JoeBob

Apologies, Bacchus. I'm not a registered member, either. When I first hit the link, it was free and open. No longer. Reckon there was a bit of traffic?

Business has a choice. They can leave: "3M chief warns Obama over business regulation" 27 Feb 2011 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bd9b4100-429b-11e0-8b34-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1FHB4QSBr Who you gonna tax when all the rich people are gone?

Apply the lesson New York has learned to the US as a whole. Study dated February 2011. "Between 1998 and 2008, a net total of more than 1.7 million New Yorkers chose to relocate, taking with them their wealth and talent... A significant portion of the relocation from New York was to Florida and Texas, two states with no state or local income taxes, a very low cost of living, and a reasonable and predictable regulatory environment in which to conduct business." http://pfnyc.org/reports/2011-Personal-Income-Tax.pdf

Baden P - Thanks for the link. I followed it to: http://www.woodbadge.org/ticket.html After reading that, any second thoughts about my ever attending WB21C are GONE! I am not a Woodbadger. In fact, I'll do BSA a favor and stay away. Stercus Tauri!

HICO, I'm in the same boat as you. 1- I'm NOT going to be a lifetime Scouter. a- When my youngest boy ages out in 9 years, I'll be done. b- Folks who are scout leaders with no children in scouts are a little creepy... c- I had a life before kids and am looking forward to getting back into the woods alone! d- I'm too stingy with my time to fritter it perpetuating a cult from Irwin, TX. (My basest impression of WB21C is that it's national's method of keeping a no-cost work force dedicated to high FOS numbers.) 2- Every time I've been approached to attend WB21C, the recruiter has failed to close the deal because of the mysterious curriculum. You've got to show me a concrete syllabus. Mind games are a negative. 3- Based on what I've been able to glean about WB21C, there is a very good chance that the program would shorten my tenure as a Scouter. 4- Posts like acco's "So, you have no interest in learning about troop meetings, PLC meetings..." strongly reinforce my negative impression. This is my attitude now. Perhaps I should wait for WB22C.

OGE - Thank you for tempering my passion. I probably should have written it out - "Where's The Funds ?" But I admit that I was playing at double entendre... Sorry. JoeBob

Scoutfish - Greed is good - according to Labot Union negotiators, who have inflated their members compensation to TWICE what the free market proves they are worth: http://www.examiner.com/progressive-politics-in-national/big-three-labor-costs-compared-to-average-manufacturing Textile manufacturing in the US died as the result of: Environmental restrictions OSHA safety Laws Lawyers Labor Unions Insurance Workers Compensation Insurance FICA Granted, a little bit of each of the above is a good thing. But Americans have gone overboard on Cradle to Grave regulation. Only a BAD CEO would keep his business in the US.

When LisaBob said: "Some parents do not want to discuss this sort of issue with a 6 year old. I can sympathize with that. Consequently I would take an approach similar to that described by Mrw1 earlier in the thread. There is no way in the world that I would instead choose to have that discussion with the child in place of his parents doing it.", she was describing me as a parent and a leader. 1- My son wasn't ready in the early weeks of 1st grade to comprehend the sexual predator talk. We worked it in gradually over a couple of years. 2- Our parents spend a good deal of time and money to protect their children from the degenerate element in our society. They would rather drop scouting than be forced to scare the _____ out of their kids that young. Once the kids start to venture out of the parish for basketball games, etc; and are no longer under the direct supervision of a parent or trusted adult, then the sexual predator talk becomes relevant. (in 3rd grade...) (Yes, we're a Catholic school. You think we don't watch those priests?)

57 posts teeing up a liberal topic, and no Gern? Hmm... I see that Merlyn has checked in, so who else is missing that has the ability to hoist this in our midst? JoeBob - aka - Troll Hunter

Irony: Egyptian ElBaradei was the UN's weapons inspector when he won his Nobel laureate. Now he's the most probable replacement for Mubarack.

FDR's promises to get SS set up: 1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary. No longer Voluntary 2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program, Now 7.65% on the first $90,000 - Strike that! NOW (5.65% plus the employers' 7.65%) $106,800 for 2011. 3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year. No longer tax deductible. 4.) That the money the participants put into the independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program. Under Johnson the money was moved to The General Fund and Spent. 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed Under Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party, immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away! (OGE here, sorry such acronyms are not scouting appropriate even in the politics sections, even if I agree with the post, good points JoeBob Only in a society under the sway of a purposefully ignorant media... (This message has been edited by a staff member.)

Two wrongs don't make a right. But three rights make a left.

ScoutNut: Be nice! Hendricks: I can think of a BSA groups who would not want to liase with a girls group, and a few girls groups (GSA ?) who would resent the attention to another paramour. Women, you can't win. Wasn't it on this forum that I read the following question: "If a married man speaks while he is alone in the woods, is he still wrong?"

The Egyptian riots this morning are being credited to Facebook and Twitter. It seems that if you have internet access, you can communicate en masse. A small uprising can be contained by the forces of government. A co-ordinated mass uprising is bigger than govt can handle. The truth? On the internet? I refuse to relegate Julian Assange as the arbiter of truth...

Our Pack has a married COR and CC, and it works great. Signatures are easy to get. Decisions are made quickly. The COR is is almost always present at pack events. They have multiple sons and a resulting very defininitive interest in the long term health of our pack. Perhaps some of the packs you're concerned about should not have been started in the first place? Was someone under presure to increase their numbers, no matter how? Nah... That would never happen. Sorry.

Back to the original post - Why? Because the scout skills you teach your boys may keep them alive. The tempermant and patriotic inspirations learned in scouting tends to make a larger share of our alums join the military. Being sneaky in the woods may help a young man get through Ranger school. Wilderness first aid may keep a buddy alive until a medevac arrives. Survival skills will certainly help in a possible evade and escape scenario. Tracking skills will help a soldier leave no trace for his enemies to follow. I could go on, but you get the drift. I was certainly a better soldier because I was a scout. (Okay, part of it was the Southern Redneck thing. But Scouting honed that.) If my influence on the quality of our program keeps one former scout alive in the future, I guess I'll just have to put up with whining parents and pompous arses.

The Pack may do the sames things repetitively, but the Dens don't. Each year is new to the boys. Webelos even have a new advancement protocol and Den camping. The fact that some things are repeated should lend a level of comfort to scouts working on new, more challenging projects, and add to Pack Retention. Besides, the things that you are doing for the third or fourth time, you ought to be doing well! As opposed to muffing some new idea that no one understands...

Check out the second entry "I would so drive that..." http://www.youputrimsonthat.com/page/3/ That's a Star Wars Geek who put his money where his brain was... Or his hyperdrive.

So, a Pack or a Troop requires Two Deep Leadership; and a Patrol should be Zero Deep Leadership. Got it! ;O)

A resource for Pack Level games. Here's what I'm using now: http://www.inquiry.net/outdoor/games/wide/index.htm

Surprizingly enough, pea shooting was covered in my BSA archery course! Pea shooters and Slingshots were given as indoor alternatives in case of inclement weather. Inhaling peas as a choking hazard were warned against. (Heimlich, anyone?) Dry dog food and popcorn kernels were suggested ammo for slingshots. Hanging pie tins make good targets for both.

Rockford - If one scout goes with the leader, that creates 1 to 1 after they lose the injurred scout and return to camp.

Openning Scenario: Camping trip, state park. 30 minutes from hospital. 3 hours from home. 2 leaders. 6pm, dusk. Scout A gashes his hand. First aid applied. Bleeding slowed, but not stopped. Closing Scenario One: Everybody piles into cars immediately and heads to the emergency room where they all stand around until Scout A's parents arrive 2 and a half hours later. Then the scouts return to camp in the dark, at midnight, to see if their camping gear is still where they abandoned camp 4 hours ago. Closing Scenario Two: Everybody takes the time to breakdown camp and then head out to the ER. Camping trip is over. Additional hour delay in getting to ER caused by breaking down camp will reduce chances of full-recovery for injured scout. Closing Scenario Three: One leader rushes injured scout to ER, and returns to camp 4 hours later. Remaining leader stays with the campers and avoids 1 to 1 contact during that time. Anyone care to argue that Closing Scenario Three is not the best possible outcome? No policy should ever cause you to endanger the life of limb of a scout in your care. Is common sense really that uncommon?

With a plywood two-lane track, there is a very real chance that one lane is faster the other. So it becomes critical that every race is run twice in different lanes: Racer A in Lane 1 vs. Racer B in Lane 2 Racer B in Lane 1 vs. Racer A in Lane 2 or your results will be invalid. Add a loser's bracket, and every car must race four times. I don't have a suggestion for what happens when the cars split races - ie Racer A wins in Lane one and Racer B wins in Lane one...

OGOwl - ROFLMAO! Regarding Bears on Camping trips: "The Montana FWP recommends carrying bear bells and pepper spray when you go hiking in the woods to warn the bears in the area of your presence. That way you let them know your coming so they don't get startled. The also have some pictures on their website showing the difference between black bear and grizzly scat so you can identify what kind of animals are around you in the woods. Basically, the difference is the black bear scat looks like regular bear scat with berry seeds and twigs, while the grizzly bear scat has little bells in it and it smells like hot peppers!!!!" Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/montana/474680-difference-between-black-bear-scat-grizzly.html#ixzz1AyrAaC1Y