Presidential Timber

The nation’s preoccupation with impeachment is being resolved in a way that will leave no one satisfied. But perhaps this provides the opportunity to take a deeper look at the sort of person this nation deserves to sit in the Oval Office. Whether or not Donald Trump committed impeachable acts may not define the problem. In November’s Atlantic, Jeffery Goldberg put it this way; “The 45th President of the United States is uniquely unfit for office and poses a multifaceted threat to our country’s democratic institutions.”

Christianity Today (The voice reflecting Billy Graham’s take on evangelicalism since 1967) in its December 19th edition put it in uncharacteristicly harsh language after a blazing condemnation of Trump’s moral depravity and a call for his removal from office – The reason many are not shocked about this is that this president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration. He has hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals. He himself has admitted to immoral actions in business and his relationship with women, about which he remains proud. His Twitter feed alone—with its habitual string of mischaracterizations, lies, and slanders—is a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused.

Here is the President who recently was forced to pay a two million dollar fine for fraud by diverting contributions to his personal use from his charity that raises funds for children suffering from cancer. What sort of person steals money raised to help sick kids?

Decades ago, there was a common phrase that attempted to define whether a potential candidate was qualified to be President. “Was he made of Presidential timber?” Those who did not meet this undefined test were written off. What test? Supreme Court Justice Potter said that he knew pornography when he saw it. If somebody was fit to be President, would not the people almost immediately know it? This did not mean that the potential candidate had an inside track on the nomination let alone the election, only that he might be qualified.

This test had little to do with her/his political opinions or party affiliation. It rather referred to a lived-out honesty, dignity, valor, nobility of character, respect, truthfulness—the sort of person even children would be drawn to respect, as would the leaders and people of other nations. The American people would know Presidential timber when they saw it. Beyond any political affiliation we would view such a person with enormous respect.

We have tended to elect candidates we knew “fit,” even if we could not define just what that meant. Woodrow Wilson was such a person as were Herbert Hoover and FDR. Harry Truman just made it but Thomas Dewey, whom he defeated, was clearly Presidential Timber. Dwight Eisenhower made the grade as did Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter and the first George Bush. Bill Clinton had it to start with, but lost it by his fun and games in the oval office. Barack Obama was a sterling example. Every passing day saw Richard Nixon shed any sturdy image he might have carried, and George W Bush turned out to be the shrub his detractors had labelled him.

In this column I will not attempt to characterize the Democratic candidates, even if all those who remain appear to make the grade. As the convention draws closer, who is Presidential timber and who is not will become increasingly obvious.

But let’s get back to the real-estate mogul who has put his name on golf courses, hotels, casinos and office buildings around the world. With the same significant sales ability he put his brand on the Republican Party he now totally controls. To this political base he has added evangelical Christians whose support I find it impossible to understand, and a collection of others I hesitate to categorize. The question remains, is Donald Trump Presidential timber? If so, where is the morality, the dignity, the graciousness, the honor, valor, nobility and capacity to remold the nation into a “more perfect union”? Are these not the qualities and character the American people have a right to expect?

Donald Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives but seems certain to survive conviction by a Senate he owns, and whose members would be committed to him no matter what he might do. The issue is not whether he should have been impeached, but whether he is fit to be the President. That question now goes to the American people who will decide in November.

So while we cannot define what it means for someone to be presidential timber, every day it becomes clearer that Donald Trump is not made of sturdy planks but of moldy straw.