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.

Some days I think I know all I need to know about the Rules of Golf in the sport I love.

Then, I learn something new, which means, as all my friends will be happy to note, I am not as smart as I think I am.

So, here are three examples of the new information – or least reinforced old information:

#1/YOU CAN ALWAYS TAKE A “STROKE AND DISTANCE” PENALTY

With kudos to the Oregon Golf Association rules writer, Terry McEvilly, who also is a friend, I report this as he did:

“Knowledge is power, especially when it comes to the Rules of Golf.

“And knowledge is even more helpful when golfers come to the understanding that the Rules are not to be feared, but can instead be a help in lowering one’s scores and making playing the game more enjoyable.

“A great example of this is playing under stroke and distance, a simple concept that allows, with one penalty stroke, a player to play a ball from where the previous stroke was played.

“Rule 18.1 makes clear it is an option that the player always has, with no restrictions.  Even if a player isn’t sure where their ball may be, they can always proceed under stroke and distance.  And ‘always’ is the key word in the prior sentence.  At any time, a player may take stroke-and-distance relief by adding one penalty stroke and playing the original ball, or another ball, from where the previous stroke was made.

“It’s worth repeating — a player always has this stroke-and-distance relief option.  It’s a right granted under the rules that exists, no matter the circumstances.”

There.   My new knowledge.

I always had thought that there needed to be a specific reason for taking a new stroke from the spot of the last one, such as a shot going out-of-bounds.  McEvilly’s information is new for me.

#2/WINTER RULES:  WHAT IT MEANS

Another rule effects many people who live in cold and rainy climes – winter rules.

In the official Rules of Golf, “winter rules” go by this term “preferred lies” and are covered by Model Local Rule E-3.

So, how does it work?

Winter rules allow a player to lift his or her ball in the fairway and place it on a different spot, all because of adverse weather.  I knew this, but is more clarity.

The committee in charge or golf course should set the size of the relief area that the ball has to be placed in (such as 6 inches, a scorecard length or even a club-length).

This distance uses the original location of the ball as the reference point, and the ball can’t be placed any nearer the hole than that point.  Once lifted, the ball can be cleaned or even replaced with a different ball.  If this process were to allow the player to go from fairway to fringe, or even from fairway to rough, that is okay, as well.

Further, winter rules should generally be used only in the fairway of the hole being played.  If they are extended to areas outside of the fairway, it could result in a player unfairly getting free relief from a place where the ball might otherwise not have been playable, such as in a bush or group of trees.

Once the player places the ball using the procedure above, it cannot be lifted again and must be played as it lies.

Here, in the California desert, winter rules do not come into play, so I’ll remember this back in my normal home, Oregon.

#3/WHERE DID THE TERM “MULLIGAN” ORGINATE?

Let’s start with a definition.  In his book The Historical Dictionary of Golfing Terms:  From 1500 to the Present, Peter Davies wrote, “Mulligan means permission by a player (forbidden under the rules) to an opponent to replay a misplayed shot, especially a tee-shot.

Most of us knew that.

Plus, a friend of mine here is the California desert where I spend my winters told me the other day that, when he plays with his friends back in Montana, everyone gets one mulligan per round to use as he or she sees fit.

Sounds like a good approach to me.

As for the term “mulligan,” it arose from the surname of one or the other of two players back in the day.

Their names were David and Buddy Mulligan, whose tales played out at courses separated by 370 miles:  One in Montreal, the other in Essex Fells, New Jersey.

David Mulligan played in a regular foursome.   One morning, after a terrible drive off the 1st tee, he instinctively placed down another ball and whacked it again.  Simple enough, something you might do any time you play and not think twice about it.  But to this group, the re-do was a stunning moment.

Thinking fast, facing opposition from others in his foursome, he said his extra shot was a “mulligan.”

One of my on-line sources added this:

“It all worked out amicably enough, but after that it became an unwritten rule in the foursome that you could take an extra shot – but only on the 1st tee — if you weren’t satisfied with your original.  Naturally, this was always referred to as ‘taking a mulligan.’

There is alternative behind this story.  First, some claim that David Mulligan picked up and drove his playing partners to the course that day. The drive was rough and over an old rickety bridge.  Because his nerves and hands were shaking, he said he should be afforded a second tee shot after a poor attempt on the first.

Second, there is a dissenting camp that credits David’s brother, Buddy, with the mulligan name.

Either story is fine with me, as long as I get a mulligan!

Now, with all this, aren’t you glad you know as much as I do about golf rules – or at least made up rules if you are talking about a mulligan.

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.

As Donald Trump ran for president, he made huge promises to crack down on immigration on the southern border of the United States, including the biggest deportation operation ever seen in this country.

His rhetoric on the subject, however false it was, was one of the main factors that put him over the top in the election.

It will be nothing if not interesting to see whether Trump fulfills his pledge.  If he doesn’t, of course, he’ll just find an excuse or blame someone else.

Several major hurdles are in the way, none of which, apparently, were worth talking about on the campaign trail where the emphasis from Trump appeared to be, “believe me because I always am the smartest person in the room.”

Hill.com and several major newspapers outlined the hurdles.

Here is a summary:

• Trump and his allies will face a number of legal battles, assuming they even recognize the jurisdiction of courts.

• Trump and his allies don’t have the workforce to match his rhetoric as he has suggested that the nation’s roughly 13 million undocumented migrants could face deportation.

• Trump and his allies will face economic realities as immigrants, with jobs, are shunted aside, leaving many companies in the lurch as they try to find employees.

• Trump and his allies will face what hill.com called “an astronomical budget increase” to fund what he says he wants to achieve, which is an immigrant-free America.  [The American Immigration Council estimates deporting the nation’s estimated 13 million undocumented people at a rate of 1 million per year would cost about $88 billion, exceeding the entire current budget of the Department of Homeland Security.]

• Trump and his allies will face something he no doubt will refuse to recognize — limits on executive power.  [In his previous administration, some of Trump’s immigration plans weren’t thrown out on the merits but because of issues with how his administration rolled them out.]

• Trump also could face “blue-state resistance” because many immigrants living in the country illegally are often concentrated in big, Democrat-led cities such as New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Denver.

• Finally, Trump and his allies likely will face lack of cooperation from foreign countries.  [The U.S. today can’t simply push migrants back across the border or even load them all onto a flight heading to the same place.  It must now orchestrate a complex dance of flights, choosing where to send its limited number of planes and fighting with other governments about when — and whether at all — they are willing to receive the flights.]

So, be ready for Trump to fail in some way, then blame others for his failure.

As I have written before, it also strikes me as unfortunate that Trump ran against immigrants.  Many of them, of course, are good people who contribute much to America.

If Trump would have run against “illegal” immigrants, it would have been more understandable, even though it also is true is that, if America’s government wanted to solve the problem, instead of just making political points, there are solutions out there just waiting to be implemented.

So, the immigration debate rolls on – or should it be roils on.

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.

Two programs exist in Salem, Oregon, that provide a glimpse into what can happen when people of goodwill and good intent get together to solve challenges in a community.

Here are the two:

• Salem for Refugees, which does what its name says — support refugees in our community.

• Salem Free Clinics, which also does what its name says – provide free health care for those who cannot afford it.

I want to give proper credit to these two organizations because they enable us to practice what some of us preach, which means loving ALL people just as God loves ALL people.

Regardless of status in life or ability to pay.  ALL.

Both programs started through commitments by the church my family has attended in Salem for more than 30 years, Salem Alliance.  From that start, many people from many other churches in the region stepped up to help.

Here is information on Salem for Refugees says as the new year begins:

“As 2024 comes to a close, we are looking back over this year with a sense of awe and gratitude.

“Salem For Refugees received 329 individuals from 17 countries!

“These ‘New Neighbors’ found their new home because of commitments to make Salem a welcoming place.

“We are so incredibly thankful for all those who have given of time, heart, and resources in 2024.”

Forgive me, but consider this contrast.

Donald Trump and his ilk want to deport all these people – real people who should be helped, not shunned.

So, if you want to help, Salem for Refugees is a solid place to start illustrating God’s love for all people – yes, ALL people.

Now, regarding Salem Free Clinics, here is its report on 2024 moving to 2025:

“As 2024 comes to a close, we reflect on a remarkable year of serving our community with compassion and care.  So far, we have provided a total of 5,500 patient appointments this year.  

“None of this would have been possible without the dedication of our 260 community volunteers, whose efforts ensure that no patient ever receives a bill for our services. 

“We supported our Salem-Keizer youth providing 300 free sports physicals, enabling students to participate in all different sports.  We treated 540 seniors, which included 120 dental visits, addressing critical needs among our aging population.

“Beyond direct medical care, we assisted hundreds of residents in qualifying for state health insurance and accessing other community resources –helping to remove barriers to all forms of care.  Additionally, we distributed over $330,000 in prescription medications free of charge to patients who needed them. 

“As we look ahead, we remain committed to providing hope and healing to those who need it most.”

Both programs allow Christians, as I like to put it, “to put hands and hearts into the gospel.”

So, in the first few days of 2025, there is good news around if all of us endeavor to find it.

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.

Opening the Department of Words Matter allows me to underline one of the words I don’t like much these days – transparency.

No one knows what it means, especially in politics.

It is just a code word political figures turn to as they seek to justify their actions.

Wall Street Journal writer Joseph Epstein wrote about this in an “essay” that appeared under this headline:  “I See Through Your Calls for ‘Transparency:’  Like all other vogue words, it will gradually lose its appeal and fall out of common use.”

Here are excerpts of what he wrote:

“Words, like clothes, can lose their elegance, come to seem inappropriate, sometimes even no longer quite fit.  They can also wear out from overuse.  Think ‘consumer society,’ think ‘lifestyle’ — vogue words of yesteryear. Think ‘tipping point,’ think ‘outlier’ — more recent vogue words now no longer altogether in vogue.

“Every now and then a word emerges from obscurity, or even from nothingness or a merely potential and not actual existence, into sudden popularity,” wrote H.W. Fowler, one of the small number of gods in my cultural pantheon.  ‘Ready acceptance of vogue-words seems to some people the sign of an alert mind; to others it stands for the herd instinct and lack of individuality.’

“Then there are ‘cant’ words deployed in ‘parrot-like appeal to principles, religious, moral, or scientific, that the speaker does not believe in or act upon or does not understand.”

That, Epstein writes, applies to the word “transparent.”

Here is how the dictionary defines the word:

“The quality of allowing light to pass through so that objects behind can be distinctly seen.”

Sounds good, but…

“In congressional hearings, in city councils, no doubt in psychotherapy sessions, transparency nowadays is regularly requested, even though many of the various people requesting surely must know that it isn’t really available.

“At the moment, with hundreds of drones flying over New Jersey and New York, and with no one knowing quite what they are doing there or whose they are, one hears from every quarter — senators, representatives, city officials, local citizens — the call for transparency about these flying objects.  None has been forthcoming, and so the calls continue, with transparent and transparency, at least for now, lodging themselves more firmly in the language.”

The word “transparent,” Epstein adds, “has several shades of meaning, and various synonyms, among them pellucid, diaphanous and translucent.  Transparent has itself become a baggy-pantsed synonym of sorts for ‘the truth.’  Politicians nowadays regularly call for transparency, though the majority of them are barred from delivering or even receiving it by their ideological blinders.”

Then, Epstein continues with a few solid sentences that indicate that, among other things, he knows how to use words well.

“Words can glimmer, glow, dance and sing, but they don’t always obey their users.  Transparent is such a word.  By now discerning people should be avoiding the word not like the plague (a cliché this discerning writer can’t allow himself) but sedulously.”

For me, a retired lobbyist, I heard the word “transparency” early on when it was used to describe the State of Oregon budget-making process.

Let’s make it transparent said those responsible for the challenge..

But the word was nearly useless. 

If you looked at the State of Oregon budget and tried to make sense of it, you would be at a loss.  So would other taxpayers who fund it.

Even to me, after so many years of involvement, I found the word to be opaque when it came to understanding the state budget.

So, if you hear the word, be skeptical, at least until you see that it actually does mean clarity of thought and effort.

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.

I have never been a great believer in the idea of New Year’s resolutions.

For some people, citing a resolution may work well to start off a new year on the right foot – and good for them.

For me, if I propose resolutions, I am not sure they carry much weight.  They often just strike me as opaque and far too general.  Plus, given my age, I often forget them in due course.

A columnist in the New York Times agrees with me (or do I agree with her?):

“Does it feel like there’s something gauche — maybe a little anachronistic — about New Year’s resolutions?  They run counter to the idea that we should accept who we are.  That we should give ourselves grace.  Do you have any New Year’s resolutions?  It’s a question that asks someone to believe they are inadequate.

“And I get that.  A colleague argues that resolutions shouldn’t be so grand that we set ourselves up to fail.  Maybe it’s better to admit we won’t improve in the new year — a dose of realism with our Champagne.

“No thanks.  

“But, I love real, down-to-earth resolutions, and I love hearing what work other people choose to do for themselves.  I think there’s a way to be better without believing you are deficient.  A New Year’s resolution is an opportunity to give myself a sense of accomplishment.  A gift to future me.”

So, that said, I have had some thoughts about the new year – thoughts, not “resolutions” — especially as all of us in America contend with the reality that an avowed autocrat, Donald Trump, will be in the White House.

But, at least for this blog, I will not mention blank _______ again.

Instead, my quick thoughts for the new year:

• Practice a choice to be positive

• Practice the Biblical admonition to care for others as you care for yourself

• Remain thankful that my status as a Christian is based on God’s free gift of salvation, something I don’t have to earn by performance

• Continue to be thankful for all members of my family and look out for their well-being in 2025

• Spend time with friends, including, but not only, on the golf course

Beyond my thoughts, I came across another column in the last few days that is worth sharing, at least in the form of excerpts.

Brenda Cronin, associate editorial features editor at the Wall Street Journal wrote under this headline:  “A Very Good Year? That Would Be Nice; The fruits of virtue — civility and cordiality — improve life for everyone”

Her words:

“The start of 2025 feels momentous, meriting more than just another late-December round of resolutions.  America, if not the entire weary world, feels on the cusp of a sea change, and it isn’t clear whether it will be a favorable one.

“With a new era, not merely a new year, upon us, here’s an ambitious notion:  What about making 2025 a return to virtue?  Not virtue signaling, preening or priggish hectoring, but actually being good and doing good.  “Why?  Because the fruits of virtue — among them, civility and cordiality — improve life for everyone and might reverse our culture’s determined downward spiral.

“Good behavior is so overdue it has become unfamiliar.  Beyond America, wars, terrorism, and political chaos are flourishing.  At home, things seem less dire, but a solipsistic skepticism, even suspicion, festers.  Unsurprising, amid headlines about random violence and events that reveal our values as more grape shot than bedrock.  Division is rife and trust diminished, perhaps because the past five-plus years have seen some epic acting out.

“…time has passed and when better than the dwindling days of December to make a lofty resolution?  The optimist in me hopes that virtue fosters peace and prosperity, and ultimately revives the American exceptionalism that has flickered but not been snuffed out.”

Excellent thoughts by Cronin, even though here “dwindling days of December” have dwindled.

One more from me:  Back when I worked at the State Oregon Executive Department, the director there practiced a good art that I have tried to emulate.  This:  Without being trite, he found a way to express thanks to someone every day for doing something for him that helped him through the day.

It’s a solid practice – so, in the new year, I will set out to continue achieving this objective. 

So, if you will, call it a “New Year’s resolution”, but, for me, it’s a way to “practice being positive,” as well as recognizing that someone – perhaps more than just one “someone” – helps me every day.

One of my friends put it very well when he wrote this in an e-mail:

“With all the political infighting and discouraging perspectives on the future, it can be easy to lose sight of many things; good health, close friends, the freedom to come and go as we please, and the ability to exercise what we value through the vote.

“Many people in the world are not as fortunate.  It’s always good to look back and realize how much we really have to be thankful for.”

Well said!

Welcome 2025!

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.

I wrote a few days ago to question whether the “checks and balances” system in American democracy still would work as a felon, Donald Trump, moves into the Oval Office for the second time.

My summary:  I did not know whether the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court would find a way to stand up to Trump.

Well, my analysis was incomplete.

I say that after reading humorist Dave Barry’s annual column in the Washington Post as he dissects 2024.  It is always a great read.

This time, Barry wrote briefly about checks and balances:

“… Joe Biden, who repeatedly promised that he would not pardon his son Hunter, cements his legacy as the most Joe Biden president ever by pardoning his son Hunter, thus forcing the Democrat Party to change its mantra from ‘Nobody is above the law!’ to ‘Hey, it’s complicated.’

“The wording of the pardon document is quite broad, covering ‘all offenses committed between 2014 and 2024, including any currently unsolved bank robberies, not that we are suggesting anything.

“The pardon outrages many Republicans who would be fine with it if Trump did it, while it’s fine with many Democrats who would be outraged if Trump did it.

“For, that is how our system of checks and balances works.”

Good point, Mr. Barry.

And, as 2024 moves into the rearview mirror, if you want to spend a bit of time guffawing, just read all the piece Barry wrote in the Post. 

And note the “checks and balances” sentence.

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 Wall Street Journal produced a long, front-page story about how President Joe Biden not only had “gatekeepers,” but some of those officials shielded him from many interactions that could have revealed his age-related frailty.

In short, these advisors thought Biden was so old that he couldn’t function normally in many of the usual roles of a president.  So, rather than just gatekeeping, they protected him.

That fact became abundantly clear when Biden couldn’t produce understandable sentences during the televised campaign debate against Donald Trump.

Losing the debate turned out to be the major reason why Biden finally decided not to run for re-election.

The Journal’s story about the tactics represented solid journalism.  It started this way:

“Presidents always have gatekeepers.  But in Biden’s case, the walls around him were higher and the controls greater, according to Democrat lawmakers, donors and aides who worked for Biden and other administrations.  There were limits over who Biden spoke with, limits on what they said to him, and limits around the sources of information he consumed.”

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan wrote this about how Biden’s staff protected him, though, unfortunately, she did not mention the name of a chief of staff who deserves debit for playing this game:

“The story is the decline of Joe Biden’s mental acuity, a word we use because it sounds both clinical and polite, and by which we mean the president has been in apparent cognitive decline for some years, perhaps since before taking office, and wasn’t fully up to the job.  His family and friends, top White House staff, and other administration officials covered it up.  Some no doubt thought his presidency was good for the country and some, perhaps, good for them.”

“Gatekeeper” is nothing if not an interesting word.

Without having to define it, the word conveys reality.  Stop at the gate unless someone lets you in.

Every high government official, from presidents to governors and others, have “gatekeepers” – those who allow certain folks in to see the top official and those who bar the doors.

Gatekeeping is not always negative.  It’s just the reality for busy public officials unless, of course, gatekeepers leave the gates mostly closed.

The Wall Street Journal story reminded me of an excellent book I read by Chris Whipple entitled, “The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency.”

Mr. Google describes the book as follows:

“The first in-depth, behind-the-scenes look at the White House Chiefs of Staff, whose actions — and inactions — have defined the course of our country.

“What do Dick Cheney and Rahm Emanuel have in common?  Aside from polarizing personalities, both served as chief of staff to a president of the United States — as did Donald Rumsfeld, Leon Panetta, and a relative handful of others.

[Here, the Journal could have or should have mentioned James Baker who served as chief of staff for two presidents and made the position into an art form, resulting in a book about his roles called “The Man Who Ran Washington” – see below.]

“The chiefs of staff, often referred to as ‘the gatekeepers,’ wield tremendous power in Washington and beyond.  They decide who is allowed to see the president, negotiate with Congress to push the president’s agenda, and — most crucially — enjoy unparalleled access to the leader of the free world.  Each chief can make or break an administration, and each president reveals himself by the chief he picks.”

To produce his book, Whipple conducted interviews with 17 living chiefs and two former presidents.

More from Mr. Google:

“Award-winning journalist and producer Chris Whipple pulls back the curtain on this unique fraternity.  In doing so, he revises our understanding of presidential history, showing us how James Baker’s expert managing of the White House, the press, and Capitol Hill paved the way for the Reagan Revolution — and, conversely, how Watergate, the Iraq War, and even the bungled Obamacare rollout might have been prevented by a more effective chief. 

“Filled with shrewd analysis and never-before-reported details, ‘The Gatekeepers’ offers an essential portrait of the toughest job in Washington.”

I read the book with a lot of interest a few years ago because, if nothing else, I am a political junkie.  I love to see how government works or doesn’t work.  And to achieve this, I often rely on solid journalism by the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Times.

The chief for Ronald Reagan named above – Baker – also worked for George Bush, the elder, and was the person with the elder Bush as he died, thus illustrating how close they were in life and in death. 

I was not a gatekeeper in Washington, D.C., but I did play a similar role on a couple occasions in Oregon, including for the governor I mentioned in this blog introduction.  Never with the weight of presidential issues on my hands, but, still, enough to enable me to provide the following posits for what an excellent gatekeeper should do, which stands in direct contrast to what top-level operatives did for Biden.

The posits:

• Of course, given that presidents, governors and others high up in government cannot see everyone, gatekeepers guard the door as to who gets in to see the leader.

• However, gatekeepers should not guard the door by allowing only those in who agree with the leader they represent. 

• Instead, gatekeepers should give the leader for whom they work a chance to hear what he or she needs to hear from those who, respectfully, disagree and have something important to say about that disagreement.

• Gatekeepers should take initiative to book appointments for leaders that will advance the administration’s agenda…which means meeting with folks who may not ask for a meeting, but should be consulted.

No doubt, on a subject this deep and wide, I’ll think of other posits, but for now, that’s enough.

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.

This blog headline asks what can be viewed as (a) a silly metaphor, but also (b) a foreboding question.

Remember the story of Scrooge, the famous story written by Charles Dickens.

Well, this week, in The Atlantic Magazine, writer Tom Nichols draws the comparison this way:

“The main character of the story is the legendary Dickens character Ebenezer Scrooge, an obnoxious miser who delights in his sneering misanthropy.

“Scrooge is a mossy cistern of cold, sour inhumanity.  His miserliness isn’t just about hoarding wealth for himself; it’s about the petty vengefulness he takes in denying money to others.  When two men come to his office to ask for contributions to alleviate the suffering of the indigent, one of them tells Scrooge that poor people would rather die than go to the workhouses and other nightmarish institutions to which they are consigned.

“Scrooge responds with calm and undiluted contempt:  ‘If they would rather die,’ he says, ‘they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.’”

Then, Nichols hits the nail on the head when it comes to the state of politics in America.

“I don’t want to overdraw comparisons to our current politics, but when political leaders are talking about creating mass detention camps in America, and voters — even those who were once undocumented immigrants themselves — approve of such ideas despite the danger to their own family, this kind of Victorian viciousness feels uncomfortably relevant.”

At the risk of stretching a parallel, Nichols is right.

I have read story after story in the last weeks about folks who voted for Trump, then realized that he intended to deport members of their own families.

Trump, like Scrooge, is miserly because he wants to keep wealth for himself and his cronies rather than watch out for the public good.

Still, Nichols cites this reality – Trump heading for his second trip to the Oval Office because more Americans voted for him than for Kamala Harris.

So, I say to myself and others, adjust yourself to the Trump reality, even as many of us fear it.

More from Nichols:

“Scrooge’s repentance comes after years of a wasted life and a night of trauma and shame.  The rest of us, however, don’t have to wait.  Each of us, every day and in our own small way, can resolve right now that mankind is our business,that the common welfare is our business,and that charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence are all our business,no matter what we do to fill our days or put food on our table—and no matter whom we voted for.

“Americans can’t control much of what’s about to happen in their national politics.  Some of the people about to govern the United States may be determined to be conscientious public servants, but others seem convinced that their fellow citizens are, to use the president-elect’s words, ‘vermin’ and ‘scum.’

“These people will bring division to our public life.  Responding in kind, or acquiescing, or withdrawing entirely and believing in nothing, will all be powerful temptations.  Giving in to anger or despair is easier, of course, but such feelings are empty emotional calories that eventually leave people spiritually starved.  We might hope that others will change their mind, but the sustainable path is to control what’s in our own heart.”

I don’t know whether Nichols is a Christian or not, but these words, his words – convey a set of Christian values…. charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence.

Regardless of how perverse Trump and his cronies act, each of us, as a citizen, can practice those values.

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.

For those of us who used to work in journalism and now watch reporters practice the art, the Fact Checker column in the Washington Post is one of the top pieces of journalism going these days.

Started in late 2007 as a feature during the 2008 presidential campaign, the Post revived it as a permanently in 2011.

Since then, the column has been written by Glenn Kessler and his partners at the Post.

In an award-winning journalism career spanning more than four decades, Kessler has covered foreign policy, economic policy, the White House, Congress, politics, airline safety, and Wall Street.

He was the Washington Post’s chief State Department reporter for nine years, traveling around the world with three different Secretaries of State.  Before that, he covered tax and budget policy for The Washington Post and also served as the newspaper’s national business editor.  He has been editor and chief writer of The Fact Checker since 2011.

So, with this background, I summarize below what Kessler and colleagues have labeled “The biggest pinocchios of 2024.” 

First, why the word pinocchio?  Well, it arises from the fairy tale about the small boy who, as he told lies and fibs, his nose got longer.  Thus, a good brand for this kind of political truth-telling as it awards “pinochios.”

From Kessler and staff:

“The annual roundup of the most outlandish claims of 2024 features four claims by President-elect Donald Trump, along with other lowlights.

“As usual with Trump, it’s hard to isolate a particular falsehood, but the Washington Post Fact Checker Column focused on four — two having to do with immigration, one on tariffs, and another on the unemployment rate.  

“Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, also landed on the list (not for the first time) for an immigration-related claim that Trump echoed in a presidential debate.

“In fact, five of the 12 claims below relate to illegal immigration, showing it was a potent issue in the election season.  

“President Joe Biden merited two spots, for a false claim on the inflation rate and for a round-up of his unverified claims about his life.  Biden’s flip-flop on pardoning his son Hunter earned a bonus award.

The list below appears in no particular order.  I give full credit to the Washington Post for practicing this kind of quality journalism.

1.  “The Harris-Biden administration says it doesn’t have any money for hurricane relief.  The Administration spent it all on illegal migrants.  They stole the FEMA money just like they stole it from a bank, so they could give it to their illegal immigrants that they want to have vote for them.”

— President-elect Donald Trump, October 3

Trump sought to weaponize Hurricane Helene relief efforts, accusing the Biden Administration of failing to provide adequate assistance.  As part of his critique, he claimed there was no money available for hurricane relief because it was spent already to handle the surge of migrants at the southern border.  This was false:  Money was not running short, and the Biden Administration did not spend FEMA disaster money on migrants.

•  “I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. … President Biden’s border policies are a disgrace.”

— Senator Katie Boyd Britt (R-Alabama), March 7

In the centerpiece of the Republican response to State of the Union, Britt told a long story about a victim of sex trafficking who she suggested was recently abused in the United States and suffered because of Biden’s policies.  But Biden had nothing to do with the travails of Karla Jacinto Romero, later identified as the person Britt referenced in the speech.  In fact, Jacinto was never trafficked to the United States; she worked in Mexican brothels during the George W. Bush Administration.

•  “Reports now show that people have had their pets abducted and eaten by people who shouldn’t be in this country. Where is our border czar?”

— Vice President-elect JD Vance, September 9

Vance sparked one of the oddest controversies of the campaign season by falsely claiming that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were eating pets — a tweet inspired by a false rumor on a Facebook post about migrants eating cats.

•  Inflation “was at 9 per cent when I came in and it’s now down around 3 per  cent.”

— President Joe Biden, May 14

Inflation was an albatross for Democrats in this election year.  After decades of stable prices — inflation of about 2 per cent a year — the sudden increase early in Biden’s term was a shock, both for consumers and policymakers.  Inflation, as measured by the year-over-year percentage change in the consumer price index, spiked to a 9 per cent annual rate in June 2022 — the highest level in 43 years.  By Election Day, it had fallen below 3 per cent, but that was not good enough for many Americans.

• “Over 13,000, the exact number’s 13,099, convicted illegal, alien murderers are now on the loose.”

— Trump, October 1

Illegal immigration surged during the Biden Administration, and Trump made many false claims about the issue during his campaign.  This statement — which became a standard line in his speeches — was especially egregious.  Trump twisted a report on the number of non-citizens with criminal convictions that were not detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to make it sound like they had been released under Biden.  But the data went back 40 years.  Most of these killers are in some sort of detention and have been since before Trump was president.

•  Biden Tall Tales

Biden, like many politicians, likes to tell stories — stories in which he tries to connect his own life with his audiences’ life and that makes up an essential part of his persona.  But throughout his career, Biden’s propensity to exaggerate or embellish tales about his life has led to doubts about his truthfulness.  That didn’t change in his last year as president.  He claimed “I used to drive an 18-wheeler” — not true, but an amalgam of driving a school bus in college and being a passenger on a 47,000-pound cargo truck.  He said he was on a list of 10 most eligible bachelors; no such list can be found.  He said he was the first in his family to go to college — but evidence suggests his father did.  And he claimed he was the state runner-up in scoring in high school football; he was in fifth place.

•  “Tyson Foods has its eyes on a different class of workers. The company is now offering new jobs to asylum seekers in other states. … They’re firing Americans and offering perks to illegals.”

— Fox News prime-time host Jesse Watters, March 14

Watters put Tyson Foods, the nation’s largest meat-packer, in the spotlight. With his platform on Fox News, he generated a firestorm on the right by claiming that Tyson was firing workers in Perry, Iowa, “one of the great American suburbs,” and hiring undocumented immigrants elsewhere in the country.  It wasn’t true.

• “A tariff is a tax on a foreign country. That’s the way it is, whether you like it or not.  A lot of people like to say it’s a tax on us. No, no, no.  It’s a tax on a foreign country.  It’s a tax on a country that’s ripping us off and stealing our jobs.  And it’s a tax that doesn’t affect our country.”

— Trump, August 17

Trump says he will impose an across-the-board tariff on all imported products.  But in making the case for his policy, he repeated the false claim he made often during his first term as president — that the entire tariff is paid by a foreign country.  Economists do not debate this fact; they agree that tariffs — essentially a tax on domestic consumption — are paid by importers, such as U.S. companies, which in turn pass on most or all the costs to consumers or producers who may use imported materials in their products.  So many pay, not just those pay tariffs first.

• “We had the best unemployment rates ever. And they were real unemployment, not like you have today where nobody’s working and they consider it to be.”

— Trump, January 21

Trump rode to victory in 2024 in part because of Americans’ dissatisfaction with the economy, especially inflation. The unemployment rate, however, was a bright spot — the lowest numbers in 70 years.  So, Trump reached back to the playbook he used in the 2016 election, when the economy was also on an upswing — suggesting the unemployment numbers are fake.  That was false.  And naturally he falsely claimed that he had the best unemployment rate ever — when in fact Biden beat him.

1. “McCormick’s promised the richest people in America a massive tax break. To pay for it, he’s made clear he’ll slash your Medicare and Social Security and cut Medicaid for nursing home care.”

— Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pennsylvania, October 10

The Senate race between Casey, the incumbent, and former hedge fund manager Dave McCormick was one of the closest in the nation.  In an ad, Casey walked out of a bank vault as he complained that McCormick’s “billionaire buddies” have spent $150 million attacking him.  Then he did something unusual — he directly attacked McCormick as having “made clear he’ll slash your Medicare and Social Security and cut Medicaid for nursing home care.”  Usually, negative ads use voice-overs or text to make incendiary claims as a way to shield the candidate from possible fact checks.  McCormick had said no such thing, and Casey’s campaign had no evidence to back up the claim.  The ad did not seem to help Casey, who lost the race by about 15,000 votes out of 7 million cast.

1. Bonus Award: Flip-Flop of the Year

                  President Joe Biden

On June 13, Biden was emphatic:  “I’m extremely proud of my son Hunter. … I’m not going to do anything.  I said I’d abide by the jury decision, and I will do that. And I will not pardon him.”  Less than six months later, the flip-flop:  The president not only pardoned his son for his conviction on three felony gun charges, three felony tax offenses and six misdemeanor tax offenses — he issued a sweeping pardon that absolved Hunter Biden of any possible federal crimes he might have committed between 2014 and this December 1.

Again, this conclusion from me.  The Fact Checker Column represents journalism at is finest. 

I hope the Post keeps it up.

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.

This blog headline lists one of most interesting words I have heard in my life – spelunking.

I heard it for the first time many years ago and just read it again the other day.

What does it mean?

“The exploration of caves, especially as a hobby.”

In some ways, that’s not enough of a definition.  For, when I first came into contact with the word, I saw a TV show illustrating spelunking.  It was when individuals decided to go underground between rocks where they could squeeze in to explore a cave.

Not me.

So, to herald this good word, I open the Department of Words Matter, one of five I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.  The others are the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, the Department of Inquiring Minds Want to Know, and the Department of “Just Saying.”

This time, the word “spelunking” arose in a column reporting a discussion among four analysts about politics in America.  It was led by New York Times columnist Frank Bruni, one of the best writers going in America – and it appeared in the Times.

Here is one quote from Bruni:

“Donald Trump will be inaugurated and Republicans will control both chambers of Congress.  Happy Holidays!  Judged by the sheer volume of words that have been written and spoken since November 5 about their party’s comeuppance, Democrats have gone beyond soul searching to soul spelunking — they’ve descended into whole new subterranean caverns of analysis.”

Good point, not to mention a good word.

Another good word arose in the discussion Bruni led.  This:  Echo-Chamber.

Here was the quote:

“The sign outside HQ now should say ‘Beware:  Entering an Echo Chamber.’  I said move to Youngstown, but it could be Pittsburgh or Cleveland or Toledo or Detroit or Milwaukee.  But I am dead serious that it should not be in Washington or anywhere on the coasts.  We need to send a bold signal that we are committed to reconnecting to people out in the real world.”

This quote came from Tim Ryan, the former U.S. House Speaker who was too good to last in the job he did not have for long.

He faulted Democrats for being in an “echo-chamber,” which means “an environment in which a person encounters only beliefs or opinions that coincide with their own, so that their existing views are reinforced and alternative ideas are not considered.”

Another good point – and a good word.

To reclaim their heritage – a party that cares about someone other than themselves – Democrats need to get out of their echo-chamber and listen to what real people are saying in the U.S., far from Washington, D.C. 

Then, I say there are two ways to achieve ends:

• First, listen to what real people have to say.  One of my former business partners put it very well when he said, “God gave you two ears and one mouth – so listen twice as much as you talk.”  Politicians, of course, tend to talk rather than listen.l

• Second, design ways to respond that make connections with real people – real people who display their citizenship by voting.

So, don’t spelunk and get out of your echo-chamber.