Psychopath in Chief?

I believe that in order to get to the truth of any matter it is essential to use only reliable sources and to avoid overstating claims against one’s opponents. I also believe our National Security Adviser should understand the difference between reliable sources and fake news, which is why I am convinced that General Michael Flynn is a very poor choice to head America’s national security apparatus. 

There are a number of reasons for my saying this, including his declaration that fear of Muslims is RATIONAL (all caps in his original statement).

Beyond this bit of nuttiness and bigotry is the fact that he posted the following tweet with reference to a fake news story about Hillary Clinton’s supposed involvement in a child sex slave operation: 

U decide – NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes w Children, etc…MUST READ! (with a link to a fake news story here)

I give Flynn no credit for finally deleting this tweet which he first posted a few days before the November 8 election. His having believed this wacky anti-Hillary story in the first place is damning evidence that proves he is unqualified to be National Security Adviser.

This fake news about Hillary’s supposed criminal, child-victimizing behavior is so outrageous and clearly false that you wonder how a sane person could believe it at all. I suppose someone who has been brainwashed into thinking Hillary is evil to the core (as many conservatives have been) and who has no skill at separating reliable sources from fake ones could believe it. Otherwise you would have to be just plain stupid.

So which one is Michael Flynn – incompetent or just plain stupid? In either case, he is clearly unworthy to be America’s National Security Adviser and Donald Trump is a fool or a scoundrel for appointing him.

Of course, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. In light of this ideal, I want to caution those on the anti-Trump side (the ones I like to think of as “the good guys”) against overstating the case against the president-elect. It is unwise to damn one’s political opponents with labels that the evidence does not justify. For example, is it really fair to call Mr. Trump a psychopath?

If you just yelled out “Hell yes!” or words to that effect, I beg you to hold on for just a minute. It is wrong to condemn someone as deeply psychologically flawed without a careful consideration of what psychologists say are the defining features of the psychopath. If we look at these defining features, I am confident that we will find that Trump is not actually a bona fide psychopath. For example, below is a list of characteristics defining a psychopath according to psychologist Robert Hare as cited in Jon Ronson’s The Psychopath Test. Surely a comparison of Mr. Trump’s personality with these traits will be enough to convince any discerning reader that he is not really a psychopath.
   

1.     Glibness/superficial charm

2.     Grandiose sense of self-worth

3.     Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

4.     Pathological lying

5.     Conning/manipulative

6.     Lack of remorse or guilt

7.     Shallow affect

8.     Callous/lack of empathy

9.     Parasitic lifestyle

10.  Poor behavioral controls

11.  Promiscuous sexual behavior

12.  Early behavioral problems

13.  Lack of realistic long-term goals

14.  Impulsivity

15.  Irresponsibility

16.  Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

17.  Many short-term marital relationships

18.  Juvenile delinquency

19.  Revocation of conditional release

20.  Criminal versatility

Never mind.