In rating the politicians or anybody working for you, the absolute requirement must be that they know and understand ethics and that they operate ethically.  This should be a dominant factor in your Rating The Politicians.

Note that ethics trumps morality as a higher (and moral) way of being.  A leader may have certain beliefs, such as religious or "morality" beliefs [believing one has the right values], but he must not impose those on others, for his 'contract' is to implement the will of the people for the good of all the people, protecting those who might be harmed. 

To explain the concepts, I take from another site, with permission, the following discussion:


Ethics is doing what creates the most good for those affected. 

However, I would add "without harming oneself", for I think we live in a "real" world.  Ideally, though, we would see that we are totally connected to the total and contributing to the total would be worth giving up our life in some circumstances - but idealism is not reality and that would harm the person, clearly - BUT if we develop this as a "value" then it is valuable and perhaps worth it (?).

I have never been able to reach that higher level.  So I just try to do what is healthy and positive.  Since I value contributing to others, when I do so, it contributes to me, so ultimately, as with all behavior, I am being "selfish" - just in a way that serves others, so it is labelled unselfish - oh, that I was so noble.

I do seek to operate on an ethical basis within my definition and limits, so I "feel" good about that and I feel that others are very safe and can rely on me never to do harm and to contribute the best I can.


Morality codes are those created (made up in the brain, not actually existing in reality) by a society to serve its overall purpose.  Like chastity rules to preserve relationships, mental health and/or physical health.  Come to church rules so that people will be infused with positive, unselfish principles so that they will not do harm.  If someone steals, that is immoral, as we don't want people taking our things!

Morality often aligns with ethics.  But sometimes the morality rules serve the interests of just a few or even of an evil purpose, such as Osama Bin Laden's followers. 

I don't give a fig newton for morality, except to the extent I don't want to harm anyone.  An example might be that I support those who want to preserve the sanctity of marriage, but I also support those who are seeking a form of making a meaningful commitment that is legal.   I support them both; they are just conflicting.

I don't seek to please everybody, follow even my church's rules (I'm in a kind of non-church church where they just seek to live better lives), or to do what is "socially acceptable", as I prioritize what I think contributes the most to me, first, and then to others.


People do the best they can given their level of knowledge, but I believe that they have an ethical obligation to increase that knowledge so that the greater good of all is achieved.

For instance, people seem to be ignorant about anger, blowing it off at and on others.  There is much harm that is needlessly incurred.  I think people can get more of what they want by not engaging in anger or any form of punishment to get others to do what they want.  I also believe that greater knowledge would serve to disappear the incredibly harmful beliefs where people believe they are threatened by things they just make up in their minds.  Education in that area is an ethical imperative, I believe.  Thus, this website.

May you increase your knowledge and wisdom so that you, and those around you, can experience a whole new level of happiness and fulfillment, operating to dramatically increase the greater good for all involved!