sherminator505

Another knot. Great. Swell.

Wood Badge as it exists today is not about the beads. It is about National's stubborn and mistaken belief that all Scouters should have the same capstone course.

I'm not closed minded, just cynical. I'll grant that there is a lot of lefty "news" out there as well, and I put just as much stock in that stuff. The problem here is that we are treated to this drama masquerading as news, with one slant or t'other, while important facts and details are entirely left out of the narrative. So there really is no "white knight" in journalism on the TV. You have to dig for the truth. As for "perfectly balanced," consider a man with one foot in a bucket of scalding hot water and the other in a bucket of ice. On average, the temperature of the buckets is

"HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF THE CO HAVING THE RIGHT TO USE THE PROGRAM HOW THEY SEE FIT. IT WOULD STAND TO REASON THAT A CO MIGHT HAVE TO ESTABLISH SOME GUIDELINES A LONG THE WAY. THINK OF IT AS UNIT BYLAWS." I think some of us would feel better about what y'all are doing over there if you weren't so insistent on how we are allowed to do things over here. Just sayin'. BTW, there is really no need to yell. We can hear you just fine.

I would try to find a better source of objective information than Fox News.

"I didn't support him, but I think he has far from failed. I think he's done way too much, and honestly, I don't think that his leadership will serve the country well in the future." Funny, I would describe our previous President in EXACTLY the same terms.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

To be fair, Reagan also set the precedent for runaway deficit spending based on the erroneous belief that deficits don't matter AND ALSO began the paradigms of declining real wages and deregulation of trade that has led to the loss of our manufacturing base, but I digress... Obama has probably met or exceeded every realistic expectation that was placed on him. What he has failed at is living up to the expectations of the liberals who expected more than he ever promised or campaigned on. As for conservatives, they will never be happy with him. He failed to "play ball" the way Clinton

I'm not just talking about looks. We have a crop of politicians right now who are completely absorbed with "selling themselves" to the public via mass media. Unfortunately, to garner the funding necessary to do this, they must "sell themselves" to corporations and other large entities. Those who do this best get elected. The problem is that the skill set required to get elected is very different from the skill set required to govern effectively. That is why we really haven't had a truly great President since Ike, and why Congress seems to be truly inept at this point in time!

Actually, you can trace the problem back much farther than that. On September 26, 1960, Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy squared off in the first-ever televized presidential debate. This event forever altered how we select leaders in this country, and the quality of our leadership has steadily declined as a result. Now we have potential presidential candidates entertaining us on TV. I find this sad, but not surprising.(This message has been edited by sherminator505)

"Those who know what's best for us must rise and save us from ourselves!" - N. Peart

"I see Gern and sherm, et al, are back to the ad hominum attacks. No arguments of substance?" I fail to see who I attacked. I pointed out that if past history is any guide, that whoever Palin picked as her running mate would have a significant influence on her candidacy. Bear in mind that she did resign as governor without finishing her term, and a precedent has been set. Now if you don't like to hear that, JoeBob, then by all means feel free to dismiss it as an "ad hominum attack," if that makes you feel better. BTW, California begins with a "C," if you are any student of geography

To think about Sarah as a presidential candidate, you really have to consider who she picks as a veep candidate, because that's who your President would be come 2014 or so, if history is any guide...

I don't believe that the Tea Party is racist. I have observed that it is based in anger and negativity, and that is the playground on which the racists romp, so it is understandable that the racists among us would gravitate in that direction. The problem with the Tea Party is that it is rooted in negativity. They concentrate on stopping the practices they believe won't help the country, but they offer little in regard to practices that would help. This is why they are influentual now, but probably won't last through the decade,

I'm surprised.

"I was pulling for Obama to win the Democrat nomination, thinking there was no way that empty suit could win the presidency." Given what happened in this country from 2001 through 2008, am I the only one who sees the irony in this statement?! And why are we seeing so much loathing for someone who is supposedly an "empty suit" who is simultaneously a communist, a socialist, radical Black Christian, a secret Muslim, and a child born in Kenya whose grandparents had the incredible insight to post a fake birth notice in a Honolulu newspaper when he was six days old and who is bent on destroyin

The LDS units call themselves Scouts and Scouters and use the BSA's uniforms and insignia. Our congressional charter states that only Scouts and Scouters use the BSA's uniforms and insignia. Further, the LDS has an enormous sway in BSA policy areas despite their insistence that the BSA allow the "local option" for them in areas of their choosing. Therefore, what the LDS units are doing must be Scouting, right?!

"This is a center-right country." No, it's not. Repeating that mantra ten thousand times will not make it true.

This is reminiscient of what happened in 1946 when President Truman lost both houses of Congress. Maybe this will be helpful, as the goings on in Congress will remind voters why they voted the way they did in 2008...

Wait for it...

Gern, you're thinking about chocolate cream pie! No, wait. That's me...

Wait for it...

You haven't driven us out yet, Woapalanne. Don't kid yourself.

"Scouting's main constituency in the US is what? Fairly conservative types, among parents and adults, no?" NO!

"Limiting the number of campouts the new scout patrol can do is no different than a unit limiting the type of camping/activity the new scout patrol can do, because of experience." I would argue that there is a world of difference there. I would agree with the notion that a new scout patrol probably isn't up to a Philmont trek, but I find that new scouts tend to stay more engaged when they get out as often as possible.

I think that part of the problem here is that we non-LDS Scouters know much less about LDS Scouting than we'd like. The perception that I have is that of a somewhat withdrawn, self-segregated group within Scouting that I learn about mainly through isolated encounters with LDS Scouters. While I certainly realize that this is not the best way to form a perception, it's usually all I have to work with. Is this perception common, and if so how might it be countered?