CalicoPenn

"SUMMARY EXECUTION! You hold an immediate hearing, find them guilty and SHOOT them. Period! NO lawyers, no mamby pamby BS, no crap. You want to shoot at me, them I am gonna execute you. If we had done that from the begining, I would not have lost as many friends as I have since this actions started." Would it be anti-American of me to agree as long as it was understood that our opponents had every right to adopt the same policy? You shoot at them, they capture you, hold a kangaroo court, find you guilty and just summarily execute you, right then and there. You are willing to accept that the opponents can summarily execute your friends in the same manner, right?

I'm going to take a different tack, and hopefully not offend Lisa in the process (because she's one of the great ones). I think in this case, the awarding of rank points to other symptoms, and isn't the problem itself. Lisa said it herself: "Why was he awarded Life? As far as I can tell, because nobody was willing to stand up to his mother. Attempts to call this child on his behavior inevitably result in screaming, ranting, raging encounters with her." My take is that the real issue is the adult leadership doesn't have the collective spine to stand up to this bully (and I'm talking about Mom here) and say "No". And then to further say "If you don't like it, there's the door". This is a situation the adult leadership have allowed to happen, and Scout's like Lisa's son see right through the platitudes and know that the adult leaders he supposed to respect are not up to the task. Unfortunately, it's too late to do something about it now - it should have been dealt with a long time ago. Calico

If he stopped being a Den Chief and became an Instructor for a short period of time, he did so with the knowledge of the Scoutmaster so the Scoutmaster should have no problem with this, if the Scoutmaster is following the advancement policies and procedures, which don't require a Scout to hold one POR continuously for 6 months. For that matter, there is no requirement that the Scoutmaster Conference be held after all other requirements are met. The Scoutmaster could hold the Life Scoutmaster's Conference the day after a lad earns his Star rank and it counts. You son should ask the Scoutmaster again for his conference - if he refuses, you and your son should request a meeting with the CC and the Scoutmaster and ask the Scoutmaster to show you the rule that says a boy must serve only one POR for rank. When he can't show it to you (and he can't), ask again for a Scoutmaster's Conference. If he refuses, and the Committee Chair backs him up, go to the Chartered Organization Representative and make your case with him/her. If this person refuses to intervene, start looking for a new troop, and simultaneously, go to the District Advancement Chairman and ask that the District finalize his Life Rank reviews. One last thought - it really wasn't neccessary for your son to "give up" his Den Chief role because the Pack doesn't meet in the summer. Most packs and many dens still do an activity or two in the summer, especially if they are trying to earn the Summertime Pack Award. The POR duties are met even if the Den does not meet weekly and the Pack does not meet monthly. The meeting patterns of Packs and Dens have been like this for a very long time - active meetings in the school year, little to no meetings, other than activities (like a pack picnic, etc., in the summer and never have Den Chiefs been required to "step down" over the summer because the Pack is less active than during the school year. Calico

I've been hesitant to reply because I can't remember what state this occurred in but very recently, within the last couple of weeks, a court ruled in a case from the primary season that individual voters wearing political buttons, stickers, hats, t-shirts, can not be turned away from the polls or forced to remove such items before voting - that electioneering rules don't apply to an individual who is in their own voting precinct and is legitimately there to vote. These things are starting to hit the courts. We'll see what happens. Calico

Glad to see you've got such a high opinion of Eammon. (ok, you're all great but that set-up line just couldn't be ignored). Calico

Barack Obama was never on the payroll of either the Annenberg Foundation or the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama was the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the non-profit Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and by Illinois Law, board members of non-profit agencies are not allowed to accept payment for their services to the agencie, except for reasonable reimbursement of certain expenses. Ayers was not a member of the Board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. He was, however, a member of another non-profit organization that did consulting work for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama and Ayers did serve together on the Board of the Woods Fund of Chicago - a board that met four times per year. I don't feel threatened by that at all. Calico

Good question, Pack - I think most of us understand that bullpuckey is inherently unreasonable. "Obama is a Muslim and is going to force Sharia Law on us" is bullpuckey which just can't be answered with anything but "Oh, bullpuckey". Or, "McCain is senile and is going to require every adult in the US to buy a gun" is bullpuckey which just can't be answered with anything but "Oh, bullpuckey". Unfortunately, there are those among us who don't recognize that bull puckey is inherently unreasonable, so I decided to be a bit redundant and use the phrase "unreasonable bull puckey". On the other hand, one could argue, I suppose, that answering someone who says "Big Macs are really good food" with "oh, bullpuckey" doesn't automatically mean the original statement was unreasonable - its an opinion that can't have any fact but personal experience behind it. We may agree it's unreasonable, but for a person who doesn't eat hamburgers from anywhere but fast food restaurants, it could be a truthful statement. Calico

Thank you, NJCubScouter. There can never be a reasonable response to unreasonable bull puckey, which is why we never try. Best to point out that the bull puckey is bull puckey and leave it at that. Calico

Not to discourage this (because I think it's a great idea) but is it possible this could fall under the category of "blood drive", or at least interpreted to fall under the category of "blood drive". Questions tht need to be asked: "Who is the beneficiary organization (is there one)?" "How does this project meet that organization's needs?" "Is this something the organization does anyway?" A health fair sounds like a great idea - but like a blood drive, is it a one time event or is it an event that is done anyway? Most of us have experienced the Scout that wants to do a blood drive - in fact my own Eagle Project was a blood drive. So what makes the difference? In my case, it was organizing the first of what would be an annual event - a blood drive for my city - my project was really putting together an organizational plan, complete with resources, that would be followed for years afterwards. The actual event was part of the project, but not the only part of the project. Once my project was complete, the city health department used the plan for more blood drives. Had I only been doing a blood drive, it's doubtful the project would have met Eagle standards. A Health Fair may face the same scrutiny - if it will be a one time fair, it might not be enough. If its developing a plan that the organization will use for future health fairs, then putting the plan into place for the first annual health fair - a self-perpetuating project in a way - then I can see this being accepted by the DAC. Calico

I can find nothing in the Guide to Safe Scouting that prohibits this as an activity. Yet axe throwing is in opposition to principles of axe safety taught in Totin Chip. If your committee is uncomfortable with this, then decline the invite. If, however, they feel it can be done safely, then do it. A key question for you and the committee to answer first, though is "Does an adult in the unit have experience throwing axe or tomahawk - and not just one time at band camp - errr Summer Camp/Philmont". If the answer is no, I would decline - you need someone with experience, who knows how to do it, and do it well, to be able to show others how its done, and to run your range safely. It is one thing to set this up as an event just for your unit at one of your unit campouts with no real experience, so that you can all learn it - it's quite another to set it up for a district event if you have no experience - would you set up an archery range for a district event if none of you were archers or had never done it before? If, on the other hand, you have adults who participate in fur-trading re-enactments, and throw hawks for recreation/contests, or have an adult who participated in a woodsman (lumberjack) team in college that threw axes, and he/she is available and willing, then I'd go ahead and do it. If you do decide to do it, there are some things I would suggest. As others have mentioned, you will need to set up a range - set it up like an archery range - with plenty of room blocked off to the side and rear of the targets. It needs to be treated like a range - no one stands anywhere down target from the thrower - either in or outside the boundaries. You'll want to set the range up in an open field, so you can see if anyone is walking down target. How deep should it be? Before you set up the range, throw a stick about the weight of the axe overhand as far as you can - then pace off that same length from where the stick landed in the same direction as the throw - and that should be your rear boundary (if, however, as far as you can isn't very far at all, then figure 40 yards at least). Use tomahawks and not hand axes or hatchets. Nowadays, hawks are generally made specifically as throwing instruments for re-enactors, so they are better balanced for throwing (not that hawks can't be used for other things, but splitting wood with a hawk is harder than splitting it with a hatchet). Be cautious, though - hawk heads are not permanently attached to handles - they will slip down. This makes it easier to replace broken handles, and they are made that way to be historically accurate - hawks were a trade item - handles can be made anywhere. By using tomahawks, you can also send a message that they are a specialized tool used mostly for competitions, not for every day use, so rules against throwing hand axes still apply - they won't be throwing hand axes, they'll be throwing tomahawks - so don't call it an axe throw, call it what it is, a hawk throw. In most cases, axe throw means throwing 3/4 to full length axes, not hand axes. You should stay away from this kind of event as it's not really age appropriate - good for Venturers, not for Boy Scouts. You'll need to build a heavy wooden tripod with a wooden shelf to hold the target. The target should be a thick and large diameter tree round - about 6 to 8" thick, and at least 18 (preferably 24 or more) inches in diameter. Stay away from the real hard woods like Oak and Elm if possible - you need the hawk to stick into the target, not bounce off if it does hit blade first which will only discourage the lads. The target should be set up about 15 paces from the front of your blocked off range, even though the Scouts will be tossing from a distance of about 7 paces from the target (need I mention that the back end of the range is two hawk-weight stick throws from the throwing position, not from the front of the range?). Keep a file or course grinding wheel/stone available at the range - between groups, give the hawks a quick rough sharpen - the blades don't need to be sharp enough to slice paper, but they do need to be sharp enough to stick into the target - and the blades will get dull as you toss them at a wooden block. Playing cards make great targets on the block - if its a competition, you can use a point system - 1 point for sticking in the block, 2 points for slicing/sticking into the card and 3 points for cutting the card into 2 pieces. Calico

Speaking of Bias - have you seen the website of the NRA lately? And speaking of nonsensical - what exactly does the AFL-CIO website have to do with sickness and corruption at all levels of Government and Media? Here I thought we aould get a well-reasoned argument against Fox News, and the Bush Administration - instead we get a diatribe against a Union that is not part of either the Government or the Media exercising their free speech rights. I suspect we have a three week troll here who will disappear once the election is over. Calico

The nightmare is presumably reasonable people buying into the bull puckey spewed daily by right wing and neocon radio and television, and the current Republican party leadership and candidates and their lackeys without putting a scintilla of critical thinking and research into the bull puckey they spit right back out. Even moderate Republicans see through the bull puckey. There's an IT phrase for such puckey: GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out. And we've seen enough of this garbage to last 10 lifetimes.

You can spend a lot of money on a good hiking boot, or you can spend a lot of money on a bad hiking boot. When looking at hiking boots, don't assume that because it has a high price, or that it comes from an outdoors store, that it is a good boot. Don't assume that because of the brand, the boot will be good for you. Some people swear by Merrells or Vasques (considered to be top of the line boots by many people - with prices to match (over $150), while for others, these boots just don't cut the mustard. Others swear by Hi-Tec or Timberland, mid-range boots in the $30-$70 dollar range. I personally prefer Hi-Tecs, and have since college, and have worn them on hikes and backpacking trips others wouldn't attempt without wearing $200 Merrells. RIght now I'm wearing lightweight low cut (looks more like a shoe than a classic boot) hiking boot from Alpine Designs, bought at Target for $29.95 - and have not had a problem with them, even on rocky trails in the Chiricahua's in Arizona, and have had them for almost 2 years. You say you have a Timberland outlet? Go check out their boots. Given your estimated useage, you should look at either the low-cut hiking boots, or if you want a more traditional boot look, the ankle height (boot tops goes over ankle)boots. You should be able to get away with a light-weight boot in either of these styles, but if you feel you need a bit more support, a mid-weight boot (sometimes called cross hikers) might be the way to go. Though there are lightweight boots in the classic boot style which may be more than enough. I think you can probably stay away from off-trail (heavy) and mountaineering boots (which are also most expensive). The most important part (other than socks) in buying boots is to try them on - both of them at the same time, and walk around the store with them. If the store won't let you do that - leave and go to another store. Boot sizes and shoe sizes are not always the same. Sure, get your feet measured for an estimated fit, then try on boots one size up and one size down from measurement too. Or skip the measurement and just use your current show size as the base line, still trying on one size up to one size down. And do this for every brand - don't assume that because you fit a 10 in brand A that Brand B's 10 is the same - you may fit into a 9 1/2 or a 10 1/2 in Brand B. Try to bring the types of socks you'll wear when you try on your boots. Also, don't over look the "big box stores". Target carries other brands than Alpine Design - I've seen Nike boots there. Don't overlook places like the Sports Authority, or Dick's Sporting Goods. And to just further cement my image as a contrarian as I wade into the sock discussion, I wear cotton low-cut socks when hiking, except in winter when I will wear wool, and don't blister up - mostly because my boots fit me correctly - blisters form due to the friction between the heel and the boot - if the boot doesn't fit correctly and your heel rides up and down, you'll get blisters, no matter what kind of socks you wear - and many folks get blisters when they wear the two-sock system - especially the poly-pro inner and wool outer sock system - your boot may fit correctly but poly-pro is slippery, and so is wool - and you may find your heel riding up and down in your socks, which can cause blisters. A lot of people solve this by wearing moleskin - which is a protective pad put on the heel so it is the moleskin taking the friction, and not your skin. If you are resorting to wearing moleskin to prevent blisters, your boots don't fit. That's my take. Calico

I'm confused - the letter was sent outside the Troop? Does that mean it was sent to Council? What is the relationship of the letter writer to the Scout? Committee Member? Assistant Scoutmaster? Scoutmaster? Who investigated the complaint? Who was the "select group of Scouters"? Who did they call as character witnesses? How could they possibly investigate this complaint without informing the parents of the Scout? There is only one honorable way to handle this. Remove the letter writer from the Troop, and petition to the Scout Executive to remove him/her from Scouting completely. Sit down and talk with the parents, inform them of the charges, inform them that no one felt it had any validity, and inform them that the letter writer is gone from the Troop - premanently (and if this means losing the letter writers sons, so be it), and hope against hope that the parents are reasonable, will ignore the fact that they weren't informed of this right away, and will accept that the letter writer is out of the picture. Alternatively, do nothing and hope against the very slim hope that the parents never find out about this in some other way (rumor mill, slip up, etc.) and find themselves a lawyer that agrees that it was libelous (slanderous) and despicable who goes after not just the letter writer but every one involved in trying to cover this up. Don't, for a second, think that the parents won't someday learn about this. Or have they already learned about this. You also ask if they have a legitimate reason to be upset that they weren't informed. That implies that they weren't informed but learned about it anyway, and are now angry that they weren't told. The parents have an absolute right to know that their son has been falsely accused by someone of "gross moral misconduct". The libel is secondary. They have that right so they can protect their son against such false charges in the future. You have no guarantees that the letter writer won't try this same tactic outside the BSA wall, so to speak. There may be issues between this family and the letter writers family that you aren't aware of. There may be issues between this Scout and the letter writer's family that the parents aren't aware of. There may be a need for this family to take legal precautions to protect themselves and their son. You may have, depending on your state, a legal duty to inform. Regardless, you have a moral and ethical duty to inform (in my opinion). Put another way, wouldn't you, as a parent, want to know if false accusations were made against your son, and wouldn't you want to learn of it upfront and not through the rumor mill? Do what's right - tell the parents - and if they already learned from unoffical sources and are steamed, then apologize, profusely, for not informing them earlier. Calico

You say your son has completed his Eagle Scout project - that means the Scoutmaster and the Committee knows that your son was working on his Eagle Scout project. Since the Scoutmaster and Committee knows that your son was working on his Eagle Scout project because all the paperwork for approval to start the Eagle Scout project was completed, and all the paperwork indicating the project is finished has been completed, then the Troop is expecting to be giving your son his Board of Review anytime now. Your son should be asking the Scoutmaster for his Scoutmaster's Conference, and not worry about what some of the other "leaders" are saying. Seems to me that if the Troop were that concerned about the age issue, they would have found some way to delay your son's start on the Eagle Scout project. Calico

What you do is only limited by your imagination and the size of your unit. Some suggestions based on my experiences: 1) Campground no more than an hour away - you want it to be convenient for parents to get to (and yes, parents should be coming - let's face it, they are the real reason to hold Courts of Honor - we already give the lads their badges during the Troop meeting (as soon as possible after they earned them) - the Courts of Honor are public recognition in front of the lads parents). 2) Tweak the Courts of Honor you already do (most Troops have a set agenda for their Courts of Honor, even if a Communication Merit Badge candidate is planning the ceremony, it will still be done according to troop traditions). If you have a set time for things such as FOS presentations, or Summer Camp Info sessions, etc., skip those this time. That way you can use the time in other ways, like Patrols being brought up at intervals to give campfire "summer camp" skits (ie - recognize T-SC-FC ranks, Screaming Banshee patrol does a skit - recognize Star-Life ranks, Jumping Tick patrol does a skit - recognize merit badges, Running Weasel patrol does a skit). Instead of lighting candles, light torches. Make a big ceremony out of lighting the campfire - one way I've seen it is to have three small fires already lit - let each represent one point of the Scout Oath, and from each fire, a Scout lights one of three torches while that point is explained (briefly please) - once all three torches are lit, the three Scouts holding one of each torch lights the large fire together. 3) Consider serving dinner to everyone - here's a great opportunity for the older Scouts, those in Troop Leadership positions (if your Troop is large enough to have a more senior patrol) to show their chops and cook a feast for everyone. You could, if you go this route, have the parents come out earlier to be led on a half-day hike by the patrols while the senior scouts stay in camp to prepare the meal - timed so when the patrols get back with the parents, dinner is just about served. Or each patrol could be could be tapped to prepare a side dish for the whole group, while the senior patrol cooks up the main course. Of course, the adult leaders could get involved too - maybe they make up dutch oven desserts for after the Court of Honor. And if you don't serve dinner? At least serve dessert. 4) Is there someone in the area that might be a really good story teller? Not ghost story, but maybe stories about the history/natural history of the area. If you're at a public campground, ask the staff while you're planning (don't wait until you get there) if they know someone (you may need to spend a little money but it could be worth it) or if they have someone on staff that could give a presentation about wildlife, the park, etc. If it isn't a public campground, call the local chamber of commerce or library - I'll bet they know someone in the area that could fit the bill. 5) Skip the regular announcements. Make this one just different enough so that people won't mind driving 2 hours (one each way) to attend. I can think of no real reason to start talking about Popcorn Sales and Scout Bucks and stuff like that at a campfire - can you? But you can still have fun with it. One skit I've seen is having an adult come striding up ringing a little bell, saying they have an important announcement to make - to be told by the MC that Announcements can be made later. After three or four times of this, the MC can call up "Mr. Announcement" to make his important announcment ("Now?" "Yes, Now") who comes up, does the Announcement song with the Troop, then announces there will be no announcements this night. Just my 3 cents. Calico

I prefer natural, hardwood, chunk (or lump) charcoal for most of my grilling needs. It starts faster (chunk charcoal is ready in about 10 to 15 minutes compared to briquettes readiness in 25-30 minutes), it burns hotter, and in open grilling situations, it tends to last longer. More importantly, it burns cleaner (no petroleum or coal derivatives are used to make it) so it can be used under my rendezvous tarp if I have to cook in a rainstorm (less smoke). I don't use briquettes for dutch oven cooking - yes, I know - easier to measure and you can use a handy dandy chart that tells you 7 briquettes on the bottom and 5 on the top will cook a cornbread in 20 minutes - or whatever it is - I prefer wood or natural charcoal. That's not to say that briquettes don't have advantages in certain situations - kettle grills being the most obvious. Natural charcoal needs more air flow than briquettes, thus it tends to lose heat rapidly in the old Weber, while briquettes burn better in low air flow (briquettes lose heat faster in open grilling situations). Had briquettes never been developed, its likely the Weber Kettle would never have been the success that it is. If I'm slow roasting in a kettle grill, I'll use briquettes, and try to use a brand that is more natural hardwood than not (like Royal Oak), or at the very least, avoid the self-starting petroleum soaked briquettes. For open grilling, and dutch oven cooking, I'm going with natural hardwood chunk charcoal. Calico

My favorite Scooby Doo episode was the one with the old sea captain, which is a classic, made before the era of that idiotic puppy power Scrappy. And speaking of sea captains....

I wonder what the reaction would be if an opponent of Proposition 8 used his Boy Scout position like this?

No one has asked the obvious question yet. What does his father, the Scoutmaster, say. Is he on his son's side in this? If so, are you prepared to replace the Scoutmaster if you decide not to accept the young man as an Assistant Scoutmaster? Do you have a potential replacement lined up? Have you even had a conversation with the Scoutmaster about this? Calico

GWD, Both the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun Times have done in depth articles on the house purchase/land purchase, with timelines - they were done just as the national media was just starting to sniff around - but you know TV news - they don't apparently read newspapers, unless they're based out of Washington DC or New York, and they don't tend to pay attention to relatively dry recitations of factual information. Calico

My take? Neither McCain or Obama are on the Senate committee charged with reviewing and recrafting, if needed, the legislation. Real leaders stay out of the way of the people who are charged with that task. McCain, through his bluster, is showing his leadership style, or should I say, lack of real leadership. He is showboating for the ignorant masses who do not understand just how the Senate really works. I think Obama said it pretty perfectly - Presidents need to be able to do more than one thing at a time. Calico

OGE - what you know about the Obama house purchase and Rezko land deal are things picked up by the national media and not explained in any detail. Here's what happened. The owner of the house and land originally put the properties up for sale and stated a preference that they be sold together, rather than as separate transactions, based on homes in the neighborhood selling very quickly once they were put on the market. There had been some interest in that house but the deal killer was the separate parcel of land that the owner was refusing to sell separately. By the time the owner was convinced to sell the house separately, the market in that neighborhood had already started cooling. When Barack and Michelle looked at the house, they made an offer on the house that was below the asking price, just like everyone else that makes offers on houses. The owner of the house, now getting worried that the house might not sell for a while, took an offer that was 15% below the asking price. To claim that the Obama's were given a "discount" is, frankly, offensive and a flat-out GOP lie, and a disservice to EVERY OTHER HOMEOWNER WHO MADE AN OFFER ON A HOUSE THAT WAS LESS THAN THE ASKING PRICE. You can be forgiven this because it was part of the BS that you heard from the media - but lets be very very clear here - what transpired with the offer and acceptance is both standard practice in real estate transactions, and happens hundreds of times every day. Anyone who has bought a house has done the exact same thing, and unless your real estate agent was a real schmuck, you likely got your home for less than the asking price. Now we come to the land. Rezko's wife (Rezko, but through his wife), did not purchase the land on the same day that the Obama's bought their house (definition time - by purchased/bought, we need to be clear that this means "closed" - the purchase doesn't take place when an offer is made or accepted, it takes place on closing). On the day the Obama's closed on their home, Rezko, thinking he could do Barack a favor because he had heard that the owner of the house wanted to sell the land at the same time, made an offer on the land. Given the limitations of the media in reporting factual information, there are now people who think they closed on the deals on the same day. The fact is that Rezko was just a stupid fool who gained nothing from this deal. The land owner had already sold the house, and there was no indication that anyone would be making an offer on the land the day that the Obama's closed on their house. The Obama's closed on the house in the morning, Rezko made the offer in the afternoon. The only part of this affair that Obama has any regrets about is then purchasing 1/6th of the land from Rezko in a later deal - one that did not come about as part of the house purchase (despite right wing talking head spin, (aka bald-faced lies)), but came out of the blue by Rezko. Let's be clear here too - though it has the whiff of special favor (which is why there is regret on Obama's part), the fact is that the land could be reparcelized to remove about 1/6th of the land and add it to a different parcel, and the Obama's paid Rezko exactly 1/6th the purchase price of the entire land plot purchase. The sale was too new for there to be any increase in land value, and there was never any quid pro quo for this deal - it was a simple land transaction between neighbors - one, a first time home buyer, and one a scheming schmuck. Calico

I think I'll stick with leaving my itinerary with a friend, and with the rangers rather than spend money on a device that may or may not work, depending on where you are, especially since more people are still found by rescue dogs than by people who carry the high tech whiz bang gadgets. Sometimes, the old fashioned ways still work the best. Calico

"But did you never wonder why commissioners are the only volunteers that have a patch that looks like the ones worn by professionals?" Because at one time, the BSA didn't have Scout Executives and District Executives. Commissioners, whose responsibility was to "commission" new units, and to recruit new members, often with direct contact, could be paid by a local Council. First Class Councils could keep up to 15 cents of the 25 cent registration fees, and usually paid their Commissioners from this retention. Second Class Councils could keep up to 5 cents of the 25 cent registration fee, and their Commissioners were Volunteers. Professional (paid) or not, they were all Commissioners. Eventually, the BSA got large enough that it was decided that there would be a paid, professional class - the Executives (Scout and District), who would no longer be responsible for direct recruiting, and direct formation (commissioning) of units, but would run the day to day business operations of the Council. Commissioners would be all volunteer and would retain their traditional roles of unit formation, unit service and recruitment. Eventually, recruitment became a responsibility of the units themselves (thus ending the Neighborhood Commissioner program, whose job was direct recruitment in the neighborhood). Though the Executive service were no longer Commissioners, they retained the "Wreath of Service" on their position patches as a reminder that their first and formost responsibility is to the Units and the BSA Program. The "Wreath of Service" should not be thought of as a means to identify a superior position in Scouting. It is meant to be a reminder and to keep the wearers humble. To be frank, the most important position patches and adult can wear say either Scoutmaster, Cubmaster, Assistant Scoutmaster or Den Leader. Every other adult position patch indicates a support role to these positions. Perhaps you should ask "Did you ever wonder why professionals have a patch that looks like the Commissioner's patch" Calico