sherminator505

I have heard horror stories about EBORs in the past. Mine was a breeze from my point of view. I wasn't told until much later that 2-1/2 hours was outside the norm. But that isn't the point of my rant... So why was it that I didn't leave the EBOR frazzled and disillusioned? Perhaps it was the relative seriousness that our troop treated EVERY board of review. There were a number of procedures that were always followed: * Every Scout who owned a uniform was expected to wear it to every board of review. * Every Scout appearing for a board of review was introduced to the board by his patrol leader (or the SPL, if he was a patrol leader). * Every Scout expected to be asked about Scout spirit, his advancement, what requirements were more challenging, what service he performed (if applicable). * Every Scout could expect a decision as to advancement after a brief deliberation, along with the gift of feedback. This was a good way to ensure that there was no fear of boards of review, while also ensuring that the experience was respected. The only Scouts in our troop who were afraid of boards of review were the ones going for Tenderfoot.

Oh, sure. The knee-high socks work well for me the first couple of times I put them on. After that...

Ah, I see your point.

"Ron Paul looks less kooky and much more wise all the time." OK, I'll bite. HUH?!

"I would find the passages in the Cub Scout/BSA literature that state a uniform is required and show it to the parents." I don't think you'll find any such passage. While it is the only place to wear Cub Scout insignia (thus making it a really good idea), I don't recall a single instance where the literature says that a Cub Scout is required to wear the uniform. Personally, I find the absence of a book to be more troubling. It makes me wonder if the boy and/or parents are really into this. I hope that this aspect changes; otherwise, I wouldn't expect the boy to stick around very long.

Congratulations! Please let us know how the EBOR goes (although I'm sure you'll do fine).

"I don't know where you got the idea that I am suggesting there is "absolutely no racism" behind opposition to Obama." - Kahuna "I don't believe I have ever heard a racial epithet directed at him, even by people who detest his policies." - Kahuna That's where. I nearly fell out of my chair the first time I read it.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

On the contrary, Kahuna. Brent has only shown the lengths he will go to to embrace an absolute statement that he knows isn't entirely true because it better reflects his world view. Neither you nor Brent can prove that there is absolutely no racism behing the acidic reaction that Obama is receiving from opponents, yet you stubbornly cling to your statement. And you still haven't answered my question about the poster.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

Amnesty for illegals? Wasn't that one of Ronald Reagan's ideas?

Brent, Look at the poster depicted in the link and ask yourself this question: Were there posters of Bill or Hillary Clinton that looked like this? How about Ted Kennedy or Harry Truman for that matter? All of them worked on public health care. Why this particular depiction of Obama? Please explain the discrepancy. http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/17/obama.witchdoctor.teaparty/index.html?eref=rss_latest

I'm not saying that racism is the main component of people's opposition to Obama or even a major component. I am saying that racism is present as an undercurrent and it is intellectually dishonest to simply dismiss it out of hand. You can believe what you want and deny what you want. Will you also deny that slavery or the Holocaust happened, or is there some intermediate point at which you draw your line? And why is it important where you draw that line anyway?(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

True enough about the NYT, although the reporter that was in the tank for the Bush administration also comes to mind...

Kahuna, I haven't been to one, either, as I am not anti-Obama either. I can only go by the descriptions from the scant reporting that they receive. But feel free to tell yourself whatever you need to to get through the day. You wouldn't be the first to deny the obvious in a vain attempt to ignore it, or perhaps a cynical attempt to further a certain point of view...(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"I'd be interested to hear what you think about the New York Times and CBS, after all the fiction they REPORTED as news." Such as, say, the link between Iraq and 9-11?

"I don't believe I have ever heard a racial epithet directed at him, even by people who detest his policies." Wow! This comment sounds like it came from someone who is either really sheltered or really naive. You should try going to an anti-Obama rally sometime. If you do, I am sure that you will see several signs with racist caricatures of the President and hear more than a few racist epithets. That said, I really don't believe that Congressman Wilson and his supporters are racist at all. They are simply disrespectful of the institution of Congress and what it represents (that is, the American people).

Awesome! Guess some problems actually solve themselves.

"The fact the they are volunteers is irrelavent." OK. Now I'm confused. Who is it that you're saying is being abused here, you or the Eagle candidate or both? My first impression was that the District was nonresponsive, then I got the impression that they were ticked off at you specifically, and now I get the message that you feel you're being abused. I think there is more to the story than we're seeing, and it is hard to give good advice when you're not given a full picture. Is there some history between you and the Council we should be made aware of?

I found President Carter's comments to be somewhat shocking if not ill-advised. Still, it is a fair statement to say that there is more than a little bit of racism floating around out there. I experienced that first-hand through my father and brothers' reaction to Obama's election. It wasn't very nice. As for Congressman Wilson's outburst in Congress, I'm not entirely surprised. Respect for Congress has been in short supply lately. Recently, subpoenas to appear before Congress went unanswered. This was also something that, up until then, simply wasn't done. And not too long before that, our previous President asserted his own will by adding "signing statements" to over 700 bills passed by a Congress that was controlled by his own party. Given this climate, it isn't much of a surprise that a Congressman would show disrespect for the body.

Looks like Congressman Wilson is having one of those moments like Howard Dean had after his Iowa speech. I hope it lasts for quite a while.

Easy. None. It looks bad. OK, perhaps that's a little extreme, but I really think that every effort should be made to find another MB counselor. As for some sort of "hip-pocket" maximum, probably five by ANY one merit counselor is a good guideline.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

Getting herself to the bus on time?! Am I completely missing the point of this thread?

I too would like to see employers punished severely for hiring illegals. Case in point - the Hormel plant in Utah. Yeah, sure, they made a pretty good show of deporting the illegal employees, but did we hear one word about what the government did to Hormel? Wonder why? I do...

Our two party system, on a national level, is nearly as old as the Constitution itself. This country wasn't founded on a two-party system, but the government as set up by the Constitution greatly favors it. So does human nature. In a democracy such as ours, with the mentality we've developed over the decades, we tend to think in terms of "us vs. the other." If a third party were to come into prominence, it would simply crowd one of the others out of existence.

I have often mused on this. A JASM would not be in a position to act as a second adult, as this would be in conflict with the Guide to Safe Scouting. And as several posters who have pointed out that there are other positions that an older Scout could fill. Personally, I feel that this is a position that has lost its usefulness in modern troop structures, and I really think that it should be eliminated.

I agree with Ed on this one... sort of. I think it's scary that the scools are scared to drop kids off without adults waiting because they don't wish to be responsible for the possible outcomes. This is a confluence of several societal problems.