Kahuna

Certainly it's not always easy, but what I think a strict constructionist would keep in mind in construing "right to bear arms" or "cruel and unusual punishment," or any other part of the Constitution that could conceivably have not taken into account modern developments in weaponry or modern sensitivity to some types of punishment is: Is this not an issue that can be dealt with by the States? Do we need to set in stone a rule of law that will govern the entire nation? and If the people of the United States feel strongly enough about this issue, will they not amend the Constitution to make it law? Until that point, they needn't split hairs to decide whether a firearm means a flintlock. A strict constructionist will err on the side of the rights of the people and the States to decide.

I agree with Semper Paratus. A DE can only do so much for your unit, and usually only when there's serious trouble. The volunteers can do it all (after all, that's how Scouting started in most communities).

I'm pretty sure the Republicans are spoiling for a fight with the Democrats. I'm also pretty sure the Democrats, who have been acting like a bunch of spoiled brats, IMHO, will get their noses rubbed in it. The Republicans are in power, like it or not, and the Democrats aren't. I, for one, would like an unbiased justice and I think it's entirely possible. As a lawyer, for instance, my own view is that Roe v. Wade is bad law. I cannot find anything in the Constitution that would support taking that decision away from the States. Personally, I like the law the way it is and believe it has saved a great deal of legislative boondoggling over the years. However, if I had been on the Court, I would have not voted with the majority in that case. That's what's meant by judicial restraint. You can decide based on what you believe the law is, not what it should be. (The above is not intended to start a discussion about Roe v. Wade, but just to illustrate that it is possible to choose constitutionality over personal feelings.)

I could see no reason that Harriet Miers should not be confirmed and see none why Alito shouldn't be. I only care that they be able and willing to read and interpret the Constitution according to its obvious meaning and intent. I'm not entirely sure how I feel about the filibuster rules, but two observations: it's my understanding they only want to change the rules as they apply to "advise and consent," and also it's my understanding that filibusters have not been used in the past for these type of confirmations. That said, I'm sure what you say is true, the time will come when Republicans will be the damaged party. However, I've never been a big fan of the filibuster anyway. I don't know of any case where it's been used to the benefit of the country (althought I confess I've not researched it much).

My thoughts on this: Are there other places where you could do the fundraiser? A lot of shopping centers will let Scouts set up in their parking lots. It's a way of sidestepping the issue and wouldn't accomplish all you wish, but your CO sounds like it has an element in it that's going to give you trouble in the future. It's hard to see the connection between a fundraiser for kids and the money changers in the Temple, so it sounds like something else is going on. I would also point out that, although the church technically owns all troop equipment, if you and the SM have paid for this stuff out of your own pocket and have not raised money from the church or in the name of the troop, it would be hard for them to stand up to pressure about the fairness of letting you take the equipment to your new sponsor, if you decide to move.

Wow, anti-Bush people, don't hold back your feelings - just let it all out! With all due respect, like most vehement anti-Bush people, you guys are just reading a bit too much into the situation. The Bush administration is not on the verge of a nervous breakdown and few, if any, members are going to be hauled off in cuffs. Sorry. The administration made what appears to be a major gaff in appointing Miers, although there are those who speculate it was a more devious plan. In any event, this did not go nearly as badly as the Bork fiasco under Reagan or some of the other gaffs from previous administrations. They certainly were able to neatly side-step with the "document release" issue as a hook. As to the VP being charged, I don't know anyone who is talking about that, except maybe Al Franken and Michael Moore. If Libby is charged, it's no reflection on the President and even if Rove gets indicted (which I personally doubt) it doesn't mean the President is without a brain. No doubt Rove has contributed a lot to the political savy of the administration, but I think Bush is smart enough to make his own decisions. I've seen the websites before with the "Bush is Toast" headlines over practically every issue since his first inauguration. Sorry, guys, you just aren't being very realistic. End of anti-anti-Bush rant.

Aloha Council has one of the oldest Scouting expos in the country. It's called Makahiki (means something like "annual") and held at a convention center downtown. Lots of units participate and lots of people come out to see it, although I imagine most are parents and family of Scouts. All kinds of booths: games, monkey bridges, Hawaiian food making, merit badges, a huge Pinewood Derby venue. It's a lot of fun and a pretty good fundraiser.

Both sides seem to dislike her. You know, they say the best bargain or settlement is usually the one that leaves both sides dissatisfied. Maybe the same applies here.

You might also just low key ask the CO to let you distribute the assets to the packs the boys have joined. If you don't make a big deal out of it and if there aren't thousands of dollars involved (if there are, you need a lawyer like me - please email me privately )the CO is really not going to care. I would not take time to explain the rules and regulations to them, they can read them if they wish. Worst case scenario is 1-the council gets the stuff or 2-the CO keeps it in a storage room until some future janitor throws it out.

I don't think most of the opposition to Miers is worth a hill of beans. Obviously, Bush knows her pretty well and understands her legal views. Some might call it cronyism, but why did JFK select Bobby to be his Atty General? He knew what the guy would do. I do agree that the more liberals who don't like her, the better I like her , but I think the conservatives are just being jerks. Nobody ever knows what a justice will do after being on the Court for a few years. The rarified air in those chambers have a way of doing things to people. All I care about in a justice is an ability to read the plain language of the U.S. Constitution (most of them can't) and try to determine what a law means rather than what they think it should be (most of them don't).

With all due respect to Eamonn, I take strong exception that the money was raised in the name of the CO. Most people who go to a Scout fundraiser and get a car washed or buy a Christmas tree only see the BSA strip on the uniform or the sign. They are not thinking of the Last Baptist Church, the CO of the unit, even if the car wash is in the church parking lot. There are other legal issues as well. Notwithstanding the BSA/CO relationship, there are state laws that govern what a non-profit corporation can do with monies and assets. In most cases they would not be able to do anything other than use it for the intended purpose or give it to another non-profit organization. Again, I strongly recommend non-profit 501©(3) corporations for large troops, or even packs, to hold their equipment. Of course, it is true that most packs don't have much in the way of equipment. I had to change sponsors a time or two and only one of them knew that they really owned the equipment. The others I just got a written consent to the change. The latter required showing written documentation as to who actually owned the equipment, which was the corporation, not the church.

Aloha Kakou, Novice CM! Same thing could be said of the tribes living on the mainland when the Pilgrims showed up! Actually, the direct Kamehameha line had died out long before the fall of the Kingdom of Hawai'i, so it probably wouldn't be a Kamehaha.

Constitutionally, it really isn't clear whether the founders intended to gives states the ability to secede. Logically, if you can join something voluntarily, you can leave it voluntarily, but there are lots of issues that arise out of that. Anyway, the country fought a war in the 1860's to establish that seceded states could be brought back by force. I think that applies to both South Carolina and Hawai'i.

It's my understanding that, no matter how the equipment or accounts are titled, they actually belong to the CO. If you shut down, they get it. If you move sponsors, they have to approve the transfer. That's why, in my later years, I created a non-profit 501©(3)corporation to control the money and the equipment. The equipment was leased to the troop for use at $1.00 a year.

Not mine, but a fellow DE back in the early seventies was assigned a new district. One of his first jobs was speaking at the district annual dinner. He got up to go the the mens and when he returned, looked down to see, to his horror, he had left his fly opened. He very stealthily zipped it back. Shortly thereafter, he was introduced, stood up and the whole table cloth, zipped into his fly, came up with him. Actually worked to his advantage. Everybody was sympathetic to him for months.

I agree training and resources are important. However, troop meetings are one of the hardest parts of Boy Scouting to make work. I think the keys area: Short (it's easy to fill 2 hours with stuff, 1 or 1 1/2 requires thought) Divided into several periods (kids have short attention spans) Minimal lecturing from the front (Doesn't do any good, kids tune you out) Keep patrols together and PL's responsible for their conduct (Boy run) Have some goals and objectives that fit into your program theme for the month (Preferably something fun) Some time for play or fun activities (Got to burn off some energy) You can never have too much fun during troop meetings - you can squeeze a lot of learning into fun activities. The point about boy run vs boy led is key. The SM and the SPL should work hand in hand (well, not literally under YP) and be on the same page as to what the troop will accomplish in the meetings.

I talk with an accent!! Or do Americans speak English with an American accent? I don't know, but if I spend a few weeks in the U.K., I come home talking like a Brit. F'rinstance, I can only say the British "halph" for "half" instead of our "haff." It's a very easy accent to pick up. I could never convince people in the U.K. that I sounded much like one of them, though. Anyway, you guys are not suspect, 'cause we can understand most of what you say.

So how many Americans does anyone know, that when travelling in a non-English speaking country, speak in the host country's language for the benefit of those that don't speak English? It's not the same thing at all. We have many Japanese, Germans and other tourists here and in Florida that obviously don't speak English comfortably. While it's true that more foreigners speak English than Americans speak other languages, you can tell the difference between foreign tourists and people who live here who just choose to speak Spanish or some other language among themselves. It is rude and that's all it is. If I travel in a foreign country I try to learn enough of their language to get around, but have no hesitation in speaking English when it's available. If I moved to a foreign country, I would learn to speak their language and would not speak English in my office or other peoples homes unless everyone was English speaking.

You know, 'Kahuna' would be a great name for a hurricane. I don't know. It wouldn't be politically correct in the Pacific, where a Kahuna is a priest and probably wouldn't make the list in the Atlantic. Does have a nice ring to it though, "Hurricane Kahuna."

I have nothing against immigrants, people speaking foreign languages (although it's very rude to speak foreign languages among ourselves when we know there are people who don't understand what we are saying in offices and close spaces like elevators) or people of other religions. I am a member of a non-Christian religious minority myself. I do find that multi-culturalism and "diversity" (nothing wrong with diversity itself, it's just the idea that we can't function without a representation of everything in all activities) are divisive in this day of constant victimhood that our nation is engaged in. I think along with the isolation (cocooning) in which people seal themselves in their air-conditioned, heated homes nowadays that we are becoming more factionalized.

I must say that in more than 40 years as a leader, during the turbulent 60's, 70's and so on, I never encountered flag burning (other than retirement ceremonies) in or out of Scouting. I'm just not sure it's much of a problem. On the other hand, I should point out that kids in homes, schools and Scout troops enjoy a somewhat limited Constitutional protection when it comes to free speech.

1-Woodbadge (Philmont, 1968), for the same reason as John-in-KC. The old WB wasn't as skill effective as the current one, but did a tremendous job of motivating us and creating real realiance on our patrol members. 2-Seabadge (SE Region 1997). A great education in Sea Scouting packed into a 21/2 day experience. As a Sea Scout ignoramus at that time, it was wonderful to have all these experienced guys giving us the benefit of their knowledge. And to a lesser extent, Seabadge Staff in 2002. Bonding with the other staff, some the same ones who taught me years before and learning my stuff as a watch advisor caused me to really review all the good stuff I knew and forgot. All were, as we used to say, "mountaintop experiences."

You can do that, yes, as long as they are different units. Otherwise it would be like being your own grandpa. Whether it's a good idea is a different story. Assuming the troop will have a different committee and chair than the pack, the only thing you need to work out is whether you can physically do both jobs. Some could, some couldn't. Also depends, I guess, on how much of a job your pack chair one is. I have no idea. That's one of the things I've never done. I know being an SM is pretty much a full time job. I could never even manage to do it when I had an "honest" job at work.

I think BadenP pretty much got it. Generally, unless there is some real violation to hang the guy on, it's better to let him serve his time, work around him as much as possible and the DE had durn sure better be sure the SE is backing him before he does anything drastic. One of my district chairman was the one from hell. Got so bad we had a shouting match at a district camporee in front of other volunteers. Not a good situation (I was a lot younger, you know). But we managed to hold it together until his term was up. He committed suicide some years later. A miserable man, apparently.

(Bagpipes playing Amazing Grace in background) I didn't see much in this thread at the start, but I'm finding it increasingly illuminating.