PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon, as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.

Duplicity #1 — Senator Lindsay Graham: The Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart writes this:

“Senator Lindsey O. Graham is a curious fellow. One year, he’s warning of the dangers that then-candidate Donald Trump posed to the Republican Party. The next, year he’s defending Trump and bragging that I’m not trying to pretend to be a fair juror should articles of impeachment against Trump come to the Senate.

“Or, as Jennifer Rubin (another Post writer) more aptly put it, Graham is in the throes of “boot-licking and willful ignorance of a ‘quid pro quo.’ It’s all so sad and shameful — for him, his party and our nation.”

Comment: To Graham, I say vote your conscience on the Trump impeachment, whatever that is. Reflect on your position and endeavor to employ a conscience, if you have one.

Duplicity #2: Senator Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader: Like Graham, McConnell has tossed his sacred Senate role on impeachment – be an impartial juror – out the window.

He has announced that he will design a Senate impeachment process in complete concert with the White House.

Say what?

However he chooses to vote – no doubt not to convict Trump – he should feel a sense of constitutional obligation to design a fair and equitable process. But he won’t.

This has prompted Post columnist Max Boot to say that “the only principle Republicans have left is partisanship.”

Boot continues:

“… Republicans fervently denounce the mythical Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election and then turn around and argue that President Trump has the right — nay, the obligation — to demand Ukrainian interference in the 2020 election.”

Comment: The farther we go in the post-House impeachment process, the more Trump looks guilty. The New York Times produced a piece of solid journalism a few days ago when it chronicled the time after Trump “withholding aid decision” as all of the White House worked to cover-up Trump’s illegal actions.

Duplicity #3: The way Republicans now handle impeachment: Based on words written by the columnist Boot, the very same Republicans who now accuse Democrats of wanting to impeach Trump from the start were intent on impeaching President Barack Obama from the start.

Further, Republicans now think that compliance with House subpoenas is strictly optional, but they once held Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with House subpoenas.

Comment: As the saying goes, “consistency can be the hobgoblin of small minds.” But it also is true that, in politics, your record follows you around. When Democrats or Republicans do one thing one minute and then the reverse the next minute their credibility comes into question unless they appear to have a good reason for the changed view. So far, those who are changing have no good reason…just partisan game-playing.

Duplicity #4: Senator Elizabeth Warren’s toing and froing: It would hard to write about duplicity without citing Warren. She rose to new heights – depths? – recently when she went after another candidate, Pete Buttigieg, for accepting political contributions from wealthy donors.

Well, it was exactly what she has done and continues to do. Buttigieg called her out effectively for her duplicity.

Comment: I would tell Warren to focus on issues – issues that matter to regular Americans – rather than to engage in such obvious duplicity.

My conclusion to all this is that consistency matters. If it cannot be maintained, then those who believe they must change should reckon with the need to provide a solid rationale for the change.

And, duplicity is not a Republican or Democrat issue.  It goes both ways.  Those who commit duplicity deserve to explain why.