CAN'T THE FEDS LEARN FROM BUSINESS?

In the last year or so I suppose you've noticed the following scenario a few times.

XYZ Corp. has fallen upon bad times, so it jettisoned a large number of employees, and the survivors were rewarded by being given more work to do at the same pay.

Contrast this enterprise-saving strategy to those of federal agencies that lose money - that's all of them, isn't it? The postal service is legendary in this way, and it's response is to raise our rates and BOAST that no jobs are lost! "Lucky you, taxpayers; not ONE of our invaluable employees will lose his job, and your unwitting generosity will maintain all the featherbedding for which we are renown." One can check himself out of the grocery store and gas station, order his own tickets for theatres or airplanes, and buy everything under the sun, but it takes highly-paid, federal employees, some of them literate in English, to weigh letters that look fat and sell stamps!

Did I say "highly-paid?" Around 14% of federal workers earn more than $100k, and they're getting pay increases this year; did you? Did you notice that all billions and billions of jobs B.O. "created" were in government? Welfare burgeons on every front. The federal government hires HORDES of people that could not obtain ANY sort of competitive position. As alternatives to welfare checks they are given jobs without any expectation of performance attached. The menial office jobs that they could do, such as sweeping the floors, scrubbing the toilets, and emptying the wastebaskets, are invariably contracted out to aliens, possibly legal, from Central America. This is apparently so that our "working" welfare employees may retain their self-esteem. Notice that you are paying for these ardent feelings.

This largess is not confined to agencies like Housing, Education, and Welfare, where one would imagine that sterling qualifications are not required where the primary duty is to throw away other people's money. No, even the Department of Defense, when it comes to the non-technical, supporting kinds of personnel - clerical, mail room, e.g. - is just another welfare program, and those hired are useless. Some secretaries of this sort do NO secretarial work aside from sending memo's to remind the working staff of meetings, while highly-trained employees with advanced academic degrees must do their own photocopying, letter writing, and other duties usually ascribed to clerical staff. Even among applicants for tangible jobs, country of origin and race are more important to the feds than are employment credentials. Quality of workmanship is light years behind "diversity" on the list of attributes held vital in the federal employment arena. You ought to walk into a federal office and take a good look at just who is doing the work of YOUR government; this exercise will send you off writing letters to your representatives and senators.

It might be imagined, then, that after decades of such shoddy practice the degree of competence in a federal office would decline. True, and government's compensating strategy is to outsource more and more work to contractors, so that you get to pay twice for the work; once to the regular hires that should do it but are incapable, and again to some company that actually does it. Even there, though, the welfare culture the feds have bred all these years handicaps the efforts, for the ownership of a contracting firm strongly influences its chances of successful bidding; e.g. being minority-owned or female-owned is an immediate head start, and if the firms doesn't employ the quota of minority individuals the feds decree, well, don't bother bidding.

Why should a job with the federal government be a solid gold certificate to interminable, absolutely unimpeachable employment with raises independent of performance, for as long as the person survives? I can't think of any other place where this guarantee accompanies hiring; why can't these duds be laid off when the budget deficit is ominous?

Another feature of federal employment is the rather generous - with your dough, recall - system of annual vacation and sick leave, which are accrued every pay period. Some long-time employees (aren't they all, don't you suppose, with such sweetheart deals?) have so much sick leave they take days off whenever they please. In some places it's possible to "work" an extra hour each day and come in only 9 of the 10 days in a 2-week period. This is a terrific way to telescope every weekend into a 3-day break, and if you can find half the staff present on a Monday or a Friday, I'll give you a dollar or a doughnut, which, with B.O. inflation, have about equal value. Supervisors don't even THINK of scheduling meetings for their entire offices on Fridays or Mondays. Even without that particular employment plan, if you walk into a fed office and don't find at least one of the sweaty laborers out "ill" or vacationing somewhere, I make you the same offer.

What do you think of this cursory education? It's your money that supports this nonsense, so why not demand an across the board 5% cut in the federal workforce? There would still be more waste there than you will EVER see in your own workplace, and what are we getting from this army of welfare recipients? Look around at government and answer the question.

JOURNALISTIC GIBBERISH

Non-reporters, did you ever publish an item, a letter to the editor or something different, in a newspaper? If so, were you able to do it anonymously or with a "nom de guerre?"

I've always had to give my name, address, tel number, and what have you, so that everyone that sees it knows exactly who authored it.

I want to quote a newspaper item that was credited only to "associated press." An acquaintance saw it in the Billings (MT) Gazette and sent it to me, but it must have appeared in papers all over the world.

The title was " 'Tea Party' Politics Provide Example of Living Democracy." Sounds reasonably complimentary, doesn't it, but here are some excerpts.

"No one is quite sure what to make of this leaderless morass of people ..." The Oxford English Dictionary defines "morass" as "a wet, swampy tract, a bog, a marsh," which, on one hand, is NOT complimentary and, on the other, is nonsensical and betrays an ignorance of our language. It makes as much sense to talk about "a cesspool of people," a "desert of people," or "a volcano of people."

Another example is, "People who (should be 'that') thought no one shared their views now can quickly find out they're part of a mob ..." Do you require a dictionary definition of "mob" to evaluate the objectivity of that cowardly snipe?

Or, try this; "Like any coalition ..., and it probably also includes people whose anger is actually rooted in distrust of the country's first black president." Here's another instance of stupidity when it comes to our language. B.O. is not a black; by definition, he's a mulatto. Jomo Kenyatta and Patrice Lumumba were blacks, but B.O., with one white parent, is a mulatto. Not only for illiteracy should the writer earn an "F" for his propaganda. Unsubstantiated drivel like "probably also includes" and "anger is actually rooted" are deplorable insinuations; the writer-clown has NO evidence so clouds his accusations with innuendo. Are there no editors out there, or are they just as biased as the boobies doing the writing?

Conservatives should instruct masses of people to discredit this sort of junk journalism, not to mention the papers that gazette it, and to lump its perpetrators with the great morass of mischief-makers out to impair or destroy our country.

THAT 1984 TOUCH - ONE MORE TIME

Long time, no see, readers, but even Y.C. needs a vacation now and then.

Remember how rapidly in the subject novel the news propagated by the dictatorship could do a one-eighty? One day Q was the staunch ally, the next, it was shelling the Brits.

Unless we count NPR (Is the "P" for "public" or "pubic?"), our dictatorship has no official news service, but it doesn't need one. Rather, the BADministration issues a decree, and syncophants like AP, UP, ABC, CBS, NBC leap instantly onto the bandwagon and imbue the position, though they may have opposed it yesterday, with indefeasible rectitude.

A recent example is nuclear reactors for power production. A few years back, environmentalists and liberals were rabidly antipathetic towards them: they would explode and annihilate millions of us, the poisonous waste would seep into water supplies and annihilate millions of us.

According to B.O., well-versed in Science from his neighborhood-organizing days, and the sycophants, though, nuclear reactors are now a "green" alternative. ("Green" is such a stupid term; plants are green, and they produce oxygen and soak up treacherous carbon dioxide molecules.) Blockheads whose only grasp of climatology has sprung from falsified, incomplete, inaccurate, or selectively-collected data would leap from tall buildings to elude CO2.

I've told you before, so listen up, pilgrims. WATER VAPOR = CLOUDS IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT GREENHOUSE GAS, AND SCIENTISTS - HONEST ONES, I MEAN - CAN'T EVEN ASSESS ITS EFFECT ON GLOBAL TEMPERATURES.

Don't leap just yet.

MOGEN JOSEPH

The "news" (see previous posts; " " to indicate ABC, CBS, NPR, NBC, CNN, most ISP pages, and other places with egregiously biased, often fallacious reports) sources made a large issue of Lieberman's having to leave his synagogue in order to cast a vote in the health care disaster. This was back when the Demo's were having all-hours votes so as to slip their nonsense past unwary members of the august body.

Joe, I'm an Independent, truly I am, was Joey on the spot to favor the BADministration's plan, and I wonder why the guy actually campaigned for a moderate Democrat like McCain.

Here's my thesis. Joe, like most Jewish legislators, an Israeli first, an American, second or lower, sensed that semi-Muslim B.O. would not prostrate himself before Israel so opposed him.

What do you think?

Y.C.

JUSTICE? WHY, OF COURTS!

Picture an Islamic ("Islam" means "peace," I read! Is that a joke, or what?) terrorist on a U.S.-bound plane and trying his damnedest to blow it out of the sky.

B.O.'s security system/administrators/personnel are childishly defeated, but the murderous, self-proclaimed religious soldier is apprehended.

He's a soldier, right? He's out of uniform, right? (Not even the checkered, Arafat turban affair, so far as I know). Seems to me military law says he could be dragged off the plane, stood up against an empty hangar, and shot full of holes. Next best, he could be dragged off the plane, given a swift court martial, and then handled according to plan A above. He'd have been happy, right? Off to see Allah after a less than successful peace (Islam) mission, but credited with a good try.

However, the Neighborhood Organizer, the Commander-in-Chief that was never so much as a cub scout and wouldn't know a sergeant's stripes from a general's stars, decided that this maggot would get a shot in our civilian courts! Unbelievable! Is there a sign out there saying,
"Please come murder us, maggots; we'll do our best to free you? signed, the U.S."

I'm not as bloodthirsty as the average Islamic (peace) emissary, but I recommend court martial, then hard-time prison until the maggot rots.

Can you imagine the rights of an American terrorist in the maggot's excuse for a country. This isn't croquet; this is a fight to survive!!!!!