Oh, so we are to believe the BEST you could do was to get a CONVICTED FELON to raise money.

"Oh, so we are to believe the BEST you could do was to get a CONVICTED FELON to raise money."

Same Old Tired Rhetoric, Different Day.....

Why am I not surprised?

Bubba, could it be that you're not surprised because YOU too do the same thing?

Do not condemn what you do not understand!

Shalom

Also, it still comes back to money. Are Boy Scouts not taught anything about money other than maybe "get all all you can, while you can, anyway you can!"

Shalom

Last time I CHECKED it WAS still A FREE country and THE boy SCOUTS could INVITE anyone they WANTED to SPEAK !!!

I agree that Boy Scouts should be taught that men can redeem themselves. What I hope, though, is that the scouts were given background on Colonel North, his biography, a rundown of his service to his country. That is important context for them to interpret his remarks.

I hope they weren't given some rah-rah red meat conservative war hero explanation of how Ollie North got to where he is today.

While everyone is bickering about whether or not Ollie was a good choice, I bet the boys in the Boy Scouts couldn't care less.

I wouldn't invite the guy but they are a private organization that can do what they like. Personally, I can think of a lot better choices.

Spare me the holier-than-thou comments, Darryl.

You and Demon Deacon are both aware that North's convictions were vacated. By definition, North is not guilty of the crimes for which he was accused.

Demon Deacon is one of several people who reguarly post here who purposefully use mis-leading statements to back up their political point of view. I will call them on it every time. And if you support an untruthful statement like DD made, I will call you on it too.

PRIVATE ORGANIZATION!!!
Excuse me, but it is a recipient of United Way funding, so I do think I can speak my mind about them whenever I choose.

Hey Bubba, have you noticed that DD is kinda forgetting who he is challenging or trying to answer lately. He jumps all over yellowdog for nothing and thinks he is attacking you since you called him out. I wonder if the guy has an alcohol problem is slopped out of his mind this early in the afternoon or is smoking something.

DD are you still drinking as much as you use to this early in the day?

bubba, I will not resort to childish bickering.

However, I will "call you" on the issue just as DD did; the BSA receives United Way funding. Thereby, that invalidates them as a "private organization."

Sadly though, the BSA can discriminate who does/does not choose to join their ranks. Sadly, the BSA has done like many other organizations; it has sold itself short on good people/talent!

Lastly, would you be so kind bubba to name the "holier than thou" comment I made? I fail to see any of my comments on this forum that meet that criteria.

Shalom

Hey Pro-Dunce,
Why don't you speak when spoken to. You're probably still angry about getting spanked over on another thread. Did I call Bubba's name in my post? Just show me where I did, or did you imagine that too, 007!

It's a private organization, and at least some of the people criticizing the choice of Ollie North have long and loyal relationships with it.

That includes the writer of the letter that sparked the letter above, me, and some of the commenters at my blog.

Whatever else this is about, it's not some nosy outsiders telling the Scouts what to do -- it's people who love Scouting talking about an organization in which we feel we have some stake.

Ed,

Couldn't agree more. Don't know/care what Demon Deacon thought about what I said. But for the rest of you, I correctly stated that BSA is a private organization (regardless of whether they get money from United Way, my popcorn purchases, or anything else) Nonprofit does not equal public.

Also, I didn't say that due to their being a private organization, DD or anyone else couldn't say anything about it. What I said was that I (that's me) wouldn't invite the guy but that they could do whatever the like. Which is true. Never said you couldn't gripe about it.

"bubba, I will not resort to childish bickering."

Then why do you resort to making childish statements?

"However, I will "call you" on the issue just as DD did; the BSA receives United Way funding. Thereby, that invalidates them as a "private organization."

I refer you to Yellow Dog's statement on this matter.

"Lastly, would you be so kind bubba to name the "holier than thou" comment I made? I fail to see any of my comments on this forum that meet that criteria."

Your "Who, Me?" defense does not cut it, Darryl.

I already pointed out one, right on this thread. The others are numerous. I will continue to point the future ones out also.

bubba, I am not using a "who, me?" defense. I am asking a clear-cut question, seeking a clear-cut answer. Was it ever considered that I may not have realized that I made such statements as I have been accussed? If my errors are not pointed out specifically, how can I be expected to correct them?

Imagine using the formula on a child that has just been used on me! The child would be bewildered and incapable of learning effectively, if at all.

I believe that the reason NO "holier than thou" comments were SPECIFICALLY noted by bubba are because there are NONE. It appears to me that Bubba only wants to build up Bubba by tearing others down.

If you disagree with what I say, that is fine...tell me what comments you disagree with in the process. However, to be as clear as a dense fog as what Bubba has, does nothing to help us as a collective group progress. Rather, it only hampers the efforts of those striving to do/be better.

Shalom

Bubba,
Darryl has a very valid point about your questions and comments. You should think about that.

Why do regular posters on this blog insist on Name calling? Is it completely necessary to change each others handles in order to pick at each other?

What did you say big butt woman? (formerly littlebuddhababy).

Ha ha. Just kidding!,

Yellowpee