Don’t forget the Senate too! Having worked for the U.S. Postal Service for 25 years, I can honestly say that this cartoon is not really showing the true nature of the departments of the government. It’s MUCH WORSE than this!
@wmconelly – after we cut through your hyperbole; there may be a way we can move forward with the conversation. First – Nos Nevets makes an excellent point. People in Washington (isolated from the people who actually suffer or benefit from a Washington decision seem to make very poor decisions that affect the rest of us).
The Federal government applies it’s programs across the entire nation even when it doesn’t make sense – School lunches for instance – In an effort to combat Childhood obesity they reduced the max calorie limit for ALL kids (regardless of their activity level). So to protect the inactive little fatties they reduced the lunch calories for Athletes like my kids who run 10 miles a day and for Football players and Basketball players. It looks good to the People in Washington because they are helping a group of kids that probably don’t get good nutrition otherwise but it forces a lot of athletes to pack their own lunch in the morning (Not impossible but a real burden for busy families). It would have been easier and better for many communities to identify the little fatties and send them to a special lunch room until they get their weight and eating habits under control – Instead of putting a burden on the families that are living a healthy lifestyle.
The quality of the decisions coming out of the Federal Department of Education is already suspect so it’s not like the decisions could get much worse if we lowered the quality of that group of doofues.
Rand and Cruz are trying to do what a lot of us want which is to get the Federal Government OUT of the day to day lives of most private citizens – For just the reasons mentioned above. They aren’t trying to take us back to the 18th century – They are trying to make the government work for the rest of us tax payers rather then just focus on the politically connected and the poor and needy.
And it isn’t a dream of a weird Utopia to think that we relegate many of the Federal Government’s usurped powers back to the states where they are made closer to the people affected by the decisions.
Things that make sense for Urban dwellers in Chicago, New York or Washington DC don’t necessarily make sense for those of us in the midwest and vice versa.
But Conservatives and Liberals alike love to have the Federal Government make those decisions so that they can push their ideals and desires onto every US citizen. And states have come to recognize this – Hence Colorado and Washington decriminalizing Marijuana.
@Respectful Troll – The choice of the word you found objectionable was, indeed, pejorative and arises from a frustration that we have to adapt an entire school institution to their bad habits and poor self discipline. Once again, the government creates a policy to protect the delicate sensibilities of those indulging in bad habits at the expense of the kids trying to do the right thing.
Kids are stuck with the IQ, culture, and home life that their family and community chooses for them. But they are also being taught nutrition and good exercise at a young age so obesity is a choice not a lifestyle choice to be respected and appreciated like any other.
And, in General, if they want to live a less then healthy lifestyle; I’m inclined to say let them. Right up until the point where the Federal Government says – We will mandate that all the healthy kids must eat a restricted diet as well so that those suffering from Childhood obesity don’t feel stigmatized.
Your caution on monikers is well founded and falls on fertile ground (I will give it serious thought) but at what point does ignoring their poor life choices become an enabling activity.
Should we now call a Gang member – Overly aggressive urban youth so we don’t hurt their feelings? Should we call bigots undersocialized insensitives? I know Childhood obesity doesn’t rise to this level of anti-social behavior but I think it demonstrates the downside of coddling a group that is inflicting harm upon themselves even when they don’t see it.
OPM’s IT staff & it’s private contractors failed to meet the security standards they were supposed to have. Whether the problem was lack of funding or mid-level managers ignoring the red flags, is still to be determined.It’s an amusing image, but the problem wasn’t a high level committee of cartoon characters.Private sector companies are having as many problems with data breaches. Pretending it’s a “Big Government” problem is hardly going to fix it.
I used to work for a small engineering company that was able to deliver secure computer controlled systems both under budget and ahead of schedule. These systems were unique, not made from COTS (commercial off the shelf) components and could not be hacked, or disassembled. The decision to use COTS to save cost, brought with it many vulnerabilities. With manufacturing and software development now globalized, do we elect representatives who understand these vulnerabilities? Adding back doors to already questionable computing and networking equipment will not make it secure.
The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 was signed by Carter, though he didn’t like it, but couldn’t sustain a veto. Reagan and others have used it to move pollitical appointees into high ranking positions, then KEEP them there as “Civil Service”. I watched the change back to the spoils system under this Act, along with the disaster of massive contracting with “privates” and corporates, If you want the key that opened the flood gates of stupid and incompent, that’s it.
Gee Uncle Joe (Troll) – If we are going to discuss mean spiritedness we can include cherry picking a post and then using it to build a strawman that’s so much easier to beat down then trying to refute a cogent argument that threatens you.
Let’s address your (concerns) one by one shall we?
I said it was the Federal Government (meaning Congress and the President) and I don’t believe I ever mentioned Ms. Obama in my discussion but I’m sure the Obamas discussed it around their dinner table.
And you are right that they are not starving my kids. I can send them with a lunch of their own in the morning which is an inconvenience – One I didn’t have to put up with before the Federal Government stuck their rules and regulations into the mix. But right in the middle of your toxic spew you actually agreed with me 850 calories is sufficient for MOST kids. It isn’t for kids who are running cross country, playing football or playing basketball. But Congress put a Blanket rule in place for all kids in all communities in all states because the right and the left love to push their rules on EVERYONE.
I don’t know if your statistic is correct or not but let’s take you at your word and assume that 1/3 of kids are overweight. That means 2/3 of kids are not overweight and have no need for these ill conceived and poorly implemented rules and regulations. A better rule or regulation would have been focused on helping the overweight kids make better choices and not limiting everyone’s access – Send them to a special lunch room, make them bring their own lunch, send them out on the track to run a few laps before lunch. There are lots of ways to correct the problem that is more focused on the problem kids rather then assuming that everyone needs congress to tell them how to eat right and exercise more often.
I was speaking more generally to over reaching laws and rules when I spoke of some laws not being appropriate for cities and others not being appropriate for suburban or rural communities. I wholly assume there are kids in the cities and rural communities alike who are working hard at their athletics and need to be fed more then 850 calories at lunch. But as an example – Last night my neighbor shot a raccoon in his back yard that was harassing his chickens. We didn’t even give it a second look. I imagine a man doing that same thing in the middle of Chicago or New York City might expect a visit from the local authorities. There are differences between Rural living and City living. But the Federal Government likes to bring it’s heavy hand of regulation down on all of us whether we need it or not.
The Federal Government is out of touch with how the average taxpayer lives their lives. They issue steaming mounds of regulations that cater to this group or that group but alot of what they are producing doesn’t need to exist at all. In the absence of Federal Law – States could make their own decisions about how their school lunch programs should operate. But again – the Right and the Left love to stick their nose into everyone’s business.
Neither my post nor my ideas are nonsense. It isn’t nonsense to expect the Federal government to rule with a light touch; same with the state but at least we have more access to our state legislators and they have to be more responsive to their people.
Combatcarl almost 9 years ago
Come to think of it – this could depict any department of the US government or congressional committee.
stlmaddog5 almost 9 years ago
Don’t forget the Senate too! Having worked for the U.S. Postal Service for 25 years, I can honestly say that this cartoon is not really showing the true nature of the departments of the government. It’s MUCH WORSE than this!
NeedaChuckle Premium Member almost 9 years ago
Hmm! This applies to all the PRIVATE companies that have no security either.
Donaldo Premium Member almost 9 years ago
ha ha, love this one
Mephistopheles almost 9 years ago
@wmconelly – after we cut through your hyperbole; there may be a way we can move forward with the conversation. First – Nos Nevets makes an excellent point. People in Washington (isolated from the people who actually suffer or benefit from a Washington decision seem to make very poor decisions that affect the rest of us).
The Federal government applies it’s programs across the entire nation even when it doesn’t make sense – School lunches for instance – In an effort to combat Childhood obesity they reduced the max calorie limit for ALL kids (regardless of their activity level). So to protect the inactive little fatties they reduced the lunch calories for Athletes like my kids who run 10 miles a day and for Football players and Basketball players. It looks good to the People in Washington because they are helping a group of kids that probably don’t get good nutrition otherwise but it forces a lot of athletes to pack their own lunch in the morning (Not impossible but a real burden for busy families). It would have been easier and better for many communities to identify the little fatties and send them to a special lunch room until they get their weight and eating habits under control – Instead of putting a burden on the families that are living a healthy lifestyle.
The quality of the decisions coming out of the Federal Department of Education is already suspect so it’s not like the decisions could get much worse if we lowered the quality of that group of doofues.
Rand and Cruz are trying to do what a lot of us want which is to get the Federal Government OUT of the day to day lives of most private citizens – For just the reasons mentioned above. They aren’t trying to take us back to the 18th century – They are trying to make the government work for the rest of us tax payers rather then just focus on the politically connected and the poor and needy.
And it isn’t a dream of a weird Utopia to think that we relegate many of the Federal Government’s usurped powers back to the states where they are made closer to the people affected by the decisions.
Things that make sense for Urban dwellers in Chicago, New York or Washington DC don’t necessarily make sense for those of us in the midwest and vice versa.
But Conservatives and Liberals alike love to have the Federal Government make those decisions so that they can push their ideals and desires onto every US citizen. And states have come to recognize this – Hence Colorado and Washington decriminalizing Marijuana.
Mneedle almost 9 years ago
Complacency sucks
Mephistopheles almost 9 years ago
@Respectful Troll – The choice of the word you found objectionable was, indeed, pejorative and arises from a frustration that we have to adapt an entire school institution to their bad habits and poor self discipline. Once again, the government creates a policy to protect the delicate sensibilities of those indulging in bad habits at the expense of the kids trying to do the right thing.
Kids are stuck with the IQ, culture, and home life that their family and community chooses for them. But they are also being taught nutrition and good exercise at a young age so obesity is a choice not a lifestyle choice to be respected and appreciated like any other.
And, in General, if they want to live a less then healthy lifestyle; I’m inclined to say let them. Right up until the point where the Federal Government says – We will mandate that all the healthy kids must eat a restricted diet as well so that those suffering from Childhood obesity don’t feel stigmatized.
Your caution on monikers is well founded and falls on fertile ground (I will give it serious thought) but at what point does ignoring their poor life choices become an enabling activity.
Should we now call a Gang member – Overly aggressive urban youth so we don’t hurt their feelings? Should we call bigots undersocialized insensitives? I know Childhood obesity doesn’t rise to this level of anti-social behavior but I think it demonstrates the downside of coddling a group that is inflicting harm upon themselves even when they don’t see it.
retpost almost 9 years ago
This should read: list of those appointed to top positions.
Uncle Joe Premium Member almost 9 years ago
OPM’s IT staff & it’s private contractors failed to meet the security standards they were supposed to have. Whether the problem was lack of funding or mid-level managers ignoring the red flags, is still to be determined.It’s an amusing image, but the problem wasn’t a high level committee of cartoon characters.Private sector companies are having as many problems with data breaches. Pretending it’s a “Big Government” problem is hardly going to fix it.
superposition almost 9 years ago
I used to work for a small engineering company that was able to deliver secure computer controlled systems both under budget and ahead of schedule. These systems were unique, not made from COTS (commercial off the shelf) components and could not be hacked, or disassembled. The decision to use COTS to save cost, brought with it many vulnerabilities. With manufacturing and software development now globalized, do we elect representatives who understand these vulnerabilities? Adding back doors to already questionable computing and networking equipment will not make it secure.
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 was signed by Carter, though he didn’t like it, but couldn’t sustain a veto. Reagan and others have used it to move pollitical appointees into high ranking positions, then KEEP them there as “Civil Service”. I watched the change back to the spoils system under this Act, along with the disaster of massive contracting with “privates” and corporates, If you want the key that opened the flood gates of stupid and incompent, that’s it.
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
^incompetent- typo, sorry, fingers aren’t working right.
Mephistopheles almost 9 years ago
Gee Uncle Joe (Troll) – If we are going to discuss mean spiritedness we can include cherry picking a post and then using it to build a strawman that’s so much easier to beat down then trying to refute a cogent argument that threatens you.
Let’s address your (concerns) one by one shall we?
I said it was the Federal Government (meaning Congress and the President) and I don’t believe I ever mentioned Ms. Obama in my discussion but I’m sure the Obamas discussed it around their dinner table.
And you are right that they are not starving my kids. I can send them with a lunch of their own in the morning which is an inconvenience – One I didn’t have to put up with before the Federal Government stuck their rules and regulations into the mix. But right in the middle of your toxic spew you actually agreed with me 850 calories is sufficient for MOST kids. It isn’t for kids who are running cross country, playing football or playing basketball. But Congress put a Blanket rule in place for all kids in all communities in all states because the right and the left love to push their rules on EVERYONE.
I don’t know if your statistic is correct or not but let’s take you at your word and assume that 1/3 of kids are overweight. That means 2/3 of kids are not overweight and have no need for these ill conceived and poorly implemented rules and regulations. A better rule or regulation would have been focused on helping the overweight kids make better choices and not limiting everyone’s access – Send them to a special lunch room, make them bring their own lunch, send them out on the track to run a few laps before lunch. There are lots of ways to correct the problem that is more focused on the problem kids rather then assuming that everyone needs congress to tell them how to eat right and exercise more often.
I was speaking more generally to over reaching laws and rules when I spoke of some laws not being appropriate for cities and others not being appropriate for suburban or rural communities. I wholly assume there are kids in the cities and rural communities alike who are working hard at their athletics and need to be fed more then 850 calories at lunch. But as an example – Last night my neighbor shot a raccoon in his back yard that was harassing his chickens. We didn’t even give it a second look. I imagine a man doing that same thing in the middle of Chicago or New York City might expect a visit from the local authorities. There are differences between Rural living and City living. But the Federal Government likes to bring it’s heavy hand of regulation down on all of us whether we need it or not.
The Federal Government is out of touch with how the average taxpayer lives their lives. They issue steaming mounds of regulations that cater to this group or that group but alot of what they are producing doesn’t need to exist at all. In the absence of Federal Law – States could make their own decisions about how their school lunch programs should operate. But again – the Right and the Left love to stick their nose into everyone’s business.
Neither my post nor my ideas are nonsense. It isn’t nonsense to expect the Federal government to rule with a light touch; same with the state but at least we have more access to our state legislators and they have to be more responsive to their people.