2006-08-02 16:35:43 · 19 answers · asked by opjames 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Because the positions attract megalomaniacs who know how to do only one thing well, impress people. People like this get elevated to positions of power because they appear to be the things that everyone wants them to be. So they get voted for based on these vaporous assumptions, and as it turns out the only thing they were competent at was campaigning for the job. It's all about image and impressing the right people.
2006-08-02 16:41:53 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The incompetent seem to rise to the top almost anywhere you go! Maybe people are afraid of others that can actually think without their nose 3/4 up someones rectum!
And why should the change? GM. one of the largest companies in the world, is rift with incompetent leaders. What's their incentive for being competent? They pay no taxes and get a refund every year.While the ship jobs to everywhere but the US!
2006-08-02 16:43:33 · answer #2 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
besides the very incontrovertible fact that your question provides the probability to various human beings to vent their spleen on the Iraq warfare, they don't answer your question - it really is totally pertinent one. the answer shows the pointlessness of most of the argument. a million. Chilcott gained't declare any warfare unlawful or every person to have acted illegally - he isn't any longer a courtroom and this isn't a tribulation and that isn't any longer in his remit. it really is like a post-mortem. 2. many all and sundry is perplexing what you've requested about - they are perplexing the warfare being declared 'unlawful/unlawful'; with warfare-crimes. no longer the same difficulty in any respect. There could properly be warfare-crimes in a lawful warfare; and no warfare-crimes in an unlawful warfare. 3. affirming warfare 'unlawfully' isn't a warfare-crime in international regulation; - no count number what percentage anti-Blairites could want it otherwise 4. in easy words the international criminal courtroom or the UN could declare a rustic to have acted illegally. which could require Iraq to hotel a grievance. 5. The 'penalty' could be that the country in contact could ought to pay reparations to the Iraqi authorities. properly, the Iraqi authorities isn't soliciting for them and has gained many billions of greenbacks to tackle the mess the coalition made contained in the first position, and needs many billions better. 6. The illegality of the invasion (if it changed into) changed into ratified by ability of the UN protection council after the substantial conflict stopped; the colation changed into declared to be the 'occupying ability' thereby granting certain rights and implementing certain duties to the 'occupying ability'. Therafter, it ceased to be 'unlawful'. So - as you'll locate from the logical procedure above; the actual repercussions of there being a announcement that the Iraqi warfare changed into unlawful could be - precisely no longer something. Sorry to disappoint those hoping otherwise.
2016-11-27 22:10:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Incompetance or Crooks?
With big money at stake you tend to see the thieves come out. Just because they wear a suit doesn't mean they are not a crook.
Call me old fashion, but I always thought the elected representatives should represent the people and defend the Constitution.
2006-08-02 16:45:17 · answer #4 · answered by Reality 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If all the leaders are competent and smart, there would be chaos all around.. everyone would be fighting on every issue due to their ego. It happens so in all fields that one smart guy would make 10 incompetent guys work under him so that he can manage them easily.
2006-08-02 16:44:28 · answer #5 · answered by kartoo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just Lucky!! If everyone voted,the results would be alot different.Only a small portion of the population votes.Politicians know who to target.Most people are too frustrated to try and make a difference,but that is the only thing that will actually change things for the better.PEACE!!
2006-08-02 16:44:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there are so many liberals running for office. Let's elect George Bush III in 2008 and keep riding the wave baby.
2006-08-02 17:05:25 · answer #7 · answered by foxray43 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because incompetent people voted for them & the competent people didn't vote at all.
2006-08-02 16:42:29 · answer #8 · answered by Joseph, II 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Easy. In order to get to the top political positions, its almost a necessity to be dishonest, a cheat, and in general a ruthless scumbag. How else are you going to win over the public... with truth??
2006-08-02 17:00:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Read the Peter Principle.
2006-08-02 16:41:06 · answer #10 · answered by Lelaki 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋