Perspective from the 19^th Hole 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 New York Times gets most of the credit for this blog headline, for it also used something similar in one of its most recent editorials.

I read the editorial with interest because I, too, have wondered how to protest the current occupant of the White House, Donald Trump, who is functioning like what he wants to be, which is a dictator, if not God, and, in the meantime, is fomenting a near-recession.

It’s hard to know how to protest Trump and his cronies because, if there are protests, it is possible all such protests will do is inflame Trump to do far worse.  Of course, as the epitome of a narcissist.  He and only he always knows what’s best – every time and all the time.

For me, two recent occurrences are worth reporting:

• A friend of mine took time the other day to join protests on Trump’s overreach, including with respect to tariffs.  I respected and admired this friend’s action, for it was a statement in political courage.
• My wife met with a local worker a day or so ago who was worried that she would be deported, perhaps to her former home, Vietnam.  She loves America and wants to stay here, and, to put a point on it, she is not a criminal and presents no danger to anyone.  Someone tell Trump.

Does Trump know or care?  NO.

According to the NY Times, there are ways it suggests could be effective to deal with Trump and, on some occasions, oppose him:

REGARDING TRUMP’S ATTACKS ON LAW FIRMS, ETC:  “In his attacks on law firms, universities and other American institutions, Trump is relying on an illusion.  The illusion is that the institutions are powerless to fight back and that they face a choice between principle and survival.

“These institutions do not have to capitulate to Trump.  They have a realistic path to defeating his intimidation.  Some law firms and others have begun to fight.  In doing so, they have provided the beginnings of a playbook for standing up to his attempts to weaken core tenets of American democracy, including due process, free speech, and the constitutional system of checks and balances.”

Harvard, one of the nation’s oldest and most respected higher education institutions is fighting back against Trump.  But it is costing the university millions as Trump responds by freezing federal dollars going to Harvard, even though it is true Harvard won those funds in fair competitions.

Here is how David Ignatius in the Washington Post wrote about Harvard “saving its soul” against Trump:

“Harvard University just gave us all a lesson in how to answer a bully with one powerful word:  ‘No.’

“The Trump administration tried to intimidate Harvard — as it has so many government agencies, corporate executives, law firms and other universities — by threatening to cut off government money.  In Harvard’s case, that meant a ‘review’ of $8.7 billion in multiyear grants.  The administration last week demanded a humiliating settlement that would have imposed an outside “audit” of faculty hiring, student admissions and other internal matters.

“Harvard refused to capitulate.  ‘The university will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights,’ wrote Harvard President Alan M. Garber.  ‘No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue.’

So it goes with Trump who now wants to run Harvard.

ON THE IDEA OF AN TRUMP OPPOSITION PLAY BOOK:  “Trump has signed executive orders punishing several law firms that have done nothing wrong.  They have merely employed lawyers who represented Democrats, defended liberal causes or participated in investigations into Trump.  

“The orders lack any meaningful legal argument and yet contain severe punishments.  They seek to bar the firms’ lawyers from entering federal buildings and meeting with federal officials, provisions that would prevent the firms from representing many clients.

“A crucial fact about these agreements is that they include no binding promises from the White House.  Trump can threaten the firms again whenever he chooses and demand further concessions.  These firms are in virtual receivership to Trump.  So is Columbia, which yielded to Trump after he threatened its federal funding.  The university did not even win the restoration of that funding when it agreed to his demands; it won merely permission to begin negotiating with the administration.”

INSIST ON DUE PROCESS:  “The American legal system has procedures to deal with Trump’s various allegations against these institutions.  If law firms are behaving inappropriately, courts can punish them.  If a university is violating students’ civil rights — by tolerating antisemitism, for instance — the Justice Department can file charges.  These processes allow each side to present evidence.  They prevent abuse of power and establish ground rules that other organizations can follow.

“The three law firms that have filed suits to block Trump’s executive orders — Jenner & Block, Perkins Coie, and WilmerHale — provide a model.  So far, they are winning in court.”

THE FINAL STEP – SOLIDARITY:  Finally, the NY Times calls for “solidarity, especially for institutions that Trump has not yet targeted.  The initial response to his executive orders from many other law firms has been the opposite of solidarity.  They reportedly tried to steal clients and hire lawyers from the threatened firms.  Most big firms also refused to sign a legal brief in defense of their industry.  Their meekness is ultimately self-defeating. The campaign to subdue law firms will either be defeated or it will expand.

“We are glad to see that other firms have spoken up.  Even better, a few firms — Williams & Connolly, Cooley and Clement & Murphy — are representing the three fighting the executive orders.  Corporate executives can also make a difference by making clear, even privately, that they will not abandon any law firm that Trump attacks.  The business world has much at stake.  The United States is home to an outsize share of financial and corporate activity partly because investors have confidence that the rule of law prevails here.  If political power instead supersedes signed contracts and the rule of law, American business will suffer.”

The Times closes with this:

“Standing up to the abuse of power is inherently difficult.  It can also be inspiring.  People who do so often look back proudly on their actions and are justly celebrated for it after a crisis has passed.  But crises usually do not end on their own. Resolving them requires courage and action.”

So, I return to the story of my friend who attended a recent anti-Trump protest.  His commitment is admirable.

As I reflect back on history before my time, I often have thought about whether German citizens, who lived during Adolph Hitler’s killing spree against Jews, thought about standing up to Hitler.

Easy to say that they should have done so, given what we know now about Hitler trying to do away with an entire race of people, the Jews.

Today, in America, all of us should stand up to Trump who resembles – and perhaps even admires Hitler.  We just need to find ways to stand up that achieve two objectives – the action works against Trump, as well as expresses our own inner commitments in words and in deeds.