When the "beef" is tainted you get rid of it.

Like many of my readers, I am trying to make sense of the District and their approach to managing public resources.

Recently, the District discovered that tainted beef was purchased for use in preparing meals for our children. A warning was issued and the District immediately removed all beef products from their menu. Of course, their motivation must have been to protect their image and prevent children from becoming deathly ill with whatever disease might have been lurking in this beef.

Why would the District view management any differently? Their current management model is tainted. Why wouldn't they pull this spoiled product from their shelves and prevent the unnecessary exposure of our children to this disease? We have already been forced to ingest a number of servings and our financial health has been significantly compromised. Why wouldn't the District be concerned about their image on this topic or the possibility of casualties?

Clearly, the problem with the management "beef" is that it is also loaded with fat. This fat gets into District administration and starts gumming up the manner in which vital, life-giving fluids get to our organs. These organs then begin to fail and die, leaving the District less able to function optimally.

It would stand to reason, that as a body runs out of organs, the brain and heart are quickly incapacitated and the whole body slips into a coma and dies. Why not eradicate the disease or carve out the infection before it causes far more damage than the body can tolerate?

Editorial: Please refrain from calling anyone a "Mad Cow" in your comments. Thank you.