See gents, and ladies, having worked previously in State government - which can be a microcosm of the larger picture i.e., Federales - none of this comes as a surprise. I forget who wrote something about holding oneself to a higher standard as a representative of the people. Bwaaaa-haaaaa-haaaa-haaaa. Are you kidding? My State co-workers at the time held themselves to the lowest standards possible. Ethics? Give me a break. Standards? How about sub-standards? Very good liars though. Very efficient at passing the buck and responsibility as well. And extremely concerned about the next COLA increase (cost of living allowance), the next raise (automatic and not based at all on performance), and retirement bennies.
You pretty much hit the nail on the head for working for the Federal Government. It is pretty much just how you described your experience working for a State Government. The only difference currently if the difference between many state's retirement programs and that of the Fed's today.
I missed qualifying for the old retirement program by about two years, the really good one, but instead was placed in the FERS (Federal Employee Retirement System), which is the basic 401 retirement program. They, the government, called it a three legged stool type of retirement system. One of the legs was the 401, the second was Social Security and the last was a stipend based on highest held grade (I was a GS-14-6) and years of service (10).
Now, guess what I receive from the last or third leg a month? Okay, you don't have to guess, it is under one hundred dollars a month.
The only people that I ran into while working for the USMS that actually tried to do a good job, were the majority of us pilots. When I was there about 80 percent of us pilots were hired straight in off the street with no previous government service at all, one pilot of this group did serve in the Army for two years after he graduated from high school which doesn't really count.
All of us went to work for the USMS to fly and for some semblance of job security, which as it is turning out, was not all that secure after all. And fly we did, I flew over 10,000 hours in the ten years I was with the USMS.
But our non-pilot support staff, just as you described, to the letter.
When I first started working for the government, an old long time Federal Employee told me the following.
If you just want a paycheck that will last you a lifetime, obey these rules.
1. Show up for work, you really don't have to do any work, just show up every day.
2. Never get noticed. Just blend into the background.
3. Never have an accident while driving a G-car while under the influence.
4. If you do have an accident while driving a G-car under the influence, don't try and lie about it, tell the truth and tell them that you have a drinking/drug problem and you will be sent to rehab, at government expense and keep your job. You can repeat this three times, the fourth, unless you own a Senator, you're out on your butt.
5. Never lie on a official government document. No matter what, tell the truth and you will be most likely forgiven, lie and you go to prison. Unless of course you have a Senator or a Congressman in your pocket.
Do not let this come as a total shock to you, but it is flat illegal in many jurisdictions to have sex with someone you are not married to! When Slick Willie and Monica were carrying on in the Oval Office, that was a crime! Of course the Prez does swear an oath to uphold the law, so that technically, doing hanky-panky means violating that oath.
Those of us old enough for this may remember Chuck Berry being locked up for having sex with a girl, basically. That was back in the Dark Ages, of course. Nowadays it could be sex with a boy, a goat or whatever, but many of those old laws are still on the books.
That's a big reason why elections are important. You once posted that in the last election you saw no difference between McCain and Obama, so you tossed a coin and voted for Obama.
There were differences between the two, but I figured they would basically end up amounting to the same end result. That's why I tossed a coin up in the air.
I think perhaps the most important consequence of the 2012 election will be the composition of the Supreme Court in the future. If we end up with a court majority of the opinion of, ' Yes, government can do that', and who vote along ideological rather than Constitutional lines, it will be a catastrophe.
But both Democrat and Republican Presidents appoint people like this to the Supreme Court.
I forget who wrote something about holding oneself to a higher standard as a representative of the people. Bwaaaa-haaaaa-haaaa-haaaa. Are you kidding? My State co-workers at the time held themselves to the lowest standards possible. Ethics? Give me a break. Standards? How about sub-standards? Very good liars though. Very efficient at passing the buck and responsibility as well.
Well, I've learned to operate under the assumption that all politicians are sociopaths until proven otherwise. Do you know the characteristics sociopaths possess?
None of what these scoundrels do surprises me. Not at all.
Very little surprises me, I'm not completely immune to surprise, but it's rare.
Perhaps what we should do instead of expressing outrage is consider it status quo.
Probably would be the most realistic attitude.
And when one of these scoundrels are caught red-handed, so to speak, they're simply sent packing at the next available opportunity.
Thermodynamically, it is evident how difficult it is to differentiate, "break away". The natural scheme of things is toward growth of influence, not its diminution. This is the profile of the (apparent) yin and yang in American Politics in the latter half of the 20th Century.
Everything blends into one...
In 1861, Lincoln spoke to America to warn it of the impending "Corporate Takeover" of the process of control, eg, Gummint.
I never knew that. It's kind of sad that these important facts are never taught in school.
The Civil War was almost exclusively about Northern Industrial and Mercantile Interests attempting to absorb the sprawling agrarian and resource laden South.
That would explain a lot of things
Europe had a huge hand in the outcome of our War. Ending Slavery was by and large a marketing scheme, especially in the North.
Slightly off present topic question? the story of that Senator who took photos of his nether regions and posted them to various ladies on the net has been covered on the News here,just thought, if that cove resigns of is sacked do you hold Bi Elections in his district to replace him in the USA? Just curious
Ending slavery should damage the economy of the South, thus strengthening the position of the North. We could have ended up with a sort of colonialism, the South supplying the raw materials, the North supplying the finished products.
Too, much of the wealth of the South was counted as the value of slaves; ending slavery should nullify that calculated wealth at one stroke of the pen, as it did.
The notion that slavery was not a proximate cause of the war is a revisionist one, largely put about post-war by Jefferson Davis in his writings. Just look at what a hot issue it was pre-war to see if that notion is nonsense.
Too, have a look at the situation in the national legislature in the early 1800s, when the South was able to over-ride 'States' Rights.' So much for the argument that the South was fighting to preserve that! The South was quite happy with the status quo when it was to their benefit.
Edited to add: Not bi-elections, when only those of a certain orientation have the vote, no! That is reserved for certain regions of the country: Key West, the East Village, San Francisco, etcetera. But by-elections, yes, to fill the gap created by a resignation or death.
On the other hand, we once had the curious case of an unelected President and an unelected Vice-President. Gerald Ford advanced from V-P to Prez after Nixon resigned and Nelson Rockefeller was then chosen (in a trial by combat, I believe) to fill his spot as V-P.
It depends on each state's constitution. Some will hold a special election, in some the governor will appoint a temporary, some will let it ride until the next scheduled election for the seat it the time span is less than X... etc. etc.
Well Harlepudlians were a simple people then and had never seen a live Frenchman before this incident Mr P, so twer a easy mistake for them to make, and as one opined many years later when actually shown a live Frenchman, "reckon we wudda still hung that monkey"
Slavery was a proximate cause? The proximate cause was Union Naval forces firing on their own Fort Sumter, for which the South was blamed. "First Blood", a must read for Civil War afficianados.
Ferdinand took a bullet so Germans and Jaye P. Morgan could sell weapons?
A Black Man is "worth" three fifths a White Man? The Constitution says so, right? Rascally Southern Founders, right? Racists from the Git?
NO. The Northern Bankers and Founders insisted on a diminution of Southern political power in Congress. To dilute the South's Representation by Census, Blacks were "discounted". True story, and one Jane likely did not learn in school either.
The winner writes the childrens' textbooks, ever was.