AMonger
Veteran Expediter
We're on a ship, sailing up the coastline. It's stormy. Our captain, it's generally agreed, is a jacktard who's about to sail us into the rocks. Let's call him, oh, George. As time goes by, most are convinced of his incompetence. He couldn't be re-elected captain, anyway, but in choosing a new captain, it was important for blame to be laid.
So we elect a guy who has only a short tenure on ships of any kind. He served a term aboard a smaller ship, though not as captain, and wasn't known for doing much of anything. He frequently couldn't even be found. Somehow, he gets hired on a larger ship in much the same position, and served only a portion of a tour, and made some pretty crazy statements about his philosophy of captaining a ship. Yet, he told us he was very different from the incumbent captain, so he was elected enthusiastically. But once he took over the bridge, he sharpened the course toward the rocks, making it clear that the ship would crash into the rocky shoreline and sink even faster, though that was hard to believe,
So here we are, about to elect another captain, and we're much closer to the rocks than before. Even the people who didn't believe the last captain was about to get us killed now know we're perilously close to the rocks. Even an experienced captain might not be able to steer us out of this mess. The course correction might come too late.
So the candidates line up, one of them being the current captain. He wants to steer us even farther left, and it's clear he's either even stupider than the previous captain (which is quite a feat, because he was our dimmest captain ever), or he actually wants to crack us up on the rocks, for whatever reasons are his. The others decry his hard line toward the rocks, though everything they say indicates they wouldn't alter our actual heading. One, though, has demonstrated far more knowledge of the designers specs and engineering, and is the sole voice advocating turning the ship away from the coastline. Not only that, but all the other candidates are in favor of locking up in the brig anyone who criticizes their steering, keeping them there without so much as a hearing until the captain decides otherwise.
So who are the jacktards that do anything other than back the one guy who wants to steer away from the rocks? Sure, they might not be completely confident in that one candidate's complete qualificiations, but they fail to realize that if we don't steer clear of the rocks RIGHT FREAKING NOW, we're not ever going to have to worry if he knows how to fend off pirates or steer around icebergs, because we're going to destroy ourselves before we run across any. Shouldn't we first worry about the cliffs that are so close we can reach over the rail and touch the rocks? The one candidate who wants to steer away from them has already pointed out that provisions exist for him to consult pirate and iceberg experts when the time comes--if we haven't destroyed ourselves on the rocks first. Or is it just that his detractors find it preferable to destroy ourselves before the pirates can?
-
You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
So we elect a guy who has only a short tenure on ships of any kind. He served a term aboard a smaller ship, though not as captain, and wasn't known for doing much of anything. He frequently couldn't even be found. Somehow, he gets hired on a larger ship in much the same position, and served only a portion of a tour, and made some pretty crazy statements about his philosophy of captaining a ship. Yet, he told us he was very different from the incumbent captain, so he was elected enthusiastically. But once he took over the bridge, he sharpened the course toward the rocks, making it clear that the ship would crash into the rocky shoreline and sink even faster, though that was hard to believe,
So here we are, about to elect another captain, and we're much closer to the rocks than before. Even the people who didn't believe the last captain was about to get us killed now know we're perilously close to the rocks. Even an experienced captain might not be able to steer us out of this mess. The course correction might come too late.
So the candidates line up, one of them being the current captain. He wants to steer us even farther left, and it's clear he's either even stupider than the previous captain (which is quite a feat, because he was our dimmest captain ever), or he actually wants to crack us up on the rocks, for whatever reasons are his. The others decry his hard line toward the rocks, though everything they say indicates they wouldn't alter our actual heading. One, though, has demonstrated far more knowledge of the designers specs and engineering, and is the sole voice advocating turning the ship away from the coastline. Not only that, but all the other candidates are in favor of locking up in the brig anyone who criticizes their steering, keeping them there without so much as a hearing until the captain decides otherwise.
So who are the jacktards that do anything other than back the one guy who wants to steer away from the rocks? Sure, they might not be completely confident in that one candidate's complete qualificiations, but they fail to realize that if we don't steer clear of the rocks RIGHT FREAKING NOW, we're not ever going to have to worry if he knows how to fend off pirates or steer around icebergs, because we're going to destroy ourselves before we run across any. Shouldn't we first worry about the cliffs that are so close we can reach over the rail and touch the rocks? The one candidate who wants to steer away from them has already pointed out that provisions exist for him to consult pirate and iceberg experts when the time comes--if we haven't destroyed ourselves on the rocks first. Or is it just that his detractors find it preferable to destroy ourselves before the pirates can?
-
You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
