Trump Refuses to Release his Psychiatric Records

As published today in the U.S. edition of the Huffington Post:

Screen Shot 2016-08-23 at 2.20.51 PM.png

_________________________________________________________________

URGENT UPDATE FOR READERS

Since the following story was published on August 8, many people are saying that Donald Trump’s refusal to release his psychiatric records is because they’d reveal that the Republican Presidential nominee was once involuntarily confined to a New York state mental health institution by court order. Though these records are sealed, it seems that the court was responding to a request jointly made by Trump’s former wives.

A photograph (shown above) that purports to document Trump’s confinement has just been published on the Internet by the National Psychiatrists Guild, a radical group that advocates free psychotherapy for everyone. The Guild engages in the highly controversial practice of “outing” prominent people who have been treated for severe mental disorders but who deny it. Most recently the group “outed” disgraced ex-Fox News boss Roger Ailes.

— The Author

_________________________________________________________________

 

Moments after Hillary Clinton released her psychiatric records to the press yesterday, the Republican Presidential nominee went on a tweeting spree “Unlike Crazy Hillary, I am not a kook,” Trump tweeted. “I’m as sane as the Rock of Gibraltar.”

Clinton acted in response to a challenge publicly issued to both Presidential nominees by Dr. Alonzo Kaplan, a prominent psychotherapist who is President of the National Association of Mental Health Professionals. Writing in the current edition of Personality Disorders Today, Dr. Kaplan demanded that Clinton and Trump release their psychiatric records “in order to prove to the public that they are psychologically fit to hold office.”

The psychiatric records released by Clinton reveal that she has, from time to time, consulted psychotherapists for “mild depression,” which is not considered a personality disorder. For his part, Trump claims he’s never once consulted a mental health counselor. “I’m a winner, big time,” he tweeted, “and people who need mental health counseling are losers. PATHETIC.”

Dr. Kaplan, who is the author of Personality Disorders in Political Leaders: From Nero to Nixon, a landmark study in the field, was interviewed on CNN last evening. He said that, after looking over Clinton’s records he considers her in remarkably good mental health, considering “all the poor woman has been through.” But as for Trump, Kaplan said, “Speaking for the profession of psychiatry, I’m confident in stating that Donald Trump scares the holy shit out of each and every one of us.”

Trump struck back while the CNN interview was still on the air. “These psychiatrists have rigged the system to make me look bad,” he tweeted. “They’re dishonest. They’re frauds. I’ve got a mind like a steel trap and they know it.”

Then last night just before midnight Trump signed off by slamming psychoanalysis itself. “Nobody gets psychoanalyzed any more,” Trump tweeted. “It’s a bogus profession. All my wives tried it and it didn’t do any one of them a single bit of good.”

 

For more:

Byron Kennard’s Capers  /  Like me on Facebook  /  and Follow me on Twitter 

If elected, Trump pledges “To Abolish the Environment”

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

Screen Shot 2016-08-16 at 2.53.33 PM

Speaking today at a gun rights rally held in Yellowstone National Park, Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump pledged that, if elected, one of his first acts will be to abolish the environment. “The truth, my friends, is that the concept of the environment is a socialist plot to destroy capitalism.” Trump claimed. “The whole thing is a hoax. It’s garbage.”

Trump’s claim was greeted enthusiastically by the thousands of “Second Amendment people” who had gathered in the park to oppose extension of the Endangered Species Act. Their response seemed to urge Trump on. “Folks, I promise you that by the end of my first term there’ll be no environment left, not even a scrap.”

Trump’s statement, however, caused increased consternation within the already-stressed-out Republican establishment. A high ranking Republican staffer on the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources (who spoke not for attribution) complained that, “Once again, he’s completely screwed things up. What our 2016 party platform promises to abolish is the Environmental Protection Agency, not the environment! Christ Almighty, has the party’s nominee even read the party’s platform?!”

Trump’s pledge, however, won strong support from some conservatives. J. Pierpont Finch III, founder and CEO of Young Americans for Freedom from Ecological Constraints, welcomed the statement. “Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as the environment,” Finch declared. “Sure, there is land and water and air, and there are animals and plants and all sorts of bugs, but to claim that they are somehow integrated into an overall whole is preposterous. It’s a plot perpetuated by environmental zealots seeking to impose world government on us all.”

Rope Purchases by Republican Party Organizations create severe Supply Shortages, especially in Swing States

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

57acfdc9170000cf02d1e448.png

It seems that many Republican Party organizations at state and local levels are taking an old adage not only seriously, but literally. “Give Trump enough rope and he’ll hang himself,” says Harley Ferguson, Chair of the Republican Party in Rockrib County, Ohio. “That’s why we spent $5,000 to buy rope that we sent to Trump’s campaign in New York City.”

Ferguson is the one of many Republican officials whose chief political aim is now to protect the party’s down-ticket candidates from the disastrous Trump defeat they see coming in November. Ferguson is also a founder of GiveTrumpRope.com, a new website that has attracted thousands of state and local Republican Party officials, many of whom have also purchased spools of rope and sent them to Trump’s campaign headquarters.

A surprising result of these efforts is a run on rope supplies in hardware stores across the country. Home Depot stores in Florida and Ohio — two swing states —have emptied their shelves entirely. Cord Wainwright, President of the Rope Association of America, stated that, “We’ve never seen demand like this. And when we figured out that all these purchasers were Republican officials we were concerned they might be planning mass suicides. Frankly, we’re relieved to learn there’s only one prospect of that. If Mr. Trump wants to hang himself, he’s sure as heck gonna have enough rope.”

Meanwhile, Agnes Gooch, Coordinator of In-Kind Contributions for the Trump campaign, announced that they will no longer accept donations of rope. “The basement of Trump Tower is packed to the gills with spools of the stuff.” she said. “We’re up to our necks in rope. Please tell people to stop sending it. We’d much rather have donations of canned goods, bottled water, flashlights, candles, and blankets to have on hand in case Hillary Clinton takes power.”

Trump Refuses to Release his Psychiatric Records

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

Screen Shot 2016-08-08 at 7.45.02 AM

“I am not a kook!” he tweets. “Im as sane as the Rock of Gibraltar.”

Moments after Hillary Clinton released her psychiatric records to the press yesterday, the Republican Presidential nominee went on a tweeting spree “Unlike Crazy Hillary, I am not a kook,” Trump tweeted. “I’m as sane as the Rock of Gibraltar.”

Clinton acted in response to a challenge publicly issued to both Presidential nominees by Dr. Alonzo Kaplan, a prominent psychotherapist who is President of the National Association of Mental Health Professionals. Writing in the current edition of Personality Disorders Today, Dr. Kaplan demanded that Clinton and Trump release their psychiatric records “in order to prove to the public that they are psychologically fit to hold office.”

The psychiatric records released by Clinton reveal that she has, from time to time, consulted psychotherapists for “mild depression,” which is not considered a personality disorder. For his part, Trump claims he’s never once consulted a mental health counselor. “I’m a winner, big time,” he tweeted, “and people who need mental health counseling are losers. PATHETIC.”

Dr. Kaplan, who is the author of Personality Disorders in Political Leaders: From Nero to Nixon, a landmark study in the field, was interviewed on CNN last evening. He said that, after looking over Clinton’s records he considers her in remarkably good mental health, considering “all the poor woman has been through.” Screen Shot 2016-08-10 at 7.50.00 PM.pngBut as for Trump, Kaplan said, “Speaking for the profession of psychiatry, I’m confident in stating that Donald Trump scares the holy shit out of each and every one of us.”

Trump struck back while the CNN interview was still on the air. “These psychiatrists have rigged the system to make me look bad,” he tweeted. “They’re dishonest. They’re frauds. I’ve got a mind like a steel trap and they know it.”

Then last night just before midnight Trump signed off by slamming psychoanalysis itself. “Nobody gets psychoanalyzed any more,” Trump tweeted. “It’s a bogus profession. All my wives tried it and it didn’t do any one of them a single bit of good.”

 

What if the GOP ‘rigged’ the election?

Byron’s letter to the editor of the Washington Post, August 7, 2016

Campaign_2016_Clinton_Fundraising-63b98.jpg
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks on Aug. 1   (Evan Vucci/AP)

Regarding the Aug. 4 editorial “His most noxious conspiracy theory yet”:

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s fears that the election may be “rigged” against him may be real. But I think any rigging was done by the Republican-controlled state legislatures that have passed laws that limit the days and times polls are open and that reduce the number of polling places. These laws may have been intended to inhibit voter turnout among low-income people and minorities, who are believed to vote mostly Democratic.

But they also inhibit turnout of white working-class voters. Often, white working-class voters don’t have flexible work hours or predictable schedules. And they may not be able to wait in line for hours to vote. (On Election Day 2012, some voters had to wait for up to four hours.) Here is all the proof Mr. Trump needs that the dastardly Republican establishment is out to destroy him: It has figured out a way to keep Mr. Trump’s base from voting.

Byron Kennard, Washington

The Wizard of Oz Cure for the Wicked Trump

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

 

ruby-for-wordpress.png

Okay, here’s what I want you to do. Stand up straight, close your eyes, click your heels together three times, and say to yourself:

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

There! Feel better? I hope so. For me, this incantation works like magic (even without ruby slippers). I chant it whenever I encounter even the slightest evidence that Donald Trump might actually win the election. And then — presto! — I return home — and by home I mean the good old days not so long ago when Trump’s candidacy for the Presidency of the United States was a joke and his nomination unthinkable. (And, oh, Uncle Sam, there’s no place like home.)

Reciting this old French proverb — plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose — reminds me that turbulent changes often do not change reality on a deep level; in fact, they cement the status quo. When the smoke clears and the tumult has died down, basically things stay the same. Now, you might be wondering just what is it I’m hoping “stays the same.”

In what I now see as ‘the good old days,” big money was the single most potent force in American politics, and the single biggest source of this money was the financial sector. That was the status quo politically, a rotten state of affairs I deplored with all the high-minded, self-righteousness at my command.

This year’s topsy-turvy Presidential campaign, however, has dislodged the big money boys from their top dog status and replaced them — at least temporarily — with one big money boy, the Donald himself. Candidate Trump triumphed in the primaries by disdaining paid ads, riding a tidal wave of free media, claiming to be self-financing, and giving the big money boys the finger — all to the delight of his populist, anti-establishment supporters.

This stratagem worked for Trump in the primaries, but a general election campaign is different. It requires big money, probably at least a billion dollars. But now the big money boys are giving Trump the finger. They don’t need him, and they don’t want him.

Remember that what the financial sector craves above all is stability. So a shoot-from-the-hip Trump Administration freaks out the big money boys. Trump represents instability. Many financial sector leaders predict a nightmare for investors. They fear he might trigger trade wars. Some predict that the stock market and economy will tank.

As the big money boys see things, Clinton represents stability. Compared to Trump, she’s the Rock of Gibraltar. That’s why Clinton raised more contributions in the primaries from executives in the financial services industry than all other candidates combined. (Silicon Valley is going for her too in a big way.)

The Donald is in a bind. He needs to launch vigorous get-out-the-vote (GOTV) campaigns to make sure his base of white working class voters actually turns up at the polls. (Working-class whites have gone from being 65 percent of the US electorate in 1980 to 36 percent today.) If Trump is to have a prayer of winning in November, he’s got to get practically every one of these voters to the polls. But GOTV campaigns require a massive infrastructure and are costly.

Where’s the money to come from? From Trump himself? True, he’s boasted that he’s rich enough to pay for the entire campaign. If Trump did so, it would certainly prove to his fan base that he’s a man who can’t be bought.

Meanwhile, current campaign finance reports show Clinton millions ahead of Trump. She’s raking in the dough. And here I am, high-minded me, chanting incantations, hoping to restore the dear old rotten status quo. Maybe Donald Trump, the self-financing billionaire, can’t be bought but, thanks to big money, the election can still be.

 

 

Trump Claims to have received more votes than Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln combined

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

Screen Shot 2016-08-08 at 3.28.08 PM.png

A short paragraph in Donald Trump’s acceptance speech about votes in past Presidential elections went generally unnoticed even by Hillary Clinton’s campaign, but it has drawn the ire of a group of prominent historians. In the paragraph, Trump described about his triumphs in this year’s Presidential primary elections.

“Who would’ve believed that when we started this journey on June 16th last year, we would have received almost 14 million votes, the most in the history of the Republican Party. And get this: I got far more votes than George Washington and Thomas Jefferson combined ever got. I got four times as many votes as Abraham Lincoln received in both his Presidential campaigns! People love me. Why, I could stand in the middle of the National Mall and toss grenades at the monuments and I wouldn’t lose any voters,” Trump boasted.

In a statement released to the press yesterday, Ivy Anderson, Executive Director of the American Society of Professional Historians, stated that “Mr. Trump’s effort to establish a historical connection between his political victories and that of Presidents Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln is erroneous. While Trump is correct about the numbers, his claim proves nothing. Both Washington and Jefferson were elected by state legislatures. Popular voting for Presidents didn’t come in until the 1820s. And while Lincoln received 1,866,452 votes in 1860 and 2,218,388 votes in 1864, that was over 150 years ago. The population of the country was far smaller then than it is now. In 1860 the total population of the United States was 31,443,321. Today, it’s 317 million people, over ten times more. Speaking on behalf of the profession, I must say that when it comes to history Mr. Trump appears to be very poorly educated.”

The release of Anderson’s statement quickly prompted a series of indignant tweets from the Republican nominee:

 

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

These crooked historians have rigged the story to make me look bad. These people are sick!

 

 

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
History is a failing profession that’s lost its way. Nobody reads history books anymore. They’re so boring! To be honest, I’ve never been able to get through one. SAD!

 

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

History is bunk! That’s why I won with overwhelming support from voters who are poorly educated about history. I love people who are poorly educated about history!

In post-BREXIT turmoil, Parliament suspends Magna Carta and grants Queen absolute power

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

queen-and-corgisforwordpress.jpg

In a desperate, unprecedented attempt to restore political stability, the British Parliament voted yesterday to suspend the Magna Carta and, in the interim, to grant absolute power to Queen Elizabeth II.

The post-BREXIT turmoil has, in effect, left the country completely leaderless. In proposing such radical legislation, David Cameron, the discredited Prime Minister, begged his colleagues to “face the facts. The Queen is the only official in the entire country who still possesses the trust of the people. She — and only she — can keep the United Kingdom united.”

In the debate, Jeremy Corbyn, the discredited leader of Britain’s Labour Party, threw his support behind Cameron’s proposal, declaring indignantly, “I’ve had it with democracy! The bloody system doesn’t work! So I say let’s give the old girl a crack at real power. God knows she can’t do any worse than we have.”

Suspending the Magna Carta seems almost unthinkable. It has been in effect since 1215 when it was imposed to curb the abuse of authority by King John I (best known for his villainous role in the Robin Hood legend). Under the Magna Carta, the king could no longer impose new taxes without consent of Parliament. It also forbade the King from personally ordering the arrest and punishment of a subject without lawful judgment.

After Parliament acted, Buckingham palace quickly issued a statement announcing that the Queen “graciously welcomes” the return of absolute power to the Throne. (Meanwhile, her husband, Prince Philip, joyously tweeted, “Damn right! It’s about time!”)

“I will rule as well as reign,” the Queen was quoted as saying. “And I promise to rule with liberty and justice for all.” Later in the day, however, the Queen appears to have thrown this promise out the window.

In the first decree issued under her new authority, Her Majesty closed the Tower of London as a museum open to the public and ordered its immediate restoration as a royal fortress and prison. Then she summarily ordered the arrest of her former daughter-in-law, Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York. “Fergie,” as the Duchess is popularly known, was forcibly escorted to the Tower where she is now imprisoned in the same cell that once briefly housed Anne Boleyn, the second wife of Henry the VIII, before she was beheaded on the Tower green.

(Last night, the palace also announced that the Queen had ceremoniously ennobled Willow and Holly, two of her pet Corgis, the Welsh hunting dogs that are her favorite breed. The Queen has owned more than 30 corgis during her reign. Henceforth, the dogs will be known as Sir Willow and Lady Holly.)

It should be emphasized that the Act just passed by Parliament only suspendsthe Magna Carta; it does not repeal it. The Act is to be in effect only for the duration of Queen Elizabeth’s personal reign. When she dies, power reverts to the Parliament. Since Her Majesty is now ninety, this lapse of representative government in Great Britain may not long endure.

Fiercely objecting to this provision, the Queen’s son, Charles, Prince of Wales, her presumptive successor, announced last night that he has asked his “Mum” to use her now absolute power to dissolve Parliament permanently. “I humbly beg Your Majesty to assert and defend my divine right to the throne when I succeed,” Prince Charles stated. “As for Parliament, who needs those bastards anyway? All they do is screw things up.”

The palace has not made any official or public reply to Prince Charles’s request.

Donald Trump Claims that Hillary Clinton has “No Balls”

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

In an interview yesterday with the New York Times, Corey Lewandowski, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, described the presumptive Republican nominee’s plans for competing in the upcoming general election. “You can be absolutely sure of one thing,” Lewandowski declared. “Mr. Trump firmly intends to put the whole penis size issue behind him.” But later the same day Trump himself negated Lewandowski’s declaration.

images-4.jpeg

In remarks before the annual conference of the National Organization of Old Male Privileged Heterosexuals (NO/OOMPH), Trump raised the penis size issue. “Look, guys, I’ll level with you. I may not have the biggest dick in the world, but at least I’ve got one.”Unknown-2.jpeg

This remark won Mr. Trump a standing ovation from the audience (except for those too old to rise from their seats without assistance).
“I’m gonna tell it like it is,” Trump continued. “It’ll take balls to negotiate trade deals with China!

And it’ll take balls to defeat ISIS! Now, gents, don’t get me wrong. In saying this, I’m not denigrating women. I like women! I love women! Woman are fantastic human beings. But let’s face it, fellas, women don’t have balls! And Hillary Clinton is a woman!”

There have been many jokes about the small size of Trump’s hands (and the implications thereof) but at this event it was clear he held the huge audience — virtually all white men over fifty — firmly in his hands, however small. The crowd was enthralled.

“When I’m President, life is gonna be so great for guys like you,” Trump exclaimed. “It’s gonna be beautiful, I promise. You’re gonna get laid whenever you want. I promise! You boys are gonna get so much ass, you won’t know what to do with it all. And I’ll tell you why this is gonna happen. It’s because the motto of the Trump administration is gonna be this: white dicks matter!” 

This caused an eruption of enthusiasm in the crowded hall that can only be described as delirious. Some in the crowd, carried away by their enthusiasm, actually unzipped their trousers so they could pridefully display their genitalia to others. Much hilarity ensued. But when Peter Braggart, NO/OOMPH’s Chairperson, asked Mr. Trump to show “solidarity” with the group by dropping his own trousers the candidate declined to do so, stating that it would not be considered “Presidential.”

Reached later in the day, campaign manager Corey Lewandowski was asked to comment on Trump’s conduct at the NO/OOMPH conference. In response, Mr. Lewandowski issued this statement, “Mr. Trump’s statements today make perfect sense, and are totally consistent with his policy positions. After all, if he won’t release his tax returns, how can anyone expect him to expose his genitals?”

images-9.jpeg

In Defense of Deviousness

As published today in the US edition of the Huffington Post:

Screen Shot 2016-08-12 at 1.50.00 PM.png
Honest Abe                                                                                                   Devious Hillary

Ladies and gentlemen, I rise in defense of deviousness, a much misunderstood and maligned aspect of political leadership. Deviousness, in truth, is often a desirable trait in political leaders — an assertion I shall prove in a straightforward manner by citing well-known historical examples that are crystal clear.

I mount this defense because voters in the Presidential primaries seem desperately eager to back a candidate they perceive to be honest and trustworthy. “Authenticity” is all the rage, especially among those voters who are enraged. Donald Trump, for example, is acclaimed by his supporters for “telling it like it is.” Ted Cruz is seen as “a principled conservative” who won’t back down no matter what. Bernie Sanders is hailed as a man who can be counted on “to do the right thing.”

There’s just one drawback. Authenticity ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. American history proves it. Time and again, great leaders who accomplished great deeds relied on deviousness to get the job done, not honesty and trustworthiness.

Exhibit A is Benjamin Franklin. Perhaps the most lovable of the Founding Fathers, Franklin appeared to be all benevolence and bonhomie, but actually he was a creature of vast cunning and guile. That’s how he managed to talk the French out of $14 billion — in today’s money — to finance the American revolution, money without which the revolution probably would have failed. (This was money the French could ill afford to give. They were tottering on bankruptcy.)

39815914-Happy-President-Benjamin-Franklin-on-100-US-dollar-bill-Stock-Photo.jpg

Franklin secured this aid while circumventing vicious infighting amongst his American colleagues and treacherous backroom dealings at Versailles. He operated on the sly, often misleading his quarreling colleagues. These included the estimable John Adams — an “authentic” man if ever there was one — honest to a fault — and therefore worse than useless in diplomacy. For his part, the principled Adams was contemptuous of Franklin, whom he described as “the greatest imposter on earth.”

price-of-us-stamp-scott-324-1904-2-cents-louisiana-purchase-exposition-siegel-968b-418.jpg

Next up: Thomas Jefferson. The original champion of small government, the original proponent of the “strict construction” of the Constitution, Jefferson was also the original flip-flopper on both these principles. In 1803, as President, he tossed his convictions aside in order to make the Louisiana Purchase —

Louisiana_Purchase_1904_Issue-10 cent stamp - 1803 LA Purchase.jpgan act of government big enough to double the size of the nation and one that was clearly unconstitutional too. Nothing in the Constitution authorizes the President, acting on his own, to spend public funds to expand the nation’s boundaries. So Jefferson bobbed and weaved, claiming that the President’s power to acquire territory was “implied” in the Constitution’s clause on treaty-making.

 

Then there’s “Honest Abe.” Lincoln.jpgIn Lincoln’s Political Thought, Professor George Kateb argues that Lincoln’s political life “illustrates the unsettling truth that in democratic politics—perhaps in all politics —it is nearly impossible to do the right thing for the right reasons, honestly stated.” So it was that Lincoln declared time and again that he was fighting the civil war to preserve the union, not to abolish slavery. While Lincoln thought slavery immoral, he knew moral arguments wouldn’t abolish it. But since the Southerners used slaves to support their armies in the field, Lincoln justified the Emancipation Proclamation as a “fit and necessary war measure” to cripple the Confederacy’s war effort.

 

This brings us to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of the most successful political tricksters of all time.Unknown-1.jpeg

Roosevelt’s success was due in large part to his personality. He was charming and funny. He radiated joy and optimism. The people loved and trusted him. But FDR was not altogether the nice guy he appeared to be. Pursuing his objectives, he could be dishonest, guileful, underhanded, even ruthless. In his relationships with others, he could be manipulative, callous, and vindictive—and not warm. “Roosevelt was the coldest man I ever met,” Harry Truman said of him.

FDR’s deviousness was never more fully employed than after the outbreak of war in Europe in 1939. Roosevelt believed this war would necessarily and inevitably draw in the United States in order to defeat the global reach of Fascism. But first he had to circumvent strong isolationist sentiment in the Congress and in the country. He did so by pretending to maintain American neutrality. Campaigning in Boston in 1940, he declared, “I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.” Meanwhile, behind the scenes, FDR was doing all he could to prepare America for entry into the conflict. After Pearl Harbor, FDR went on to lead the nation to victory in the greatest war of all time. As Harry Truman also said of FDR, “He was a great President.”

This brings us to the Cold War and to the three Republican Presidents who ran for office as ardent Cold Warriors but—once in office—turned out to be secret peaceniks. I’m speaking here of Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan, each of whom found it necessary to bamboozle not only the Soviets but also the hardliners and hawks in their own Administrations.

images-6.jpeg      images-7.jpeg      images-8.jpeg

Eisenhower’s smiling, genial, “regular guy” image belied his immense political skills, one of which was a flair for hiding those skills. His motto was “Conceal your strengths.” In Eisenhower, British historian Paul Johnson quotes Richard Nixon describing the President under whom he served as Vice-President for eight years as “by far the most devious man I ever met in my life.’’

The 1950s were the height of the Cold War, and throughout the decade dangerous provocations brought great pressure on President Eisenhower to respond militarily. His foreign policy and military advisers, for example, wanted to use the atom bomb to stem an expanding communist threat in Indochina. Ike, the war hero, refused. He made sure no wars were fought on his watch. Today, many historians look back on the Fifties and hail it as a decade of peace and prosperity, a rarity in history.

When he became President, Nixon — no piker himself when it came to deviousness — secretly initiated negotiations with China. He knew that the Soviet Union and Red China, despite their facade of ideological unity, were actually in deep conflict. So Nixon’s strategy was to play off one against the other. Ultimately Nixon visited China and broke bread with Mao Zedong. Given his reputation as a fierce anti-communist ideologue, Nixon could risk such a gigantic flip-flop in foreign policy, something no dovish Democratic President could afford to do politically.

When Ronald Reagan became President he continued this Republican tradition of saying one thing while doing another. While raining denunciations on the “evil empire,” Reagan quietly forged a rapprochement with the Russians. This involved misleading his own relentlessly hard-line advisors who were convinced that any negotiations with the Soviets were dangerous traps. Nevertheless, Reagan entered into a sustained and intensely personal exchange engagement with Mikhail Gorbachev, the new Soviet leader. Ultimately, this exchange led to the liberation of Eastern Europe from communism, a victory achieved without firing a shot.

Now, what lesson should voters seeking “authenticity” in a Presidential candidate learn from this history? I assume these voters are also seeking a strong President who is capable of great deeds, such as defeating the threat that terrorism poses to the nation. This hugely difficult task, I argue, calls for statecraft of the highest order.

Here is my vision of just how this statecraft should operate. Our new President will only appear to be “telling it like it is” while he’s actually doing something else behind the scenes — just like Ben Franklin and FDR. When he judges it to be in the national interest, our new President will bend or even betray his principles — just like Thomas Jefferson. Our new President will always strive to “do the right thing” if he can figure out some devious way to accomplish it — just like Abe Lincoln. And — if we’re lucky — our new President will surreptitiously pursue peace while avoiding the start of a new war — just like Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan.

Hey, why in heck am I saying “he” when there is only one candidate in the running who can fulfill this vision? That candidate is Hillary Clinton. In a recent survey of voters, the words most used to describe her were “liar, dishonest, and untrustworthy.” Wow! That’s music to my ears!

h.jpg

In my terms — in statecraft terms — the bad things people say about Clinton eminently qualify her for office. Sure, the rough and tumble battles she’s been through have left scars, but they’ve also taught her how to get things done in the face of an opposition that is remorseless and even unhinged. Compare Clinton’s deviousness with the “authenticity” claimed by other Presidential candidates. I ask you, which is most likely to defeat ISIS? I would remind you, ladies and gentlemen, that deviousness in the defense of liberty is no vice.