Dear Charlie. Or is it Charley?
I read your book. Well, sort of. I had one of my people read it, and then summarize it for me, and I listened to that for all of 90 seconds, so I think I get what you were trying to say. But I gotta disagree with some of your conclusions. Well, one of them, anyway. You claim that evaluation makes people smarter, because the stupid ones die before they can pass on their jeans. That doesn't make any sense. My own experience shows that most people aren't smart, even presidents. All of the presidents in the past have needed intelligence briefings, and they include evaluations. At least, the one I attended did, and it didn't make me any smarter. And I pass on my jeans all the time. You never see me wearing jeans, do you? If evaluation made people smarter you'd think that Hillary would've figured out how to win, after all the evaluations she's had.
Here's my take on things. Giraffes have got long necks, right? So's they can reach the top branches. And they did that all on their own, without an evaluation. It's the same with people. Take me, for example. I'm smart because I tricked a lot of people for a lot of years into letting me use their money, and I did it for a long time without an evaluation. Even when I lost their money I made money, that's how smart I am. If your theory of evaluation was right you'd think that people would have learned something from that, wouldn't you?
You should watch my TV show. The contestants all get evaluated, and it doesn't make them any smarter. And maybe you should read the news once in a while. The media are always evaluating the voters, and it doesn't make them any smarter. The voters, I mean.
Well, that's all I wanted to say. Stop by if you're ever in New York, and I'll sign a copy of your book.
[dictated but not read]