I recognize that some may regard my critique and negativism
toward the current Oval Office occupant as personal and categorical animosity.
I reject that characterization for a number of reasons and base my critique
upon objective measures of performance in relation to the high office involved.
In my estimation, the American public does not demand a great deal from its
presidents. Contrary to popular mythology, we do not really expect superheroes
and average persons can rise to the level of very good, if not great,
presidents. But placing individuals in such high office gives us the right to
objectively judge them and hold them accountable for their performance. What is
expected in such a leader are four essential qualities: honesty, integrity, principled
decision making and human compassion.
Honesty is the quality for truthfulness in communications
and actions. It does not require omniscience or superior intellect. It does
require the ability and willingness to speak and act consistently with what one
knows or reasonably should know to be factual; and to avoid misrepresentation and
deceit by making statements or taking actions one knows are untrue. In PUTHOP’s
case, the fully documented volume of untruthful statements and actions is so
large that it is unfortunately reasonable to expect that his statements are
lies rather than assume they are honest. He has been described as a “pathological
liar,” one who may be incapable of honesty and truthfulness. Not only does
PUTHOP fail to tell the truth, he suppresses those who are willing and able to
tell truth to the public. Witness the number of whistleblowers fired by PUTHOP,
and the tenuous post of Dr. Fauci whose expertise and evidence based
disclosures are regularly contradicted by PUTHOP.
Integrity is the quality of accepting responsibility for one’s
own actions and for tasks undertaken or assigned. No one is required to take on
the role of president, but doing so involves accepting a great number of
responsibilities. No reasonable person should accept the job who is unable or
unwilling to perform the necessary tasks as well as possible and accept
responsibility for failures as well as successes. When there are shortcomings,
one acts with integrity by owning the deficiencies and vowing to do better.
Integrity is not about “looking good,” but rather about “doing well.” Here
PUTHOP’s actions show lack of integrity. When faced with major challenges, he
has ignored fundamental tenets of the problem and acted based upon egoism. This
is true with regard to trade and foreign policy. It is starkly apparent in his
choice to place persons who are inexperienced, corrupt, or clearly incompetent
in positions of high official capacity in nearly every federal government
agency. [EPA, Commerce, Justice, Treasury, SCOTUS, Education, Housing, etc.]
And it is currently evident in his clearly incompetent response to the COVID-19
Pandemic, in which he ignored the impending threat to the American people and
economy and refuses to follow advice from experts who DO understand the problem
and have proposed reasoned solutions.
Principled decision making is the quality of grounding
decisions and actions upon evidence and logic in a manner that is consistent
with some moral and ethical construct geared to accomplish responsibilities of
the job of president. The job entails representing the public good and best
interests of ALL Americans, not just those who one likes or who agree with the
president. It also involves fidelity to established fundamental principles such
as the rule of law and not abusing the power of high office for personal gain
for self or family. Here too PUTHOP has repeatedly acted erratically and in an
unprincipled manner. His abuse of office to promote his political campaign led
to impeachment, and his position was protected only by similarly unprincipled
action by a GOP controlled Senate. His response in marshaling testing
resources for all Americans in response to the Pandemic has been tainted by his
statement that states are “on their own” and that those who showed “appreciation”
to him would get aid while others who did not grovel and supplicate would not
be favored. Now he has reversed himself by throwing away criteria for relaxing
social distancing restrictions grounded in research and evidence in favor of a
push to “reopen the economy” which he apparently thinks will improve his
personal chances of re-election. And he has rejected the rule of law in
directing the DOJ to drop felony charges against Gen Michael Flynn, a move that
has confounded legal experts of all political parties. More examples are easy
to find.
Human compassion is the quality of empathy and the
acknowledgement of pain and suffering of fellow human beings, even when
powerless to prevent or alleviate their suffering. It also involves a personal commitment
to prevent such suffering to the extent one can. There are numerous reports and
studies that document the failure, and perhaps inability, of PUTHOP to express
empathy and compassion for anyone other than perhaps his family. He has
repeatedly used racist dog whistle claims and sought to demonize immigrants of
color. His choice to adopt policies that will inevitably lead to more suffering
and deaths from COVID-19 in order to promote potential profits for the “economy”
is another example of lack of compassion. Keep in mind that the “economy” being
privileged in his action involves wealth disparity at historic levels, so those
being “rescued” are the wealthy 2% at the expense of disposable lives of the other
98% of Americans.
This extended explanation involves only a small sample of
the large volume of evidence supporting the arguments and analysis of PUTHOP’s
deficiencies in those essential qualities needed in a true leader. His
supporters are prone to disregard those same qualities and “make up” facts in
attempts to defend PUTHOP. They also try to deflect scrutiny by pointing
fingers at others, but no one else sits in the Oval Office so such dissembling
is ineffectual. Their arguments must be subjected to the same standards and
analysis: honesty, integrity, principled decision making and compassion.
Otherwise they simply reinforce arguments indicating PUTHOP’s deficiencies. Those
arguments and evidence supporting them are not “personal,” and they are based
upon performance relating to the high office involved. And I am fully open to hearing honest and
evidence-based arguments that may contradict my analysis.
