scoutldr

I love it when I'm sent scrambling for the Dictionary, but "syaty" is one that even Mr. Webster hasn't heard of. ;-) Yes, Bush did a lot of things that I didn't agree with...starting with invading Iraq. If a country needs "regime change", it's up to that country's citizens to make it happen. As a DOD employee, I can tell you that Rumsfeld was universally hated...he was an idiot and egomaniac. As a scientist, I disagreed with the ban on stem-cell research. What can be wrong with discovering cures for diseases? As a bread-winner, I liked Bush, because DOD spending was high, meaning I had a job. Can't say I will still have one a year from now. As far as Mr. Obama...I am not a liberal in that I espouse personal responsibility. I find "wealth redistribution" to be abhorrent. Giving "tax rebates" to illegals and those who don't pay taxes is idiotic. Call it what it is..."welfare". Giving me a check for $600 didn't stimulate anything, nor will another "one-time" handout. If you want to make me happy, cut my tax rate. Bring back some deductions, such as making medical expenses or loan interest on a new car 100% deductible. Get out of the business of providing millions of $$$ for digital TV converters (sheesh!) and paying price supports for tobacco farmers. Is there no common sense in government any more? I, too, listen to Rush when I can, and he did explain his remarks. He does not agree with Obama's "plan for America" and believes it is wrong. Therefore, he hopes Obama fails in carrying out those plans.

One thing I think needs to be done is to ban pharmceutical advertising of prescription drugs, except to the medical profession. That would free up millions (if not billions) of dollars which could then go to reduced costs to the patient or more R&D. "Ask your Doctor if Levitra is right for you!" BS. Tell you Doc your problem, and let him prescribe. A lot of Docs will prescribe just to make the patient satisfied, whether medically indicated or not (sorry, vol). In Public Heath grad school we learned about a study about health beliefs...a patient's satisfaction after a Doctor visit directly correlates with the number of scrips they walk out with. Another, more recent study showed that not only do placebos make a pt feel better, but the more expensive the placebo, the better they feel. It's human psyche we're battling here. A relative of mine is a good example...she's terminal with advanced COPD, chronic diverticulitis, bronchitis, diabetes, O2 24/7, etc brought on by 60+ years of smoking. But she wants to live forever, no matter what it costs the taxpayers (currently about 10K per month from Medicare, plus 3-4 hospitalizations per year)...but when they charge her a co-pay for drugs she protests mightily how unfair it is, even though she never worked and never paid a dime into the system! She's ENTITLED!

Here's an idea...since his practice of Scouting is more akin to that of a "Lone Scout" I would suggest that he'd be happier being registered as such.

I came to the conclusion long ago that the folks in Irving are not nearly as passionate about proper uniforming as some of us here. As long as they're registered and their check clears, "good to go"! Blue jeans??? Who cares?

It's not right, Mr. Maynard. You and the CC and COR should schedule a meeting with the District Advancement Chair and District Commissioner and request (demand?) some answers. If you and your fellow leaders feel strongly that the scout is being, shall we say, "unethical", then revoke his membership. There is no rule that you, as a volunteer, owe this guy anything. Not sure what you meant by "has his 4 eagle projects for his HD award"...what's an HD award?

How can a scout be awarded more MB and Palms if the unit is not filing Advancement Reports signed by the troop committee? Curious minds want to know. Sounds like fraud to me. I would also wonder if he's using registered MB counselors.

"Plus, as a Christian, I can't really see denying a child care because his parents were stupid, or drunk, or just poor." I don't think anyone of either party has advocated denying care to children. Anyone can stroke a check to the charity or poor family of their choice. Why does the Govt need to be involved, involuntarily seizing the assets of some and giving it to others? If Christians want to be charitable, there's nothing stopping them. How about the Catholic Church, for example...they can set up group health insurance and clinics...heck my wife graduated from a Catholic hospital nursing school run by Nurse-Nuns, which has since closed its doors....why does it have to come from Washington or employers? Let's think outside the box here.

I've never heard of District-level Palm BOR, but I guess it's possible. As far as SMC, I would say NO. By definition, the SMC is with your SCOUTMASTER (or Asst if the SM is your Dad). I don't see any way that can happen without the involvement of the unit and the SM.

When I was Cubmaster, our Pack met in the local elementary school (K-5). As a token of gratitude, I regularly purchased (with my own $$$) the hardcover editions of the various CS and BS handbooks and Fieldbook (when I could get them), put a bookplate in them ("Donated by Pack XX") and donated them to the school library. When we rechartered, I would also add a subscription to Boys' Life for the school library. The librarian told me that they were some of the most checked-out books in the whole library. At one time all the MB pamphlets were available in hardcover library editions. You see them from time to time on Ebay. Thanks for the reminder...I'm no longer CM, but maybe it's time to refresh the library copies with new versions.

My dad passed in 1995 of lung cancer. He was 69...way too young, but the cigarettes caught up with him even though he had quit them years before. He served in submarines in WWII in the Pacific theater. 53 subs were lost to enemy action, and the casualty rate for submariners was 50%. When he died, the Submarine Veterans of WWII came and performed a Submarine Memorial Service and acted as pallbearers. My dad wasn't a "joiner", but his "Shipmates" didn't care. He was one of them and they were there to see him off as he sailed "On Eternal Patrol". Over the years, I think about him every day. I've done some reading, and gone through his pictures and papers. Only by the grace of God am I here writing this today. The hardships and utter terror that those men endured had to have been enormous. He never talked about it much. He was an enlisted man in charge of keeping the diesel engines running. He did his job. Every day. HIS subs always came back. They sank lots of enemy ships and even torpedoed a supply train on a bridge. One of his COs got the Medal of Honor. He didn't get any medals or recognition, but he served proudly. Many of his buddies never came back. I don't have many regrets in my life, but the biggest one is that I won't have an American flag on my casket. While I served the Navy as a civilian for 30 years, I was not eligible for active duty and am not a "shipmate". I am in awe of those who served and am eternally grateful for their sacrifice.

Just make sure you have the approval of your Chartering Organization (CO), so you don't conflict with their plans or policies.

At least he didn't do it in the Oval Office while holding the highest office of the land, lie to the American people on national TV and expect everyone to ignore it as "boys will be boys."

Go to www.grainger.com and search on "thermometer". Lots of choices...should be something there for you. The "panel mount" versions designed to be attached to the wall...perhaps you could permanently mount one to the inside of your chuck box or something.

Check out a vintage copy of the Fieldbook.

The former pros here will chime in, but there is a series of training courses that new DEs have to go to Irving for, at the Council's expense. Not sure about the salaries, but considering the hours they are expected to put in, it's not much.

Yes, thousands of voters will be sorely disappointed when they wake up and realize that they really do have to keep sending in their mortgage payments.

During the campaign, and being a reasonably smart guy, I always wondered how the Obama administration and Democrat congress were going to pay for "universal health care". In a recent edition of the Wall Street Journal (which, I assume 99% of the voters don't read), the details are emerging. It's "health care redistribution". In a nutshell, the proposal, hidden in the $825B stimulus bill, will allocate $1.1B for studies to determine the relative "cost-effectiveness" of various drugs and medical devices, with an eye toward limiting their use to save money. The bill says that the "more expensive" medical products will no longer be prescribed. "The bill gives incoming Health Secretary Tom Daschle wide discretion to set priorities, and he's long advocated a US approach based on the British agency, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Mr. Daschle argues that the only way to reduce spending is to allocate medical products based on "cost effectiveness. He's also called for a "Federal Health Board", modeled on the Federal Reserve to rate medical products and create central controls on access." Article written by Dr. Scott Gottlieb of the American Enterprise Institute. PS: The article was sent to me as a .pdf file, so I can't post the link. If anyone's interested, I'll forward the file by e-mail if you PM me.(This message has been edited by scoutldr)

The DE works for the SE, who is the Chief Operating Officer of the Council. In large councils, there may be intermediate supervisors, such as an Asst SE, Field Director, District Director or Senior DE who give them their daily marching orders and monitor performance toward goals (more units, more members and more money).

BREAKING NEWS: Chief Justice Roberts goes to White House and re-administers Oath of Office to Obama on advice of White House Counsel. Also read that Biden took a cheap shot when administering Oath to White House staffers..saying, "I need a copy of the Oath...my memory's not as good as the Chief Justice." The Prez was not amused, accorging to reporters. Editorial comment: Biden is an idiot.

My 1950's version of a BC is on papyrus...should last longer than I do.

gwd- I didn't say I was a journalist...just that I took a class once. And I don't think of myself as partisan...just objective. Believe it or not, I didn't vote a straight ticket in November. I voted for those who made the most sense to me, my family, my job, and how I think the world should be. Obama did not get my vote. Biden is a buffoon. Bush would not have gotten my vote again, either. Palin was a joke, but I was willing to compromise.

Well stated, Liz.

No animus intended, pack. I wasn't quoting you, but the insinuation that I gleaned from your statement, "Consequently, he was at great needless risk". From that, I assumed you were implying that he could reduce that risk "if he wanted to." I, too, worked with a close friend who weighed significantly more than I do...I would guess close to 400 lbs. Unfortunately, he died two years ago at age 58. He used to tell me, "if it were as simple as knowing what to do, we'd all be thin." I did manage to lose 50 lbs a year ago...I had a raging case of diverticulitis and was on clear liquids for over two months. So I know what works. But as soon as I resumed a "normal" diet (meaning solid food) following surgery, the weight came back with a vengeance. BTW, when I was sick and down to a "normal" weight, all I heard was how sick I looked (sheesh!). Someone posted here not long ago, that smokers have the luxury of quitting cold turkey. Eaters have to "lie down with the devil" every day...we don't have the option of "quitting".

What makes you think his weight was something that he could control, "if he wanted to?" Obesity is a very complex disease comprising an interaction of many physical and mental factors, not the least of which is genetics. The same could be said of smokers. But we look the other way, because, "the poor souls are addicted and they can't help it, and it's really, really hard to quit." BS. I feel the same way toward smokers that other people feel about me..."just quit putting stuff in your face, stupid." Would that it were that simple.

Perhaps more explanation is needed. A scout is not "nominated". The SM is asked by the election team to compile a list of "eligible" scouts, based on Scout Spirit, rank, #of nights camping, etc. It has nothing to do with "desire", however if a scout really does NOT want to be in OA, he can always decline to attend the ordeal. Some do this, however it can be viewed as a huge insult to your troop-mates who have honored you with selection. Then the troop is visited by an election team of OA members, which explains the OA and what the election means. Every scout on the list of eligibles can be elected...or none of them can. To be elected, a scout must have a majority of the votes cast by those casting a ballot. It is not a competition among those eligible. Scouts are to consider each name separately, and, if they feel they are worthy of being chosen (i.e., lives the Scout Oath and Law in daily life, and is an example of "cheerful service"), put a check mark by their name. As I said, they can check ALL the names if they want...or NONE...or any number in between. This is a little different from the OA of OUR youth, where only a certain number could be elected, based on the size of the troop. Is it sometimes a popularity contest? Sure. But in my 30+ years, I have found it rare that the boys make a bad decision.