Callooh! Callay!1428010939

Would that scouters and scouts placed as much emphasis on making 1st Class Scouts, first class scouts, the backbone of scouting.

"Do yeh folks actually recognize a fellow manipulatin' you for his own lobbying purposes?" Can't say if the manipulation would be recognizable because the original post was not worth slogging through. Once we read the erroneous idea that "They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence" we lost interest and thought to ourselves "if only!" Because we know the problem with this administration has not been that it has been gridlocked but rather than it hasn't been gridlocked enough. And we know that partisanship is neither good nor bad, it's what one is a partisan for that may be so. And we don't fear incompetent government as much as we fear government that is hungry to grow its power and control and is competent at doing so. But fairly often we do notice comments that stand up for "real conservativism" the way Marc Antony stood up for Brutus in that famous speech that illustrates manipulation.(This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

Is it also the highest percentage in one year or is it due to a larger population entering during the time period in which these new Eagle Scouts began scouting?

"do you know of any studies on the effects on children of having single fathers?" No, but your logic comparing lack of mother to lack of father sounds sound. The circumstance is, however, less common and if there are such studies they'll be relying on less data. Exercise, if one can but does not, is a good way to realize improvement in one's health and probably in one's happiness. Or if one can and does, continuing to do so is a good idea. But it seems unlikely exercise is much of a factor in spree killings. These killings are so vanishingly rare that there isn't much data to analyze. (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/25/fathers-disappear-from-households-across-america/print/ http://www.fatherhood.org/media/consequences-of-father-absence-statistics

Our society is desensitized to single motherhood. Frowning on it is frowned upon; some attach more stigma to speaking ill of single motherhood than to making bad choices that result in it. Delinquency in youth correlates positively with having a single mother. Liking violent games correlates positively with being a boy. This is not to argue that games like Grand Theft Auto are harmless. But complaining how Grand Theft Auto might contribute to delinquency and crime in our society is like complaining about an ingrown toenail on a patient with a sucking chest wound. Don't seek to empower government to play father to us all by regulating everything. Our society needs real fathers.

Quote from the article: "It was obvious that the violent games desensitized these youths to violence." Yes - it was obvious to the author. But what's obvious to the reader is that the young criminals may just be telling the author exactly what he wants to hear (essentially: "the devil made me do it") or that the author set out to elicit such comments in the first place. Conveniently, his conclusions allow his government funded organization to muster arguments for more government... and more government funding for organizations like his. Since he himself was not found guilty of anything, we shouldn't be surprised he feels no need to mention the scandal around his organization's use of government funding... it was probably just trumped up charges or administrative mistakes anyway... people who tell us they're doing good and helping the downtrodden wouldn't waste money the government confiscated from taxpayers would they?

If he just retired and didn't transfer the benefits while he was on active duty, he's probably eligible for Post 9-11 GI Bill. The post 9-11 GI can be used to pay for some non-degree programs, like, for one specific example: the National Outdoor Leadership School's Wilderness Medicine Institute: http://www.nols.edu/wmi/ How much of the cost it would cover and what other training venues are eligible are subjects your friend may wish to research at http://www.gibill.va.gov/resources/education_resources/

"Bushmaster low cost?" The idea that that the Bushmaster is "one of da low-cost firearms" must be one of those "Old School Conservative" positions. As a modern progressive liberal, to me it seems rather pricy for what you get. It's a semi-automatic rifle. I've never used an AR-15, but I've used both the M16 and the M4; the AR-15 is a popular design and other than being limited to semi-auto, it's not so different from its military cousins, so I imagine it must be OK. But at the prices it sells for, it seems like no bargain to me. You can get a semi-automatic rifle that in all the most important aspects would provide you with similar performance (in larger or smaller calibers, depending on your intended use or preference). But if people want the Bushmaster rather than something I might consider more practical.... as a modern progressive liberal I say let them choose the semi-automatic rifle they like. Another "Old School Conservative" position is that the Bushmaster's design is "to get around da previous assault weapons ban by careful use of technicalities." Even as a modern progressive liberal, I can see how that could be true, since the assault weapons ban itself was an exercise in technicalities...whether or not they were carefully used is less certain. Another interesting "Old School Conservative" idea that modern progressive liberals will find harder to agree with is that having something stolen in a home invasion counts as having left that something unsecured.

The most frequent perpetrator in the murder of children, is not a stranger with a gun. It's a parent or step-parent. And strangulation and beating are common means. But it's not the availability of the means that is the problem. It's the motive, and/or the mental health of the parent who commits the crime. Don't blame guns and don't advocate making public policy based on emotional reactions to vanishingly infrequent statistical anomalies. Don' let collectivists manipulate your emotions and your natural impetus to want to "do something" cause you to support policies that will be ineffective at stopping the evil you wish to stop, but very effective at weakening restrictions on the government's power to violate citizens' rights. http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493660/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355789622&sr=8-1&keywords=more+guns+less+crime

"So what do you think some reasonable restrictions or prohibitions should be????" The second amendment is a reasonable prohibition against the government abrogating our rights.

oh... never mind. (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

No. Macedonia... and whether or not it's Greek.

The "democratic process" in which some would apparently like to see these "pimples" popped, is a process to elect the government of a Republic. It's "United States" not "United State." The electoral college is an expression of state sovereignty. States should assert their sovereignty more, not less. States should stand against collectivist driven federal overreach. The population of a state written off as ""a mere pimple on the landscape?" Why? Are they "kulaks?" "Capitalist roaders?" Roadblocks to some collectivist "great leap forward?"

Edit: friend (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

That phenomenon, if not addressed in the MB Pamphlet might be addressed in the recommended reading. Maybe the reading recommended above (Eating Fossil Fuels) in this thread will make the Sustainability MB recommended reading list. It could introduce Scouts to the writings of an author who is very concerned about such issues and who (according to Amazon.com and other sources) "has written about class war, sustainability, direct action and the environment. He is also an anarchist activist and a member of the Industrial Workers of the World. In 1999, he was one of the organizers of a hunger strike to provide medical care for political prisoner Leonard Peltier." We can learn some of what the author of "Eating Fossil Fuels" has to teach us about oil prices and markets in an article he has published in The Anarchist Library http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/dale-allen-pfeiffer-peak-oil-and-the-working-class Therein he explains for us why oil prices go up.

Plenty of good advice above - JBlake and Beavah posts cover most items well. Concentrate on the basics. Think about what you need to do (not what you need) and get simple items to do it. There are a few basic items on which it is wise to spend what it takes to get quality: Socks: Owning just two pair of good wool socks is better than owning 20 pair of cotton socks. Some weaves are more suited to warm and some to cold - but all are better than cotton. Wool is great in all climates, it doesn't become as smelly in socks as cotton does. It keeps your feet dryer, and it doesn't lose its insulation properties when wet. Wool socks wash easy and dry fast enough. Wear one pair while you air the other. Some synthetics are OK, maybe. If wool makes you itch - spend a little more and try Marino wool. Shoes: They should fit, be in good repair, and be suitable for the terrain - light hikers or cross-trainer all purpose type shoes will be more versatile than heavy duty hiking boots. Underwear: Do not go with briefs or boxers or anything cotton. Get two lightweight jogging/gym shorts made of synthetic lightweight fabric and wear them as underwear. Get them in dark colors and make sure they're the kind with the super thin stretchy "underwear" liner. Owning two pair of these beats owning 20 pair of briefs or boxers. Wearing these, you're still decently dressed without your pants, yet they're no more bulky as underwear than are briefs or boxers. They work fine as swimming trunks. They dry very quickly. At camp you wash them by wearing them into the shower with you (and again - they dry quickly). In the field, you wash them when you wash yourself. Undershirts: No cotton. Dry-fit type fabric. Wicks away moisture. Doesn't get as odiferous as cotton. Stays cleaner. Washes easy - dries fast. Get dark colors. Two will do - even for long term camping - you wash the t-shirt you've been wearing when you wash yourself - just like you do with your shorts. Hat: - appropriate to the climate and sufficient to shade your face and ears - light and easy to pack and made of quick dry - easy wash fabric would be nice but is not of paramount importance. Pants: No jeans or anything else 100% cotton - a blend may be OK. Get some pants made of decent fabric - think about the climate. Make sure they fit relatively loosely - not baggy but relatively loosely with plenty of freedom of movement. Shirt: No need to get anything fancy - just Long Sleeves - light fabric (Not 100% Cotton - a blend may be OK) for hot weather - something warm (wool?) for cold - always wear a t-shirt (as described above) and a long sleeve shirt. Your outer shirt should fit a little loosely. Don't go around with your arms in the sun. (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

It appears previous posts have this topic very well covered to include some pros and cons of Blue Cards. One theory suggests that Scouts have a youth version of the G2A that is unavailable to Adult Leaders. If this version of the G2A does exist, some observations suggests that its section on Blue Cards may read as follows: 1. Start working on the MB with no Blue Card. 2. Start intending to get a Blue Card. 3. Get a Blue Card but unsigned... intend to get it signed next time you see the SM. 4. Forget... and intend to get it signed next time. 5. Get the Blue Card signed. 6. Lose the signed Blue Card and return to step 2 in this process. 7. If you are unable to complete step 6, produce your signed Blue Card but first ensure that it appears to have been floating around with other items in your backpack for a couple weeks and that it is stained with a mysterious substance (something from lunch, engine work, or the like will do) and that some of the writing is smudged into illegibility.

"Eating Fossil Fuels," (The reading recommended to us by the originator of the other thread on this subject in which overt political references are forbidden), just from a from a quick perusal, does appear to offer a foothold to understanding something about Sustainability. The author has also "written about class war, sustainability, direct action and the environment. He is also an anarchist activist and a member of the Industrial Workers of the World. In 1999, he was one of the organizers of a hunger strike to provide medical care for political prisoner Leonard Peltier." (From Wikipedia of course - that's how these posts stay so misinformed and confused). And the publisher, New Society Publishers, would likely be delighted to advise us on Sustainability Merit Badge requirements as the subject is their specialty. Their website informs us that "New Society Publishers roots are firmly in the activist soil of both the United States and Canada. In the US, a Philadelphia office first emerged from the Movement for a New Society during the anti-Vietnam war, offering Americans nonviolent, civil disobedience training. From this work grew the need for a publishing house, and New Society Publishers was created in the late 1970s with a mandate to publish books for nonviolent social change." The Movement for a New Society had a "vision of a decentralized, democratic and caring social order; a nonviolent revolutionary strategy; and a program based on changed values and changed lives." One supposes they hadn't much use for Julian Simon, as that would certainly be deemed political.

"renders your argument irrelevant" Which argument? The one arguing that SP's concerned conjecture about the "Sustainability" MB probably stems from his awareness of current trends in usage of the word "sustainability?" Or the one arguing that conservation and concern for the environment are Conservative concerns? Or is it the ancillary "leftists lean collectivist" shoes and discomfiting worry that they might fit that has us atwitter? And all over propaganda that is apparently hardly worth addressing... informed as it is by nothing more than wikipedia used to support views from one who "needs to be reeducated" and is "so confused and misinformed?" "As others have said the BSA was founded by some of the avid conservationists of the day and has always been one of the centerpieces of the program which renders your argument irrelevant." Surely, since the argument never disputed or even mentioned BSA being "founded by some of the avid conservationists of the day" the argument is irrelevant to that statement or that statement to it. And so a fair rebuttal is this: "Many conservationists like to drink coffee which render your argument irrelevant." "It certainly doesn't help them learn about each other. Instead, it just drives them apart." "learn about each other" has its merits. But it's often more interesting to discuss ideas than people. But since we're on the subject, it's perhaps worth noting that in plenty of instances, learning about each other does drive people apart. Anyway, while SP's concerns over what "sustainability" means have some reasonable foundation, one hopes that this "Sustainability MB" will be a good learning opportunity. It'll be interesting to see what the requirements are when they do come out and how they differ from Environmental Science. Cooking back on the Eagle list. That's cool. It was on my sons' required (by their helicopter parents) list anyway. High speed, low drag is great approach to nutrition in the field but it's good to know all the basics that Cooking MB covers. And as is observed in the NJCubscouter post above... the proposed additions look pretty heavy on the techie emphasis. (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

Sorry. It's easy to forget that this is the thread in which we're told we need to be reeducated - not the thread in which we're supposed to remark on what that has meant. It is, of course correct that this isn't really the right topic area for political commentary. But threads do stray - and sometimes right out of the gate. And so we take to heart the wise admonishment from above to: "Please keep the rest of this scouting related. And btw, TR may have been a republican, but he was a progressive, not a conservative (his words, not mine). He would not find a welcome home in the current Republican Party." It's interesting that a post requesting we keep it scouting related ends with "and btw" arguments about politics. (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)

"I think someone needs to be re-educated" Yes. Advocacy for such is common on the Left. In power, it has gone beyond advocacy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reeducation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reeducation_camp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re-education_through_labor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_North_Korea#Reeducation_camps

SP didn't claim to know what the requirements were. He expressed concern over an issue that the word "sustainability" might reasonably suggest to persons whose English language skills extend beyond basic fluency. The linguistic nuance that prompted his observation might be lost on anyone unaware that "sustainability" has become an ostensibly nice sounding buzzword frequently associated with socialist, communist, or other collectivist efforts to assume power and control in the name of some ostensibly greater good like "sustainability." But... "Nothing is more conservative than conservation" - Russell Kirk Environmentalism and Conservation are and have been Conservative concerns. Just as conservatives first championed the abolition of slavery and the civil rights of minorities, it was conservatives that first championed conservation and environmentalism. After conservative succeeded in protecting minority rights, liberals adopted the cause as their own and use it primarily as a means to advocate increased government control over citizens. Likewise with environmental issues. Modern Lefties champion the environment because they think environmental problems demand the solutions they like best for every problem... collectivism. Communism, socialism, and collectivism in general tend not to sell very well these days unless they're packaged as something else. "[There is an] absolute necessity of waging all-out war against the debauching of the environment. . . The bulldozer mentality of the past is a luxury we can no longer afford. Our roads and other public projects must be planned to prevent the destruction of scenic resources and to avoid needlessly upsetting the ecological balance." Governor (then) Ronald Reagan Nation's first fuel economy standards signed into law - Gerald Ford Environmental Protection Agency Created - Richard Nixon Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act - signed into law by Richard Nixon 1964 Wilderness Act and the 1968 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act - cosponsored and advocated for by very conservative Congressman Saylor, PA Arctic National Wildlife Range (8.9 million-acres) - Dwight Eisenhower Herbert Hoover increased national park system 40 percent Theodore Roosevelt doubled the number of national parks, established 130 million acres of national forests, 18 national monuments, and 55 bird and game reservations

There is agenda driven selection bias in reporting from both Leftist and conservative news sources. But the agendas differ in ideology and variety. The Left prefers collectivism and enjoys more conformity of opinion. Differences of editorial opinion in news outlets catering to the Left are across a relatively narrow spectrum with the occasional non-lefty strawman or token dissent. Conservatives tend less toward collectivism and among them we find great diversity of opinion. Any news source that wishes to appeal to the non-Leftist market must take into account a wider variety of agendas.

This is a timely announcement, with the festival approaching next month. For most, the lanterns go on the water vice in the air anyway. It's always a good idea to take precautions against creating hazard, annoyance, or litter with such things. (This message has been edited by Callooh! Callay!)