Incompetence Touted as a Virtue


by OPOVV, ©2015

(Mar. 12, 2015) — In the real world of commerce, when a mistake may cost money and even bankruptcy, dishonest and incompetent employees are weeded out. Those companies that are flush may very well continence less than stellar employees, but when the bottom line becomes threatened, people who can’t (or won’t) pull their weight are soon discarded. Successful (profitable) enterprises thrive when everyone is on the same page.

Unions have an embarrassing history of protecting the unqualified and the lazy. The one constant in the universe is change. Maybe a worker has personal problems that affect his once-admirable productivity but now is lacking. Things happen: people change.

Marriage reflects a successful business in the model of a partnership. When each party brings to the table a 100% effort, the marriage/partnership will last. However, when one partner lies and is deceitful, the marriage will flounder and dissolve. Same with a corporation.

An employee of a corporation has a responsibility to be productive and not engage in non-productive behavior. Conducting personal business on company time and using company assets, such as phones and computers (text and emails), is a telltale sign of a disengaged employee.

So what’s a “disengaged employee?”  Well, the prime example would be Harry Reid, now wouldn’t it? Let’s throw in Nancy Pelosi, two who said they vetted Obama, but were a little short on the truth. Government employees who’ve turned their backs on the Oath they took to “defend the Constitution,” always found hanging around the water cooler waylaying anyone who wants to talk “pension.”

So where does Hillary fit into this maze of shadows and deception, a world of grey where right and wrong are just philosophical concepts to be debated by students who never had a real jobs, never having been trapped in rush-hour traffic as a way of life, year after year, where the only way out is retirement or an early death? Right-dab smack in the middle.

One question: Benghazi: Who gave the “Stand-down” order? Now that’s interesting, isn’t it? Just asking the question preconceives that there was, initially, an attempt to muster the forces to go save those guys. Meaning that cavalry was ready (perhaps) and willing (for sure) to saddle up and save the day, meaning personal was already focused; transportation arranged; fuel tanks full; ammunition chosen and loaded; weapons cocked; adrenaline spooling up.

But . . . someone gave the order to sacrifice those four guys. Someone gave the order and that order was passed down the chain of command.

Did any of Hillary’s emails reflect the “Stand-down” order chain of command from the White House and/or State, and/or the Joint Chiefs of Staff, right on down to the lowly PFC? Was the Secretary of Defense involved in any way?

Benghazi was September 11, 2012, and the American people are still waiting for answers.

Come on, Hillary, come clean. Tell us the truth: really now, who gave the “Stand-down” order? Who’s the one who left our guys out in the cold?  The family’s of those four need to know. And the American people deserve the truth.

Semper Fi


One Response to "Incompetence Touted as a Virtue"

  1. Stephen Hiller   Friday, March 13, 2015 at 10:54 AM

    “Hillary come clean” ??? It ain’t gonna happen.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.