[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

That question has been on my mind lately as we have watched the ego-driven candidate continue to surprise analysts by not falling out of run for the Republican nomination for president.

Trump’s latest incredulity revolves around his charge that George W. Bush was to blame for the 9/11 tragedy.

According to an October 22 column by Daniel Henninger in the Wall Street Journal, Trump raised the 9/11 issue in a recent interview. He said, “Look, Jeb said we were safe with my brother. Were we safe? Well, the World Trade Center just fell down.”

Mr. Henninger, who was in New York when the World Trade Center towers when down, went on to write this: “So I have to say, with all respect to Mr. Trump’s easily offended supporters: For Donald Trump to suggest in his syntactically-vague fashion that former President George W. Bush bears blame for September 11, which occurred nine months after he assumed office; or for Donald Trump to revisit 9/11 to promote his thoughts on immigration, is frankly disgusting. His remark about President Bush is an utter falsity, and it demeaned the reality of what happened that day.”

Henninger is right – dead right.

And he is also right in this conclusion in his column:

“Donald Trump fits for now, but poorly. He isn’t the leader of a movement. He’s an impresario of sensations. Reducing 9/11 to a political prop was indeed sensational. It was also beyond the pale.”

Trump is not held to a high standard by today’s media. He gets away with saying stuff that everyone knows is bogus, but the sound-bite quote rules the day. Almost no reporters did deeper and ask Trump to justify his apparent off-the-cuff generalizations which have very little basis, if any, in fact or an ability, if he were somehow to become president, to be achieved.

Here’s hoping that Americans will wake up and consider real people with real solutions who campaign to take the real job as president.

Trump isn’t it.

[PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

There is a saying that those who don’t know or understand history are doomed to repeat it.

Point made.

Having just returned from a river cruise down the Seine in France to the D-Day killing fields at Normandy, the admonition to remember history has been on my mind lately.

What I saw at the site of the Omaha Beach landing in Normandy left a set of vivid images that surely will last for the rest of my life. My father served in World War II, but was in North Africa at the time of the D-Day invasion. I also do not know of any relatives who were involved in D-Day landings.

Still, it was sobering to stand on the promontory looking over Omaha Beach, which is exactly where Germans stood in 1944 and mowed down about 95 per cent of the American troops who landed in the first wave. The carnage prompted the Omaha Beach commander, General Omar Bradley, to want to retreat and send troops, instead, to Utah Beach. But he could not reach the supreme commander, General Dwight Eisenhower, so he never received permission for the change in plans.

What happened then is the stuff of history. American, Australian and British and other troops landed on the five D-Day beaches and managed, despite huge losses, to push inland eventually to free France from German occupation. The successful D-Day landings in 1944 also represented the start of the end of the war.

My thoughts also went to what prompted the need for the D-Day landings in the first place, which claimed thousands of lives of Allied troops. It was the horrific rule of Adolph Hitler, including his goal to conquer Europe, rule the world, and exterminate all Jews.

When I returned to this country from the river cruise, I managed to find a new book on the war entitled, “1944: FDR and the Year That Changed History” by Jay Wink, a writer known for his research-backed approach to recounting history.
It is a good read – good in the sense of the contributions by the author to an understanding of what led up to D-Day. It contains extremely graphic descriptions of the actions by Hitler and his goons to kill Jews with almost unimaginable treachery, including on the city streets and, eventually, in the concentration camps.

My thoughts then moved to the question of whether something like the German atrocities under Hitler could happen in this country. Well, the answer is yes and one partial indication of this is what “we” did to Japanese Americans in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor. With the Pearl Harbor bombings fresh in the minds of Americans, I suppose it is possible to understand what prompted the internment of Japanese Americans. But history sheds new and unfavorable light on what “we” did.
At least it could be said that “we” did not go farther and try to exterminate these Americans on the heels of rounding them up and putting them in camps.

In a piece that ran in the October 18 Oregonian newspaper, a local Oregon author, Mark Matsushima wrote this, under the headline, “Where hostility to immigrants can lead,” with this tagline, “Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.”

“Pundits and politicians paint a grim picture for our nation when it comes to immigration and the taking in of refugees. What harsh and demeaning things do we hear nearly every day? “They” sneak across our borders to take away jobs from “real Americans,” have “anchor babies” who should be denied birthright citizenship, are criminals, carry diseases, don’t look like “us,” refuse to integrate into society because they celebrate the customs, language, foods and dress of their homeland(s). Worst of all, they are a threat to our security and way of life because we cannot trust where their loyalty lies. Deny them citizenship, no property rights, round them up, put them in camps, and send them back where they came from!

“Am I talking about the United States of 2015? Yes and no.

“Take any current immigrant or refugee group of controversy — Mexican, Central American, Syrian — and substitute it for any past group — Irish, German, Italian, Chinese, Southeast Asian, to name a few — and you will find the same misguided, prejudicial, hurtful and dangerous characterizations and demands.

“A visit to the Oregon Nikkei Legacy Center and the Japanese American Historical Plaza in downtown Portland demonstrates just how dangerous this can be. Before World War II, Japanese Americans, regardless of citizenship or immigration status, were already heavily discriminated against in the state of Oregon. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, discrimination gave way to mass incarceration without due process of law of men, women and children only because they were one-eighth or greater Japanese ancestry. They were forced from their homes, schools, businesses and farms with little notice. Most ultimately were sent to either the Minidoka internment camp in Jerome County, Idaho, or to an “enemy alien” camp at Crystal City, Texas. Surrounded by barbed wire and machine guns, citizens born here were faced with the very real possibility of being deported to a country they had never been to and knew very little about.”

So, I come to one more thought. What Donald Trump, incredibly a Republican candidate for president, has recommended when it comes to immigration strikes me as filled with hatred and gross exaggeration.

What he wants to do is deport all immigrants, a move which would require tearing kids from their parents, sending all immigrants back across some border, spending billions of dollars to do so, and scrapping the U.S. Constitution in the process. Not all immigrants are, as Trump contends, rapists and pillagers. Many of them are like many of us – immigrants to this country.

I hope and pray that all of us will learn lessons from history and not let the Trump approach to immigration take hold in America.

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

The other day I wrote a blog listing my Top 10 list of favorite golf courses. Now, the time seems right to produce a second Top 10 because, of necessity, a number of my favorite golf courses did not make the first list.

So, here goes.

11. MOUNTAIN COURSE AT LA QUINTA

An excellent parkland-type track in the Palm Springs.

12. DUNES COURSE AT LA QUINTA

A twin to the Mountain course, this track contains a few links-style holes.

13. MISSION HILLS PLAYER COURSE

Named for all-time great golfer, Gary Player, this track in the Palm Springs is very playable, bringing water into play on a number of holes.

14. EUGENE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB

About 60 miles south of where I live in Salem, Oregon, this track in Eugene always gets the nod as one of the best in Oregon in rankings produced by golf magazines. It is a solid track, but, speaking as a member of Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club in Salem, I think Illahe ranks right up there with Eugene GC.

15. COLUMBIA EDGEWATER

Sitting hard astride along the Columbia River, this track has served as host for a LPGA event in the last few years. It is very playable – tough, but fair.

16. CASTLE STUART

I return to Scotland to name this course, a new one near – yes a castle — Castle Stuart. Designed by Gil Hanse, this course opened only a few years ago, but still looks like it belongs in the ranks of great Scotland courses which date back to the 1800s, if not longer ago. The links-style course gained fame three years ago when US pro golfer Phil Mickelson won the Scottish Open there before moving on the next week to capture The Open at Muirfield.

17. SILVER ROCK

I return to the U.S. and the Palm Springs to cite this public track in La Quinta. It can play as long and as tough as you want with various tees. It also is not unusual to see Bighorn sheep come down from the hills to feed on grass on the course.

18. DESERT PRINCESS

This course – actually a 27-hole track – lies close the Palm Springs Airport in Cathedral City. I have stayed in the surrounding golf course condos there many times over the years and taken advantage of a pricing structure that allows you to book 12, 20 or 40 rounds at a cost that ranges to about $60 per 18.

19. BEND GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB

Nestled in the pines in the southern part of Bend, this private golf club is one of the best – if not the best – course in Central Oregon…in my judgment.   Like some other 40-50 year-old courses around Oregon, Bend GC has recently benefitted from an intentional effort to remove trees. The action helped to return the club to its original routing system.

20. BLACK BUTTE RANCH

My family is fortunate enough to have a cabin at this destination resort about 100 miles east of Salem. There are two solid golf courses there – Big Meadow and Glaze Meadow. Under the direction of architect John Fought, Glaze Meadow underwent a major renovation three years ago, which made the course far more playable, as well as restored attractive sight lines.

There. That’s a second Top 10 list. Any suggestions for other great courses? There must be some.

An important admonition applies equally to government offices and private sector organizations. It is this: At all costs, preserve credibility.

There have been two examples in Oregon lately of individuals or organizations that have sacrificed credibility – the Governor’s Office under the former executive, John Kitzhaber, who is alleged to have misused the power of his office, accusations that led to his resignation, and the Oregonian newspaper for its failure to correct obvious inaccuracies in its coverage of Kitzhaber’s fall from grace.

For Kitzhaber, he sacrificed credibility that, at least to a degree, he had earned over 35 years in public life. As is true with any political figure, not everyone liked him, of course, but he had held major elective positions in Oregon state government, first as Senate President and later as Governor.

He also had earned a national reputation for his interest in and commitment to health care reform. It is true that his last contributions didn’t fare too well as Oregon struggled to implement ObamaCare, as well as to engage in a failed attempt to create its own health insurance exchange. But there was no doubt that, as a former emergency room physician, Dr. Kitzhaber had focused on health care during his 35 years in public life.

Health care might have worked so well in Kitzhaber’s last year or so in office, but he lost his position and his reputation over allegedly giving too much influence and power to his live-in First Lady, Cylvia Hayes, not yet his wife. He also was alleged to have used a private e-mail system to skirt public transparency.

Credibility? Gone!

For its part, the Oregonian newspaper took on Kitzhaber and led public calls for his resignation, using its self-defined “Public Watchdog” role to keep up the anti-Kitzhaber drumbeat. It assigned a group of reporters to follow the Kizhaber trail, including looking into use of the private e-mail systems. (Hayes also used such systems.)

But the state’s largest newspaper failed when it made several important factual errors in its coverage, then failed to correct those errors, either quickly enough or prominently enough. The corrections ran on inside pages of the newspaper while the negative stories on Kitzhaber had mostly been displayed prominently on the front page.

The Salem Statesman-Journal joined the fray earlier this month when it ran front-page coverage that gave Kitzhaber a chance to explain his pique at the media. The coverage also enabled the Oregonian’s competitor from Salem to raise questions about the Oregonian’s ethics in avoiding immediate corrections.

The Oregonian’s credibility? The Oregonian is still here, so its credibility is not gone, but is at least damaged.

As a state government official for 15 years and a private sector lobbyist for 25 years, I know the value of credibility. Without it, you fail.

In the two cases above, credibility suffered. Kitzhaber is now awaiting the outcome of a criminal investigation into his conduct, which means he will never again ascend to an important position in public life. The Oregonian might recover a portion of its credibility, especially if it hews to a brighter line in correcting its own errors.

Making an error is one thing. Correcting it can restore credibility.

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

As the prelude to this blog indicates, golf is one my passions. So, it seems logical for me to provide a list of my favorite courses, both around the world and closer to home where I live in Salem.

I share this Top 10 list, not because it carries any acknowledgment as being perfect. No. It is just a personal list.

You will note that there are a number of “links-style” courses on this list. That is because I have had the privilege of playing links golf mainly in Scotland, as well as occasionally in this country, and I have become addicted to its special charms.

Before my list, permit me to provide a definition of links golf, which is an often-misunderstood term. A traditional links course will have many – perhaps all – of the following features:

• The course is built along the seaside;
• The soil is sandy and drains easily;
• The course is laid out naturally, so that unusual bumps and slopes in the fairways and greens remain, rather than being smoothed over;
• The rough features natural seaside grasses;
• Bunkers are numerous, and while they range from very small to very large, are typically deep (to keep the seaside breezes from blowing the sand away)
• Fairways are rarely (if ever) watered – except by nature – and play firm and fast;
• Links courses usually have few if any trees;
• The course very often (though not always) routes out and back. The No. 1 hole begins at the clubhouse and the front nine plays straight out so that No. 9 is farthest hole from the clubhouse; the direction turns back in at No. 10 and the course ends with No. 18 back at the clubhouse.

Now, on to the list.

1. ILLAHE HILLS GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB

This is my home course in Salem, Oregon and one that I never tire of playing. That’s good because I live three houses from the first tee. Dating back to 1960, the course was designed by a relatively famous Oregon designer, Billy Bell. It has undergone a number of renovations since it was first built, but it remains essentially the course it was back then. A key step occurred about 10 years ago when nearly all of the greens were re-built, a step required by the rainy climate here that risked even having green turf remain in place. The project made the greens acknowledged as some of the region’s best.

2. ROYAL DORNOCH

I have had the privilege of playing this world famous course several times over the years, the first time with my son who, everyone knows, is a far better golf then I am. It was a memorable father-son golf experience on this track, which dates back to 1877. It is acknowledged as one of the best courses – yes, a links course – in Scotland, prompting American golf pro Ben Crenshaw to proclaim that playing it “was the most fun I’ve ever had on a course.”

3. OLD COURSE, ST. ANDREWS

Again, I have had the privilege of playing this iconic course several times, the first company of my son and the last time with my daughter and son-in-law. The first tee lies hard at the side of the Royal and Ancient Clubhouse, a fact that, along with the course’s proximity to the town of St. Andrews, means that various folks will be there to see everyone tee off.

Here’s a great quote from one of my favorite golf writers, George Peper, now editor of Links Magazine:

“No matter who you are, to stand for the first time on the 1^st tee of the Old Course is to experience the greatest natural laxative in golf. So intimidating is the opening that Dwight Eisenhower, a five-star general who once held the fate of the free world in his hands, couldn’t handle the pressure. He slinked to the second hole.

“There you are, barely a dozen steps from the front porch of the Royal & Ancient Golf Club, the full weight of its four-storied grayness upon you. Thirty-two clubhouse windows face that tee, and you can feel eyes piercing from everyone one of them, especially from the Big Room – front and center on the ground floor – where the blue-blazered members sip their gin and tonics and peer imperiously through graduated bi-focals.

“You feel their eyes, lasered into your temples. You feel the eyes of every golfer in your group, every golfer waiting to play, every lurking caddy, raking greenkeeper, and passing motorist, every shopkeeper, dog walker, street cleaner, beachcomber, and windsurfer, every gull, snipe, and pigeon, every fisherman on every trawler in the North Sea. Most of all you feel the eyes of Old Tom Morris and Harry Vardon, of Henry Cotton and Bobby Jones – of every great player, live or dead, who has ever walked these fabled links. And you don’t want to disappoint them.”

On our last trip to the Old Course, the good news is that my daughter, worrying she would be sick, piped a great drive down the middle of #1 and we had a great time traversing a course which earned this quote from Jack Nicklaus: “I fell in love when it the first time I played it. There is no other golf course that is remotely close.”

4. MANELE BAY

This course, designed by Jack Nicklaus, sits on the water on the island of Lanai, just across about a 45-minute boat ride from Maui. Playing it is a great experience.

5. THE LODGE AT KOELE

This course, designed by Greg Norman, sits up on a hill about a half hour from Manele Bay on the same island, Lanai. It is a very different course than Manele, weaving it way through hundreds of trees and water features.

6. BAY COURSE AND PLANTATION COURSE AT KAPALUA

I list these two courses in the same paragraph because they are part of the same development in West Maui. The Bay Course, is a straightforward parkland style venue, with impressive views of the ocean. Its signature hole, a par three, requires a full shot over that ocean.

As for the Plantation Course, it is beast, dsigned by Ben Crenshaw and Bill Coore in a manner that enables it to be played best in the dominant trade winds. The par 5 18^th hole, famous because of coverage of an annual PGA tournament there, is all of 650 yards down hill and, even at that distance, many of the pros reach the green in two shots.

7. MACRIHANISH

This course in Scotland is famous for at least one major reason – the tee ball on the 1^sst tee requires a 200+ yard shot over the Atlantic Ocean to a fairway that then heads toward the green another 200 yards ahead.

Playing Macrihanish, a links-style course, is a quiet experience. Usually, all you can see are your playing partners and hills and hummocks that make shots challenging.

The first hole, though, remains a sharp memory. It has been voted often as the “best opening hole in golf.”

8. ROYAL ABERDEEN

This course, in Aberdeen, Scotland, earns very well its title, “Royal,” which is reserved only for courses so designated by the Royal Family. It is an out-and-back links style course, which happens to be situated adjacent to its lesser-known neighborhood, Mercar.

The courses are so close together and look so similar that it has been reported that some groups tee on #1 at Aberdeen and then finish at Mercar.

9. BANDON DUNES

This development on the South Oregon Coast – four major, world-renowned golf courses, another par 3 course and a practice area that sparks envy from many visitors – represents a huge economic boom for a remote area beset by sagging timber and fishing fortunes.

Before the courses were carved out of the seaside land, Michael Keyser, an executive who had made a fortune in Chicago in the recycled greeting card business (whatever that it is?), was reported to have gotten in a plane, flown over the South Coast and said to a realtor, “I want to buy that tract of land.”

He did and the rest is history under the moniker “golf as it was meant to be.”

10. PUMPKIN RIDGE

In 1992, a group of three men decided to embark on a venture which has come true: Create a golf destination that could, eventually, serve as the venue for major United State Golf Association (USGA) national events.

Success. A number of USGA events have been held on Pumpkin’s Ridge’s two courses, Ghost Creek and Witch Hollow. Plus, the parkland-style layouts – one private and one public – continue to attract both memberships and public play.

There. That’s my Top 10 lit of golf courses. How about yours

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

The answer should be a simple and resounding no.

The first evidence was verification that the organization had sold baby body parts for a profit. Alone, that stunning news should have prompted supporters to become opponents.

To Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, it was enough, though she had a pro-life stance already. As columnist Frank Bruni wrote, “Even if she had said nothing else at the CNN debate, Fiorina would have stood out for her gut-punch of a statement about the horror of the guerrilla Planned Parenthood videos capturing the ghoulish organ harvesting that is an important side business of the organization (the main business, of course, is aborting babies).”

The second evidence against Planned Parenthood emerged in media coverage of the organization’s first appearance before a Congressional committee, the House Oversight Committee. The leader of the committee said that the Planned Parenthood had engaged in huge amounts of spending on entertainment and travel.

Here is an excerpt from a story that appeared in the newsletter, The Hill:

‘The head of the House Oversight Committee is accusing Planned Parenthood of misspending more than $40 million in federal dollars on “lavish” travel, theme parties and a costly Manhattan office.

“Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) on Tuesday accused the organization of racking up “exorbitant travel expenses,” including first-class flights, charter travel and entertainment costs that included $622,706 on “blowout parties” with celebrity guests.

Some of the themed parties had names such as “Gathering of Goddesses and Gods,” “Chocolate Champagne” and “Murder Mystery,” according to a report released by the committee during the hearing Tuesday.

“’That’s money that’s not going to women’s healthcare,’” Chaffetz said.

“The Oversight report details Planned Parenthood’s total of $5,109,997 on travel in 2013, which averaged approximately $14,000 a day.

“The committee’s report also noted Planned Parenthood’s real estate holdings, including $34.8 million for its corporate office space near Madison Square Garden in New York City in 2011. In 2015, it sold a 72,000 square-foot condominium to Brookfield Property Partners for $69.6 million.“

Again, even these revelations didn’t prompt Democrats to change their views. Consider this quote from The Hill about comments from the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee:
“’I find it totally inappropriate and discriminatory,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said. “I’ve never seen a witness beaten up and questioned…’”

From the standpoint of general government spending, there should be no question but that Planned Parenthood should lose its place at the trough.

Add to that the heinous selling of baby parts and the action is even more clear – kill the funding.

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

The answer should be a simple and resounding no.

The first evidence was verification that the organization had sold baby body parts for a profit. Alone, that stunning news should have prompted supporters to become opponents.

To Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, it was enough, though she had a pro-life stance already. As columnist Frank Bruni wrote, “Even if she had said nothing else at the CNN debate, Fiorina would have stood out for her gut-punch of a statement about the horror of the guerrilla Planned Parenthood videos capturing the ghoulish organ harvesting that is an important side business of the organization (the main business, of course, is aborting babies).”

The second evidence against Planned Parenthood emerged in media coverage of the organization’s first appearance before a Congressional committee, the House Oversight Committee. The leader of the committee said that the Planned Parenthood had engaged in huge amounts of spending on entertainment and travel.

Here is an excerpt from a story that appeared in the newsletter, The Hill:

‘The head of the House Oversight Committee is accusing Planned Parenthood of misspending more than $40 million in federal dollars on “lavish” travel, theme parties and a costly Manhattan office.

“Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) on Tuesday accused the organization of racking up “exorbitant travel expenses,” including first-class flights, charter travel and entertainment costs that included $622,706 on “blowout parties” with celebrity guests.

Some of the themed parties had names such as “Gathering of Goddesses and Gods,” “Chocolate Champagne” and “Murder Mystery,” according to a report released by the committee during the hearing Tuesday.

“’That’s money that’s not going to women’s healthcare,’” Chaffetz said.

“The Oversight report details Planned Parenthood’s total of $5,109,997 on travel in 2013, which averaged approximately $14,000 a day.

“The committee’s report also noted Planned Parenthood’s real estate holdings, including $34.8 million for its corporate office space near Madison Square Garden in New York City in 2011. In 2015, it sold a 72,000 square-foot condominium to Brookfield Property Partners for $69.6 million.“

Again, even these revelations didn’t prompt Democrats to change their views. Consider this quote from The Hill about comments from the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee:
“’I find it totally inappropriate and discriminatory,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) said. “I’ve never seen a witness beaten up and questioned…’”

From the standpoint of general government spending, there should be no question but that Planned Parenthood should lose its place at the trough.

Add to that the heinous selling of baby parts and the action is even more clear – kill the funding.

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

I am one of those who has been hoping that, as voters, we would be able to consider real people who would propose real solutions to the real problems we face.

Color me disappointed.

On both sides – Republicans and Democrats – we have terrible choices that tear at the fabric of representative government.

On the D side, we have a leading contender, Hillary Clinton, who is nothing but a crook if only based on her attempts to avoid transparency in her apparently intentional creation of an e-mail account beyond anyone’s review. Who knows what she would do if she was really elected president?

On the R side, we have the unbelievable leader in a blowhard who believes he knows everything and criticizes anyone and everyone who dares wonder whether he has the public policy chops to be president. I am not even sure he knows what public policy is!

One of my favorite columnists, Charles Krauthammer, put it very well last weekend in a column headlined, “The Double-Suicide Presidential Campaign.” Here is an excerpt:

“Meanwhile, on the Democrat side:

“– They are running a presidential campaign decrying wage stagnation, income inequality and widespread economic malaise — as if they’ve not been in office for the past seven years.

“– Their leading presidential candidate is 27 points underwater on the question of honesty and is under FBI investigation for possible mishandling of classified information.

“– Her chief challenger is a 74-year-old socialist with a near-spotless record of invisibility in 25 years in Congress. The other three candidates can hardly be found at all.

“– The only plausible alternative challenger, Joe Biden, has run and failed twice and, before tragedy struck (to which he has responded, one must say, with admirable restraint and courage), was for years a running national joke for his endless gaucheries and verbal pratfalls.

“For the GOP, this has all been a godsend, an opportunity to amplify the case being made every day by the Democrats themselves against their own stewardship. Instead, the Republicans spent the summer attacking each other — the festival of ad hominems interrupted only by spectacular attempts to alienate major parts of the citizenry.

“The latest example is Ben Carson, the mild-mannered, highly personable neurosurgeon and one of two highest-polling GOP candidates. He said on Sunday that a Muslim should not be president of the United States. His reason is that Islam is incompatible with the Constitution. On the contrary. Carson is incompatible with a Constitution that explicitly commands that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

“Carson is not one to cynically pander. Nor do I doubt that his statement about a Muslim president was sincerely felt. But it remains morally outrageous. And, in a general election, politically poisonous. It is certainly damaging to any party when one of its two front-runners denigrates, however thoughtlessly, the nation’s entire Muslim American community.

“Particularly when it follows the yeoman work done by the other leading GOP candidate to alienate other large chunks of the citizenry. Three minutes into his campaign, Donald Trump called Mexican-American immigrants rapists who come bringing drugs and crime. He followed that by advocating the deportation of 11 million illegal immigrants. And sealed the deal by chastising Jeb Bush for speaking Spanish in answer to a question posed in Spanish.

“Trump’s contretemps with women enjoy even more renown — his attacks on Megyn Kelly (including a re-tweet calling her a bimbo) and his insulting Carly Fiorina for her looks.

“Muslims, Hispanics, women. What next? Who’s left?

“It’s a crazy time. One party is knowingly lurching toward disaster, marching inexorably to the coronation of a weak and deeply wounded presidential candidate. Meanwhile, the other party is flamboyantly shooting at itself and gratuitously alienating one significant electoral constituency after another. And it’s only September. Of 2015.”

Krauthammer has it all right. If nothing changes by the time election rolls around next year, I won’t vote for either the crook or the blowhard. I’ll cast my ballot for someone like the late Oregon Senator Mark Hatfield who, to me, personified the ideals of integrity, clarity and ethics in politics.

God bless the late senator. We need more like him in politics today.

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

That was the theme of a sermon last Sunday from the lead pastor, Steve Fowler, at the church we have attended for more than 30 years in Salem.

His point: On the hand, the time may be right for those who attend church to function as “renters” when they are just visiting or learning about a church they might attend over the longer. But, on the other hand, once someone has found a church home, it is better for that person to function as an “owner.”

That way, they’ll have a sense of responsibility to share in the functioning of a church and to help people find their way toward God.

There are a number of spiritual implications of Mr. Fowler’s point and I know he hoped those who heard him would focus on those implications.

Let me say I did, but after church, my thoughts also went to renters and owners as those terms might apply to the lobbying business where I made my career for about 40 years.

My point: It is better to own an issue you are lobbying than simply to rent it – or borrow it – for a period of time.

If you own an issue as a lobbyist, you will work doubly hard on behalf of your client to achieve the objective, or in the art of politics, to find a workable compromise

If you just rent the issue, you won’t care as deeply about it – or work as hard as you should to achieve the objective.

In summary, what are some of the characteristics of those who own a lobbying issue?

• You would care for the issue like you would the house or car or any other possessions you own.

• You would take responsibility to make it is ready to be viewed by guests.

• When the time is right to sell the issue you own, you would work hard to make it presentable to potential buyers.

So, permit me to emphasize this secular perspective from a spiritual point – as a lobbyist it is better to own an issue than rent it.

[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 to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 an Oregon state government manager and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing pubic policy – to what I write. If you are reading this, thanks for doing so and please don’t hesitate to respond so we can engage in a dialogue, not just a monologue.]

It used to be that anyone running for office would worry about his or her reputation.

• Was there some past misdeed that would come back to haunt the candidate?

• Could the candidate avoid the gaffe that would put him or her under fire for weeks?

• Could a candidate concentrate on being for something without engaging in personal attacks?

Well, for those enamored with Donald Trump, the very nature of politics has changed.

Go no farther than considering this description of Trump authored by New York Times columnist Frank Bruni in a piece about Trump’s supposed appeal to parts of the so-called “religious right:”

“Let me get this straight. If I want the admiration and blessings of the most flamboyant, judgmental Christians in America, I should marry three times, do a queasy-making amount of sexual boasting, verbally degrade women, talk trash about pretty much everyone else while I’m at it, encourage gamblers to hemorrhage their savings in casinos bearing my name and crow incessantly about how much money I’ve amassed?”

In the past, some of those in politics have acted as if any mention of their name in the media, even in a negative story, was better than not being mentioned at all. For Trump, he has taken this to an entirely new level.

As someone who values a positive reputation and an ability to engage in respectful political discourse, Trump’s run for the Republican nomination for president leaves me cold. It also raises the specter that political campaigns have changed – and for the worse.

In a Wall Street Journal piece a week ago, author Andy Kessler provided the following summary of Trump’s success, which he called “Trumponomics in 10 Easy Steps:”

1. Be born rich.
2. Own politicians.
3. Get tax breaks.
4. Monetize addiction. “Protected cash flow from apartments and office space is nice, and the Trump name attracts tenants willing to blow cash. But there must be another way to extract money from people. Fortunately, gambling became legal in New Jersey in 1976. Voilà: Harrah’s at Trump Plaza opened in 1984 and quickly shortened its name to Trump Plaza (hey, it was the ’80s, and the name said classy to high rollers).”
5. Go in debt up to our eyeballs.
6. Stick banks and bondholders with disasters, (as Trump has done by declaring bankruptcy more than once).
7. Churn out books. “Pop business books are often like tomes from Deepak Chopra, Eckhart Tolle or other gurus. You read them in a flash, feel inspired for 24 hours and then days later can’t recall a single worthwhile syllable. Mr. Trump mastered this art: “Trump: Think Like a Billionaire” (2004); “Trump 101: The Way to Success” (2006); “Midas Touch” (2011). It’s hard to find anyone who profited from these books, other than the guy with the I’m-a-serious-thinker expression on the cover.”
8. Franchise your name.
9. Channel your inner Kim Kardashian. “With so many Trump properties and golf courses and “The Apprentice” television show, it’s hard for most people to remember how Donald Trump got so rich in the first place. In the Kardashian and Nicky Hilton tradition, Mr. Trump is now famous because he is famous.”
10. Run for office. His presidential aspirations seem to be a vanity run gone wild.

All of this sickens me, as does Trump. He is a buffoon who has no business running for office with his sordid reputation, his pandering approach to women, and his outsize ego where he is always the most important person in the room no matter what he says or does.

My view is that no one should pay any attention to him. We need real people, with real pasts who will run for office with a real approach to recommend how to solve real problems.

Not Trump.