Wow, again. So many people seem to insist on making this a hairball and lumping everything together.
Further, despite some statements to the contrary clearly some of the contributors here are questioning Admiral Greene's judgment and decision in these matters reference:
" I am not saying the Admiral is not qualified but maybe just not as informed as he should be. He may have done many things but working with kids AT a school is different from working with kids in the service. JMO."
My opinion on this is on record in my prior post but if we are "
voting" please place my
"vote" into the "most strongly disagree" column, thanks. If there is a comments column then please insert the following: "A federal service academy isn't just any school or even just a school, and neither a "normal college" or a Service Academy is all that much similar to a high school. Working with midshipmen and cadets and training them for their life's work isn't very similar at all to working with "kids" who don't already have the sense of duty and honor that compels them to fore-sake a normal college life and all that it includes and give up numerous rights and privileges and attend a Service Academy. At times the mere realization of what they've given up is bound to adversely affect their individual outlook on life and morale, especially these days when they can and do stay so in touch with what their high school friends at "normal colleges" are doing. I'm glad my personal day to day job and measured success at it, doesn't include the responsibility of trying to keep those kids motivated and in a positive frame of mind, must be at times a really thankless and impossible job."
RE: "Flying Under the Radar"
I want to say that for those of you that fear reprisals, etc. for not "flying under the radar" and that sort of stuff, in my EXPERIENCE in the community of USMMA stakeholders, nothing could be further from the truth. Look at the record, fact lots and lots of people in the Alumni Community have said things to Charlie Hill and Jim Tobin about how some of their recent Columns in the Kings Pointer could be misconstrued, misunderstood, and used in ways they never intended to what might be the detriment of the very goals they are trying to further. Further case in point the second quote above. These discussions were and continue in open forums at gatherings of
ACTIVE alumni, such as the USMMAAF Chapter President's Alliance Semi-Annual meetings; meetings at which the leadership of the Parent's Association attends. Meetings at which numerous members of the Academy's staff participate, present what they are doing and get feedback from all. Meetings which I assure the folks reading this forum that dissenting opinions and alternative views are voiced and discussed civilly and respectfully of one and other, since we all know that at the end of the day, the reason those traveling to MITAGS or the Academy to participate, at their own expense and on their own time, which usually includes at least one "normal work day" is everyone there shares a love for the USMMA and wants to see it and the current regiment of Midshipman endure and prosper. Further, I think we all share an understanding that the Academy must and should evolve and adapt to the changing reality that is the world economy and our national priorities if that is to happen; and we all know all too well if the Academy doesn't do so (evolve) that goal won't
continue to be maintained and achieved. So even though change is hard, and we all certainly do not agree 100% on what changes need to be done first, we all work together to further that evolution. I expound on this because given the noticeable absence of posts by some of the folks who participate there and who I suspect are in the "pro" Guest camp, I'd be shocked if they are not already using those sorts of avenues to voice their opinions.
My own bottom line on this general subject: I've never been one to "just shut up and take it because the Administration knows best?" (Luigi's words above) Not 30 years ago when I was a member of the regiment, not over the time since, and especially not since my son entered USMMA himself. I do however like to think that over the 32+ years since I entered Vickery Gate to be a Plebe Candidate myself, I've learned and grown better at how to "pick my spots" and achieve my desired results. A lot of that learning occurred between July 1978 and June 1982 when as KPSQRD pointed out I was trained to make my way in the world at the USMMA, with as was noted a lot less parental involvement in the day to day operation of the Regiment of Midshipmen than exists today. I just don't think a big letter writing campaign that lumps all these items together into what to me looks like a big hairball will be effective.
Reference this point above:
"Some of you speak of the Alumni supporting KP, that is true, they need to but supporting KP with funds will not keep CC or the Guest on campus. Just as other schools were looking at CC and how it worked and wanting it in their schools, NOW KP is going to get rid of the people who started it? Who will take over? No one wants that responsibility. They have been asked and they each say no."
While it's clear to me that I'm probably in the minority I wonder if the act of delivering cookies weekly to our college aged children, who are also members of the military (Midshipmen, USNR) and have fitness requirements, etc. is the best way to help them get through the stress they go through transitioning from civilian life through being Plebe Candidates and into young adults who will literally be sailing around the world and "working without a net" in short order. Before anyone jumps down my throat, I also don't have any better ideas and I do accept that at least some of the Plebes and other midshipmen greatly appreciate and need the type of support they find at Cookie Cafe. That said USMMA "worked" before Cookie Cafe and I believe it would continue to "work" if Cookie Cafe were ended.
The biggest issues at hand that all seems to oxymoronically get lumped together and perhaps lost are the ones that underlie the third and final quote above. First as noted in the earlier posts in this thread to some apparently Cookie Cafe' is just that cookies and milk and a break in the day each week for the mids who want it and come, basically a secular, non-threatening, etc. sort of thing. The sort of thing that nutritional and fitness sort of things aside, one would look at at say, how in the world could those in the USMMA Administration charged with maintaining good morale possibly object to? To others, it's apparently not a solely secular enterprise and undertaking, rather it's a ministry of sorts. Further, apparently no one in the geographic area closest enough to the USMMA, parent or otherwise, is willing to continue to do the work that continuing the Cookie Cafe' on a weekly basis entails, if they are required to decouple the non-secular from the secular aspects of it. That is both interesting and telling to me (reference the second quote).
I really
like these statements (NOT - in other words I disagree with much of what I feel are their underlying sentiments, though I defer to clarification by the original poster if I am reacting erroneously):
"If one reads the "Kings Pointer" magazine, the financial support by alumni has not been stellar, even as compared to the other academies. Why is that? Could morale have something to do with it? The Alumni Foundation has said that it is imperative that the alumni ALL get involved financially with KP if the place is to be properly renovated. "
In the past I've been accused of being long winded and preachy from time to time so if you pardon me for being short and to the point in my reaction to the above:
i) Yes, more alumni should donate and actively participate as stakeholders in the USMMA community, I gladly contribute and will continue to do so; I also actively encourage my classmates to do so.
ii) More parents should donate to the USMMAAAF annual campaigns as well and I often wonder why they do not do so. Fellow parents when you point a finger at the alumni numbers that Charlie and Jim put forth, please remember there are four pointing back at yourself.
iii) While it is accurate to point out that our children who are current members of the USMMA Regiment of Midshipmen could have gone elsewhere, a complete view of that relevant landscape should also take into account that had our DS/DD gone elsewhere it is very, very likely the spot they are taking would have been easily filled by an equally qualified young man or woman who wanted the spot.
iv) It's Jasperdog's personal opinion that with the exception of the USMMA Class of 1974, efforts by his fellow alumni to point to issues they had to deal with while attending the USMMA as reasons for not donating to the USMMAAAF annual campaigns are generally contrived and specious rationalizations to cover the fact they are frugal to the point of being cheap. I've had these conversations Charlie Hill and pointed to counterpoints to Mr. Hill's points, and from my perspective we've agreed to disagree, further it really doesn't matter since we share the same bottom line and goal - higher levels of participation in the USMMAAAF Annual Campaigns.
In closing, if any fellow parent or alumnus in the DC Metro area wants to join my foursome (it's already paid for) at the Country Club of Fairfax at the Heidemar Blue & Gray this Monday and discuss this topic further, PM me (first come, first served), Be forewarned though, you will be playing with myself and another
ACTIVE 80's era alumnus, and I'm not at all good at golf. My definition of
ACTIVE Alumnus is one who continues to support the Academy financially through donations to the USMMAAF and with their time through participating in their local alumni chapter, so be prepared to pay for your round of golf by listening to a lot of discussion about both our errant shots and the USMMA then and now, good and bad.
I'm pretty sure I've made all my relevant points on this thread so please pardon me, if it seems like this point forward I am lurking. I doubt you'll miss me on this one from this point forward, there seems to be more than enough drama and self-manufactured "organizational dynamics and politics" here that this will now likely be a long-lived and lengthy thread.
