Without question, job interviewing is stressful. It ranks
second to a family death, divorce, relocating, major illness and losing employment. It qualifies as no laughing
matter. When it comes to politics, however, the entire process can turn into a
three-ring circus, replete with clowns riding jackasses and people running
around scooping up elephant poop.
In the realm of
serious interviewing and vetting, the process
is no joke. Most screening interviewers take the task seriously, and many find
the process as equally challenging,
frustrating and stress producing as job candidates do.
Most of the major
employers have ultra-strict interviewing procedures, while mid-size organizations
tend to be somewhat less so. The smaller operations gravitate toward
lousy-goosy—similar to what you see on
the boob tube.
Different ground
rules apply to distinctive positions and skill needs. Governmental entities
usually have stricter guidelines than non-governmental organizations. Within
the federal government, for example, at the upper levels, the hiring process takes into consideration the political factor.
The dichotomy
that exists can best be illustrated by using the State Department. At the
lowest rung—an entry-level clerical position–the application process can literally
take your breath away.
Such a position
requires tedious amounts of exhausting paperwork. If the job involves working
in an overseas embassy, you may have an advanced degree, plus multiple language
proficiencies under your belt. Naturally, you will have to undergo the full Monty treatment by both the FBI and
NSA.
At the opposite
end of that hiring spectrum, there is the Secretary of State position (currently held by John Kerry). For that,
the qualifications are simple: You need to be a US citizen, be appointed by the
President, and confirmed by the US Senate. The hard part is having the
political connections. A certified elementary school teacher has to hold more
credentials.
Even to hold the
Presidency, the qualifications are minimal: You have to be 35 years of age, a
US citizen and must have previously lived in the US for 14 years (though not necessarily consecutive). Oh, and you have to secure 270
Electoral College votes—that’s the heavy-lifting part. The scary part is that you
could be dumb as dog droppings, and still meet the qualifications.
We overly rely on the broadcast media to vet
the candidates who haphazardly apply for the job. Ben Carson found that out
when he informed Anderson Cooper he wasn’t applying for the job. Cooper reminded
old Ben that he was indeed applying for a
job. In a flash, Cooper’s quip torpedoed Ben’s lofty political aspirations.
We (the stakeholders in the upcoming election)
should not rely on quick-witted show-host moderators to perform our due
diligence for us. We bear some of that
responsibility. I have a short list of
questions that will never be asked. But just for fun, I’ll share a few.
For Trump:
You have repeatedly used the phrase, “if
they show me proper respect and are fair.” You’ve used the phrase countless
times during your campaign. Why do you deserve respect and fairness when you
show none toward others?
For Clinton: Has your husband shared
with you why he signed the NAFTA
legislation the Republicans wrote? If so, would you share his reasoning or
rationale for doing so?
For Trump:
I’m taking bets that you’ll never release your tax returns, so I won’t ask. But
what about a sealed, certified transcript of your courses at Wharton? I am
betting you won’t release those either. Tell me whether I’m right or wrong? And
why?
For Clinton: You’ve admitted that using
a private server for State Department communications was a mistake. What have
you learned from that mistake?
For Trump:
You have repeatedly told voters you are very smart and “have a very good mind.”
You’ve campaigned on that numerous times. Would you mind if an independent
examiner tested and evaluated your IQ?
For Clinton: Many people, mostly voters, and all NRA members, are interested in
your position on the Second Amendment. Clarify for voters the type of proactive
modifications you might push for Congress to enact? (The question implies Congress would act, but don’t worry, they won’t.)
For Trump:
While you were at Wharton, you majored in Finance, correct? Would you mind if I
asked you a couple of standard eighth-grade mental math questions?
For Clinton: Would you seriously
consider appointing Mr. Barack Obama to the Supreme Court? Include in your
response, why or why not.
For Trump:
You have accused your opponent of having had extramarital affairs. You’ve
openly boasted about your extramarital affairs, but what tangible proof do you
possess that warrants making such a slanderous and penurious accusation of your
opponent? Remember, I’m asking for tangible proof—not supposition.
For Clinton: What is your plan for fixing
the educational system? And, how would you go about selling that plan to a
do-nothing Congress?
For Trump: You’ve stated that you’ve created many, many jobs.
You’ve also declared bankruptcy many times. In all those jobs you created, how
many those workers got stiffed when you declared bankruptcy?
For Clinton: The Clinton Foundation has
come under attack for accepting foreign donations. How have those foreign donations been spent?
For Trump: Have you ever heard of Seven Arrows Investment and
Development Corp? (Yes) Have you ever
contracted with Seven Arrows to do business in Cuba on behalf of Trump Casinos
and Hotels under the guise of humanitarian purposes? (Yes) Are you aware that you were in violation of a US trade embargo
for this clandestine activity?
For Trump:
It has come to light that you’re heavily in debt to a Saudi prince and lenders
from China. How much in debt are you to these foreign entities, and how might
that influence our nation’s relationships with those two countries? Also, are
you in debt to any other foreign entities, such as Russia or Ukraine?
For Both: A lot of retirees are annoyed
about having their Social Security taxed. What would your administration’s plan
be to keep Social Security solvent?
For Both: What is your stand on raising
the minimum wage across the board?
For Both: What is your substantive plan
to fund the federal government without raising taxes on the ever-dwindling middle
class?
For Both: Automated technology and
artificial intelligence will continue to replace everyday jobs. Even the
coal-mining industry could be totally automated. What long-range strategy to
deal with that issue?
For Both: Congress has shown no
interest in simplifying revising the US tax code, nor will Congress consider
reform campaign funding laws. What would be your strategy to get Congress to do
anything?
For Both: According to the US Health Department, the US population is
seriously overweight. Michelle Obama made an attempt to raise the bar, but her
role-model efforts encountered fierce resistances. What could you a President possibly
do where others have failed?
For Both: As an entity, the healthcare
industry is running amuck—mostly due to high administrative costs and
overcharging Medicare and Medicaid. Would you consider nationalizing the
healthcare industry? If not, how would you as President correct it, assuming
Congress will do absolutely nothing to help you?
For Both: The North Pole is melting. Sea levels are rising. Weather is becoming
larger and more violent. What are your views on global warming?
For Both: Should the NRA be
reclassified as a Political Action Committee rather than a nonprofit
organization?
All in fun, folks.
Then again, perhaps not. Don’t fret: I can assure readers most of these
questions will not be asked by bobble-headed,
broadcast media moderators. Both major parties might cry foul. On the other hand, given the political bombast, chicanery, and arrogance, what do stakeholders
have to lose?
Copyrighted © 2016 by
Robert James