to take donations for a tax exemption (federal 501©(3) status), or for being exempt from sales tax (which is a function of state law completely unrelated). If yeh want to accept donations that the donor can take a deduction for, yeh need to be operatin' under your CO's 501©(3) determination, or yeh need to do what Eamonn did and get an IRS determination of charitable status for an incorporated or voluntary association group. Unless yeh meet the gross receipts test (take in on average less than $5K per year), in which case you can act as a 501©(3) without filing. So again, that's Option 1 preferred, Option 2 possible, Option 3 is a no-go. If yeh want exemptions from sales tax, that's a document you have to apply for from your state revenue department. Depending on the state, some entities that are exempt from federal income tax under section 501© are not exempt from sales tax, and some entities may be exempt from sales tax that aren't exempt from federal tax. Once again, operatin' under your CO's certificate is the best way to go, but it may also be possible to apply as a voluntary association in your state. So again, that's Option 1 preferred, Option 2 possible, Option 3 a no-go. Three different things (bank account, taking donations, sales tax), but the same options for each. Beavah The above text is for general informational purposes only, and shall not be construed to be a legal opinion or legal advice. For specific solutions to a particular need, consult with an attorney and/or accountant in your area.(This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, I think one of da things that we all learn to eventually accept as scouters is that we're not responsible for family dynamics or poor parenting, eh? We are only responsible for our own actions and choices on behalf of da program. If mom wants to keep secrets, that's up to her, eh? You should not keep secrets or change your behavior, though. I also get really, really leery when parents try to fix things "behind the scenes" like this, eh? Seen it blow up into adult wars on more than one occasion. Also doesn't do anything to help the other lads learn. Always best for scouters to respond quickly on behalf of da program. Conference required at the very next meetin' if not sooner. Justice needs to be fair and swift for everyone's sake. For where you're at now SMT224, the lad will never be accepted by his peers in the troop if he doesn't make full restitution, includin' the ear buds, in a way they at least might believe is truly contrite. If there's no avenue to get there, he's lost. Even if you are able to achieve that, yeh probably don't want to set a precedent that stealin' something gets you a private tent! Leastways, not unless yeh do a lot of backpacking and your tents weigh 20 lbs. each . How you proceed just depends now on what yeh know of the lad and the adult associations yeh have in place. If there is a man who the boy truly looks to in the troop, who is willin' and has the time to make this boy a project, then maybe yeh have a shot. Pretty clear that he's not goin' to get anything out of scouting without that kind of attention (includin' picking the boy up for meetings, etc.). That may be a real work of mercy for this lad, given his challenges, eh? But first, he's got to come completely clean with that scouter's help. If yeh don't have any man who is that tight with the lad, I think there's only one way this ends up. B

Yah, still a bit buggy at da moment, eh? Also doesn't seem to be friendly to all browsers. Be interesting to see whether they pick up any traffic, or whether they're so late to the game that it's wasted effort, kinda like da ScoutParents forums. B

Yah, apparently not many people have any ideas eh? Here's one. What is everyone doin' with the election? Anybody hosting a Cit. Nation MB session on election night and watchin' the returns come in? Printing out ballots for each of da boys to vote, and providin' 'em with League of Women Voters and other independent information sources so they can learn about the issues and candidates at all levels? Anybody takin' lads to local debates? Hostin' MB sessions in conjunction with televised state or national debates? How about goin' to visit local campaign headquarters of each party or various candidates? How about goin' to visit da local headquarters of a lobbying organization? Teacher's Union, Chamber of Commerce, ACLU, Right to Life, etc.? Perhaps pursuing an issue? Like finding somethin' a lad is interested in and checking into da law (legislative), regulations (executive) and case law (judicial), reporting (media), science/research, and public opinion on it? Seems like right now, between da election and financial fracas there's a million ways to approach Cit. Nation in particular. B

[off topic aside] Yah, instructor levels are part of da shotgun sports associations, eh? NSSA, NSCA, and ATA. In da NRA, there are also levels, but they're called Coaching Levels rather than instructor levels. I always mix up which is which. NRA and da shotgun sports association levels are not equivalent, though. Hard to equate 'em, but I'd guess a NSSA/NSCA Level II is about an NRA Level 3. I was talkin' about that level. I'm sure someone with more experience will correct me if I'm gettin' da level equivalence wrong. Requirements for leveled instructors/coaches are a lot more stringent/well developed than da NRA basic course instructors. B

Yah, thanks OGE. Sorry to have made it extra work for yeh! BobWhite, I'll give yeh cred for "pithy" for "no responsible instructor teaches safety second." Aside from bein' pithy, though, I think yeh need to make an argument which actually responds to mine, eh? To recap, my claim is: 1) "Covering" safety up front is insufficient because a responsible instructor must never assume that all kids "got it." Therefore, providing safety by controlling the environment is necessary. 2) It is possible for a qualified and capable instructor to provide safety for a reasonable-sized group of beginners in an activity. 3) Because of #2, "covering" safety first is not required, and in fact detracts from the experience of da boys. 4) Because safety in an activity requires experience and skill in the activity, followed by developing judgment through doing the activity, safety is in fact the last thing most boys and adults actually become proficient and self-sufficient at, eh? 5) Experienced and professional instructors know all this. Beginner instructors and lazy instructors follow da requirements in order, and "cover" safety first like a school class. 6) The weak instruction provided by lazy and novice instructors is boring to kids, and doesn't promote real safety. Real safety is not covered or taught first, it is demonstrated and developed continuously through experience and instruction. B (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, scoutingtexas, yeh are an ASM in this troop? So aside from takin' shots at the SM, what are you doin' to help? It's up to the committee and CO what they do with their SM. Your job is to assist your Scoutmaster in helpful and productive ways. I'd worry about doin' your own job, instead of tryin' to do the committee's. If you do that well, then yeh make yourself a candidate for SM in the future. B

Yah, in da parent thread, ASM411 mentioned how his old unit used to do the "merit badge class" thing for the Citizenship Badges. I agree with him it's a very common way to go, especially because in a lot of ways da citizenship badges are pretty dry and hard to "get into." So for those of you who are Citizenship MB counselors, how about some ideas of what you've done to really make those badges not be classes, and instead be active, fun mentoring and learning opportunities for a boy. Give us all some ideas on how to break the school class w/homework habit. Beavah

I don't think there's any difference for non-outdoor MB's. We have to remember the BSA's official policy on Merit Badges: To the fullest extent possible, the merit badge counseling relationship is a counselor-Scout arrangement in which the boy [singular] is not only judged on his performance of the requirements, but receives maximum benefit from the knowledge, skill, character, and personal interest of his counselor. (National Executive Board policy statement) So even if a lad has grown up in a family of pilots that run an air charter company and can whip off da requirements for Aviation MB, the counselor is not supposed to just give the lad a signature after a couple of hours. The counselor is supposed to counsel, eh? To introduce the lad to other aspects of aviation, take him to a TRACON or control tower, have him plan a route and take him for an orientation flight, invite him to da local Dawn Patrol fly-in and check out all the airplanes. There's no such thing as a Merit Badge Teacher. We're supposed to be counselors and mentors. Yah, and just because one lad comes with a lot of experience in a badge and can breeze through da requirements doesn't mean that every boy who signs up can do that, eh? Some boys may never have been close to an airplane or at an airport before in their lives. They're goin' to take longer, eh? ----- BobWhite, with respect to canoein', I think yeh use the standard excuse for MBC's who are lazy, eh? "It's a safety thing, I have to lecture for a long time first". Balderdash. Doesn't take much effort at all to select a location where a bunch of lads who are swimmers can safely hop aboard a canoe with a quick example and a helping hand and begin to paddle. Takes even less if yeh have a troop with real patrol method, and the older, more experienced boys in each patrol are providing an example and helpin' out the younger lads. Same with firearms. I've watched good Level 2 NRA instructors hand boy scouts a shotgun and head out on da skeet range, teachin' and coachin' as they went. Plus, I don't reckon that lecturin' really helps much anyway, eh? Boy's don't listen. Beavah (This message has been edited by Beavah)

Yah, Cpt. Green seemed to post this on a bunch of "dead" threads, so I figured I'd post his query in a fresh thread so folks could respond: As a part of my Wood Badge ticket I am putting on a "Medical Merit Badge Midway" for my district. I have the potential instructors for it but I would like to know if anyone has out there has any power point presentations (or other another type) for Medicine, Dentistry, Public Health or Veterinary Medicine? If you do it would be greatly appreciated.

The MB's on these campouts are usually the outdoor type and can be done in a weekend with a reasonable class size. Yah, I reckon da bad example we set at summer camp of MB "classes", and then reinforce with Merit Badge Fair "classes", has completely overrun da original intent and value of merit badges. Scouting isn't school. We really shouldn't be doin' "class" should we? For outdoor badges in particular, it sure seems like we should be takin' kids canoeing, and climbing, and doin' pioneering projects. You know. Fun, active learning. Play. And then, when each becomes proficient in da skills of the badge, they earn it. May the Great Scoutmaster forgive me, I'm startin' to think like Kudu! I can imagine if BSA adults ran sports leagues, we'd plan a weekend "soccer" campout centered around the Soccer MB. Half the requirements of Soccer MB would be "explain" or "tell" or "describe", which the boys would get signed off for after sittin' through a couple lectures on da pitch. Then they'd be shown a few drills and made to do a few drills, and get signed off for those for somethin' like kicking one ball into an empty goal on their own, or performing one throw-in correctly. If they're lucky and there's time, they might play one game with the adults givin' instructions all the time. Six months later, when someone asks a boy with Soccer MB to teach a skill or organize a game or play striker for their team, the lad won't be able to. His Scoutmaster will accuse anyone who asked him such a thing of "retesting." Just like we do at camp, eh? Just like school. Start with da definitions. This is a gunwale, this is a thwart. Don't get into a canoe until day three. Blech! An alternative thing to try is Scouting. Just plan a canoe campout, or several. Put boys in canoes. Teach 'em "live", by doing. After yeh say "hold onto the gunwale" a couple of times, they get it, eh? Doesn't need a class. Boys need time paddling, racing, flipping, having fun. Just like soccer, eh? A lad who actually plays the game can also describe da rules, explain the positions, demonstrate a free kick. And six months later, after a winter off, he still can. No wonder soccer is cool and Boy Scouting is dorky, eh? Beavah

Yah, your experience is sadly not that uncommon, BrianScout. As BobWhite suggests, it just depends on your district and council trainers and their level of skill and commitment. In the deep dark days of BSA history back before there were lots of professionals in council offices, districts were really more like "local troops working together" than da top-down administrative thing they have become. If your district training team is dysfunctional and yeh don't have the time to rescue it, take Trainer's EDGE and then move the training "in house". Use your youth leaders to help train new adults. Run OLS for new adults on da same weekend as a troop campout, just in a separate campsite. Invite folks from local troops who need training. If yeh encourage a couple other troops to do something similar, yeh can share the load amongst 3-4 good units without any problem, eh? Plus offer services to any new/small units that need help. In other words, your units can be the district without havin' to spend any time with da paper district. Beavah

Yah, congrats and Scout Salute, eh? Now yeh can even call yourself a Beavah!

Yah, scudder, welcome to da forums, eh? My question about high adventure would be why would your youngsters be participatin'? Perhaps your high adventure program can step it up an additional notch to really challenge your high schoolers in ways that wouldn't be as good a fit for your younger boys? High school students have different social needs and needs for challenges, eh? So do middle school lads. In answer to your question, though, there's nothing particularly wrong or against da rules in doing a joint Venturing/Boy Scouting campout or even adventure trip. You need a male and female adult leader, and boys can't tent with girls. Many summer camps often run with both boy scouting and venturing coed staff, and joint campouts can be a great way for Boy Scouts to be introduced to da fun of Venturing. Not that big a deal from da kids' perspective; many of the boys have older sisters and go to coed schools, eh? Beavah