As I mentioned last year, I spent many years in the Boy Scouts as an adult leader while my son, who became an Eagle Scout, was going through the program, only to be disappointed by the national organization in recent years. As predicted, the Boy Scouts went from allowing homosexual boys into the program, to allowing homosexual scout leaders to admitting girls-who-claim-to-be-boys to now allowing girls to be Boy Scouts.

While the parent organization will still be knows as “Boy Scouts of America,” the name of the group of 11- to 17-year-olds that used to be called “Boy Scouts” will now be called “Scouts BSA,” further distancing them from the original point of the organization, which was to teach boys how to become men and good citizens. The BSA is claiming that they are doing this to give girls the opportunity to earn the coveted rank of Eagle Scout and to give families the opportunity to have their sons and daughters in the same program to make it easier to coordinate the children’s activities.

That goal, however, completely contradicts their pledge that the new Scouts BSA troops will be single-sex. As a former scoutmaster, the idea that any local sponsoring organization will be able to procure separate spaces at the same time so that boys’ and girls’ troops can meet at the same time, to say nothing or recruiting enough parents to support both groups, is ludicrous. It’s simply not going to happen.

A large part of my son’s journey to Eagle Scout was Summer Camp. Aside from the opportunity to just learn how to “be a guy” by spending a week in the woods with other boys, he earned the majority of his merit badges at camp. It is simply not possible to reconcile these two important aspects of scouting when girls are added to the mix. If girls are not given the opportunity to attend Summer Camp, it will be much more difficult for them to become Eagle Scouts. To avoid yet another discrimination lawsuit, BSA will be forced to either a) allow girls to attend Summer Camp alongside the boys or b) create parallel camps for girls. It is simply too expensive to create separate camps (also subject to a “separate-but-equal” lawsuit anyway), so the BSA must allow girls to attend Summer Camp alongside boys.

It is simply a fact that boys will behave differently when girls are present. They will spend more time trying to impress the girls and compete with the other boys for the girls’ attention than they will learning how to just be comfortable with themselves around other boys. The very nature of scouting will change.

While it sounds nice to give girls the opportunity to become Eagle Scouts, there is no way the BSA can give girls this opportunity without robbing boys of the unique things that made the Boy Scouts the Boy Scouts. Anyone who tries to convince you otherwise is either lying to you or doesn’t know what Scouting used to be.

Don’t for get to hit DaTipJar! Better yet, subscribe.

By John Ruberry

For decades, probably since in the advent of rock and roll, America’s has been a youth-worshipping culture. In eastern Asia, at least for now, elders are admired and respected, on the other hand.

Back to America. Is it a coincidence that four years after Elvis Presley appeared on the Ed Sullivan Show with 82 percent of television viewers tuned in, the youthful John F. Kennedy became the youngest person elected to the presidency, replacing the oldest president up to that point, Dwight Eisenhower?

The Democrats found young pay dirt again in 1992 when Bill Clinton, the first baby-boomer president, who was 46, defeated incumbent president George H.W. Bush, age 68, and in 2008 when Barack Obama was 47 when he bested 72-year-old John McCain to win the presidency.

In this off-year election there are a couple of races I’ve noticed that may show the Democrats are betting that the fountain of youth is the key to winning a majority in Congress.

The first match-up already occurred. In the special election in Pennsylvania’s 18th congressional district, Democrat Conor Lamb, age 33, narrowly defeated GOPer Rick Saccone, age 60, for the vacant seat of Tim Murphy, who resigned because of a sex scandal.

Lamb won in a district that is traditionally a Republican stronghold.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Wisdom and experience should still count for something, right?

Democrats, at least on social media, are excited about the prospects of US Rep. Beto O’Rourke upsetting Republican Ted Cruz, a presidential candidate in 2016 who is still well-respected by conservatives despite his tussles that year with Trump. They’re about the same age, O’Rourke is 45 and Cruz is 47, but look how CNN is potrarying the candidates:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

How long did it take the writer of that CNN article to find a photograph of Cruz with a double chin?

For his part, O’Rourke won his nomination in a primary while Lamb was selected by a party convention.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Whoah, O’Rourke is the dreamiest, isn’t he?

While good looks and youth don’t make anyone automatically stupid–my wife says I still have the former and I used to be young–I have a question: Why are the Democrats running glamour shot campaigns?

If their ideas are correct, shouldn’t that be enough?

On the flipside, Donald Trump, a 71-year-old with an orange comb-over, is our president. And the Democrats in the House are led by Nancy Pelosi, 78, but youngster Lamb says he will vote against Pelosi the next time there’s a vote for Democratic leader in the lower chamber.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Drudge links to a WSJ story suggesting that Mueller will “go dark” if it gets too close to the elections:

Though Mr. Mueller doesn’t face any specific legal deadline, the fall midterms amount to a political one, according to experts and prosecutors. He will reach a point this summer when Justice Department habits dictate that he will have to either finish his inquiries or go dark and stretch out his work until past November so he doesn’t appear to be trying to sway voters’ decisions, which would be at odds with Justice Department guidelines for prosecutors.

It’s a quaint little piece presuming that our friends on the left and in the deep state are playing by Hoyle, so for those living in the real world, where Trump is the president and the media/Democrat left combined with the deep state are doing all they can to thwart him let me explain what will happen.

If the Mueller investigation is seen to help Democrat prospects and hurt the President then it will continue unabated all the way to election day.

If the Mueller probe seems to energize potential GOP voters and/or Donald Trump continues to successfully use it to drive public opinion and sympathy toward himself and against his foes then it will be “stretched” out or paused.

If the Democrat conclude that dropping the whole thing or a finding that concludes there is no proof of collusion or obstruction will so enrage their base that they turn out in droves, it will be dropped.

Anyone who thinks anything else hasn’t been paying attention these last 18 months.