funscout

Our troop has endless opportunities for patrol (or self) cooking. The boys can cook at every troop meeting if they choose to, and of course they cook at every campout. Our boys prefer the dining hall for summer camp, because it allows them the time to take 5 or 6 merit badges or have free time for open swim, open rifle, etc. The boys can cook anytime, back home, but can't do rifle shooting, swimming, etc. at every troop meeting.

As a parent, I would rather see my money go towards my boys learning new skills and earning merit badges at camp, rather than time focused on cooking and clean up which my boys have plenty of opportunities to do back home.

I forgot to comment on Horizon's post. So, didn't you appreciate Nancy Reagan standing in for her husband? LOL

Yeah, not all presidents did attend a Jamboree, but this is the only time we'll ever have a 100th anniversary of BSA.

It's kind of like a parent saying to his kid, sorry I can't go to your birthday party, but I have a scheduling conflict. (when it's something that could be done any other time)

Many of these scouts will be of voting age by the 2012 election and they will remember that Obama chose to spend time with Whoopi and friends rather than help the Boy Scouts celebrate a once in a lifetime event. If Obama had skipped Jamboree for an important reason, then there would be no controvery. But to skip it for a day time T.V. show that he could appear on anytime he wanted to - now that sends quite a message to our boys.

It's too bad Obama didn't give very much notice on his no-show, because just maybe former presidents Clinton, Bush Sr., and Bush Jr. could have stepped in to fill his place. Those 3 all attended a Jamboree during their presidencies and those Jambos weren't even big anniversaries.

Crossamwedge, that's too bad about your son's car being DQed when it wasn't even his fault. Whenever we had a scout who made an honest mistake or in your case, a factory design flaw, we had the boys vote as to whether the car should be allowed or not. We made sure the cubs knew that the boy in question did not purposely break a rule, and we had them think of how they would feel if their car hadn't been allowed. I'm proud to say that each time, our boys voted to allow the "illegal" car to race. If it had been a situation where a boy broke the rules year after year, then we wouldn't have been so lenient, but we felt that the derby was for the boys and was supposed to be fun, not cutthroat.

I wish we would have thought to have a winner for the slowest car! I love that. Occasionally we had boys who raced a block of wood, because they forgot to work on their car, but still wanted to race.

I, too, worked with deaf and hearing impaired kids. I only have one thing to add, since you have already gotten good information.

I hate to even have to bring this up, but you might want to learn a few of the common "naughty" words in sign language, so you'll know if the kids start using them. Kids will be kids, and if they think they can pull a fast one over the non-signing leaders, they just might do it.

Also, be sure you really know the signs that you end up using. Just like in any foreign language, it can sometimes be embarrassing if you use the wrong word. I know my students got a few laughs over my mistakes!

As a Republican, I guess I should be pessimistic, but I continue to have faith in the American people. I am optimistic that people will see through Obama's false promises, and I continue to pray that all of our leaders will let God guide them to make the right decisions.

I have been dismayed over Obama's talk of gloom and doom, because he was supposed to be the candidate of Hope. He and the media fostered the pessismism, I suppose, so that any small improvement would look like a miracle. So, is my disappointment and worry considered pessimism? Perhaps. I think I am being a realist, in worrying, but being an optimist in truly feeling that our country will eventually head back in the right direction. The scary part is how long it might take and how much of my investments will be lost in the meantime.

A friend of mine had a very strict father who was a minister. He wouldn't allow his family to say any slang word, if it was a substitution for a swear word. That cut out pretty much every slang word you can think of... shoot, darn, dang, golly, gosh, gee, etc. She finally started saying, "oh naughty words, naughty words" as her substitution for the slang words.

Well, BadenP, you'll have to add me to your list, because I trust Rush Limbaugh's ideas way more than any Democrat I know. That doesn't mean I follow him blindly, it just means that I agree with his conservative viewpoints. If I didn't agree, then I wouldn't listen to him.

By the way, I laugh when I hear people say that Rush is the voice of the Republican party! He is very disgusted with the Republican party right now. Rush stands for conservative politics, not necessarily the Republican party.

Getting back to the original post, my husband and I are still spending, so we are doing our part to help the economy. We will not, however, buy big items on credit, as Obama suggested. We only pay for what we can afford right now.

I am concerned that the stock market has plummeted some 2,000 points since Obama took office. I wish he would do something to inspire confidence instead of constantly talking about gloom and doom. What happened to his platform of Hope and Change?

There is one good thing about having Geithner as "boss" of the IRS. If any of us ordinary people make income tax mistakes, then we can just point out that the IRS' boss made mistakes without penalty, and we expect the same treatment.

Scoutldr, you are right that many pro-lifers do not put their money where their mouth is. Much more is needed to help pay for the care of women with unwanted pregnancies.

My family has very little extra money since we have chosen for me to be a stay-at-home mom. The ONLY charity, besides church, that I give money to, is to help unwed mothers. If I were rich, I would "adopt" as many of these women/babies as I could afford, but alas, I can only responsibly afford to provide for the 2 children that I chose to have. I wanted more kids, but knew I would need to work in order to afford more kids, so we stopped at two.

Since we didn't have much extra money, I usually donated gently used baby/child items since I couldn't afford to be buying new items for my own kids as well as somebody else's. I recently filled a baby bottle with cash and spare change for the God's Gift program of Crisis Pregnancy Center. I wish I could do more. Just imagine what could be done if every pro-lifer gave even the small amount that I do, each year!

I know several people who got pregnant before marriage. Some of them chose abortion, and lived to regret it. Others chose to get married, and are still married 20+ years later. Each one of these friends who kept their babies and married the baby's father can not imagine not having their first child. My friends who had abortions lament the fact that society back then did not do much to educate people on the reality of abortion. My friends take full responsibility for their decisions, but would likely have made a better choice if provided with better information. Each of my friends who chose abortion are vehemently pro-life, now, and if they could go back in time, they would choose adoption. Marriage was not an option for them at that time, but they realize now, that killing their baby was the absolute wrong decision.

My parents have a friend who encouraged his daughter to have an abortion when she got pregnant out of wed-lock 25 years ago. She instead kept the baby and luckily for her, married the child's father and is still married. The grandfather became pro-life as soon as his grandchild was born, and tells anyone who will listen, how wrong he was to encourage abortion. Every time he thinks of his grandchild, he thanks God that his daughter did not listen to him!

Of course, not all pregnancies end up with happy stories, so that is where adoption comes in. I have several friends who are adopted and I am thankful their parents did not choose abortion.

This mother made several tragic mistakes. First, in having so many children that she already can not afford (and with no father in the picture.) Next she sought fertility treatment to have MORE babies that she could not afford! The moral thing to do now would be to give all eight of those babies up for adoption. Of course, she won't do that, because, as her mother said, she is obsessed with children. That woman needs psychological counselling. I am appalled that there are doctors who are willing to enable women like her.

Laws will never be passed that force irresponsible women to be sterilized, but maybe incentives could be given for over-productive mothers who voluntarily choose sterilization. If I were rich, I would offer financial support for all 14 children if the mother would undergo sterilization.

I'm afraid that some people romanticize the notion of having multiple babies at once. I love the show "Jon and Kate Plus Eight" (they have twins and sextuplets) but even they tell people, "Do NOT try to have multiples!" People have actually written to the Gosselins asking how to go about having multiples!

No, the entire Republican caucus did not follow President Bush. That is why so many of us tried to get a conservative on the Republican ticket. Democrats helped the moderate Republicans get McCain nominated, but that was not the choice of all Republicans. I was disappointed with McCain's nomination, but still felt he was more conservative than Obama, so I voted for McCain.

Even though I disagreed with Bush's overspending, I still am thankful he kept our country safe. I can criticize him in some areas, but support him in others.

Hopefully I will be able to support Obama in some areas, too.

LisaBob, you are right that there are some middle ground issues that both sides should be able to agree on.

Gern, Reagan was the first to put the restriction on, and Clinton rescinded it. GW Bush brought back the restriction and now Obama has again rescinded it. I don't see how taking govt. OUT of the equation, like Reagan and Bush did, is interfering. Providing tax payer funding for agencies that provide abortions is most certainly govt. involvement in the abortion issue. Taking away the govt. funding is taking govt. OUT of the issue. People can still have abortions, according to the current govt. So, if pro-choicers want govt. to butt out, then they should also expect govt. not to help fund abortions.

I can't quote exactly, but I think he did say, "I hope Obama fails." Those of us who listen to Rush regularly, know that he meant he hoped that Obama's policies fail. But, being the entertainer that he is, Rush chose to go more for what I call "shock value." I am not an entertainer, and I try to be kind, so that is why I would have worded it differently.

Gern, I respectfully disagree with you. True, Bush allowed spending to get out of control, but that doesn't mean that Obama's policies are the answer. Bush did not stick to a conservative playbook. If he had, then this country would be better off. Obama's stimulus package has too much pork. I am very disappointed in him. I did think he would honestly try to do better than he has so far. Maybe he will surprise me and look at conservative policies eventually. If he does, then he will have my full support. I don't care if he calls himself a Democrat, if he would be willing to use conservative measures, then he will have my support.

Pro-choice groups tend to want government to keep out of the abortion issue. They feel that it is a woman's right to decide what she does with the baby inside her. So how is it that Pro-choicers like Clinton and Obama think it is all right to involve government to fund abortions? Does anyone else out there see the hypocrisy of this?

Here we are in a recession, and one of the first things Obama did was to take our tax dollars to help fund abortions overseas. I don't see how that is going to help the American economy. It's sad that he is more concerned with liberal agendas than helping Americans where they really need help.

This is a respectful disagreement. Notice that I did not call names. For those who respond to this topic, I hope you will show similar respect.

Although I agree with Rush Limbaugh's hopes of Obama's policies failing, I disagree on how he worded it. I disagree with most of Obama's policies, so of course I do not want those policies to succeed. Rush is an entainer, and he goes for shock value. Those of us who listen to him know that he has nothing against Obama as a person, but has much against him as a politician. If Obama held the same conservative values as Rush, then Rush would be one of his biggest supporters.

My children know that I am very disappointed to have such a liberal president, but he is my president, so I will respectfully disagree with him, rather than be rude and disrespectful.

Obama will find, however, that others will not show him the same respect. Instead, they will show him the same respect that the Bush haters showed Bush.

Thanks for the post, it was very informative. I don't think areas of the country should be penalized for how their vote went, though. Every "Blue" county and state has it's share of "Red" voters, and vice versa, so it's more important to look at the businesses that support Obama's "Spread the Wealth" plan.

I printed out the list of "celebrity" donors for McCain, but my computer wouldn't let me print out the "celebrity" donors for Obama! I tried several times, hmmm, what's up with that?! Oh, well, most of Obama's supporters were actors and I already boycott liberal movies.

McCain's supporters did, surprisingly include a few actors, but was mostly made up of business owners, sports team owners, and of course fellow Republicans.

DanKroh, you are right to not buy Domino's Pizza because they donated to McCain. I don't buy the pizza because I don't like it, but, maybe I'll have to rethink that now!

We do a lot of shopping at BestBuy, which was a McCain donator. Other "McCain" businesses that my family patronizes include: Menards, Coors, Anheuser-Busch, Pepsi, Estee Lauder, Blockbuster (but not much, since there are so few moral movies out there), AT&T, General Electric, Hilton hotels, Sear's, Clear Channel, Walgreens, Verizon, Enterprise Rent-a-car, The Sharper Image, Tyson Foods, JCPenney, Target, Wal-Mart, eBay, Motorola and DuPont. Several banks, credit unions, insurance compnies, energy companies, etc. were also listed. I'm not much into sports, but there sure were a lot of sports represented: golf, football, basketball, NASCAR, baseball, and boxing.

Now, some of these supporters were on both lists, so I guess they are trying to court everyone. So, you'll have to look for yourself to see if the business you want to patronize only contributed to one of the candidates.

With some research, you can find out the names of CEOs at various businesses to see who they supported. I found several Beans listed as Obama donors, but I don't know the names of the current Beans (if they are still Beans) at LL Bean. It will take a long time to go through the alphabetical listings, but for people who want to do that, it's a better idea to boycott based on the actual company rather than the area of the country where it's located.

Good Luck to those who want to do the research!

LisaBob, I think your son is a little like mine, in that neither of my boys are progressing very quickly in scouts. My 15 year old is a Star scout, and my 12 year old is just Scout, not even Tenderfoot yet. I got so burnt out from too many positions at the Cub Scout level, that it has been hard for me to get excited about being a leader in Boy Scouts. Even though neither of my boys is in Venturing, I am going to register as a leader with the Crew. I have been on one canoe/camping trip with the Crew and I had a blast. I think the change was exactly what I needed. My boys will stay in the Troop and I will keep my ASM role, but my heart is more with Venturing.

My younger son probably won't last long in scouts. He's just in for the socializing and isn't motivated at all to earn rank. Maybe he'll join the Crew when he's old enough. Older son now has a plan: he wants to earn Life and get more Eagle required badges out of the way and then join the Crew.

I'm sorry for your son's bad experiences. If there was any chance of the Troop improving, then I would suggest taking a vacation from the troop, before making a final decision. But if things are not going to improve, then maybe it is best for both of you to move on. Your son might find he really enjoys Venturing. I know my older son is finally motivated to get going on Boy Scout rank, and than he will also join the Crew.

Good Luck!

I think LisaBob is correct that some Republicans did not vote for president this year. McCain was not the best choice for our party, and I can see some people not voting at all since they wouldn't vote Democrat, but didn't want to support McCain, either.

TwoXForr for president in 2012! Great ideas!

My troop has had to cancel high adventure trips due to not enough "qualified" scouts interested in going. I can understand needing certain skills and experience, but a list of prerequisite merit badges often kept boys away, rather than encouraging them to finish the badges. Recently one of our former scouts was able to go on his first high adventure campout, because now he is a leader and no longer has to worry about the fact that he did not complete certain merit badges.

I want to thank all the men and women who have stayed on in scouting even after their kids have graduated. Those who no longer have kids at home, actually have more time to give. They do not have to run kids to various activities like those of us who still have kids at home. Also, they have years of experience that are an invaluable resource.

That said, as a Mom, I would be a little concerned about men in girl scouting, just because of the stories I have heard. That doesn't mean I wouldn't allow a daughter (if I had one!) to attend scout events with men present, but it does mean I would find out all I could about them. I hate to say it, but even Adam Walsh's dad, John Walsh advises against having male babysitters. Even though 99 percent of men can control themselves around girls (or any children), there is unfortunately, that small percentage (actually I don't know the numbers, I'm just guessing) who seek out childrens' organizations because they are child predators. I'm not saying women can never be child predators, but we all know they are rare.

Okay, men, don't hate me for being cautious. I've always lived under the idea of not putting temptation in your way, if you can help it. I've advised my boys not to date one on one, but rather stay in groups of friends, to help avoid temptations. If I'm trying to lose weight, I don't keep sweets around.

Please don't paint me as man-hater, because I'm not. I love all those wonderful men who give so much of their time to run the scout meetings and events. I would just advise parents to know the leaders, and talk with your kids, to get a feel for what is going on when you aren't there.

And once again, thank you to all you veteran leaders who continue to give your time to scouting.

Getting back to the original post:

If ScoutMomSD's daughter looks like she's 16 or older, maybe these young men were interested in her for more than religious reasons! It's tough having kids who look older than they are. Both of my boys look several years older than their true age. When my older son was just 12 years old, he was asked what kind of car he drove!

I don't see anything wrong with the LDS church giving their support to a political issue.

I also don't see how that reflects on their association with scouts. Now, if these men had been in boy scout uniforms when they approached someone about a political matter, then that woule be wrong.

A couple years ago, while at a Show and Sell with Cub Scouts, 2 young Mormon men approached us and they were very nice and respectful. We enjoyed hearing about the fun they had had when they were Cub Scouts. These men were not pushy at all and I admired them for their dedication to their religion.

I have never had a problem with Mormons who have knocked on my door. They have consistently been polite and respectful as I explain to them that I am secure in my own religion and will not be converting. Now, Jehovah's Witnesses, on the other hand, have sometimes been rude to me when I explained my faith. I made the mistake of being too nice to one J. W. and finally had to be rude after her THIRD unsolicited visit to my house, in less than two weeks! Just saying, "I'm not interested" was not enough. I had to atually say, "Do not come back to my house." I felt bad about having to be rude, but she just wouldn't give up!