www. ElectionsAreStupid .com
A realistic cynical view of elections
There are several reasons why elections in their current form are stupid. The current form of elections almost guarantees that a small group of people with evil intent and without shame will take complete control of the economy by manupulating the election process so that they make sure that they get all the corrupt people they need into government to promote and protect their previleged monopoly positions to enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of the population. The people they back for election have been pre-tested by them to be corruptible. We can call this small group of people that are the promotors of corruption the "Master Puppeteers" because they pull all the strings in an econpomy. The corrupt politicians that are promoted into office will assist the "Master Puppeteers" in plundering the economy of trillions of dollars at the expense of all the rest of us. And that plundering is done perfectly legal with all the laws and regulations that have been written by the Puppeteers and passed into law by the corrupt politicians that are royally rewarded by the thousands of lobbyists with large bribes.
The Puppeteers have a good system to select candidates that they will finance to run in the general election. All candidates that run in the primaries for election are tested by the Puppeteers for their corruptibility and the ones that are most corruptible are funded for their election to win in the primaries. The Uppeteers will fund the most corruptible candidates of each party so it does not matter in the general election who wins because either way the Puppeteers have a highly corruptible person in office and get any legislation they want passed by them into law. To find the most corruptible candidates among all the politicians that run in the primaries at all levels of government, you offer all the people that run in the primaries bribes. You offer them free hunting trips to Montana, free golfing trips to Scotland, free Carribean cruises or vacations for their whole family and other free stuff. The primary candidates that accept the most bribes are the ones that are financially backed by the Puppeteers to run in the final elections. The Puppeteers select one candidate from each party, so it does not matter which candidate of either party wins because they have their guaranteed corrupt person in office.
If you were to need to have a job done well such as cleaning a drain pipe it would be stupid to hold an ELECTION among butchers, bakers and candlestick makers to find a person qualified to do the job. It would be normal wisdom to make a SELECTION from among plumbers that are skilled for that job. Yet in choosing the people that are expected to do a good job in running our various levels of government we let all comers have a shot at it by way of elections. We need good administrators for the job of elected official and people who have some notion of economics. Yet we wind up with a lot of lawyers and teachers because they are apparently more corruptible and they have the gift of gabb and have already been tested for their corruptibility and they have an overblown opinion of themselves.
People appointed to cabinet posts or hired to perform government jobs are not chosen by way of elections. They are chosen by way of selection from a group of people who are thought to have qualifications required for the job. At least that is how it used to be in former years. Today, I regret to say, the way people are chosen for government jobs are appointed by the corrupt people that were elected and they are most likely pre-selected by the Master Puppeteers that got the corrupt legislators elected.
WE NEED A BETTER SYSTEM THAN ELECTIONS
Should there be some thought given to bring change to this senseless process and apply more reasonable methods of deriving at better qualified people for leadership positions? Because the way it is, we would wind up with better people in office if we were to just have a blindfolded drawing from all the names in the White Pages of the phone book.
If you were to need brain surgery, would you hold an election among lawyers, school teachers, retired military personnel, clergy, gay rights advocates, ethnic leadership types, union leaders, actors and sundry other people? Of course not. You would make a selection from among a number of brain surgeons and scrutinize their records of qualifications and prior practice. Even if you wind up selecting the worst brain surgeon of the bunch, your chances of survival are better than if you were to have the surgery performed by a lawyer or a school teacher.
The reasons why many politicians in general have grave character flaws are as follows:
INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO HAVE A REASONABLE CHANCE OF BECOMING ELECTED MUST HAVE A MAJORITY OF THE FOLLOWING NON-HARMFUL ATTRIBUTES PLUS ALSO HARMFULL CHARACTER FLAWS: THESE POINTS ARE NOT LISTED IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE. THEY ARE OF CUMULATIVE IMPORTANCE. HE OR SHE WHO HAS THE MOST OF THESE ATTRIBUTES AND CHARACTER FLAWS HAS THE BEST CHANCE OF BECOMING ELECTED. The most important character flaw must be corruptibility so that the Master Puppeteers will be funding their election campaign with as much support as it takes to become elected.
1. MUST BE MALE.
For various valid practical reasons and several politically incorrect reasons females have a lesser chance to become elected than males.
With this electability requirement of being male we practically lose the vast majority of the female population to being able to run for elective office with the prospect of winning. That is effectively 50% of the population (females) with a lesser degree of electability. And the factors of leadership ability and intelligence did not enter into the equation. That leaves about 50% of the population as potential candidates for elective office.
2. MUST BE TALL.
The second requirement is to be a tall male, rather than short in stature. It has been statistically established that the tall males have a distinct advantage over males of shorter stature when it comes to electability.
Obviously 50% of the males are shorter than the other 50%. We are losing another 50% of the male population to this attribute that is important in electability requirements. We are now down to 25% of the total population as possible successful candidates for elected office. The requirement of being tall is likely driven by the female vote that subconsciously favors taller males (discriminatory, I know, but that is Mother Nature at work). There is a preference among male voters to taller males as well, but the percentage shift is smaller.
3. MUST BE REASONABLY ACCEPTABLE LOOKING.
The third requirement is that the candidate has a reasonably attractive facial appearance. You need to be looking reasonably appealing on a billboard and on television campaign ads. You cannot expect to become elected if you look like the Hunchback of Notre Dame (I know that this is discrimination as well, but you cannot force voters by law or otherwise to be non-discriminatory when they are voting).
Again 50% of the remaining 25% potentially electable people have a more attractive personal appearance than the other 50% and therefor have an important edge over lesser good looking people. The requirement of having a more attractive appearance (face, erect stature, broader shoulders) is driven by voters of both sexes. We are now down to 12.5% of the population that has a reasonable chance of becoming elected and we still have not considered leadership ability and intelligence.
4. MUST BELONG TO A LARGE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP OR MANY LARGE SUCH GROUPS.
The fourth point of importance to electability is having an association to a group, be it a religious association or belonging to an ethnic group (yes we officially legislate color-blindness and we officially legislate separation of state and religion, but we violate both of these rules at the ballot box. When we are in the voting booth we immediately forget all our lofty ideals. Why? Because it is a secret vote that allows us to express all our biases in secrecy). It means that candidates from a particular religious slant or candidates from a particular ethnic background will have a heavy advantage among like constituents. With this attribute requirement we lose at least 50% of the remaining 12.5% electable population and we are now down to about 6% that have electability assets and we as yet have still not considered leadership ability and intelligence (there is a difference between intelligence and connivance, being sly, clever and dishonest).
5. MUST BE CHARISMATIC.
The fifth requirement to be electable is charisma. You need to have more charisma than your opponent. Charisma is this rare quality attributed to leaders who arouse fervent popular devotion and enthusiasm, personal magnetism or charm. Since the vast majority of humans lack this very important quality altogether, it is only necessary to have more of it than your opponent. Half of the remaining 6% people have more charisma than the other half. This leaves us with less than 3% of the population that has a reasonable chance of becoming elected because they have passing marks for the first 5 requirements.
6. MUST BE ABLE TO LIE ON A FREQUENT BASIS.
The sixth most important point in having a reasonable chance to become elected is to be able to talk with “forked tongue”. This means that you must have the wherewithal to be able to express ever shifting opinions that are closely tailored for consumption by the particular audience spoken to. If it is a “labor” audience then labor friendly opinions must be spoken and labor friendly promises must be made. If the audience is made up of business leaders then business friendly opinions and promises must be spoken. In other words the candidate must be able to lie a lot AND very importantly, must be able to cover up the lies and get away with them. With this very important requirement we lose another 50% of the 3% remaining candidates because half of them will be better liars than the other half. We are now down to only 1.5% of people among the adult population who have a reasonable chance of becoming elected and we as yet have not spoken about leadership abilities and intelligence.
7. MUST BE A BACK STABBER AND MUDSLINGER.
The next requirement is that the candidate have the capacity of stabbing the opponent in the back and being able to sling mud. We lose another 50% of the remaining candidates here because 50% of them are better at these negative traits than the other 50% and we are down to less than 1% of the general adult population having a reasonable chance of becoming elected.
8. MUST BE A CLOWN.
An important requirement is that the candidate must be able to kiss baby bottoms, hug grannies, wear straw hats and squeeze a lot of hands. Again, 50 % of the candidates will be better at all these tasks than the other 50%. We lose another 50% of the remaining candidates and are left with less than 0.5% of the general population that has a reasonable chance of becoming elected.
9. MUST BE ABLE TO SELL HIM/HERSELF TO THE SPECIAL INTERESTS ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE POLITICAL DIVIDE.
It is important to raise a lot of election funds. This point is equally important to poor candidates as to wealthy candidates. The more money a candidate can raise the more high bidders believe to have the candidate in their “pocket”. The candidate is making a lot of promises to opposing interest groups and once elected must balance his loyalties between the many special interests. This is very costly to the taxpayers who will ultimately pay the price for the promises made. Again we lose about 50% of the remaining possible candidates because 50% of them can sell their souls to the devil more effectively than the other 50%. We are now left with only 0.25% of the population that has a reasonable chance of becoming elected.
10. MUST HAVE A LONG CAREER IN POLITICS.
The candidates must have the mental and the physical stamina to slowly climb the ladder of political infighting and deal with the physical requirements of campaigning on the road. Again we lose 50% of the candidates because half of the candidates have paid more political dues and have more physical and mental stamina for the process of elections. And we are left with only 0.13% of the adult population that has a reasonable chance of becoming elected for political office. In all this we have not put a lot of value on leadership ability or intelligence.
11. The most important character flaw that candidates must have is that they are easily corruptible for low amounts of money. It is thought by many that everybody is corruptible at a certain price. The price may be small for some and very large for others. Some people cannot be persuaded into corruption by any amount of money and the price the Manipulators force on them is threatening them with harm to their family members or harm to themselves. If that does not work the Manupulators simply will get these stubborn people out of the way by having them pay the ultimate price.
THE SAD TRUTH IS THAT THE PROCESS OF ELECTIONS LEAVES US WITH A MUCH GREATER CHANCE OF GETTING CORRUPTIBLE CHARACTERLESS PEOPLE INTO ELECTED OFFICE THAN WE HAVE A CHANCE OF GETTING DECENT INTELLIGENT PEOPLE WITH GOOD CHARACTER.
The 11 requirements that are factors in becoming elected will result in elected officials that have a majority of those requirements. The first five requirements are rather harmless and will result in: Tall, reasonably good looking charismatic males who have association to several large groups of special interests. The largest such groups are political parties and religious affiliations. It does not help to be politically associated with small political parties or socially associated with fringe religious groups. In fact that guarantees a non-viable candidacy. If a person is idealistic (lacking realism) and believes in appealing to the higher intellect of people, then running for elective office is only a cute exercise in futility.
The remaining 5 requirements are far more harmful and will result in: Clowns who are characterless back-stabbing liars and who sell their soul to the highest bidder and who have reinforced the 5 negative aspects through the process of ascending the political ladder within their political associations.
The average decent citizen who has established him/herself as an intelligent honest person will have a less than slim chance of becoming elected. It happens on occasion that decent people with good character get elected, but mostly in the lowest ranks of political office where the stakes are low and the distillation process has not as yet taken its toll. Climbing up the ladder into higher office distills most of the decent people out of the process. Just once in awhile the general electorate will see through the smoke and mirrors of election procedures and be fortunate enough to wind up with a person in higher office who has the fewest of the negative traits required for success in political elections.
If we continnue with our tried and proven corrupt way of elections to derive at our government leaders with an election system that favors candidates with character flaws and at the same time does not require intelligence and vision, then we should not be surprised that we wind up with mediocre leaders with character flaws. Surprise, surprise. When we then later discover that some of them have been selling their souls to the highest bidder and are lining their own pockets, we should not be astonished at their corruption and dishonesty because our system of elections makes it a requirement to have these character flaws to become elected in the first place.
Maybe the objective of instituting elections was to create the most democratic method to give anybody the opportunity to become President or to hold any other elective office. That objective has not been met with current methods of holding elections. Under current election methods only a fraction of a percentage of the general public has the advantage (if you could call it that) of having a majority of the 10 above mentioned attributes and character flaws to have a reasonable chance of becoming elected. That certainly does not make it a democratic (having an equal chance) level playing field to being able to become elected.
The question is: Are we best served with this system of elections? Or can we improve upon the current system whereby honest people with high standards have an equal chance of becoming elected without having to stoop to the negative tactics often employed by those who in our present election system have the upper hand?
Can our current system for deriving at leadership positions for our various levels of government officials be improved upon by employing methods that will give people with intelligence, job qualification and good character at least an even playing field if not an edge?
Selections are the answer to the problem. Stay tuned for http://www.selectionsaresmart.com/
If you have any comments or suggestions, please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org .
A word on improving your environment
Most people fail to understand that the environment that is closest to them has the greatest impact on their quality of life. There are millions of people very concerned about the cleaning up of the polluted environment. They have big protests against dump sites they want to have cleaned up but they fail to see that the closest environment that has the greatest impact on their quality of life is their own body, the body that holds their own life. They walk around in a very toxic and polluted body that they dump very toxic medications in every day and they feed themselves with food that contains a lot of pollutants as well. They have all kinds of illnesses that they can easily reduce or eliminate and certainly prevent. They are obese, diabetic, have high cholesterol and high blood pressure. They have arthritis, muscle and joint pain and they fail to see that they have all of these problems for lack of exercise OR BECAUSE OF TOO MUCH EXERCISE. They can clean up their own toxic bodies without having to have protest rallies and cleaning up their own bodies and improving their health will improve their quality of life much more than cleaning up all the pollution on Earth. Amazing, isn't it?
The big problem is to learn how to clean up your body and strengthening your immune system. The healthcare industry (I call it illness industry) has no interest in your health improvement. They can only make money on illness. Them teaching you how to become healthy and avoid illness would be like a car mechanic wanting to teach you how to take care of your car so that you would never need to bring your car in for repair. Car mechanics make money on repairing cars, they are not interested in "healthy" cars. There is no money in "healthy" cars, there is only money in unhealthy cars. And so it is that the whole illness industry and the pharmaceutical industry is not interested in your health. To improve their image in the public eye, they will on occasion mention the importance of diet and exercise, but your doctor learns hardly anything about diet and exercise in medical school because there is no money in healthy bodies. Illness is the feedstock for the illness industry and health improvement would destroy that whole business model. That is why in all Congressional discussions on the illness problem there is never a single word about PREVENTION or WELLNESS.
The major factors in improving your health are exercise and diet. Both are very easy to make big improvements with your health. Exercise is almost impossible for 92% of the population but is very possible with a very expensive 4 minute per day exercise machine http://www.fastworkout.com/ . Diet improvement is cheaper when you follow my 2 simple diet recommendations: 1. Eat living food, food that has life in it or that has been dead as short of a time as possible (no processed food in cans or in the deep freezer that has been dead for a long time). 2. Buy food that has a very short shelflife and spoils in the shortest amount of time Reason is that when food spoils very quickly such as bread getting moldy, it means that if bread can be 3 weeks on the shelf without getting moldy that there are not even valuable nutrients in it that are interesting to mold and micro-organisms to live on and that there is then obviously nothing of worthwhile food value in it for humans.
Following is a link to a very clever exercise machine with which 87% of people can succeed being on an effective lifelong exercise program. Why? Because it gives a complete workout for cardio, strength and limberness in exactly 4 minutes per day (never more than 4 minutes). People do not exercise because it takes too long. If an exercise requires 15 minutes or more then 92% of the population is unable to do it because they do not have the discipline to do 15 minutes of exercise per day. Brushing teeth is something that people can do because it only takes a couple of minutes. If teeth brushing were to require 15 minutes or more there would be very few people brushing their teeth. So when people become interested in doing exercise, they immediately set themselves up for failure when they buy exercise equipment that requires 15 minutes or more. Only 8% of home exercise equipment is used and 92% is totally useless exercise equipment because it is not used. Similarly the average voters keep electing government leaders from among people that have serious character flaws and are corrupt and are surprised why the economy keeps collapsing on regular intervals.
45 minute exercise is stupid
http://www.FastExercise.com/ is smart