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.

Donald Trump has often proclaimed himself as the best deal-maker in history.

That’s his reality.

Accuracy tells a different story.

His deal-making falls short for three reasons:

• First, he is unprepared.

He never bones up before starting a deal. He also never relies on confidants who may know more than he does before he runs amuck.

• Second, he is mercurial.

That’s a not-often-used word, but it means this:  Describes someone whose mood or behavior is highly unpredictable and liable to change rapidly.  Sounds like Trump, right? 

• Third, Trump often is desperate for a deal and everyone knows it.

Desperation breeds negative results.

The Atlantic Magazine wrote about this in the last week and included this summary of the deal Trump says he is trying to strike to end the Iran war he started without a rationale for doing so, nor an attempt to convince Congress to go along with his escapade for which we are all paying a high price. 

Trump’s war has cost American lives, roiled the economy with sky-high gas prices, and given Republicans who support Trump a lot to consider.

Writing in Atlantic Magazine, here is how columnist David Graham described Trump’s record:

“Donald Trump’s reputation and political career were built on his deal-making prowess, yet the president keeps demonstrating that he is a terrible negotiator.

“Repeatedly over the past nine years, Trump has gotten rolled by counterparts during high-stakes exchanges.  North Korea, Russia, Russia again, China, and China again have gotten the better of the United States.

“Trump has had to slink back to Washington without much to show except empty talk about friendship with whatever dictator has just run circles around him.”

Of course, then Graham goes on to point out what he calls “one glaring exception” to Trump’s self-proclaimed deal-making credentials.  It came when he was negotiated with himself to get his own administration to set up a $1.8 billion slush fund for his political allies.  [As this written, Trump’s fund in legal scrutiny in court.]

To Trump, that’s a win.  For Americans, it’s an incredible abuse.

Graham adds this conclusion:

“… these factors combine to mean that Trump is ill-equipped to win any negotiation, much less one that is the result of his own blundering into war.  Trump is likely to muddle through, as he has so many times in his career, and reach some sort of agreement with Iran.  He will surely say that it’s a great triumph, but reality will be harder to ignore than it was when Trump’s failures merely hurt his own bank accounts.

“One of the ironies of The Art of the Deal, the book that made Trump’s reputation as a clever businessman, is that Trump himself didn’t write it. His ghostwriter, Tony Schwartz, has said that he cobbled the volume together after sitting at Trump’s elbow while he conducted his daily business.  

“Unfortunately, it’s probably too late for Trump to hire a real professional to handle negotiations with Iran.”

So, deal-maker?  No.

Self-dealing?  Yes.

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.

In the past, my best quote was attributed to General Colin Powell when he said he would not run for president.  The reason:

“He bemoaned the loss of civility in politics.”

But, then, today, I stumbled across a contender for my “best quote accolade.”

Perhaps not surprisingly, it came from President Ronald Reagan.  In 1986, he said this:

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases:  If it moves, tax it.  If it keeps moving, regulate it.  And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

In only a few words, Reagan, the wordsmith, made a great point.

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.

Here’s another quick look at the governor’s election race in Oregon.

The only fact I know for sure in the race in Oregon who is running against whom.

It will be a repeat of the last time around:

• The current Democrat Governor Tina Kotek is running for re-election, hoping her first four years in the job will produce a second term.

• Her opponent, as was the case four years ago, will be current Oregon senator, Republican Christine Drazan.

Will things be different this time around?  Will a Republican win for the first time in Oregon in more than 40 years?

The best answer now:  Perhaps.

And, to Republicans, hoping for a re-set in Oregon, that is the best answer they’ve had in years.

Why?

A couple reasons.

First, Kotek won a lot of debits among voters because she supported a major gas tax and other transportation funding measures in the last Legislature.  Opponents gained referral to the primary election ballot and the measure went down like a stone.

It’s possible Kotek could pay a price for her support.

Second, Kotek has faced a number of problems in state agencies, such as, for example, in the Department of Human Resources which handles foster care management.  The agency has dramatically failed and, while state agency problems don’t translate easily to the campaign trail, foster care could be different.

Third, I don’t pay much attention to national polls on how 50 governors are doing in their states – who knows how such polls are done – but, for what it’s worth, Kotek has pulled a very low rating.  No doubt Republicans will try to capitalize on that standing.

Over the last 40 years or so, Republicans have not been able to gather enough votes in urban Oregon to win statewide elective offices, including governor.  Democrats almost always control urban outcomes.

That was the case in 2010 when the Republican candidate then, Chris Dudley, won 29 of Oregon’s 36 counties, but lost urban Oregon to Democrat John Kitzhaber who turned that strength into re-election.

Plus, this time around, the Republican primary victor, Drazan, will have to decide how to deal with the impact of Donald Trump in Oregon.  It is likely Drazan will try mostly to avoid Trump, but we can expect Kotek and her allies to tie Drazan directly to the U.S. president.

So, for now, months before the election, Democrats hope to hold their dynasty in Oregon while Republicans hope it’s time for a change.

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 answer to the question in this blog headline could be “yes.”

That’s the contention of a writer, Cleve Woodson, Jr., whose work appeared in the Washington Post under this headline:  “Repeated violence puts spotlight on divisive political speech.”

Here is how his column started:

“Scholars who study rhetoric and extremism say the country’s political language has grown more aggressive and can trigger violent acts.

“For years, President Donald Trump has relied on insults, menace and combative political language as central features of his public persona — portraying opponents as enemies, critics as threats and political fights as existential battles for the country’s survival.

“After multiple assassination attempts against Trump and amid a broader rise in threats against public officials, scholars of political violence are debating whether incendiary rhetoric from political leaders makes real-world violence more likely.”

From me, two points:

First, I love words, so using divisive ones always strikes me as counterproductive.  It only results in what characterizes politics these days – contention, division, derision, and a win-at-all-costs mentality.

Second, divisive speech doesn’t contribute much, if anything, to what I long for in politics – the ability to see and land on the middle ground, which is where the best solutions to pressing public policy problems lie in the first place.

More from Wootson:

“Presidents and the White House have long been the focus of people driven by political grievances, personal instability or emotional volatility. But scholars who study political rhetoric and extremism say the country’s increasingly aggressive political language can make that more likely, even in cases where the perpetrator lacks an ideological motive.

“’The tone from the top models expected behavior,’ said Helio Fred Garcia, a professor of leadership at New York University and ‘Columbia University who has written a book on Trump’s political rhetoric.  ‘If you create conditions where hate and violence become more acceptable, people are going to act on that.  Sometimes it will be supporters.  Sometimes it will be opponents.”

Is Trump at fault for the descent into words abyss?

I say yes, though he is not alone.

Trump’s defenders say Democrats and the media unfairly pin the blame for political violence on the president and overlook the corrosive rhetoric of his political opponents.

Trump’s critics point to the president’s own record of harsh and aggressive speech.  His no-holds-barred approach has been central to his political identity since he first entered national politics, and it has intensified during his second term.  A Washington Post analysis found that Trump’s use of vulgar language, personal insults and self-aggrandizing rhetoric has increased markedly since his first term.  

Critics have pointed to the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol as the clearest example of incendiary political rhetoric with violent, real-world consequences.  Trump painted his Democrat opponents as illegitimate usurpers and urged supporters to come to Washington on January 6 for a gathering that ‘will be wild.’

Before the mob stormed the Capitol, Trump encouraged his supporters to ‘fight like hell’ to stop the certification of Joe Biden’s victory.

My bottom lines:

• Listen more than you talk, including in politics, which, if it occurred, would stand normal politics today on its head.

• Strive to use words that don’t send antagonistic messages.

Too much?  Perhaps.  But worth a try.  Both in life and in politics.

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.

If I was going to write about something over the recent Memorial Day Weekend, it could have about those who gave their lives to defend the country I live, the United States of America.

But, even as offer supreme value for those deaths, my mind turns to one Donald Trump.

If you want to know the definition of corruption, just look at Trump.  You would see more than you want to see.

Now, about two years into Trump’s second term, you could have thought you had seen all the self-dealing you could tolerate from a president who looks after himself and the cronies who bow to him.

Then, no.

You see what New York Times editorial writers saw when they wrote under this headline:  “There Has Never Been an Example of Presidential Corruption Like This.”

Here is how the editorial started:

“Has there ever been an episode of presidential corruption so blatant and threatening to constitutional order?  Certainly not in modern times.

“President Trump’s Justice Department is using taxpayer money to create a $1.8 billion political slush fund.  Ostensibly set up to compensate those who the department claims have ‘suffered weaponization and lawfare,’ it will in fact reward loyalists willing to defy the law and commit violence on behalf of the president.”

The Times says the fund combines three of Trump’s most alarming traits:

• One, it is an obvious form of corruption coming from a president who has used his office to enrich himself, his family, and his allies.
• Two, the fund continues his pattern of using the Justice Department as an enforcer to punish his perceived opponents and protect his friends and allies.
• Three, the fund is his latest attempt to re-write history about the 2020 election and the January 6, 2021, attack on Congress.

This further comment from the Times:

“It is worth pausing to put the fund into the larger context of Trump’s political project:  He is destroying pillars of American democracy to empower himself.  He claims elections are legitimate only if he wins.  He uses federal law enforcement to investigate and prosecute his perceived enemies.  He purges his party of officials who defy him.  He describes members of the other party and civil society as traitors and enemies.  He incentivizes his supporters to break the law on his behalf and rewards them when they do.  He directs his allies to change election rules to keep his party in power.”

How did Trump think of doing this?

Well, he told the IRS what to do and, remember, he controls the IRS.  He instructed the agency to negotiate a resolution to a suit he filed contending that his tax returns had been released unfairly.

He negotiates with himself and you could predict the result:  He wins.

For Trump’s supporters, the handouts will come from the slush fund.  The Justice Department will tap a permanent stream of revenue that Congress created in 1956, known as the Judgment Fund, to settle lawsuits against the federal government.  Now, this fund will reward those who committed acts of aggression against the government in 2021.

So, this conclusion from the Times:

“Americans should be cleareyed about what the president is doing.  He is taking their money and showering it on criminals.” 

Including on himself, for he is a felon.

An essayist in the Times put it this way:

“The president may wish to be considered in the same class as Napoleon or Alexander the Great, but he is in danger of turning himself into the next Mobutu Sese Seko or Suharto:  A kleptocrat remembered not for his ideas and not for his power, but for his greed.”

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.

A few weeks ago, in a “Links” Bible Study at the golf club where I play in La Quinta, California, the leader caught my attention with a description of this:

Examples of what the world counts as valuable in contrast to what the Bible asks Christians to count as valuable.

He mentioned three examples:  Status, wealth and power. 

So struck by these contrasts on this Memorial Day, I have gone a bit deeper by verifying what the Bible says about them.  Here is a summary according to the greatest book ever written, the Bible.

Status:  The world wants status and counts it as valuable.

But the Bible says status doesn’t matter.  It views status through the lens of contentment, spiritual focus, and humility, encouraging believers to avoid comparing their lives with others.  It warns that envy and comparison produce discontent, while contentment and faithfulness bring true fulfillment, regardless of worldly circumstances. 

The Bible states that godly contentment is great gain, urging individuals to be satisfied with their current situation, such as is found 1 Timothy 6:6-8, Philippians 4:11-12.  Comparing yourself to others is described as a trap that steals joy.

Wealth:  The world wants wealth and counts it as valuable.

But the Bible presents a good reputation, integrity, and godly wisdom as the primary objectives instead of the pursuit of financial wealth.  Proverbs 22:1 states that a “good name” is more desirable than riches, emphasizing character over money.  Other key contrasts include spiritual contentment (1 Timothy 6:6) and eternal life (Mark 10:25). 

Power:  The world wants power and counts it as valuable.

The Bible advises against seeking power through selfish ambition, coercion, or unethical means, urging humility and stewardship instead.  It warns that pursuing power often stems from sinful greed, harms the vulnerable, and ultimately leads to destruction.  It advises believers to trust in God’s sovereignty rather than manipulating circumstances for authority.  And, it warns against promoting oneself (2 Timothy 3:5), advising that true greatness comes from serving others rather than ruling over them.

Tough to achieve these Biblical injunctions?  Yes, on our own it is not just tough; it is impossible.

So, the Apostle Paul conveys the proper method when he writes in 2^nd  Corinthians, as follows:

“My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.  Therefore, I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.  That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties.  For when I am weak, then I am strong.”

So, I say, rely on God’s power to demonstrate the Biblical views of status, wealth, and power.

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.

Most of us know what Memorial Day is, so we celebrate it to honor those who served our country.

But, for me this morning, I decided to consult Mr. Google to get more information and here is what I found.

“Memorial Day is a solemn U.S. federal holiday observed on the last Monday of May, dedicated to honoring and mourning all American military personnel who died while serving in the armed forces.

“While it often marks the unofficial start of summer with barbecues and travel, its true purpose is remembrance.  It is not a day to thank living veterans, which is reserved for Veterans Day in November, but rather a time to reflect on the ultimate sacrifice made by those who never made it home.

“The holiday originated in the aftermath of the Civil War.  Originally called ‘Decoration Day,’ it was established as a time for communities to decorate the graves of fallen soldiers with flowers, wreaths, and flags.

“General John A. Logan proclaimed it a national day of remembrance on May 30, 1868, with a major ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery.

“How It’s Observed:

• Grave Decoration:  Volunteers and families visit national and local cemeteries to place American flags on the headstones of the fallen.
• National Moment of Remembrance:  Congress established a designated time to pause and reflect.  Wherever you are in the U.S., Americans are asked to stop for one minute at 3 p.m. local time.
• Tributes and Parades:  Communities across the country host memorial services and parades to pay tribute to their local heroes.”

So, what will I do today, the day before Memorial Day?  Well, my wife I will put a new American flag up on our deck to commemorate this important day in the life of our country.  And, we’ll be thankful for those we know who gave their lives in service to our country.

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.

Regarding this blog headline:  All about money in two ways.

• First, how much the top players make in golf tournaments.
• Second, how much they pay out week-by-week to support their entourages that help them succeed.

We’ve often heard about the first – huge prize money for the winners and those that finish in the top 10, tournament-by-tournament.

According to Google:

• Majors:  The largest prize fund resides at The Masters with a $22.5 million total purse and a $4.5 million winner’s share.
• The PGA Championship:  A $20.5 million purse, awarding $3.69 million to the champion.
• Signature Events:  These limited-field tournaments feature $20 million purses, routinely paying about $4 million to the winner.
• The Players Championship:  This flagship tournament offers a massive $25 million total purse.
• The FedEx Cup:  The Tour Championship now counts as official money rather than an end-of-year bonus, sporting an overall pool of $40 million with $10 million going to the winner.

But, with these huge prizes, what often gets lost in the shuffle is how much top players fork out each week to those who help them as they ride on their coattails. 

Golf Digest came up with answers to help understand the context.  It did so by turning to one top PGA Tour players, Ben Griffin, contending that his outlay would be duplicated by many other players.

The story appeared under this headline:  “The astonishing amount of money PGA Tour players pay out during the season.”

Astonishing?  Yes.

Here’s how.

“From hotels to caddie fees, the costs of competing on the PGA Tour are far higher than fans think.

“Ben Griffin has lifted the lid on the enormous costs that come with life on the PGA Tour, revealing he spends around $50,000 per event week just to compete.

“The 30-year-old American, who enjoyed a breakthrough campaign in 2025 with three PGA Tour victories and a debut on the United States Ryder Cup team, has revealed the financial demands of elite professional golf are far greater than many fans realize.”

Although Griffin earned roughly $2.5 million during the 2026 PGA Tour season, a significant portion of that money went straight into his expenses.

Speaking to Golf Digest, Griffin explained how quickly the costs pile up once travel, accommodation and support staff are factored in.

“There are definitely going to be some base fees that you’re going to have to pay when you get to a tournament.

“So, obviously travel costs, all hotel costs are on the players or Airbnb’s, rental homes, those costs, everyone has a caddie.  The caddie needs a base, and also a percentage based on performance.  So that can range significantly per tournament, especially depending on how you play.

“Additionally, coaches will come to events, trainers, physios, all of these costs come out of the pocket of the PGA Tour player.

“So, my average spend is probably very high, because I just had a really good season, and I pay my caddie, my coach, and my trainer based on my performance, as well as base salaries.

“You could argue my average spend per week this year was probably $50,000.”

Based on Griffin’s estimate, his expenses for the season are already approaching $750,000.

From me, no sympathy.  Players like Griffin make enough to pay expenses and have a lot left over. 

It also would be possible to bemoan have far sports – including golf – have descended into a financial abyss.  No information on how deep it is.

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 headline on this blog appeared over a recent column by Frank Bruni, who writes for the New York Times.

I used it, but another alternative could be this as applied to Donald Trump and the minions who “work” [do they really work?] for him:  Looks matter more than competence.

Several of these minions have jobs for Trump that they did not gain based on their experience or credentials.  But, often on camera, Trump thought they looked good, so he gave them high-level jobs.

Here are a few paragraphs from Bruni who always uses words very well:

• Befitting his home in the Trump administration, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. practices the politics of narcissism:  If I embrace it, it must be right.  If I embody it, you should emulate it.  I flaunt a sun-sizzled appearance, so you should have the same leathery license.
• Kevin Warsh has a decent résumé to qualify to serve as Federal Reserve chair, but he also has signaled obeisance to a president.  Warsh has an additional asset.  “On top of everything else, he is ‘central casting,’” Trump wrote in the late January social media post that announced Warsh’s selection.  According to an article by Eva Roytburg in Fortune Magazine at that time, Trump once told Warsh, during a 2019 meeting in the White House, “You’re a really handsome guy.”
• To Trump, that’s an important credential.  All the world’s a television show, “central casting” is a recurring compliment and handsomeness or beauty establishes a kind of superiority, which in turn bequeaths confidence, which then begets dominance. By his zoology, an aviary of peacocks equals a menagerie of lions.
• Never have I witnessed a White House so devoted to surfaces. Surfaces caked with makeup.  Surfaces puffed up with hair spray. Surfaces glossed with gold.  Surfaces that glitter blue — or someday might, if the over-budget overhaul of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool ever works out as promised.
• Appearances simultaneously obscure reality and substitute for it. Your sheen is your success, and you are what you impersonate. Trump has long been known to judge potential cabinet secretaries and military leaders on whether they look the part, and that thinking factored into his embrace of Warsh.
• Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s habit of sharing videos of his workouts would be seen as a grossly self-enamored distraction.  In Trump’s circle, they’re a testament to his tenacity.  The defense secretary posted one such ode to his own musculature shortly before the beginning of the war with Iran, as U.S. warships headed toward that region; it showed him doing a bench press as the soldiers whom he’d gathered around him cheered, his wife applauded and, I guess, the ayatollahs quivered. Nothing spells imminent doom like a cabinet member’s pecs.
• To Trump, pitch and packaging are everything.  Perfect them and you don’t have to worry about the product itself.  That thinking informs the cabinet secretaries’ physical preening just as it explains the president’s oratorical preening — all those ludicrous superlatives — and his emphasis on costumes, scenery and slogans.

Then, a story appeared in the New York Times this morning to underline Trump’s priority:

As he spoke at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, “The president got the most out of the crowd when he was being apolitical, hamming it up with the coasties as he welcomed them onstage and teased them about how attractive they were.  ‘I hate good-looking men,’ he growled, after a young man named Matthew came up to shake his hand.  A cadet named Thomas walked up next.  ‘Look at the muscles on this guy,’ Trump observed.”

So, again, looks over competence.  That’s Trump.

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.

At any golf course there is an issue that almost always sparks serious debate:  Trees on the course.

Are they good or bad?

Do they add to course architecture or subtract from it?

There are no easy answers to questions such as this.  Plus, as golf courses age, trees that once were “this” tall grow to be “this” tall, thus obscuring views.

This issue arose last week during the annual PGA Golf Championship which was held at Aronimink in Philadelphia.  Writing in Global Golf Post, here is how Ron Green, Jr., described the situation in a column that appeared under this headline:  Debate over trees simmers at Aronimink.

“It is a discussion that titillates course architecture nerds, many of whom bemoan – and rightly so – the outsized impact technology now has on the game.

“How necessary are trees to a great golf course design?

“Nearly 100 years after Donald Ross, the da Vinci of his time, laid out a course that rivaled Pinehurst No. 2 for his ultimate affection, Aronimink.  It was something of a case study last week because modern-day master Gil Hanse and his partner Jim Wagner took down a significant number of trees when they worked nearly a decade ago.”

For his part, Ross, when he wrote a book about golf, said that “trees should not crowd out the real intent of a golf course.”

Aronimink wasn’t strip-mined but it was opened up, creating expansive vistas across the property creating bumps and rolls with a natural rhythm, giving the layout much of its character. 

I have not been there, but views on TV reminded me of a “links-style” course, much more than a “parkland layout.”

In a less public way than at Aronimink, the “trees or no trees” issue has come up at the course where I play most of my golf in Salem, Oregon, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club.

It is now about 65 years old and, of course, small trees have now become big trees, hampering the layout first created by course architect Billy Bell.

So, our golf course superintendent has made it a goal to remove trees to provide what he calls “a clean layout.”

The moves have sparked some controversy because, on occasion, trees created a visual backdrop for some holes.  Now that those trees are gone, the visual backdrop doesn’t exist.

But, for me, not an arborist, I favor removing trees for this simple reason:  When you have too many trees on a golf course, the ones you want to be healthy are adversely affected by so many competitors.

So, let the three debate continue, as I advocate for fewer of them.