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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I subscribe to PEW Research publications for several reasons:

• On occasion, I learn something new.
• On occasion, findings give me something to question.
• On occasion, findings really are “striking.”

Pew Research Center is a non-partisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world.  It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, content analysis, and other data-driven social science research.  It does not take policy positions.

So what does PEW stand for?  Well, it is not an acronym; it is the name of the family that started the site.

A couple days ago, a new PEW publication shed light on public opinion around some of the BIGGEST NEWS EVENTS OF 2022 – from Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine, to the overturning of Roe v. Wade, to Americans’ experiences with extreme weather events.

So, without further ado (though I add a few of my own comments below), here is a list of the 15 findings, which were called “striking.”

1. Today, roughly four-in-ten Americans (41 per cent) say none of their purchases in a typical week are paid for using cash, a July survey found.  This is up from 29 per cent in 2018 and 24 per cent in 2015.
2.  If recent trends continue, Christians could make up a minority of Americans by 2070.  That’s according to a September report that models several hypothetical scenarios of how the U.S. religious landscape might change over the next 50 years, based on religious switching patterns.
3. Views of reparations for slavery vary widely by race and ethnicity, especially between Black and White Americans, a November analysis found.  Overall, 30 per cent of U.S. adults say descendants of people enslaved in the United States should be repaid in some way, such as being given land or money.  About seven-in-ten say these descendants should not be repaid.
4. A growing share of adult TikTok users in the U.S. are getting news on the platform, bucking the trend on other social media sites, according to a survey fielded in July and August.  A third of adults who use TikTok say they regularly get news there, up from 22 per cent two years ago. 
   
   

Comment:  I don’t get any news on Tik Tok, which I have never opened – and don’t plan to open.

• Most Americans who have experienced extreme weather in the past year – including majorities in both political parties – see climate change as a factor, according to a May survey.
• Following Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine, Americans became much more likely to see Russia as an enemy of the United States.  In March, just after the invasion, 70 per cent of Americans said that, on balance, Russia is an enemy of the U.S., up sharply from 41 per cent who held this view in January.
•  Relatively few Americans take an absolutist view on the legality of abortion – either supporting or opposing it at all times, according to a survey conducted in March, before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The vast majority of the public is somewhere in the middle when it comes to abortion:  Most think it should be legal in at least some circumstances, but most are also open to limitations on its availability in others.

Comment:  This reflects my own view.  It’s impossible for me to join either the “no” or “yes” sides in the debate.  The abortion is far too personal and complicated to end up with a simple answer.

•  Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, the partisan gap in views of the court grew wider than at any point in more than three decades. While 73 per cent of Republicans expressed a favorable view of the court in an August survey, only 28 per cent of Democrats shared that view. That 45-point gap was wider than at any point in 35 years of polling on the court.
•  About 5 per cent of Americans younger than 30 are transgender or non-binary – that is, their gender is different from their sex assigned at birth, according to a survey conducted in May. By comparison, 1.6 per cent of those ages 30 to 49 and 0.3 per cent of those 50 and older say that their gender is different from their sex assigned at birth. Overall, 1.6 per cent of U.S. adults are transgender or non-binary – that is, someone who is neither a man nor a woman or isn’t strictly one or the other.
• Most Americans say journalists should always strive to give every side equal coverage, but journalists themselves are more likely to say every side does not always deserve equal coverage, according to two separate surveys conducted in late winter amid debate over “bothsidesism” in the media. 

Comment:  As a former journalist, I feel for reporters and editors today.  The question is whether the old adage – cover both or all sides equally – should apply today.  I say not, if only because the news media should call out scofflaws like Donald Trump and his minions, and thus fail intentionally to cover “both sides.”

1. A recent surge in U.S. drug overdose deaths has hit Black men the hardest, a January analysis found.  While overdose death rates have increased in every major demographic group in recent years, no group has seen a bigger increase than Black men.  As a result, Black men have overtaken White men and are now on par with American Indian or Alaska Native men as the demographic groups most likely to die from overdoses.
2. Nearly half of U.S. teens now say they use the internet “almost constantly,” according to a survey conducted in April and May. This percentage has roughly doubled since 2014-15, when 24 per cent said they were almost constantly on-line.
3. The share of aggregate U.S. household income held by the middle class has fallen steadily since 1970, according to an analysis published in April.
4. Growing shares of both Republicans and Democrats say that members of the other party are more immoral, dishonest and closed-minded than other Americans, according to a survey conducted in June and July.

Comment:  This is a reflection of the problem that the “middle ground” rarely exists in politics any longer.  Still, that is often where the best solutions lie.

1. Majorities in nations around the world generally see social media as a good thing for democracy – but not in the United States, a survey of people in 19 advanced economies found.

PEW again performs a useful service by summarizing these statistics.  Do all of them represent me?  No.  But they are worth thought and reflection.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The Washington Post newspaper has showed up with a list of the most egregious lies told by political figures in the last year.

The story, labeled “The biggest Pinocchios of 2022,” was reported by the Post’s Fact Checker column writers and editors.

Reading the list reminds that the lies were so profound that no one would likely believe them.  Right?  Well, no.  Many Americans do.

No surprise here, but presidential aspirant Donald Trump, U.S.Senator Ron Johnson and media wacko Tucker Carlson made the list.

But topping the list?  Former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows.  He got the “special hypocrisy” award from the Post – for this:

“Mark Meadows, as Trump’s last chief of staff, helped spread Trump’s lies about the 2020 election and fanned fears of voter fraud.  He asked in one interview:  “Do you realize how inaccurate the voter rolls are, with people just moving around?”

“But the Fact Checker revealed that in 2022, he was simultaneously registered to vote in three different states — North Carolina, Virginia and South Carolina.  He lost his North Carolina registration after the New Yorker magazine reported he had registered to vote at a home where he did not reside. He then voted in the 2020 election via absentee ballot.

“In November, state investigators submitted to state prosecutors the findings of a voter fraud probe into Meadows’s actions but the state’s attorney general has not yet announced whether he will bring criminal charges.”

Meadows, like Trump, has talked incessantly about election crimes.  He was guilty of one himself.

I have heard of duplicity, but this tops the list.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

After I posted my blog this morning, a story from Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB) announced this:

“Washington Governor Jay Inslee proposed Wednesday that state spending during the next two years place a top priority on housing, including an effort to quickly build thousands of units that would require the okay from Washington voters.

“The governor’s proposed budget would spend $70 billion over two years starting in July 2023.

“That figure represents a roughly 12 per cent proposed increase in spending from the current budget.  

“The additional money would pay for about 5,300 housing units between 2023 and 2025 and 19,000 in the following six years, according to the proposal.  Nearly 13,000 people are living unsheltered throughout Washington — up from more than 10,500 in 2020, according to the state’s 2022 Point in Time Count.”

What Inslee proposes or does in Washington doesn’t directly affect Oregon, of course.  But his emphasis on housing could be reflected in what Governor-Elect Kotek proposes once she takes office after the first of the year.

OPB’s story did not use the word “homeless” as a justification for more housing in Washington, but there is little doubt that the governor to the north has that issue in the back of his mind, as would be case with all governors across the country.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Anytime a new governor takes over in Oregon, those of us in the political cheap-seats wait for announcements about a new sense of direction.

Governor-Elect Tina Kotek chose this week’s Business Summit in Portland as the location for her first major public comments since winning a hard-fought three-way battle for the state’s highest political office.

Here is how the Oregonian newspaper reported her comments:

“Oregon governor-elect Tina Kotek told business leaders at an annual summit in Portland on Monday that she will prioritize rebuilding trust, increasing accountability in state government, and boosting partnerships between various government entities and the private sector when she takes office in January.

“Kotek also promised to deliver results on three ‘issues of shared concern’ across the state:  Housing and homelessness, mental health and addiction services, and schools.

“We must improve the experience of Oregonians who are counting on us to deliver services every day.  Accountability in government is one of the primary reasons I ran for governor.”

Too often, the Oregonian says, “state leaders have declared victory after passing new programs or funding, then failed to ensure the public ultimately received the services or benefits that were promised.”

I agree with the Oregonian.

Making promises is one thing.  Delivering on them is another.

The latter often settles into the dust.

As a lobbyist and government manager in and around state government for 40 years or so, I could cite example after example of programs failing to deliver on promises.

Let me cite just one today – and I choose it, for one reason, because Kotek was not involved in it.  I prefer to give her a chance to succeed without posing questions in advance of her tenure.  Give her a clean slate.

The case I recount involved passing a bill to install a “pay for performance” approach to private sector foster care contracts,  It was a top priority for one of my firm’s clients, ChristieCare, which came to be called Youth Villages.

Here is how the director, Lynne Saxton, described the problem in testimony to the Legislature in 2011:

“According to industry data, there are 8,689 children in foster care in Oregon today.   For every 10,000 kids in the state, 100 are in foster care.  The national average is 57 and the average in Tennessee is 45.

“Stop and think about this statistic for a moment.  It is nothing if not sobering.

“On behalf of ChristieCare, as well as Youth Villages, the nationally-known non-profit organization with which ChristieCare recently affiliated, I want to go on record strongly in favor of this legislation, which requires the Department of Human Services and county partners to implement Strengthening, Preserving and Reunifying Families programs to provide family preservation and reunification child welfare services.” 

Through Senate Bill 964, it was Lynne’s way to call for a better foster care system, one that helped kids, not put them in increased jeopardy, which had been a huge blot on Oregon’s hyman services record.

Let me put it more simply.  SB 964 instructed the Department and private providers to focus on reducing foster care caseloads in Oregon, which had risen to the alarming levels listed above.  If private contractors did not succeed in delivering on their promises, their contracts would not be renewed.

What happened?

Nothing.  The legislation sits in Oregon lawbooks today with no result.

This is not Governor-Elect Kotek’s responsibility; it is just one example where Oregon state government did not practice what Kotek has now emphasized – accountability for performance.

Here are other highlights of her Business Summit remarks:

“The real victory doesn’t come until that working mom enrolls her child in an affordable childcare program, until an unhoused military veteran gets a home “and the student who’s been struggling to read knows the satisfaction of reading her first book.”

“The governor-elect said she will push her administration to ‘re-frame success,’ to prioritize results. and she will deliver lists of expectations to state agencies after she takes office.”

“Our entire state benefits when Portland is healthy and economically thriving,” Kotek said. Some Portland-area civic leaders have faulted Gov. Kate Brown for her hands-off approach as the state’s largest city struggled with rising gun violence, homelessness, and other problems.

A lot will happen as Kotek takes office after the first of the year, including her State of the State speech to a joint session of the Legislature.

It is not surprising to hear the governor-elect identify homelessness as a major problem.  It will be a challenge for her to find a way to work with urban leaders – especially in the City of Portland – to find a way through the public policy thicket of homelessness and housing.

Most of what has been tried recently has not worked, but Kotek did emphasize, in her remarks, that she intends to reach out to urban leaders to collaborate on potential solutions.  She may want to look in Salem where Church at the Park has been making some progress. 

A further indication of Kotek’s priorities will come when she announces her “Recommended State Government Budget for 2023-25,” a task the law instructs every new governor to perform. 

Good governors will use the state’s budget to propose the priorities they want to set for their Administration.

Will the new governor succeed?

One hopes the answer is yes.  Success will be good for all Oregonians, both those who voted for Kotek and those who didn’t.

No matter.  The time for campaigning is over.  The time for governing has arrived.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I show up today with summaries of stories that appeared in two of my on-line golf publications.

Publishing this allows me to focus just a bit on golf, inasmuch as it is tough to play these days in Salem, Oregon, where I live.  Too rainy.  Too cold.

So, here are excerpts of the stories, one that lists famous “watery graves” on golf courses, and another that lists the “most expensive rounds” you can play as long as you don’t care how much it costs.  In two cases, I add my perspective.

WATERY GRAVES

In the most recent issue of Links Magazine, David DeSmith lists what he calls “12 of Golf’s Scariest Watery Graves.”

He starts his story this way:

“Whether you call them water hazards or penalty areas, golf’s lakes, rivers, streams, and oceans often become final resting places for our errant shots.  You can recover from deep rough or a bunker.  But there’s no coming back from a water hazard unless it’s a very shallow one and you’re feeling especially courageous.”

Right.

So, here’s the list:

Rae’s Creek—Augusta National Golf Club (Augusta, Ga.)

Let’s get the most famous one out of the way first.  Patrons of the Masters know well the role that a nettlesome tributary of Rae’s Creek plays in guarding the front of the green at Augusta National’s famous par-three 12th hole and the fairway and green of the equally famous par-five 13th.

Mangrove Lake—Mid Ocean Club (Tucker’s Town, Bermuda)

Bermuda’s Mid-Ocean Club credits C.B. Macdonald and Seth Raynor as its original designers.  At Mid Ocean’s par-four 5th, they created a classic Cape hole that starts at an elevated tee and bends gently left around the edge of Mangrove Lake.

Machrihanish Bay—Machrihanish Golf Club (Machrihanish, Scotland)

It’s not a lake you need to worry about when you hit your opening tee shot at Machrihanish Golf Club—it’s the Atlantic Ocean. Here again, the par four sweeps gently to the left, hugging the shoreline. There’s plenty of room to bail out to the right, but that just makes this 424-yard hole even longer. Should you hit your tee shot left, you might get lucky, though. If the tide is out, you can play your second shot from the beach.

NOTE:  I had the privilege of playing this great course and, on my tee shot over the Ocean, I managed to make it.  But I hit the sand and played my second from the beach must like a fairway bunker.  Still got par on the hole.

Stillwater Bay—Pebble Beach Golf Links (Pebble Beach, Calif.)

Imagine coming to the 18th tee at Pebble Beach needing a birdie or par to win the U.S. Open and seeing the vast expanse of Stillwater Bay lurking to the left.

Victoria Cove—Cape Wickham Golf Links (King Island, Tasmania)

Here’s another 18th hole where a water hazard features prominently. In the case of Cape Wickham’s 434-yard finisher, though, the fairway bends to the right along the edge of Victoria Cove and its secluded beach.

Pacific Ocean—Cypress Point Golf Club (Pebble Beach, Calif.)

Just up the coast from Pebble Beach lies one of golf’s most demanding holes:  The 230-yard, par-three 16th at Cypress Point, which is all-carry from tee to peninsula green—usually into the prevailing wind off the sea.

Pacific Ocean—Mauna Kea Golf Course (Kohala Coast, Hawaii)

The 3rd hole at Mauna Kea is another all-carry par three—this one with black volcanic rock thrown in for good measure.  Robert Trent Jones serves up this 210-yard tester early in the round, and the unique volcanic rock formations and cliffs will make multiple other appearances as you move through your round.

NOTE:  I played this course and remember it pretty well.  I managed to lay up a bit to the right and ended by bogeying the hole.

17th Hole Pond—Ocean Course at Kiawah Island (Kiawah Island, S.C.)

At 223 yards, the par-three 17th hole at Kiawah Island’s Ocean Course didn’t need water to make it a tough test.

West Whale Bay—Port Royal Golf Course (Southampton, Bermuda)

The 16th at Port Royal in Bermuda is another all-carry par three.  (Notice a trend here?)  In this case, it’s West Whale Bay that your tee shot will have to avoid as it travels the 227 yards from tee to green.

Pacific Ocean—Punta Mita Golf Club, Pacifico Course (Nayarit, Mexico)

Jack Nicklaus must have been drooling when he saw the coastline he’d have at his disposal when he was asked to design the Pacifico course at Mexico’s Punta Mita Golf Club.

Hawke’s Bay—Cape Kidnappers (Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand)

Don’t play Tom Doak’s Cape Kidnappers on New Zealand’s North Island if you’re afraid of heights.  Several of its spectacular fairways and green sites have steep drop-offs from cliffs perched 400 feet or more above the tumultuous waters below.

17th Hole Lake—TPC Sawgrass, Players Stadium Course (Ponte Vedra Beach, Fla.)

The famous island-green, par-three 17th hole at TPC Sawgrass is golf’s ultimate do-or-die hole.  All it demands is a high, straight shot of around 137 yards.

EXPENSIVE GOLF

Now, on to the second issue, the most expensive bookings you can play.  For me, just a curiosity because I don’t ever intend to fork over that much cash for just 18 holes.

Shadow Creek (Las Vegas, Nevada)—$1,000

Sensei Porcupine Creek (Palm Springs, California on an estate that used to be owned by billionaire Larry Ellison) — $950

TPC Sawgrass (Players Stadium) (Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida)—$600

Wynn Golf Club (Las Vegas, Nevada)—$600

Pebble Beach Golf Links (Pebble Beach, California)—$595

Whistling Straights (Kohler, Wisconsin)—$555

Kiawah Island (Ocean) (Kiawah Island, South Carolina)—$500

So, for me, back to golf reality.  Thinking about playing.  And, if I do, finding reasonable costs on the 1^st tee.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Today, I open one of three departments I run, the Department of Pet Peeves.

I do so to emphasize one example of a “words matter” emphasis for me.

Before opening Pet Peeves, know that the other departments I run are the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering and the Department of “Just Saying.”  All three departments operate under my full and complete authority; no one tells me what to do.

My new pet peeve arises from a story in the Washington Post written by media critic Erik Wemple, normally a very competent writer.

His most recent story appeared under this headline:

“Why did the New York Post disappear an article on sexual assault?”

His story started this way:

“The New York Post is officially busted.  In September 2017, it published an apparent scoop about an alleged sexual assault by a top staffer to then-New York City Public Advocate Letitia James.  Then it disappeared the story without alerting its readers — a major violation of journalism hygiene.”

Say what?

The word disappear is not a verb.  You can make something disappear.  Buy you can’t disappear something.

At one point, I thought what occurred might rest with the headline writer and, those of who have been in the journalism business know that headline writers sometimes get things wrong as they post stories. 

But, this time, it was both the writer and the headline writer.

So, Mr. Wemple and his colleagues at the Post should know better and do better.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Atlantic Magazine staff writer Tom Nichols asks the question in the headline as he ponders what prompts the Oath Keepers and other seditious organizations to do what they do.

Then, he answers his own question with striking words.  These:

“Even before January 6, 2021, I wondered about the kind of people who live the classic American paranoid life, the citizens whose politics are a stew of ‘heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy.’

“I first encountered this mindset when I worked in the U.S. Senate as personal staff for the late John Heinz of Pennsylvania:  I would field calls from constituents who demanded to know whether the senator was in league with the Trilateralists or the Bilderbergers or the one-worlders.

“I was barely 30 and taken aback at speaking with people who seemed to be living on some other planet.

“I am thinking about such people again, now that the leader of the Oath Keepers, Elmer Stewart Rhodes, and some of his associates are likely headed for federal prison.”

Why?  For what?

Nichols says he was struck, “not by the grandiosity of the militias, but by their smallness.”  

Rhodes is a disbarred lawyer who managed to shoot himself in the eye.  Kelly Meggs, the leader of a state Oath Keeper chapter who was also found guilty of seditious conspiracy, was a Florida car dealer.

Nichols wonders, as I do, what the Oath Keepers intended to do if they and their ilk had won the day on January 6?  

He adds:

“Perhaps they expected Donald Trump to strut out onto the south balcony and declare martial law.  Maybe they thought that they would march into Congress and be greeted as liberators, perhaps with medals bestowed.

“There is perhaps no more reliable indicator of a society’s ripeness for a mass movement than the prevalence of unrelieved boredom.  In almost all the descriptions of the periods preceding the rise of mass movements there is reference to vast ennui; and, in their earliest stages, mass movements are more likely to find sympathizers among the bored than among the exploited and suppressed.”

Washington Post columnist George Will wrote about this in 2020:   “When society is bored by its own comforts, there is a ‘hunger for apocalypse,’ a need for great drama that can provide some sense of purpose in life.

“The Oath Keepers and the militia movements found their sense of purpose in a belief that their fellow citizens were too hoodwinked, too stupid, too corrupt to run an election, and know that the results are fair.  They made ominous-looking arm patches and wore tactical gear and glowered through their sunglasses at the people whose rights they claimed to be defending.  They arrogated to themselves the duty to interpret the Constitution in any way that would dissolve their sense of emptiness, douse their own insecurities, and make their lives more interesting.”

Some of these aimless people will now go to prison.  Others will live out their lives stained by their participation in the events of January 6, with careers obliterated, friends gone, family destroyed, and even freedom taken.

So, to answer the question in this blog headline, there was no “what.”  Just animus.

Which means that all of us who value American democracy, with all of its faults and foibles, must work hard to save it and improve it by the steadfastness of our citizenship.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I stumbled across this summary of the way Morocco beat Spain in the World Cup a few days ago.

“When the moment came for Morocco’s Achraf Hakimi to take the most important penalty kick in his country’s history, he was suddenly faced with a million options.

“He had 196 square feet to aim at from 12 yards out.  Go right or left, high or low.  Hard or soft.  All Hakimi had to do to send Morocco past Spain and into the World Cup quarterfinals was put the ball where the goalkeeper wasn’t. 

“Instead, he did the opposite.

“Hakimi took a deep breath, approached the ball with four short steps, and dinked a gentle shot right down the middle of the goal.  Had Spain goalkeeper Unai Simon stood his ground, the ball would have dropped right into his hands.  Unfortunately for Spain, he didn’t.  Simon dived low to his right and was already on his knees by the time Hakimi’s penalty bounced into the net.”

Hakimi became an immediate national hero.

What I learned was that Simon was the latest victim of “the most audacious, most inadvisable gamble in soccer:  The Panenka.”

What?

Well, it turns out that the incredible move has earned the name of person who first did it, Antonin Panenka.

Just like Dick Fosbury.  Remember him?  

He was the high-jumper for Oregon State University who inaugurated what came to be called “The Fosbury Flop” and now, many years later everyone uses it in that part of track and field.

I also remembered that there is a third case of an athletic move named after the athlete who did it, the “Ali Shuffle,” named after Muhammad Ali, the famous boxer.

And, still, I found out there is fourth case that bears the name of the player who invented a move, the “Cruyff turn,” an evasive dribbling move used in soccer named after Dutch player Johan Cruyff.

I knew about the Fosbury Flop and the Ali Shuffle, but not the others.

So, for all of you who have as much on your hands as I do, here is a brief description of all four athlete-named moves – and, to give credit where credit is due, I defer to Mr. Google:

THE PANENKA:  The icy-veined, slightly crazy individual who made it popular was Czechoslovakia’s Antonin Panenka in the final of the 1976 European Championship against West Germany.  The game ended 2-2 in regulation and eventually proceeded to a penalty shootout. That’s when a German miss gave the Czechs a chance to end it.  

Up stepped a 27-year-old wearing the number 7 on his back and a hairbrush of a mustache on his face.  Panenka took a fast run-up as if to hammer the shot.  But at the last moment he simply played a delicate chip down the middle.

The keeper had already thrown himself to his left.  Thus “The Panenka.”

THE FOSBURY FLOP:  This is a high jumping style popularized and perfected by American athlete Dick Fosbury, whose gold medal in the 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City brought the style to the world’s attention.

The flop became the dominant style of the event.  Before Fosbury, most elite jumpers used other forms — the straddle technique, Western Roll, Eastern cut-off or scissors jump to clear the bar.

Though the backwards flop technique had been known for years before Fosbury, landing surfaces had been sandpits or low piles of matting and high jumpers had to land on their feet or at least land carefully to prevent injury.  With the advent of deep foam matting, high jumpers were able to be more adventurous in their landing styles and hence experiment with styles of jumping.

Then came Fosbury and the “Fosbury Flop.”

THE ALI SHUFFLE:  This is the famous series of fancy footwork created by Muhammad Ali as a taunting mechanism.  He used it multiple times to win against opponents, cementing his status as one of the greats in a sport I don’t follow – if it really can be called a sport when the aim is to pummel someone into submission.

But, Ali made the “sport” famous, in part by using the “Ali Shuffle.” 

THE CRUYFF TURN:  In the 24th minute of a game against Sweden in the group stage of the 1974 World Cup, while Johan Cruyff had control of the ball in an attacking position but was facing his own goal and being guarded tightly by Swedish defender Jan Olsson, he feigned a pass before dragging the ball behind his standing leg, turning 180 degrees, and accelerating away.

With its simplicity, effectiveness, and unpredictability, the Cruyff turn remains one of the most commonly recognized dribbling moves in modern soccer.

So, we have the “Cruyff Turn.”

There, now you know what I know.  And don’t feel better?

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

On occasion, a column I read is so well done that I reprint it as my blog.  This is one of those cases.

This time, one of the country’s best writers, John Feinstein, had his column published by the Washington Post under the headline that leads this blog.

His support for Rory McIlroy is noteworthy.

McIlroy, besides one of the best, if not today’s best, pro golfer, he has become the voice of aligning with the PGA Tour as it fights insurgent rival, LIV Golf.

Here is the summary of Feinstein’s main point:

“McIlroy’s great golf is not why he should be sportsperson of the year.  It’s because he became the conscience of his sport.

“Golf is in the midst of a crisis, divided by the presence of a new circuit that is funded by the government of Saudi Arabia, which is so corrupt that it makes the choice of Qatar as host of the World Cup look like a blip.”

So, without further ado, here is the full text of Feinstein’s column.

**********

Error! Filename not specified.

I have absolutely no problem with Sports Illustrated naming Stephen Curry its sportsperson of the year this week. In June, Curry led the Golden State Warriors to the NBA title — his fourth — and was the Finals MVP. He even went back to Davidson and finished his degree.

He’s a class act, a wonderful story and an excellent choice. My only quibble: He was part of the Warriors team that won the award just four years ago.

Still, if I had been consulted — which, remarkably enough, I wasn’t — I would have recommended someone else: Rory McIlroy.

McIlroy didn’t win a major championship this year, although he finished in the top 10 at all four: second at the Masters, eighth at the PGA Championship, tied for fifth at the U.S. Open and third at the British Open. He did win three times on the PGA Tour — including the Tour Championship despite its screwy format — and claimed the year-long titles on both the PGA Tour (for a third time) and the European tour (for a fourth time).

But that’s not why he should be sportsperson of the year. It’s because he became the conscience of his sport.

Golf is in the midst of a crisis, divided by the presence of a new circuit that is funded by the government of Saudi Arabia, which is so corrupt that it makes the choice of Qatar as host of the World Cup look like a blip.

There is absolutely no doubt that the money behind LIV Golf is blood money. There’s also absolutely no doubt that most golfers and those who have gone to work for LIV don’t really care. They point out — correctly — that there are plenty of other corrupt governments that are embraced by the sports world.

Qatar is hosting the World Cup. Russia recently hosted a World Cup and an Olympics. China, which is very much in business with the NBA, has hosted the Olympics twice since 2008. If Qatar, Russia and China can “sportswash,” why can’t the Saudis?

They can, which is why Hall of Famer Phil Mickelson, British Open champion Cameron Smith and 11 other major champions jumped to LIV for huge guaranteed money, some of it into the hundreds of millions. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s first recruit was Greg Norman, who was hired as LIV’s CEO and lead recruiter.

My friend David Feherty, about whom I have just finished a book, also jumped, becoming LIV’s lead analyst for millions. Feherty is different from most players in that he made no bones about why he joined the new circuit.

“Money,” he said. “… I hear, ‘Well, it’s to grow the game.’ Bull. … They paid me a lot of money.”

Most players who have jumped made the “grow the game” claim. The most important players who turned down LIV money — and have been adamant about why — are McIlroy and Tiger Woods.

Woods has been sportsperson of the year twice and is, for all intents and purposes, an emeritus superstar who played all of nine rounds in actual competition this year. He will turn 47 this month and remains a major voice in the game.

But McIlroy is the top-ranked player in the world. He has won four majors but none since 2014. He’s 33 — the same age Mickelson was when he won his first major and a year younger than Ben Hogan was when he won his first.

More important in 2022 was his willingness to speak up on behalf of the PGA Tour, both publicly and privately.

Last spring, when his good friend Sergio Garcia was being recruited by LIV, the two had a lengthy talk. Garcia’s mind was made up; he told McIlroy this was their chance to “finally get paid what we deserve.”

“Sergio, we’re golfers,” McIlroy answered. “We don’t deserve to be paid anything.”

McIlroy is a multi-multi-millionaire, and he has cashed in on his fame and success around the world. He doesn’t apologize for that. But unlike so many wealthy professional athletes, he understands that he doesn’t deserve any of the money he has made.

“I’m lucky that I’m good at a sport that allows me to make a lot of money,” he told me this spring. “That doesn’t mean I think I deserve it.”

McIlroy’s sense of the world was shaped differently than that of most of his colleagues. His dad, Gerry, was a bartender at Holywood Golf Club in a middle-class suburb of Belfast. His mom, Rosie, worked in a 3M plant as her only child was growing up, and both parents worked second and third jobs so they could afford to pay for Rory to travel when it became clear his talent as a golfer was undeniable.

Their son is honest and willing to admit mistakes. When he first qualified to play in the Ryder Cup in 2010, he told reporters he would be happy to play, but his goal in golf was to win major championships. The Ryder Cup, he said, was a nice exhibition.

“It took me about 15 minutes after I got to Wales [for the 2010 matches] to know I’d been wrong,” he said years later. “… Looking back, what I said initially was selfish. I’m an only child, and since I was a kid, my golf was the most important thing in my world. I had to readjust my thinking to understand that wasn’t true.”

He smiled. “Can you imagine that, a golfer being selfish? Had to be a first.”

This year, he dueled publicly with Norman and talked with many of his fellow golfers about why staying with the PGA Tour is important. Many, like Garcia, haven’t listened. That hasn’t stopped McIlroy from telling them and the public what he thinks. Recently, he said Norman needs to “exit stage left” before the PGA Tour and LIV can sit down and negotiate the peace. Woods has said the same thing, and Norman has responded by saying he pays no attention to what either says.

Eventually, with or without Norman, there will be some sort of agreement between LIV and the golf establishment. The Saudis are never going to run out of money, and they are continuing to recruit big names.

Woods still has a voice but tends to be careful with what he says publicly. McIlroy is the No. 1 player in the world and never holds back publicly — and he will still be onstage during major championships in the future.

McIlroy had a great 2022 on the golf course, though not a perfect one. He had a greater year — and a more important one — off the golf course.

For me, he’s the sportsperson of the year.

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 my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

One of my friends took issue with I wrote yesterday comparing millions of dollars in charitable donations made by the PGA Tour with what I contended was zero made by LIV, the rival tour.

He sent me information saying that LIV, in fact, had committed $100 million to a new global corporate social responsibility platform.

Well, I responded, why would I want to let a new fact intrude into my perspective, which, put simply, is that I favor the PGA Tour over LIV.

These days, facts are not often allowed to intrude into points of view, especially in politics.  Right?

But, seriously, I told my friend that the information he sent was helpful, that I would accede to it, and that I would stop arguing that charitable giving is a measure of differences between the two golf organizations.

My friend and I talk about lots of stuff, not just this golf issue, and we enjoy the interchange, no matter whether we agree or disagree.

However, on the PGA Tour vs. LIV, I still hold these views:

·      I favor PGA tour COMPETITIVE golf over LIV exhibitions.

·      I continue to wonder how players who made millions using the PGA tour as a platform can now find their way clear to disavow that platform and move to LIV.

·      And, I hope that negotiations between the two rivals can occur, but the only way that has chance is if LIV mouthpiece Greg Norman exists the scene.  He carries so much animus for the PGA Tour, cultivated over many years, that no one wants to sit down with him, especially to consider the future of golf.

So, in a genuine nod to my friend, I will throw away one of my arguments against LIV – charitable donations — and focus on others.