Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for May, 2013

I’ve never been a fan of the Boy Scouts.  My father was a scout leader when he was young, my  husband was also a scout.  Both of my boys have been scouts and I have been a cub scout leader, thanks to the church to which I go, on multiple occasions.  While I can see some benefit in the organization for boys, especially boys whose fathers are absent or neglectful, I find myself uncomfortable with SOME “devoted” leaders within the program.  They become too involved, too invested, becoming that person who “knows how the program is supposed to work and you’re not doing it right”.   That said there are opportunities for boys to lead, which they get no where else in this society but the one up mans ship and pressure that accompanies these things can be difficult for some boys and parents to swallow.

The one thing that I could never fault the organization on, in the twenty years I’ve been exposed to it, is their insistence in obeying the scout law and oath.

Scout Oath

On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

Scout Law

A Scout is:
Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful,
Friendly, Courteous, Kind,
Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty,
Brave, Clean, Reverent

I copied this from the Boy Scout of America web site so this is their official declaration to the world, as it were. While the goals are laudable, it seems the coursing and cancer that affects our society has finally worked it’s way into this venerated organization.

Yesterday the Boy Scouts of America, modeled after the organization begun by Robert Baden-Powel (1st Baron Baden-Powell) in Britain in 1908, voted to allow openly gay boys to participated in it’s program.  Other changes through the years were developed in order to address the issues of race, a place for younger boys and activities for older boys, which were in line with both the Scout Oath and the Scout law.  Yesterday’s vote however, flies in the face of the words and intention of the scout oath.  I would guess that with in short order a new oath will be unveiled. One more in keeping with the new patina of the scouting program.  Maybe a rainbow patch will be developed to go on the opposite arm of the uniform or right under the American flag.

Please do not get me wrong. I do not hate gays, I do not hate gay boys, I do not hate anyone. I simply believe that if one wants to join an organization one does not join it and expect them to change their paradigm to accommodate the feelings of a small minority.  As a socialist one shouldn’t  join the VFW or American legion and expect them to embrace the ideas of Karl Marx.  If one is an atheist one shouldn’t expect the Knights of Columbus to denounce the Catholic Church.  If one likes and wears animal fur they shouldn’t think that by joining PETA the organization should accept and acknowledge that a good use for minks is a fur stole.

It has been the focus of the Boy Scout organization to mold and shape young men into leaders, to create good citizens who value learning, set goals and participate in the economy, in government, in the military and all other facets of life on the planet.  Boy Scouts have been business leaders, government officials, teachers, generals, religious leaders and so much more.  This has been a great boon to our society and hopefully will continue to be so.  The organization has also been a refuge from the chaos of our ever coarsening culture, but no more.  The Boy Scouts have embraced the “new normal”.  They have thrown away a century of insistence that their members are;

To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight.

They are now no different than any other organization that has knuckled under to Political Correctness. They, as the Mad Hatter said to Alice, ” have lost their muchness.”

So what, you ask?  Why does it matter?  To me I guess the crux of the matter is the forcing of others to either abandon or abdicate their personal beliefs.  Why do I have to change my beliefs to suit those who disagree with me?  I wouldn’t force an atheist to pray or a Muslim to eat pork.  I wouldn’t support a law that makes sagging pants a crime nor would I make it a law that everyone should be allowed to join any group no matter whether they are eligible to join or not.  Seriously, should the Daughters of the American Revolution be forced to accept someone  who doesn’t have any ancestors in the United States? Should Mensa be forced to accept people with an IQ of 50?  Should AARP be forced to accept members in their teens?

My point is that according to the history and stated oath of the Boy Scout organization a scout must be “morally straight” and I don’t mean it as in “straight vs gay” .  I mean straight as in correct, within standards according to religious doctrine.  This organization acknowledges God in it’s oath as well. Will that be the next thing to go?  They say they aren’t going to allow gay leaders. How long before that goes by the wayside? Once a society begins to compromise it’s principles than it is ripe for destruction from within while it’s enemies wait, like slavering beasts to divide the carcass. See Greece, Rome or modern day Britain for examples of this.

The thought of some who accept this new direction for the Scouts will of course be that by bringing in “gay” boys they will be exposing them to boys who don’t feel as they do, which will in turn help guide gay boys to the alternative, especially if they want to fit in.  This of course is patent nonsense.  Bussing was a program that was going to revolutionize inner city life for children. They would be taken from their schools and put into schools with children who were progressing, which in turn would encourage the inner city children to perform better. It looked so good on paper but the opposite occurred. In many situations the schools achievement numbers went down or flattened out.  Why work hard to get ahead if the guy sitting next to you does nothing and still passes.  Children aren’t stupid  (most of the time). Agreeing to accept those into an organization who will not follow the set standards and insist that those standards be changed to suit their agenda never ends well for the organization nor the people they serve.

It won’t end well here either.  History has proven that, but we can’t learn from history.  What do a bunch of dead guys know anyway?

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Scott Pelley made a speech at Quinnipiac University  in which he said “We are getting big stories wrong over and over again.”

He later went on to say, “Twitter, Facebook and Readit, that’s not journalism. That’s gossip. Journalism was invented as an antidote to gossip.”

Unfortunately for us, Mr Pelley journalists have abdicated their responsibilities to cover a story by presenting the facts of that story.  They have become advocates for organizations, agendas and politicians.  Don’t believe me, let’s  visit a few of the more egregious examples.

Benghazi:  This was a whole pile of bad. From beginning to end, from stem to stern. If this had happened under any other president someone would have been forced to resign and others would have gone to jail.

Vacationgate:  Formerly journalists would have embarrassed those involved into apologizing or at least ceasing and desisting.

Mass Murder Gosnell: No matter what their feeling about abortion, journalists in the 60’s and 70’s would have covered the heck out of this trial.  None of this “it’s just a local trial” nonsense.

Fast and Furious: This would have scuttled any other previous administration.  Those in charge would have been incarcerated.

Birth certificate/Social Security Number issues:  Any other politician would have been forced to explain the irregularities.  They would have been forced to provide actually copies of the forms and if they couldn’t they wouldn’t be candidates long.

Voter fraud:  How many times did people vote to assure this man’s victory.  Past journalist would have been chasing a Pulitzer.  Of course that was when getting one meant you did an awesome job researching and reporting. Now it just means you’ve articulated the administrations talking points succinctly.

So pardon us if we don’t believe you.  Pardon us if we don’t assume that law abiding citizens who’ve never engaged in terroristic activities are behind the latest disaster.  Excuse us if we don’t believe that “some white guy with a gun” is always the shooter or that a “Tea Party Extremist” is to blame.  Since there have not been issues like that at Tea Party/ Conservative  or Libertarian rallies we would point you in the direction of your Occupy Wall Street, Code Pink, Moveon.com, New Black Panther fellow tin foil hat wearing compatriots.

Since you in the media can’t be trusted to be objective, we have to get our news from other places.  Your integrity has been shredded, your lack of honesty highlighted and your agenda posted on the national billboard of the internet.  We are tired of being lied to, being castigated, being manipulated and more than that being insulted.  Most of us know we are not the problem.  We know we do not think or believe what you claim we do and because of that we are suspicious of what you claim others think or believe.  We are insulted that you think we are so stupid, so naive and so ignorant that we can’t figure things out for ourselves. That we have to be spoon fed watered down, spun, barely recognizable facts instead of being given the actual facts and being allowed to decide for ourselves.

But you’re right Mr. Pelley.  Your house is burning down.  But there is no one who cares and even less who would bother to bring a bucket complete with hole.   Good luck with that.

Read Full Post »

Well I watched some of the testimony yesterday.  What I saw was at times riveting and at time bat crap crazy irritating.

Mr. Hicks of course was riveting, as was Mr. Gowdy.  The latter’s substantive questions of the former were the highlight of the day for me.  Mr. Chaffez from Utah was also compelling.  It was obvious that he was frustrated by the lies and CYA moves of those involved within the administration and State Department and that he was tired of having to ask the same questions over and over again as well as dealing with the nonsense from the other side of the aisle.

Mr. Hicks in an obviously emotionally draining testimony answered the questions with a stoic demeanor.  He was interrupted by Democrats who wanted copies of the email, or who wanted to make a point or cast aspersions about his character or his patriotism because he’s willing to call a liar, a liar no matter who it is.  The most appalling comment came from the Representative of the “People’s Democratic Republic of Maryland“, Cummings , who made a ridiculous and obscene statement yesterday during the hearing.  I guess we should tell those whose  ancestors lost their lives frighting for civil rights that, hey, wasn’t a big deal….”death is a part of life.”  How about the families of those killed last year in Chicago or Tryvon Martins family?  How about those affected by the Boston Marathon Bombing?  When does it stop being “a part of life” and become murder. Hey lawyers, new defense,  death is a part of life so you can’t really charge someone with murder, you can just use that statement as your whole defense.  Call it the “Cummings idiocy.”

Then there is the “What difference does it make” and “Benghazi was a long time ago” and ” we won’t learn anything new” cadre of sycophants.  Well we did learn some new things, murder has no statute of limitations and it makes a world of difference to the folks who lost their loved ones as well as those who have to depend on the State Department to keep them out of harms way.  The truth always makes a difference.  Always.

Some interesting things that weren’t addressed yesterday are:

Where is General Ham?  Why was he relieved of command? When?

Where is Rear Admiral Gauoette?  Why has he not been interviewed? When was he relieved of command and why?  Exactly.  I want to know exactly what he did.

When senior members of the military are relieved of their commands at the height of a crisis, the American public deserve to know why.  Did they refuse to follow an illegal, unethical, immoral order?  For example did they refuse to stand down when Americans were being tortured and murdered?  Did they call into questions the motives of those in authority?  Did they suggest that the administration was covering up behavior that wasn’t above board?  Did they understand that more was going on besides the attack, like perhaps gun running into Syria as long ago as 2012 or before?

These are things the lame scream media was supposed to be reporting on.  This is the kind of story real reporters (Woodward and Bernstein come to mind) used to report on.  Of course today with few exceptions journalists CAN’T do this kind of journalism. They weren’t taught how to really research or report objectively on anything.  They were taught to spin the news, propagandize the news and dismiss anything that didn’t fit the meme. Today news rooms are populated with advocates not journalists, teenagers not adults.

Could someone find the adults in America and ask them to call home?  The tweeners are peeing in the pool, the teenagers have set fire to the couch and the babies are smearing poop on the walls and the crib.  The toddlers and kids are hiding under the sink and the baby sitter has died.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »