Why is it that “we the people” of the United States of America demand that Doctors, Pharmacists, Police Officers, Firefighters, EMT’s and people in many other professions take a “TEST” before allowing them to actually work in those professions? The answer is simple; because these people hold our very lives in their hands when performing their duties.

So, why do we not demand, or even expect our representatives in Washington DC to pass any sort of “TEST” before heading to their offices to govern the most powerful country in the world; our country! We just watch them campaign, vote for our favorite party or whoever looks the least evil, and then hand them a lifetime paycheck. Afterwards we sit back and complain that they're all crooks, liars, drunks, thieves, perverts and deviants. You name the crime and it’s most likely been committed by someone WE VOTED for to govern our country.

Have even one of these people regardless of party affiliation proven him/herself to be totally trustworthy in their governing of our country? Have one of them proven they are truly fit to be responsible for the protection our lives and our children’s lives? Has any one of these people shown him or herself to even be psychologically stable? NO!!

And it seems more and more often we’re finding out that they are anything but. We can turn on the news or pick up the paper any day to find that one more of our countries most powerful people have been accused of or found guilty of serious crimes that they have enacted laws against and we are obligated to abide by. I for one am sick and tired of finding out “after the fact” that there are so many criminals and perverts leading this country. They are NOT representative of me, nor do I believe they are representative of most people in this country. So why are we allowing them to disgrace us this way in front of the whole world?

So, my proposal is that we form a nationwide organization demanding TESTING in areas of ethics, morality, and psychological stability of our countries leaders BEFORE they can take office, with all incumbents required to test immediately. If they are going to have the power to tell us what is and is not acceptable in this society, then we have the power to tell them what is and is not acceptable of our government! After all, they work for us, not visa-versa.

The time has long come and gone to identify the criminal minds, no matter which party they are with and kick them out of Washington!

I echo your feelings Kix seems like the powerful politicians are among the most perverted people around and I am quite sick of it.
Like really sick dude, its discusting

"So, my proposal is that we form a nationwide organization demanding TESTING in areas of ethics, morality, and psychological stability of our countries leaders BEFORE they can take office, with all incumbents required to test immediately."

>>>The only test you could do would be to run office-seekers naked through a high school locker room and watch for hard-ons.

Well George, I think you've pretty much proven with your response that your mind isn't one we'd want in Washington.

I guess you've never heard of the test that Law Enforcement officers throughout the U.S. are routinely required to pass in order to get and/or keep their job? It's called the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2; MMPI-A). It's a written psychological assessment, or test, used to diagnose mental disorders, personality and psychosocial disorders and/or criminal tendencies.

A few derelicts would manage to get through but I like this idea.

I would like to see politicians actually tell us what they would do if elected rather than how bad the other guy is. Then I want them to come back every week and tell us why they lied to us in the campaign.

The truth is no politician can ever adhere 100 percent to the promises he made while running for office. Remember, once he is elected he represents all the people, not just those that voted him in. If he is going to be reelected (and that is his/her main goal once elected) he must piss off as few people as possible. I was a 100 percent Reagan Republican but Ronnie never did all the things I wanted him to do and actually did some things I didn't want him to do. The same with Clinton, he actually did do some things I wanted to have done.

As far as the deviants in elected office, probably there are no more as a percentage than in the general population, its just that someone is always trying to get the dirt on the opposing party so they show up more often. And no one can say honestly that one party is more or less deviant than the other. Both parties are made up of individuals and individuals are not perfect.

I would have to disagree with you here Nathan. They legally permit themselves "immunity" from things like speeding, drunk driving, etc while in session. For some reason these people, once they get into these powerful positions believe they should be exempt from accountability. And there are a LOT more of them committing crimes and getting by with them than the public knows about.

In 1999 the following list was comprised from a series of articles. This list went out as spam to a lot of people. Of course, it's outdated now, but little attention was paid to it because everyone knew they would be voting soon and being the silly nation of people we are, everyone figured they'd vote out the criminals and vote in decent people to lead our country. Unfortunately, it appears as though we've just voted in a whole new batch of criminals.
~~~~~~~~
Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 500 employees and has the following statistics:

*29 have been accused of spousal abuse
*7 have been arrested for fraud
*19 have been accused of writing bad checks
*117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at leased 2 businesses
*3 have done time for assault
*71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
*14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
*8 have been arrested for shoplifting
*21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
*84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year

Can you guess which organization this is?

It's the 535 members of the United States Congress.

Forty five, I agree with your estimation.

I think it would be better if the group brings the lack of use of the slander , defimation, and fraud to a point and pushes for enforcement.

If the laws are made to include lies, misinformation, misrepresentation and conspiricy in political campaign speaches and adds it would stop most of the negative campaigning lies and voting records misrepresentations..

If a position is aquired by fraud it would carry a jail sentence equivelent to the term of office.

Also Any representative that votes against comprehensive campaign finance and lobbying practices would have it posted in all the news papers. No representative to be able to go to work for an industry that he had under his department.

But the biggest thing would be to send some campaign managers and staff, and or the candiate to jail and be prohibited from polititics for life.

__________________
Archimedes
Because they can't wait use Rescue 8
self closing flotation rescue device.

I believe any personality test will often have mixed results. The thought process of the person taking it is fluid, and almost ever-changing. Though I believe the test might be spot on in determining the "criminal potential" of the person at the time the test is taken, it would not serve as an accurate examination of what the person might be capable of during the entire course of his or her life.
George, I don't believe we've spoken on any issue. However, I wanted to make sure you knew I laughed out loud at this remark. It doesn't show or prove to me in any way, shape, or form that your mind is not suitable for Washingon. At its core, it showed you have a sense of humor. I am neither perturbed by this, or threatened.
Exactly. I'm in complete agreement with you, Nathan. Both parties are made up of individuals. Good or bad, slightly criminal or not, this would in my estimation make them the best people to represent the rest of us. None of us are perfect, and each of us are capable of faltering in the eyes of the law.

I honestly wouldn't feel comfortable with people calling the shots for us, who were absolutely incapable of doing wrong. What in the world would we talk about?
I think the above sentence serves as the foundation for my opposition.
I believe in "Innocent until proven guilty". The proposed testing in question acts as a slap in the face of this belief. Efforts made to determine whether or not somebody is capable of criminal acts, and refusing employment on the basis of such a determination, is not only blatantly discriminatory, but also shows a willingness to reprimand him or her for a crime he or she has not committed. Whether or not there might be cause to add a "yet" at the end of the previous sentence really doesn't matter, 'cause yeah...

Innocent until proven guilty

__________________
"Call my Complaints Department." --Edward Scott

Excellent point, I would support it.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUHXHRHguj4

Mr. Stockbroker
"As a matter of opinion though possibly retarded WVpeach is still smarter than you. LOL"