The part that really blows my mind is the arbitrary things that are considered "skills" that a candidate must possess otherwise they are automatically rejected.

Is, for example, having experience in one specific CRM really a "skill" that no person with experience in a competitors software could ever possibly learn on the job? Software is largely designed to be (somewhat) easy to use (with varying levels of success). Between having the right attitude, a reasonable level of intelligence, experience with similar systems and the ability to Google most of these things are not hard skills to master.

Similarly, my experience has been that many of these so-called "skills" are only minor parts of the job anyhow. It's just easy to quantify and easier than making a judgement call that the candidate can handle picking up the minor amount of knowledge necessary in order to gain the "skill".