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

In my last blog, I wrote that it appears President Donald Trump operates without a cohesive strategy, preferring to fly by the seat of his pants, even when so much is at stake as he operates on the world stage.

I called his conduct “swagger, not strategy.”

Well, it appears that Senator Bob Corker, R-Tennessee, agrees with me – or perhaps, better put, I agree with him.

Here is what Corker said as he chaired a meeting of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to hear testimony yesterday from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo who also endured often-hostile questions and comments from committee members. Most of the questions related to Trump’s controversial conduct in the Helsinki Summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“You (referring to Pompeo) come before a group of senators today who are filled with serious doubts about this White House and its conduct of American foreign policy. From where we sit, it appears that, in a ready-fire-aim fashion, the White House is waking up every morning making it up as they go.”

I couldn’t have said it better.

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

One of my favorite tactics over the years has been to mimic former late night TV host David Letterman by preparing my own “Top 10 List” in relation to any number of issues.

So, I did so recently in regard to President Donald Trump who continues to amaze with his beyond-understanding conduct, even on a world stage. I will call my list, therefore, a “Bottom 10 List.”

Further, the list below appears in no particular order of priority. Each indicates a trait of “our president,” one I hope has only four years in office. It will be tough enough to survive even that period of time, must less four more years in the nation’s highest political office.

So, here goes:

1. TRUMP’S SUPPOSED STRATEGY? HE DOESN’T HAVE ONE – IT’S ALL TACTICS [This relies on my long-standing belief – one I have followed in all aspects of my career – that strategy comes first, then tactics to implement that strategy. In other words, an overall strategy is the goal; tactics, which shouldn’t be first, are designed to implement the strategy. On this scale, Trump fails miserably.]
2. TRUMP DEMONSTRATES SWAGGER, NOT SUBSTANCE, BELIEVING HE IS ALWAYS THE SMARTEST PERSON IN THE ROOM
3. TRUMP DEHUMANIZES ALL IMMIGRANTS AND REFUGEES, THOUGH ALL OF US IN THE UNITED STATES, IN FACT, FIT IN THOSE CATEGORIES, EXCEPT NATIVE AMERICANS
4. TRUMP DEMONSTRATES NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF HIS OFF-HAND REMARK, ESPECIALLY AS THOSE OFF-THE-CUFF REMARKS AFFECTS SUCH METRICS AS THE STOCK MARKET
5. TRUMP COMMITS NEAR-TREASON IN HELSINKI, BUT AT LEAST, IF NOT NEAR-TREASON, IS GUILTY OF COLLUSION AND BECOMING A “CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER” TO THE U.S., GIVEN HIS SIDLING UP WITH SOVIET LEADER VLADIMIR PUTIN, THUS RELEGATING U.S. INTELLIGENCE INTERESTS TO SECOND PLACE[Here’s the way Tufts University Professor Daniel Drezner put in a recent Wall Street Journal piece. “President Trump, who has a little something of the later Roman emperors in him, is not engaged in making war on the United States, though it is galling to defend him from such charges given his own propensity for talking treason lightly.  He is not engaged in treason or anything like treason. He is engaged in hypocrisy and moral illiteracy. He is a frank admirer of caudillos such as Vladimir Putin, because in his mind ruthlessness, grasping, and amorality are associated with effective leadership. Hence the praise for Kim Jong-un.”]
6. TRUMP’S USE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEFIES LOGIC [Here is the way columnist George Will put it in a recent excellent column: “Precision is not part of Trump’s repertoire: He speaks English as though it is a second language that he learned from someone who learned English last week. So, it is usually difficult to sift meanings from Trump’s word salads.”]
7. TRUMP IS THE ULTIMATE NARCISSIST – EVERYTHING ALWAYS REVOLVES AROUND HIM AND ONLY HIM
8. TRUMP’S VERSION OF “AMERICA FIRST” ONLY MAKES SENSE IF YOU CONSIDER HIS DEFINITION OF IT
9. WITH TRUMP, HONESTY, INTEGRITY AND ETHICAL BEHAVIOR ARE WOEFULLY MISSING
10. WITH TRUMP, TOSS NORMAL POLITICAL CONVENTIONS IN AMERICA OUT THE WINDOW; THERE ARE NO CHECKS AND BALANCES IN HIS SYSTEM, JUST TRUMP’S DICTATORIAL INSTINCTS

As I wrote earlier, I hope America can survive four years of Donald Trump. There are many real Republicans who have renounced that political label because of the misdeeds and over-reach of Trump. I would have, as well, had I now already become “unaffiliated,” which I thought was a better status for a lobbyist.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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 have been involved in public and media relations for my entire career, which underlines why I have no understanding of the way President Donald Trump conducts himself in public.

To suggest that Trump operates with a media or public relations policy is to express an extreme overstatement.

He clearly flies by the seat of his pants.

I have tried to understand his approach, but it is almost impossible for this reason: Over my career, I tried to help clients get through problems, not aggravate them; Trump’s style is the reverse – capitalize on problems or create them, then say he is the smartest person on earth and is the only one who can solve what he, himself, has created.

For one case in the Trump’s universe, just look at Scott Pruitt, the former director of the Environmental Agency who recently resigned from his post under huge ethical clouds.

This from Walter Schaub, former federal ethics director:  “Scott Pruitt’s resignation should be good news. As former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, he is the subject of at least 13 investigations. His rampage through the EPA is the stuff of legend, and it will feature prominently in annual ethics training sessions across the executive branch for years to come. We are, indeed, fortunate to be rid of him, but the wreckage he leaves behind is no cause for celebration.

“Pruitt’s tenure establishes conclusively that President Trump doesn’t care about government ethics, and Congress won’t do anything about it. Pruitt may have been the most extreme offender, but the Trump administration is failing to live up to the animating principles of public service. In some sense, Pruitt’s failures represent a broader failure of government.”

Or, this from columnist Michael Gerson in the Washington Post:  “We are seeing the sad effects of President Trump’s renunciation of moral leadership on American politics and culture — the waning of civility, idealism and respect, and the waxing of contempt, prejudice and racial division. But how is a similar moral abdication — summarized as the doctrine of “America first” — influencing America’s place in the world? And does that really matter?”

So, in response to such comments as those from Schaub and Gerson, below is a summary of three principles I tried to follow in my media relations, lobbying and consultant career.

Some of them are drawn from what I and my partners learned from a mentor, the late Chuck Frost, vice president of one of my lobby firm’s first clients, Tektronix, then Oregon’s largest private company. Chuck also served as an advisor when we started our lobby firm in 1990 and during about 15 years of our operation.

• Build and bank good will. Establishing a pattern of service will serve you well with clients and in the community. Tektronix, under Chuck’s leadership, set out to do that in the Oregon Legislature and in Congress, earning credit that allowed the company to be seen as Oregon’s high-tech business leader.
• Integrity is your main credential — don’t lose it. Always do the right thing. Honesty in business relationships will stand you in good stead regardless of the business environment.
• Advance principles that are not just in your self-interest, but in the public interest, as well. For our firm over the years, this was a critical test in any lobbying or public relations task. Can we pass a public-interest test — is what we advocate on behalf of a client good for the public and not just the client, and can we describe the objective in those terms?

Frankly, my view is that Trump violates all of these and other operating principles. And, he knows, frankly, that he will continue to get away with unscrupulous conduct because that’s the way he has operated for his entire life, a style that is appreciated, unfortunately, by many in this country.

Consider what happened in Britain earlier this month.

First, amazingly, Trump creating a huge diplomatic incident when he lofted intense criticism of his host, British Prime Minister Theresa May only a day before meeting her on the world stage.

Trump kind of apologized to May, but did not entirely back off the critical statements about her handling of Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union.

He used a news conference at May’s country home to assail the news media once again, deny facts in plain evidence and make a series of false or questionable assertions.

The second day of Trump’s visit to Britain was a jarring mix of carefully choreographed pomp and pageantry on one hand and the unpredictability of his relentless convention-breaking on the other. The special relationship between the United States and Britain may survive, but, for a day at least, it was in question.

“I am doing a great job, that I can tell you,” Trump said, “just in case you haven’t noticed.”

Typical Trump. Everything revolves around this narcissist. He is always the one who “is doing a great job.”

I don’t think so.

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

Ever notice how often Trump talks in circles around himself, apparently getting lost in the jumble of his own words.

If he doesn’t know where he is going in his use of language, then others are lost, too.

And, when he doesn’t know where he will end up, the problems he creates often go beyond just words. Consider Trump’s recent “performance” in Helsinki when he sidled up to Vladimir Putin, committing what some have called near treason.

Columnist George Will put in very well in a recent column commenting on the incredibly poor performance by Trump in Helsinki.

“Precision is not part of Trump’s repertoire: He speaks English as though it is a second language that he learned from someone who learned English last week. So, it is usually difficult to sift meanings from Trump’s word salads.”

Again, if the risks with Trump were confined to words – misusing them and, often, failing to spell them accurately — that would be bad enough for the supposed leader of the free world.

But Christine Emba, writing in the Washington Post, indicates why the issues go farther than words.

“But there are words, and then there is the actual ‘job’ — that of improving the administration, seeking to change it or attending directly to the needs of those affected by its policies. The one can influence the other. Language changes how we think. When we use increasingly divisive and polarized language in the public square, we change how we are able to interact, discuss and exist together. The F-bombs and c-words are a distraction from the actual work that could be done and cut off possibilities for cooperation in the future. And, as professional entertainers should have figured out by now, they’re boring.”

Emba is right.

Words matter.

But actions, often buttressed by confusing words, matter more. And, on that score, as with language, Trump is an abject failure.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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 have blogged about FAKE NEWS before because, as a former media reporter and media relations official, I believe there is no consensus about what the term means.

The Washington Post’s media columnist Erik Wemple provided this example recently when he wrote about Sarah Palin and how she had fallen for an actual fake news approach.

“Now Palin knows what ‘fake news’ really is,” Wemple wrote. “It’s someone seeking an interview under false pretenses — something that the people she has labeled ‘fake news’ don’t do. It’s someone concocting storylines — something that the people she has labeled ‘fake news’ don’t do. It’s someone seeking to embarrass you — something that the people she has labeled ‘fake news’ don’t do.

“Sure — the people Trump, Palin and others label as ‘fake news’ do from time to time make mistakes, crank out false reports and otherwise reach hasty conclusions. Such moments are as inevitable in journalism as malpractice is in medicine and a blown interview is in politics. The simple reality that humans sometimes err factored into the definition of ‘fake news’ as it roared into familiarity toward the end of 2016. Back then, it designated intentionally false reports designed to accomplish a political end and to enable click-baity profit.

Yet, Trump and his flunkies debased it. ‘Fake news’ became a handy term to classify media gaffes and, eventually, stories that the White House just didn’t like. According to one study, four in 10 Republicans ‘consider accurate news stories that cast a politician or political group in a negative light always to be ‘fake news.’ ”

Wemple is right.

In my previous post on this subject, I wrote that there were four types of alleged “fake news.” 

1. THE LITERAL ONE

Fake news is distributed by many interests that, literally, make up stuff, then disseminate the material as attachments to websites, as news releases, and in other ways.

It is clearly material made up out of whole cloth, but, depending on the size of the distribution, it can affects public perceptions.

2. THE CONCOCTED ONE

This relates to what I consider to be staged events that are designed to gain publicity, either a picture on the front page of a newspaper or a few seconds on local TV news.

Examples are demonstrations in government capitols in favor of one thing or another, which are staged to gain news coverage.

3. THE “I DISAGREE WITH IT” ONE

This tends to be what Donald Trump or Sarah Palin mean when they labels something fake news. If he or she disagrees with it, then it is fake.

4. THE “CAN YOU BELIEVE IT ONE”

Here, I cite the story from Iowa a few months ago where Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley wrote an opinion piece for the Des Moines Register that led to speculation he was starting a run for president.

Can you believe it?

I cannot, so I rate the Merkley news as “fake news.”

In all of this, the best attitude is healthy skepticism. Don’t believe, at least at first blush, everything you read on social media sites, hear on the radio or see on TV. Recognize that what you read, hear and see requires a sense of perspective. Form opinions on the basis of a variety of sources rather than just one.

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

******

Note: From my home in Salem, Oregon, I don’t usually write about international events, except, perhaps, when Donald Trump is involved and trips over his own tongue. That happened in Europe and especially in his press conference with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. So, I wrote about that, feeling better for having done so. And, with Trump’s mind-blogging explanation today, I felt compelled to express my thoughts again.

******

Donald Trump, unusually so for him, tried to walk back what he said during the press conference with Vladimir Putin.

At the press conference, Trump said this in response to a direct question about whether he believed Russia had interfered in the presidential election that he, Trump, won”

“I will say this, I don’t see any reason why it would be Russia.”

Trump on Tuesday said that he had meant to say, “I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia.”

Right!

Trump got caught in his own spin as, essentially, he threw his own intelligence interests under the bus in favor of Putin. Some of those who criticized him said he had committed treason, probably an overstatement, but, still, worthy of the shock value Trump’s comments produced.

The criticism, almost unremitting from both Republican and Democrat sources, apparently prompted the walk back.

I guess it’s good that Trump reversed course. Too bad he had to do so in the first place. It would have better he had he proceeded with more substance than swagger.

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

• A trip with more swagger than strategy.
• This will be a day that leaves an indelible mark on the presidency.
• Openly colluding with a leader of a hostile power

These are just three comments from analysts writing about President Donald Trump traipse through Europe where he pilloried allies and made nice with Vladimir Putin.

Well, to answer the question in the headline, my only response is that I’ll feel better if I had just a few wthoughts.

At least I’ll have the solace of commenting on what many observers couldn’t believe – “the” American leader kowtowing to a Russian leader on a world stage. My notions won’t inform the debate over President Donald Trump’s incredible conduct; they will just illustrate, at least to me, why Americans need to identify an alternative to Trump at the next election – if we can survive that long.

What Trump should have done in Europe and Russia is what he could not bring himself to do, which is to act in a mature fashion, perhaps, if he wanted to do so, to build personal bridges to the Russian leader, but, at the same time, holding him accountable for his formidable actions against the U.S., including clear proof that Russia interfered in the last presidential election.

One of the questions, I suppose, is why Trump would want to meet with Putin in the first place when he, Trump, didn’t have a strategic reason for doing so. Of course, strategy is not Trump’s long suit, if he has a strategy at all.

Without any first-hand knowledge of the give-and-take in Europe – if that’s what it was, “give-and-take” – I turn to quote more practiced hands.

From Dan Balz, chief correspondent for the Washington Post: “Monday’s news conference was the capstone to an international trip in which, at every opportunity, the president undercut U.S. allies in Europe while playing nice with Putin. He did this through repeated derogatory tweets, backroom hectoring of European leaders (especially German Chancellor Angela Merkel), interviews with the British media (in which he attacked British Prime Minister Theresa May) and the U.S. press, and in public settings with other world heads of government.

“Together, they added up to a moment that will leave a mark on Trump’s presidency. That’s not to say it will fundamentally change the course of his presidency, given the fluidity of events, the reality that attention spans are short and the probability of more shocks from various directions that will put the focus elsewhere. Nothing much changes minds about the president, and this trip and Monday’s news conference might not, either.”

From Dana Milbank in the Washington Post, a columnist I often hesitate to quote because he makes a living off rebuking of Trump, but his comments, this time, make sense to me: “My fellow Americans, we are a deeply stupid nation.

“I know this must be the case because President Trump has repeatedly informed us that we are a “stupid country”— he offered this opinion on at least nine occasions since he launched his campaign for the presidency — and he should know. As he reminded us after his NATO meeting last week, he is a ‘a very stable genius.’

“It is furthermore the president’s highly intelligent opinion we have been led by ‘stupid people’ and ‘our laws are so corrupt and stupid.’ We have been stupid about trade. We have been stupid in dealing with Iraq, Iran, China, Mexico, Canada, Europe and Muslims. We have the “dumbest” immigration laws. Among the many stupid things Trump has identified: White House staffers, the FBI, the National Football League, Democrats, the filibuster and journalists.”

From Washington Post editorial writers: “In Helsinki, Trump again insisted ‘there was no collusion’ with Russia. Yet, in refusing to acknowledge the plain facts about Russia’s behavior, while trashing his own country’s justice system, Trump in fact was openly colluding with the criminal leader of a hostile power.”

From David Ignatius in the Washington Post: “Jonathan Lemire of the Associated Press was the reporter who asked Trump bluntly: ‘Who do you believe’ about Russian election interference — Putin or U.S. intelligence? Trump initially spun some conspiratorial nonsense about missing Democratic computer servers and Hillary Clinton emails. And then this unforgettable statement:

“My people came to me, Dan Coats [Director of National Intelligence] came to me and some others, they said they think it’s Russia. I have President Putin; he just said it’s not Russia. I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would be. . . . I have confidence in both parties.”

“’It was unbelievable,’ said a stunned Will Hurd, a Republican congressman from Texas and former CIA officer. ‘I would never have thought I’d see an American president being played by a foreign adversary in that way.’

“Donald Trump left for Europe a week ago with his reputation enhanced by a strong Supreme Court nomination. He returned Monday with that reputation diminished after a tumultuous week of indulging what amounts to the Trump First Doctrine.

“Trump marched through Europe with more swagger than strategy. His diplomacy is personal, rooted in instinct and impulse, and he treats other leaders above all on how much they praise Donald J. Trump. He says what pops into his head to shock but then disavows it if there’s a backlash. He criticizes institutions and policies to grab headlines but then claims victory no matter the outcome.”

From Wall Street Journal editorial writers: “The world hasn’t seen a U.S. President like this in modern times, and as ever in Trump World, everyone else will have to adapt.”

And, finally, I wonder what happened to America First if that is really a hallmark of Trump’s presidency. It was not display this week in Europe.

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

A friend of mine called me to task recently for, in one of my blogs, using a reference to “ObamaCare” to describe health care reform enacted during the former president’s tenure.

This friend thought – probably properly – that “ObamaCare” was a pejorative reference.

With a nod to my friend, from here on I will use what I consider to be a neutral term – “Federal Health Care Reform.”

I decline to use the other term for health care passed during Obama’s term – the “Affordable Care Act” – because I know that term was coined with an eye to its positive connotation. Of course, the reverse has happened – health care premiums have risen across-the-board.

I also could call Republican efforts to repeal what was passed on Obama’s watch the “McConnell Health Care Resistance,” but that, too, could be taken to be a negative reference to the Senate’s Republican leader who – Mitch McConnell – who, like Obama, did not try to find the smart middle ground.

He and his colleagues on the right side of the aisle only resisted Obama at every turn without any attempt to compromise

In my most recent blog on health care policy, I provided a list of what “my platform” would be if I was involved in a new reform effort. Of course, I won’t be so involved, which, I suspect, will strike many as a good thing.

My platform was intended, not as a final answer, but as opening gambit.

That’s what this country needs to be able to do what it should be able to do, which is reform health care. We need “opening proposals” which would go to group of Republicans and Democrats, who, with Executive Branch involvement, would find middle ground.

It can be done. In the past, at the State Capitol in Salem where I lobbied for about 40 years, I saw and was involved in many compromises, including on health care.

In Washington, D.C., I say a pox on both Congress and the federal Administration, including both parties. All they have produced is disagreement and discord. It’s way past time to find the smart middle.

So, I advocate for “Federal Health Care Reform.”

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

Ed Koch. Rudy Guilani. Michael Blomberg.

Well known names all.

And, at least to a degree, they deserve credit for policies and approaches over the years that sparked a revival in the City of New York.

One name who also deserves credit is not well-known.

He is Larry Mone, who has announced his retirement after 23 years as executive director of the Manhattan Institute.

Here is what Wall Street Journal editorial writers said about his contributions:

“The city has since undergone a renaissance due in no small part to the ideas generated by the Manhattan Institute (MI). The mayors who pulled this off—Ed Koch, Rudy Giuliani, Michael Bloomberg —could not have done so without the intellectual ammunition provided by MI.

“Many think tanks labor in Washington. MI has made a particular contribution by focusing on how conservative solutions can solve urban problems. It’s no coincidence that MI published ‘Fixing Broken Windows,’ which popularized the work by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling arguing that addressing pockets of disorder and even small crimes is crucial to effective policing. New York is now the safest big city in America.”

As Mone announced that he was stepping down from his post, he said “he had the privilege of leading a first-rank think tank devoted to free market principles located in the midst of one of the world’s great cities.”

“For New York,” Mone added, “it has generally been a period of rebirth— from the publication of Fixing Broken Windows in 1996, to assisting the city with the development of a municipal counter-terrorism strategy in the aftermath of 9/11, to shaping an effort to rezone large swathes of the city’s long-neglected industrial spaces, the Institute has provided no modest portion of the intellectual energy that brought New York back to its feet. We have also driven major policy change at the state and national levels, leading on issues from school choice and charter schools, to the health care marketplace, to the role of law enforcement in our society. “

To state what may be obvious, I don’t live in New York. And, beyond that, my family knows that I don’t like visiting the city. I am more comfortable in the small town of Salem, Oregon.

I do enjoy watching the TV drama, Blue Bloods, which is set in New York. Among many other subjects, it has included references to the Broken Windows theory of law enforcement.

The facts about the Manhattan Institute’s accomplishments, including advocacy for Broken Windows, are particularly interesting. It has brought a sense of optimism to New York by advocating free market principles – call them “conservative” if you must – to solving problems in the nation’s largest city.

Kudos to MI.

“The Institute must face these dangers,” Mone said in reference to issues where MI had made a difference. “It must continue to lead; it must remain an incubator of fresh insights and a place where forgotten truths can be recovered. Our city, our state, and our whole nation are divided in pitched arguments not only over the details of policy, but the essence of principle.”

To me, one key to MI’s advocacy has been its commitment to free market principles. The point is that such principles can help to produce solutions for cities and counties, not just every-increasing reliance on government largesse.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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 came across a good column in hill.com the other day. It repeated a theme I have been striking for a number of years, including in this blog.

The theme is this: All of us ought to be more interested in the true purpose of politics, which is compromise. We and those who represent us ought to be in the business of finding what I call the “smart middle” because that is where the best solutions lie anyway.

But, today, imbued with energy by the most buffoon-like president in U.S. history – Donald Trump – all of us spend more time, figuratively-speaking, yelling on street corners at the top of our lungs, suggesting that we know the RIGHT answers to all pressing public policy questions.

We also appear to hate those who disagree with us as they yell at the top of their lungs, too. So we avoid even considering where we might be able to meet in the middle.

It is easy to blame politicians, including Trump, for this, and, to be sure, they bear much of the blame. But they represent us and often they feel that, unless they go over-the-top, we won’t listen because we, like them, are prone to discord and disagreement.

Well, I add that, in the first place, listening is a lost art, especially in politics.

Mark Penn, a managing partner in a private equity firm specializing in marketing services for companies and a former pollster for President Bill Clinton, wrote the hill.com piece that caught my attention.

Here is a quick excerpt of what he wrote:

“There’s some very wise political advice in a popular song these days: ‘Oh baby, why don’t you just meet me in the middle?’ America is not a country of the right or the left but a country squarely in the middle and, yet, today’s clickbait-driven world has suffocated the true majority of the country.

“The song goes on: ‘Of just how we got into this mess, got so aggressive. I know we meant all good intentions.’ With shrill rallies on the steps of the Supreme Court protesting nominations before they are even made, our politics is becoming almost a caricature of itself. Even the once-serious New York Times told Democrats that they should ‘Go to the mattresses’ over the Supreme Court nomination, making a reference to the tactics depicted in ‘The Godfather,’ in which rival gangs shoot each other.”

Sound familiar – the “shooting each other” I mean?

Yes, both figuratively and, sometimes, literally.

Penn adds that structural problems in our politics have frustrated the sensible center from solving issues such as immigration. “The most vocal Democratic senators are already running for president and falling over themselves to capture the Iowa caucus electorate, one of the most progressive, far removed from the working-class Democrats in the big states who wind up with too little say in who will be the next Democratic presidential candidate.”

The House Republican Freedom Caucus, on the other end, Penn says, has for years created a breakdown of the budgeting process plagued by delays, government shutdowns and endless continuing resolutions.

“We are nowhere in terms of reforming the process and setting up a capital budget so that investments in the future of the country are treated differently than transfer payments and government salaries. Only such a budget can identify the true current deficit and encourage the right investments in infrastructure.”

Republicans, who often have been unable to agree upon anything amongst themselves, and the current crop of Democratic leaders, have produced a perfect storm of partisanship and gridlock at a time that at least some voters want compromise and action on the tough issues of the day. According to a Harvard Caps/Harris Poll, nearly 90 per cent of the public wants to see politicians reach a consensus rather than stick only to their left-wing or right-wing principles – if extreme positions can be called principles at all.

In the coming mid-term elections, is it too much to ask, as Americans, that we will consider voting for candidates regardless of party affiliation and who will indicate they are interested in solving the nation’s problems from the middle?

The pessimist in me says, yes, it is too much to ask.

The optimist in me says, no, it is not too much to ask.

The realist in me says the jury is out and only the results of the election next fall will tell the tale.