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.

As I was driving up the road from Salem to Portland the other day, I was listening to one my favorite discs – “The Very Best of Neil Diamond.”

It was a good way to pass the time on a drive that, most of the time, is marked by too many cars and frequent traffic jams.

So, here are Thoughts on a few Diamond songs.

Forever in Blue Jeans

This is the first song on the disc and the lyrics always remind me of former Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber. He made popular the attire of wearing blue jeans with suit jackets.

It was something, then and now, that my wife would not allow me to wear. But, for Kitzhaber, during much of his time in office, both as Senate President and Governor, he set a style that was mimicked by many others.

I’m a Believer

Neil Diamond first sang this song, then it was made popular by the Monkeys, of all strange developments in the music business.

I can never hear the words without thinking of my wife, the light of my life, when I hear, “then I saw her face and I’m a believer and I could never leave her.”

Pretty Amazing Grace

I don’t know the exact derivation of this song — in the sense of Mr. Diamond’s religious convictions — but there must be as religious connotation to it. The fact is that, for Christians, there is “pretty amazing grace.”

Our personal relationship with God depends, not on our own performance or earnings, but rather that on what Jesus Christ has done for us. That’s “pretty amazing grace!”

Holly Holy

If you listen to the lyrics, not to mention the rising crescendo of voice and instruments, it is hard not to park the car and, privately, move or dance along with the music.  In my case, no one would want to see that.  Holly Holy is a work with a spiritual focus, reportedly one of Mr. Diamonds’ favorite songs. The spiritual tone is indicated by these words:

Call the sun in the dead of the night
And the sun’s gonna rise in the sky
Touch a man who can’t walk upright
And that lame man, he’s gonna fly
And I fly
And I fly

Sing on, Mr. Diamond.

America

I cannot hear the lyrics to this great song without thinking of the contrast to today’s America, where, under President Donald Trump, all immigrants are considered evil and corrupt.

Now, of course, there are corrupt individuals in any cohort, but the fact is that immigrants over the years have contributed much to our country. They wanted to “come to America” and our country, overall, is better for their arrival.

There is more that could be written about Diamond songs, but let me just say this – “The Very Best of Neil Diamond” will remain in my car disc player.

Listening is a great way to pass the time, as well as think various big thoughts spurred by great music sung by a great song writer.

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 written about this before, so sorry for the repetition. But, it is fair and accurate to point out that Attorney General William Barr is acting with skill and experience as he handles the follow-on issues related to completion of the Mueller report.

Here is a paragraph from the Wall Street Journal that makes my point:

“In his letter (to Congress), Barr said the report (the Mueller report) was nearly 400 pages, excluding tables and appendices, and that officials had no plans to submit the report to the White House for review of any confidential or privileged information. He said material related to intelligence sources, ongoing investigations, grand-jury matters and the privacy of individuals not charged with crimes will be redacted from any version made public.”

Kudos to him.

Note the phrase, “material related to intelligence sources, ongoing investigations, grand-jury matters and the privacy of individuals not charged with crimes will be redacted from any version made public.”

Nor should it, I add. An appropriately redacted report makes all the sense in the world – and that’s what Barr intends to prepare and release.

Many Democrats, including most of those who appear to be running to oppose Donald Trump in 2020, want the full Mueller report to be made public. They don’t care that laws and genuine legal traditions (such as protecting grand-jury deliberations) argue against full release.

I write none of this to defend Trump or protect him from a full review of his abhorrent conduct in office. He deserves to pay for his incredible lack of character and veracity.

Still, I remain confident in Barr’s ability to deal with all of these issues and to fend off the incessant, beyond-legal demands from the left.

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.

You can tell I have too much time on my hands because I have enough of it – time, that is — to write a blog on this subject.

But, the golf phrases listed below have been on my mind lately and, as you will see, some come from real golfers and real TV golf commentators — and a few come from me. After all, I, too, am a golf expert, at least in my own mind.

• If he would have hit it harder, it would have gone farther.

I remember the time I heard this phrase uttered by a commentator. Stop for a moment and think about it. Stands to reason, doesn’t it! Someone got paid big bucks to say the words. So why not pay me big bucks to utter such obvious notions?

• Callaway pays Mickelson and many others to play their golf clubs and golf balls; I pay Callaway to do the same.

I am the author of these semi-famous words. Why, given how much I have done for Callaway, doesn’t the company invest in me? Who knows?

• Better than most! What do those three words really mean?

As we have just passed the annual Players golf tournament in Ponte Vedra, Florida, we have been reminded again and again about those three words.

They were uttered by golf commentator and former player Gary Koch several years ago as he watched Tiger Woods hole a very long putt on the iconic 17^th hole at the TPC Sawgrass course.

As the putt trailed toward the hole, Koch said the words, “Better than most.”

Think about it. What do those words really mean and are they worthy of such high status? Perhaps not, though I add that I like Koch as a TV commentator. He has an understated way of calling a golf tournament, adding to the action without distracting from it.

• Jack Nicklaus, Dustin Johnson and I all play fades.

This is a quote from me – and, surprisingly, it is true.  I have have no particular ability to hit a draw on command.  However, when it comes to Nicklaus and Johnson, they both hit their fades farther than I do, which, I guess, is not surprising, given my advanced age.  Plus, the longer I play the shorter the distance.

• He has a lot of green to work with.

If you watch golf on TV, you are likely to hear this phrase multiple times. A pro player hits a shot long and there is a bit of distance between where his golf ball lies and the pin. So, the commentator intones, “he has a lot of green to work with.”

Where did the phrase originate? Work with? What does that mean? Who knows?

• I’ve just got to stay patient.

You don’t have to listen and watch much golf on TV before you hear this phrase. I’d love for someone to define the word patience as we hear it repeatedly.

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.

Pretty far!

Off the political spectrum, in fact!

Political columnist, Peggy Noonan, made this point in a piece she wrote recently for the Wall Street Journal.

“A generation after President Bill Clinton declared that the ‘era of big government is over, Democrats,’ Democrats are engaged in an intra-party fight over how aggressively to expand the government’s reach into the lives of everyday people.

“Free college, government-backed health care and subsidy checks for newborns, all considered politically untenable ideas during the 2016 presidential campaign, are among the proposals being floated by top candidates in the crowded 2020 presidential primary field.

“The advocates for a larger government role are among the party’s savviest social-media users, including Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, which has provided a megaphone for their views.

“The wing of the party that advocates more incremental change is resisting what it sees as moving too far, and too fast, toward a bigger government role—something that already is being labeled ‘socialism’ by the Republican opponent-in-waiting, President Donald Trump.”

As far left as these proposals are, no one can top Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is a major author of some of the notions.

And, in the interest of fairness, far right folks, including President Donald Trump — if he belongs on the right and no on his own weird stance as nowhere other this bloated ego – are no better than the lefties. Neither side has the country’s best interests are heart.

The push to the left is coming in part from a vocal group of freshman lawmakers, including Ocasio-Cortez, who ran in Democrat strongholds vowing to shake up the party hierarchy and push for change on such issues as climate and health care.

Not only that. Ocasio-Cortez has demonstrated an incredible lack of understanding about public policy that, in effect, makes her like Donald Trump. Neither knows what they’re doing when it comes to making decisions about government, either in terms of an appropriate role or the details of individual policies.

Ocasio-Cortez made this abundantly clear when she applauded Amazon’s decision not to move forward on a second headquarters location in the New York area. Good, she said, and now it would be possible to spend the $3 billion that would be saved on other left-learning programs.

Of course, almost everyone else knew that there was not $3 billion to be spent. That was the amount Amazon was scheduled to receive then gave up, in tax incentives. Ocasio-Cortez didn’t know about the easy-to-see distinction.

Or, as a governor I worked for a number of years ago would have said: “She doesn’t know beans from buckshot.”

When I queried a friend – he is an admitted and avowed liberal — about Ocasio-Cortez, he said she did not represent the true Democrat party. Well, if not, then she is getting a lot of publicity as one apparent leader of the left.

Former Vice President Joe Biden told would-be donors recently that he often faces criticism from the “new left,” but claimed he has the “most progressive record” of anyone trying to get into the 2020 presidential election field.

One of his would-be rivals, Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, has called the policies outlined in the Green New Deal—a climate change platform advocated by Ocasio-Cortez—as “aspirations.”

Noonan says what she calls “an ideological debate” could re-define the Democrat Party after more than two decades of dominance by supporters of the Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Noonan continues: “The Democrat fight is being fueled by pent-up frustration from a new generation of leaders, whose political outlooks were largely formed in the aftermaths of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York and Washington and the economic meltdown at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency.

“It is being animated by a liberal activist base that has grown independent of the party establishment. The ultimate arbiter in the struggle will be a Democrat primary electorate that reflects the party’s emerging power centers: Millennials and minorities.”

Still, looming over the intra-party debate is the question of how best to beat Trump. Former Delaware Governor Jack Markell, an ally of Biden and several governors considering entering the race, said “the only way that Trump can win is if the D nominee is too far to the left.”

Asked his definition of “too far left,” Markell said it is “the giving-everything-away-for-free lane.”

So, the Ds favor increasing government largesse? Yes. They have no problem spending other people’s money.

I hope some kind of centrist – Republican, Democrat, third-party, I don’t care – emerges who can appeal to voters opposed to either far left or far right ideas that are designed more to attract certain kinds of voters than to produce good solutions.

That’s the only way Trump can lose his re-election bid, as well as the only way Ocasio-Cortez and her ilk can be relegated to where they belong, which is on the sidelines.

Give me a person with character, knowledge, experience and credibility in the Oval Office.

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.

The headline trumpets a key question as we head toward the 2020 presidential election. Are Donald Trump for the Republicans, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for the Democrats standard-bearers for both parties.

I hope not.

For they deserve each other, even if some on both sides dispute the notion that they are standard-bearers because, if nothing else, standard-bearers have to have standards. Neither does.

First, each is nuts, without the first idea of what it means to govern with skill and diplomacy – from their posts on the far right for Trump and the far left for Ocasio-Cortez.

Can Trump be placed on any political spectrum, including the far right? Perhaps not, and, in this country, real conservatives would no doubt disavow Trump as illustrative of someone who wears the mantle of Republican. He defies explanation. Frankly, so does Ocasio-Cortez for Democrats on the left.

Second, solid, upstanding character is not an issue for either Trump or Ocasio-Cortez. They don’t have much, if any.

Third, lying comes naturally to each, so much so that they believe, often rightly in this day of social media “news,” that lying covers up a host of stupid, near-illegal actions.

Fourth, each craves media publicity. There is no higher calling thatn to get your names in newspapers or on-air. And, reporters and editors succumb to their entreaties, which is not good news for Americans who would benefit from a focus on “real news,” not Trump tweets or Ocasio-Cortez media blitzes.

A letter writer to the Wall Street Journal got it right this other day with this:

“In ‘Socialism? Yes, Be Afraid’ in his Wonder Land column on March 14, Daniel Henninger compares Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ideas to Jack Handey’s ‘Deep Thoughts’ bits on Saturday Night Live.

“Right comedy show, wrong character. Ocasio-Cortez is more like Gilda Radner’s Roseanne Roseannadanna or Emily Litella, always making an internally logical, if very irreverent argument, but one based on an intellectually wacky or unfounded premise (see Radner’s classic ‘Saving Soviet Jewelry’ as an example).

“The problem is no one else in the Democrat Party has either the common sense or courage of Radner’s skit partners, who leaned over to whisper in her ear, mid-rant, that her premise was nuts, the earnestness of her presentation notwithstanding. Gilda always gave us the sheepish look with a chagrined ‘Never mind!’ Ocasio-Cortez, instead, is too self-enchanted to ever admit her arguments might need a re-think.”

Then, consider Trump.

He never expected to be president, seeming to believe that campaigning was just an infomercial for his Trump brand. He figured it would be more publicity for him and nothing else mattered, because he values publicity over anything.

Trouble is, he won. And we all are worse for his victory. He wasn’t prepared for the White House and, in the words of a solid, experienced military veteran who served him, for a time, as head of the U.S. Department of State, he displayed no ability to prepare for anything, much less read anything about the presidency or its current challenges.

Now, I have a friend on the left who makes light of my comment that Ocasio-Cortez could be a standard-bearer for the Ds. He says she is just an after-thought, and to illustrate his point, he holds two fingers together closely to indicate that she is thin and doesn’t matter.

I beg to differ. She gets more air-time and news-space that any other Democrat even as erstwhile D candidates for president in 2020 adopt her costly ideas – free medical care for everyone, free college for everyone, reparations for “the slavery issue,” tear down all buildings and build new ones according to some kind of ill-defined “new green deal.”

No talk about the price for such ideas. And, of course, price doesn’t matter because, for many Democrats, they enjoy spending other people’s money.

So, I believe we can do better than either Trump or Ocasio-Cortez as we look for standard-bearers in both parties. Or, if we find no solid examples in today’s excuse for politics, we could look for a third-party candidate or candidates who can lead us to the smart middle on issues facing this country – all the while demonstrating high character and standards.

Trump and Ocasio-Cortez? No.

Better standard-bearers? Yes.

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 wrote the other day how comforting it was to me to have a seasoned legal pro, William Barr, sitting in the U.S. Attorney General’s chair.

I made that assertion minutes after Special Counsel Robert Mueller delivered his long-awaited report to the AG.

I could write that sentence again, with confidence, after watching a few days of the to’ing and fro-ing over the Mueller report and the AG’s summary of it.

Many Democrats feel Barr should be required to release the full report even if it violates certain provisions of the order creating the Special Counsel in the first place, or even if it violates long-accepted legal practice, such as not releasing transcripts of grand jury proceedings in order not to incriminate those who might have testified, or even if it jeopardizes ongoing investigations.

None of this matters to many Democrats who believe they, and only they, have the smarts to analyze the full report.

And, if they want to use the report to tarnish President Donald Trump, well, he deserves it given his reprehensible conduct in office.

And, of course, President Donald Trump, to his discredit, continues to do what the Washington Post’s James Hohmann describes in his Daily 202 Column:

“Even when a story is great for him, Trump still has a penchant for over-hyping just how great.

“He’s a billionaire, yet he inflates his wealth. Trump Tower is a tall building, yet he sprinkles in extra floors. He’s tall but overstates his height. Trump got elected president by winning the Electoral College, but, insists, without evidence, that he also would have won the popular vote if millions of undocumented immigrants hadn’t cast ballots illegally.

“When the Islamic State was battered, he said it was eradicated. There are many more examples.”

Back to AG Barr.  He reiterated on Sunday that his “goal and intent” is to release as much of the report as possible. Barr said he’s asked Mueller to help identify information in his report that cannot be released publicly because it’s related to grand jury deliberations or other ongoing investigations that have been referred to other offices.

“As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies,” Barr wrote.

It is important to add that a clause in the document creating the Special Counsel allows the AG to release the full report, with, of course, redactions.

I suspect Barr will do that. But, again, I am very glad he is in the top chair making that and other decisions about what comes next.

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.

When it comes to seeing and absorbing information, I believe there are three kinds of people in this world:

1. Those who prefer words
2. Those who prefer graphics and pictures
3. Those who prefer charts and graphs

Of course, there are folks who share portions of all of the above.

For me, I prefer words. And, for me, words matter.

Let me provide a few examples.

THE WORD “NEGATIVE:” My concern about this word arrives when, after I have had a blood test at a doctor’s office, I get a call reporting the results. The person on the other end of the phone says results were “negative.”

Say what?

When I hear that word, I often respond, “oh no, now what do I do?”

But, of course, when conveyed in such a manner, the word negative is positive. Get my drift. Nothing is wrong with the test results.

Would be better, I submit, for the response from the doctor’s office, to be something like, “there is nothing wrong based on the test.”

THE WORD “TRANSPARENT:” I cite this because, while I like the word based on its definition, I never know what it means for sure when it is uttered by a political figure.

Usually, it means what the politician wants it to mean.

The dictionary definition of transparent is a bit complicated, as follows:

• Having the property of transmitting rays of light through its substance so that bodies situated beyond or behind can be distinctly seen
• Admitting the passage of light through interstices (whatever that last word means)
• So sheer as to permit light to pass through; diaphanous; easily seen through, recognized, or detected

It is possible to see how this word – transparent – could illustrate the importance of open and “transparent” government. But it has come to mean what politicians want it to mean, which is to support their claim that they believe in open government.

Except the reverse is often true for many of them. They want us to know what they want us to know, not the full depth and scope of information about government issues.

So, when I hear the word “transparent” used by politicians, I am skeptical.

THE WORD “LOGISTICS”: As I drove north on I-5 earlier this weekend, I did not just notice a lot of huge trucks; I also noticed that, in many cases, adds on the sides of trucks indicated they were involved in “logistics.”

Who knows what that word means? Trucks used to be called vehicles that hauled stuff. Later, the trucks were called “transportation vehicles.” Today, many carry the moniker “logistics.”

My friends at “dictionary.com” – I consult them regularly – define logistics as this: “The planning, implementation, and coordination of the details of a business or other operation.”

So, I guess the word is appropriate. Just not one I would know how to use in regular communication about the number of big trucks on highways.

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.

Two legislators – Representative Nancy Nathanson, D-Eugene, and Senator Mark Hass, D-Beaverton – went on record this week asking Oregon businesses, in turn, to go on record in favor of what kind of tax they wanted to absorb.

Over my years at the Capitol, I lobbied both Nathanson and Hass and found them to be interested in what they considered to be sound policy from their position as centrists, but a little to the left. I know their current request was made with the best of intentions, but I was left with a question.

The request was made in a letter to Oregon Business & Industry (OBI), the new organization that grew out of a merger of sorts between Associated Oregon Industries and the Oregon Business Association.

OBI Executive Sandy McDonough responded appropriately, I felt, when she said the organization she runs would expect government spending control in return for new taxes.

More detail on all of this can be read in various newspapers, but, for now, let me cite an axiom that would animate my lobbying on this issue – if I was still a lobbyist and, thankfully, I am not.

If Oregon businesses are going to accept new taxes, the deal should be part of a political transaction.

In return for supporting for more taxes for business to pay, I submit legislators should commit to taking either of two actions:

1. Commit to getting control of the now out-of-control Public Employee Retirement System. Some will say this is impossible given the contract the State of Oregon has signed with PERS pensioners, a contract upheld by the Oregon Supreme Court. [And, in the spirit of full disclosure, I am one of those pensioners.]
2. Or, put in place what I call a “results oriented” approach to state government spending. What I mean is that programs should, by law, be required to estimate the results they will achieve and, then, if they don’t achieve those results, be subject to termination. Otherwise, all new taxes produce is more government, with no accountability for performance.

Now, a number of my former colleagues who still work the halls of the State Capitol probably will tell me that the axiom I have summarized above will not work. One of the main reasons is that Democrats are in charge by super-majorities in both the Oregon House and Oregon Senate and, because of their clear control, many want to impose new taxes on a number of payers, including businesses.

So, my lobbyist friends say, business lobbyists should propose how they want to be taxed rather than simply let taxes be imposed by Democrat super-majorities.

Perhaps.

But, in the spirit of good and better government, I say impose the “results orientation” instead of just more government business as usual.

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.

The big news this afternoon is that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has forwarded his long-awaited report to Attorney General William Barr as he was required to do under the regulation that created his position.

Now, just want for various Democrats to do what they have been doing for months since Barr stood for and survived Senate confirmation for his second stint in the top job at the Department of Justice.

There is little doubt but that Barr will withstand the almost-constant demand for release and stick with the regulatory and traditional response to such a report.

Here is what Barr said to the Wall Street Journal this afternoon:

“The attorney general wrote he would consult with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Mueller “to determine what other information from the report can be released to Congress and the public consistent with the law, including the Special Counsel regulations, and the Department’s long-standing practices and policies.”

Well said!

Many Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for advocating loudly and strongly that Barr violate the law.

Barr should continue to resist Democrat entreaties to violate regulation and accepted legal tradition by releasing the report.

I am glad Barr is serving as attorney general. We need reasonable and experienced officials in top Executive Branch positions. Barr fits the needed description to a “T.”

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.

It will not be news to anyone who knows me to report that I am a dog lover.

My wife, Nancy, and I have had two – first Hogan, who is in heaven looking down on us, and now Callaway who provides us our every day with love and devotion.

And those to emotions go both ways.

So it was this week that I read a piece by the Associated Press under this headline:

Exhibit explores keen senses, abilities of man’s best friend

It was a story about a major dog-related exhibit that is starting in Los Angeles and moving to other cities.

The AP writer asks this question: Did people domesticate dogs or was it the other way around? And why do these two species seem to think so much alike, act so much alike and get along so well?

He reports that the California Science Center has spent the past five years sniffing out the answers to those and hundreds of other vexing canine questions. It will begin revealing the conclusions Saturday (last Saturday) with an ambitious, if somewhat lighthearted, new exhibition called “Dogs! A Science Tail.”

“It’s really not about just dogs and science,” the museum curator says. “It’s really about how dogs and humans are both social animals. About how dogs and humans have evolved together over thousands of years. And the fact that, because we are both social animals, we’ve learned to work together.”

Most of us have seen dogs around fire hydrants. They do what comes naturally to them. But the new exhibit on dogs reveals this:

“…we just smell pee. A dog can tell what other dog was there, what time they were there, and actually which direction they were going.”

Dogs have an amazing ability to learn information, in part because of the estimated 300 million sensory receptor sites they carry in their noses. That far outnumbers the six million receptors in humans.

These receptors led the exhibit curator to say that, “In a bedroom, dogs can hear a termite scratching on the wall.”

Such skills also provide more riveting benefits. An avalanche rescue dog is able to sniff out a person buried in snow in a minute’s time while its handlers stand there without a clue. Dogs are able to sniff out bombs people would never find until they exploded.

Those who see the L.A. dog exhibit watch canines from around the world help save people from drowning off the coast of Italy, rescue people trapped in collapsed buildings, even track down Kenyan poachers preying on endangered elephants and rhinos.

They also can watch Garmin, a two-year-old golden Labrador retriever who is about to graduate from guide-dog school. He takes blindfolded folks through a maze of obstacles, and when one person hesitated, Garmin pulled gently on his leash as if to say, “Come on, let’s go. I’ve got this.”

But do really love us?

Or, are they just trying to wheedle another treat when they open those big black eyes of theirs and give us that look?

“If you look a dog in the eye, a dog will look back at you and you will produce oxytocin,” says the exhibit official. It is the chemical known as the love hormone because of the feelings it evokes in people.

“And,” the official adds, “the dog will produce oxytocin in his own body from looking back at you. It’s a mutual affection.” A chimp, on the other hand, will just look away.

Back thousands of years, both wolves and people could see the other was pretty good at hunting for food. But did the wolves walk up and offer their help in that endeavor? Or, did people make the first move?

Whoever did, they created an enduring bond.

And, I have been lucky enough to experience that bond twice – first with my good old boy Hogan, and, second, with Callaway who is just getting out of puppy hood.

They both came from the same poodle breeder in Amity, Oregon, and she says that, if you trace the lineage, Hogan is Callaway’s uncle.

Both great dogs – and, more importantly, great friends.