atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#5270: Losing their grip on the reins?

Hillary Clinton is a symptom of a larger problem.
There's another way to look at it. That is, the ruling class has lost control of the reigns and they can no longer police themselves. Hillary Clinton has no business being president. It's absurd even without the massive corruption and criminality. Hillary's crowning achievement was marrying Bill Clinton 50 years ago. Even a deeply corrupt and incompetent ruling class should be able to filter out the likes of Hillary Clinton. The fact that they cannot bring themselves to flush her from the system when they have an iron clad criminal case against her is ominous.

There's another angle here. The whole "Arkanside" thing is a fun gag, but it does appear that the ruling class is playing much tougher with one another. Judge Roberts was either blackmailed or threatened into reversing his opinion on ObamaCare. That’s incandescently obvious. FBI Director Comey's erratic performance yesterday suggests there's more here than just a man suddenly changing his mind about law enforcement. He has prosecuted many others for these exact same crimes.
If the ruling class has indeed lost their grip on the reins, it means bad things for the little people.

In Game of Thrones, by and large, it is not the nobility who suffers when the nobility wars against itself. Occasionally this or that noble is killed, but by and large the vast armies of smallfolk are the ones who do all the bleeding and dying.

This AoSHQ headline says it all:
Let a Thousand Treasons Bloom: Our Nation's Attorney General Refuses to Say If The Law Means What It Says When It Says That Giving Secret Information to a Non-Cleared Person is Illegal
...because it only applies to people who are not Democrat Presidential nominees. If Hillary Clinton were a Republican, she would have been arrested and jailed when this story first broke--last year--and the primaries would have excluded her entirely.

People who have committed lesser crimes than Hillary--violations of the same law--have been sent to prison for a long time. Because they're not powerful Democrats.

* * *

What, indeed, if whites start hitting back? It will not take much more to spark genuine race wars in the United States. If blacks begin killing whites solely because they're white--if this idiocy becomes widespread--do not expect whites to take it laying down. Do expect a return of Jim Crow and Judge Lynch.

It would be bad. It would be very bad. The attitude would be, "Well, we tried treating you as equals, and this is what you do? Go to the back of the bus. In fact, get off the bus entirely and walk. We're done with you." Segregation would return with a vengeance.

Remember Francis Porretto's story? This one? That's what would happen.

It's not just America. What more proof do you need of a hate crime than someone yelling, "I HATE WHITE PEOPLE!" and punching a white person? If a white person yelled "I HATE BLACK PEOPLE!" and punched a black person, that'd be a hate crime, and they'd talk about it on the nightly news for two months. This double standard has existed for a very long time, and it has not gone unnoticed...and it rankles.

Meanwhile, elsewhere--where it is not so racially charged as it is in the US--the segregation bandwagon is picking up steam.

* * *

Cheating enabled and encouraged by faculty in order to make the school look better than it is. Why not? The faculty makes out fairly well in the deal. Sure, the kids get screwed when they try to do other things and find out they're not all that well-educated after all, but that's someone else's problem, right?

One of the things that bothers me considerably about my job is that it forces me to work that way: focus on resolving the issue well enough that the caller rings off and gives me a good survey, and don't care about the long-term complications. Can I get this guy to decide to keep his extraneous phone line until the end of this conversation so I don't get the disconnect on my metrics? Will giving this woman a $20 credit, even though she's not entitled to it, keep her from down-checking me? Can that other person be transferred to another department so I don't have to spend an hour trying to figure out how to get e-mails on his phone, thus jacking my number of calls handled for the day?

It's bad for me. It's stressful. I want to work in an environment where I'm allowed to fix the problem without having to resort to tricks or chicanery, without having to fob an issue off on someone else. The requirements of the job are just contradictory enough, though, that I must, because to do otherwise is to risk censure and firing. That's what I hate most about it; if I had the power to fix things without doing that kind of shit it wouldn't be nearly as bad.

That's why I want to go work a job where I sit at a workbench and do whatever-it-is they pay me to do, without having to talk to too many people. Something technically demanding where I am empowered to do what is needed to fix the problem in front of me. Where I come home from work tired because I achieved--because I fixed things and made them work!--not because I'm beaten down by stress and the strain of trying to tap-dance as fast as I possibly can to avoid bad surveys and metrics.

That's what I want. I don't mind hard work but it has to be useful, it has to matter to me...and saving someone $10 a month on their cell phone bill just doesn't mean anything to me. (And it doesn't happen very often. Especially now that they have the $New_Major_Telecom_Plan.)

Well, I've got a feeling that things will be changing soon, that another job is on the horizon. I just need to keep punching until it gets here.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.