Hunt

When you say "crew" do you mean a Venturing Crew, or do you mean you intend to sign him up as an Assistant Scoutmaster? If you plan to sign him up as an ASM in the Troop, he is an adult, just as you are. If it's a Venturing Crew, the Guide to Safe Scouting clearly prohibits smoking by youth members. But I've gotta ask you, what makes you think he's less addicted than you are?

"If I wish to play football, then surly I must adhere to the rules. It would be a little pointless if I decided that I did not want to be tackled and on that basis insist that the rules be changed." The youth sports leagues that my kids have played in have changed their rules numerous times.

"It is easy to stand in opposition to abortion until your 14 year old daughter comes home and tells you that she is pregnant." It is also easy to oppose torture until you capture the guy who knows where the bomb is planted. Notice that opponents of both torture and stem cell research will spend a great deal of time arguing that those practices will not (or may not) save lives after all, when that's not their real objection to them. Do you think that most opponents of stem cell research would change their position if it could be clearly proven that it would save lives? Ditto for oppone

Christian conservatives have been complaining about the failure of the Republican leadership to actively pursue social issues: Here's a few relevant references: http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040219-115609-3712r.htm http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/100206F.shtml http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52958 (this one says the leaders haven't been economically conservative, either) I don't know if Republicans promised to overturn don't ask/don't tell, but I don't think conservative Christians support that policy. Oh, yeah, Harriet Miers was another example of t

In the debate over torture, one side of the debate says that torture is absolutely wrong and can never be justified. The other side says that torture (or torture-like alternative methods) can be justified in some situations because the information obtained can save lives. For stem cell research, one side says that stem cell research is absolutely wrong (i.e. because it's like abortion), and the other side says that it can save lives. I guess my view is that "it can save lives" is not ultimately persuasive in either case, at least until you discuss whether there is a moral absolute involved

It occurred to me that the same arguments are being made with respect to these two issues, but from different sides. One side argues that the practice should be prohibited as a moral absolute, and the other side argues that the practice should be allowed because it has the potential to save lives. This makes these issues different from something like the minimum wage, where is seems that most of us are willing to argue about what is the most effective method for improving the economy and the situation of the lowest-paid workers. It's also different from something like flag-burning, wher

"By contrast, the Republicans have done little to deliver to the social conservatives to whom they pandered to get elected." As I think more about this, I don't want to overstate it...there have been a few things. I think Reagan was a much bigger culprit on this. Still, the Republicans didn't overturn the don't ask, don't tell policy, they haven't returned prayer to the schools, and they haven't done much about abortion. I think the partial-birth abortion ban is only symbolic, and is likely to get struck down anyway. I would also refer to the most extreme pandering case, which was Bi

Well, where I vote, the limit is clearly marked, and there are a bunch of people electioneering right outside it. There is no way to get to the polls without going through them. Note that I, like Ed, didn't say they were too close to the polls, so there is nothing to report. I agree with Ed that I find them annoying, just as I'm annoyed by anyone who puts himself in my way trying to push ideas I don't care for.

"Democrats have always pandered to the poor. They have convinced the poor that they need the Democrats in power to help them survive. That only the government can help them take care of themselves and their families. This is common knowledge." I would argue that one difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats generally deliver to the masses to whom they pandered--thus, the Dems will pass an increased minimum wage. By contrast, the Republicans have done little to deliver to the social conservatives to whom they pandered to get elected. This is common knowle

"So if I read this correctly, as you see it, the red wool jacket with the official BSA patch on the pocket manufactured by Bemidji Woolen Mills and sold at Northern Tier, a national high adventure base of the BSA, doesn't qualify as "official" simply because it's not sold through BSA distribution?" To slice this even thinner, it seems to me that the Northern Tier jacket is clearly "scout-related," just as a T-shirt you might buy at summer camp is. Certainly it's OK to wear it. But perhaps it is not "the" red wool jac-shirt referred to in the Insignia Guide. The question, then, would be

"I'd suppose that a group that excluded Jews would also be barred if there was an issue involving Jews on the ballot, no matter how much the supporters of the "no Jews allowed" club thought it was a minor aspect of their private, discriminatory club." Although I like my examples better, since they are closer to reality, I take it from your response that you would favor excluding the Knights of Columbus if an issue "involving Jews" was on the ballot? Knights of Columbus is also a private, discriminatory club (you have to be a Catholic man to belong--I guess they would accept a Jew who bec

"Hunt, the scouts only had to move for this election because there was a gay-connected issue on the ballot, and the scouts are (now) publically perceived as being officially anti-gay, so their presence by a polling place raised electioneering concerns. There's no general ban on charity drives near polling places, just organizations that are overtly political, like the Boy Scouts now are." But surely even you must recognize that this is a ridiculously broad definition of "overtly political." As far as I know, BSA has never endorsed any candidates, or taken any position on electoral issues

Does this mean that any charitable group with any identifiable position on any issue would be electioneering just by being present to collect food for a food drive? Actually, as I think about this, maybe just having a food drive is electioneering, since concerns about poverty and hunger are so clearly associated with one of the political parties, right? The whole thing is pretty silly. I don't consider it a big deal if they want charitable groups to be 100 feet from the polls to avoid voters having to run the gantlet, or because the groups might engage in electioneering. It's pretty far-f

"Lieberman already said he will caucus with the dems. In fact, I expect him to be brought back into the party and his seniority honored with a nice committee position." I think this has already happened or is about to happen.

I agree that the election was not a triumph of liberalism--the Democrats very shrewdly ran moderate candidates in order to capture the middle. It will be interesting to see whether both parties learn from this both in governing and in running candidates next time. It could be very good news for McCain, and I think you'll be amazed at just how moderate Hillary Clinton is for the next couple of years. But I think the election did show that trying to counter the Democrats by tarring them as liberals did not work. The Republicans seemed to think that the idea of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker would

What irked me about Bush's speech accepting Rumsfeld's resignation was his statement that he had planned to replace Rumsfeld, win or lose. Can't the guy stop lying for five minutes? As far as bipartisanship, I think the Democrats will do whatever they think is most likely to help them take back the White House in 2008. If they decide to do that they need to look reasonable, bipartisan, etc., that's what they'll do. If they think it would be better to drag all the Republican scandals out and to force Bush to veto a bunch of legislation, that's what they'll do.

"For Packsaddle, FB, Hunt, BadenP and the rest of you liberals, I'm sure your vast and significant amount of military tactical and strategic experience would be greatly appreciated in Washington right about now. " Well, maybe we should offer our services...we couldn't do much worse than Rumsfeld did. And Gonzo, I hate to break it to you, but as of Tuesday, I don't think "liberal" is a dirty word any more.

This is a situation in which I believe the rules do not adequately deal with the reality, which is that boys turn 18 at different times during, after, or even before their senior year in high school, and while boys are in high school their grade is much more important than their age. Especially if the boy is going on to college, it isn't really practical to turn him into an adult leader for his last few months in the troop. I agree that under the rules you must register him as an adult, and you must ensure that he no longer tents with youth members, but I don't believe it is realistic or nec

"Not sure why Hunt thinks the Boy Scout memorial is weird. I thought it was very interesting; it is near the White House ellipse." Well, it would not have occurred to me to include a huge naked man in a Boy Scout memorial--I understand that it symbolizes "manhood," but it still strikes me as a little strange. I agree with oldsm that the Museum of the American Indian wouldn't be much fun if it was very crowded. I forgot to mention the National Zoo, which is quite good and can be reached by Metro from the Mall. (Riding Metro itself may be an attraction for some people.)

"I guess the pictures (from the liberal media) of Iraqis cheering the recent sentence in Saddam's trial aren't real?" Well, the Shiites were cheering--the Sunnis, not so much. It was the administration's inability to understand distinctions like that that has contributed to the situation in Iraq now. In this respect, Iraq is not so much like Vietnam as it is like the former Yugoslavia, where the end of a dictatorship allowed old rivalries to reemerge, leading to awful bloodshed.

"One way we get beat this "torture" thing is to kill them all on the battlefield, you know, take no prisoners." I'm still confused--which approach are you saying is more in tune with Christian values?

It is pretty cool, but I have a few reservations. First, it costs money, as opposed to the museums of the Smithsonian, which are all free. I would certainly recommend the Air and Space Museum over the Spy museum, for example. Also, the Spy Museum is a little corny and commercial--my wife's comment was that it really belongs in Orlando. Alternative suggestions: Air and Space and Natural History museums--both have IMAX movies (which do cost money) If you have wheels, the Udvar-Hazy center near Dulles airport--also part of the Air and Space Museum--is really awesome (although you have to

BrentAllen writes: We haven't been attacked by terrorists since 9/11 Furthermore, haven't we been told repeatedly that the insurgents killing US troops on an almost daily basis in Iraq and Afghanistan are terrorists? I think perhaps what Brent doesn't get is that Bush and has crew don't make many Americans feel good about themselves or their country, but the contrary--they make me feel disgusted and ashamed. Clinton was no saint, but compared to Bush he's a superstar. I can understand how Republicans are nostalgic for Reagan, who did have a peculiar ability to make people feel go

"I am however for extracting information that will save Americans lives. I think it should be OK to tinker with the clock, make some one think it's a different time of day. Play loud Barry Manilow music, rock music, light or sound deprivation, etc. Even scare tactics with dogs. I'm opposed to turning the dogs loose on the enemy. Even the waterboard should be allowed." So you're OK with this as an international standard--meaning it would be OK for enemy countries to do this to U.S. soldiers in wartime? I'm really at my wit's end trying to figure out how anybody who is a member of the par

When I saw the story about this, I had to read it a couple of times before I could believe it was true. I showed it to my wife and said THIS is why people should be voting the Republicans out of office; not all this tangential stuff. "Bush says we don't torture. We don't. End of story." Wow.