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.

One of the subjects I like is golf rules. 

Stupid?  Yes.

Still, I like them, even though they are hugely complicated and could benefit from a re-write, not to mention a few changes.

So it was that I read a Golf Digest article the other day that, as this blog headline says, summarizes five rules most golfers get wrong.

Indebted to the magazine, I list these wrong decisions for many, if not most, golfers.

1.  In a match, the farthest player from the hole plays first.

Don’t roll your eyes if you think this one is obvious, because you’d be surprised how many golfers think a player off the green has to hit his or her shot before a player on the green can putt.  Not true.  If a player on the green is farther from the hole than a player off the green, that person should putt first.  In match play, if you play out of order, your opponent can make you replay the stroke.  That would sting if you chipped in.

In stroke play, there is no penalty for playing out of order and it’s encouraged by the rules makers if it speeds up play.  Obviously, courtesy matters, so it’s probably a bad move to walk in front of another golfer to hit your shot ahead of him or her, but prudence should rule the day.

2.  You don’t get relief from boundary objects such as out-of-bounds stakes or fences.

You hit a shot that nearly left the golf course but stayed in play — that’s great.  However, having your ball next to an out-of-bounds fence or some other course boundary means you’re going to have to get creative about how to play your next shot.  Unlike stakes that mark things such as penalty areas, environmentally sensitive areas or ground under repair, you don’t get relief from OB markers unless you want to take an unplayable lie (and accept the penalty stroke that comes with it).

What you could do is strike the fence or object first to advance your ball, or even play your shot off the boundary object.  Players at the Old Course at St. Andrews have been known to hit shots off the rock wall behind the 17th green to get their ball on or near the putting surface.

3.  There is no lateral relief for penalty areas marked in yellow.

This rule is especially important to remember when a yellow penalty area fronts a green.  Even if your ball carries the pond but then rolls back in — like from the false front on the 15th hole at Augusta National — you don’t get to drop on the side of the pond where the ball rolled in.

At best, the course might provide a drop zone so you don’t have to replay from the spot where you just hit or anywhere using back-on-the-line relief, but playing on the other side would be playing from the wrong place (two strokes or loss of hole in match play).

4.  You probably won’t get relief from a sprinkler head on your line of play.

It seems unfair to be a few yards from the front of a green but your only decent option for your next shot is to chip over a sprinkler head.  Unfortunately, that’s typically the case.  Although sprinkler heads are considered immovable obstructions, you only get relief if your ball, stance or swing are interfered with by one of them.

There is one exception, however.  If the course or committee is using Model Local Rule F-5, there’s a good chance you can move your ball.  Here are the requirements:

The sprinkler head must be on your line of play.  That doesn’t necessarily mean it has to be on a direct line between your ball and the cup, but you can’t claim the free relief if you choose a line of play that is clearly unreasonable.  The sprinkler head must be within two club lengths of the putting green and your ball must be within two club lengths of the sprinkler head.  A club length, by the way, is the longest club in your bag that is not a putter.

5.  You can’t play a provisional ball if its known or virtually certain your ball is in a penalty area.

Golfers get this one wrong, a lot.  If you hit a ball into a penalty area, the minute you re-load and hit another shot, the second ball is in play (plus add a penalty stroke).  It doesn’t matter if you said “provisional ball” or similar before hitting the shot.  

The provisional-ball procedure is reserved for times of uncertainty, like when you think the ball you just hit might be lost and you want to save time not having to walk back to the spot of your previous shot after a failed search.

There’s nothing uncertain about seeing your ball fly into a penalty area or being told by someone else it went in.  You must proceed with penalty-area options, which, by the way, include hitting a shot from the penalty area if you can find your ball.  And you can ground your club and make practice swings, too.  Did you know that rule also changed?

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.

It takes great skill to translate something complicated and transcendent such as Christianity into just a few words.

A visiting pastor at the church we attend in La Quinta, California, did just that a couple weeks ago.

Here is what he said:

“Remember, it’s Amazing Grace.  Not Amazing Effort.”

 His point:  We don’t earn our way into becoming children of God.  We accept the free gift of salvation God offers to those who make a choice to accept it.   

Though some of the words below hearken back to the past, they still portray a solid message.

Amazing grace how sweet the sound
that saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost, but now am found,
was blind, but now I see.

‘Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
and grace my fears relieved;
how precious did that grace appear
the hour I first believed!

Through many dangers, toils and snares
I have already come:
’tis grace has brought me safe thus far,
and grace will lead me home.

The Lord has promised good to me,
his word my hope secures;
he will my shield and portion be
as long as life endures.

Since I cannot sing a lick, it’s worth it to me to focus on the good words of Amazing Grace.

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.

Frank Bruni, who writes for the New York Times and teaches at Duke University, has become one of my favorite columnists.

Why?

• Well, first he uses words very well, better than most.  In almost every column, he uses a new good word and I have no choice but to look up the definition.
• Second, he highlights the good words many other writers use, which indicates that he practices humility, knowing that he is not the only good media writer these days.
• Third, he is precise and concise in his analysis of politics, skewering both sides when they don’t find the smart middle.

But, then, too, he is dog lover like me.  He often writes about his sidekick, Regan, which he did this week.  Here is what he wrote:

“We’re not the only creatures that turn their faces toward the sun.  That enjoy the tingle of a warming epidermis.  That have a complicated, contradictory relationship with heat.

“When the mercury crests 70, my Regan will sometimes refuse to take a walk of more than 200 feet.  But then, perhaps half an hour later, she’ll agitate to go outside and she’ll choose a patch of the driveway or backyard for bathing in the bright light.

“Here she is recently [I am not including the photo here] minus the lawn chair, sunglasses and piña colada that a more doting, generous human caretaker clearly would have given her.  It’s a wonder she puts up with me.”

I have similar thoughts about our dog, Callaway. [Yes, I named my golf clubs after him.]

When we spend our winters in the California desert, he loves to go outside on our patio without a leash.  Then, he finds a great spot and lays down in the sun in the warm grass, loving the heat while feeling a bit of independence without a tether.

Bruni and I share two things:  A love of words and a love for dogs.  He is better at the first than I am, but, as for the second, I suspect we’re equal. 

So enjoy the sun and contemplate life.

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.

Anyone who knows me knows that I was never a fan of the LIV golf tour when it started a few years ago.  It gaf players billions of dollars tainted by the source of the money – the Saudi government’s erroneously named “Public Investment Fund.”

Then, it created what amounted to “exhibition golf.” 

So it is that the likely death of LIV doesn’t bother me at all.

Writing in Golf Magazine, Michael Bamberger also is not bothered as he wrote a solid piece under the headline I used for this blog.

In addition to problems with LIV directly, the headline contends that LIV has changed the PGA Tour but not for the better.  I also agree, though I also think it’s not too late for the PGA Tour to return, at least in part, to his roots.

Here are highlights from what Bamberger wrote:

• For a large swath of golf fans, the rise of LIV Golf has been unsettling. Even if the league does unwind here, and it may not, the damage already done will take years to fix. The billions of petro dollars that the Saudis pumped into the pro game via LIV, too good to be true or sustainable from the start, ultimately revealed a certain opportunism among some of our golfing heroes.  The broader pro game has taken a hit.
• Phil Mickelson, Dustin Johnson, Brooks Koepka, Bryson DeChambeau, Patrick Reed, Sergio Garcia, Jon Rahm and others blithely broke off from tradition, the tradition that formed them.  And for what, $100 million here and $300 million there?  Who would have thought their loyalty could be bought at all?  Did they not see that LIV Golf, and it’s small-field, no-cut, hand-picked team-and-individual model, was way too far removed from traditional tournament golf, the golf on which they were raised?  Did they not see that the founding principle of LIV Golf was borrowed from The Dating Game?
• The players LIV left behind, the stars and near-stars of the PGA Tour, lost their way, too.  They have been diminished.  They allowed their fearless leaders — commissioner Jay Monahan, Tiger Woods, the Strategic Sports Group investors and, more recently, CEO Brian Rolapp — to dismiss the very thing that made the Tour so singularly attractive:  Guaranteed nothing.  Earn it, earn it, earn it.  Earn the right to play in 2026 based on what you did in 2025, that’s golf.  Earn the right to play on Saturday and Sunday based on what you did Thursday and Friday.
• LIV Golf played an indirect role in sunsetting the PGA Tour’s mark-your-calendar Hawaii stops.  Swaying palms in winter, swinging golfers underneath them, trying to get the new year off to a good start. The locals put on a show, and the rest of us could watch or not. What was there not to like?  But Hawaii not appears to be gone as a PGA Tour stopl
• American tournament golf, from the early Ben Hogan years nearly 100 years ago to the rise of young Jordan Spieth a fast decade ago, represented the purest and most civilized form of hunting, of capitalism, of sport.  A guy could, in Tour parlance, “stay out” until he played his way off the Tour.
• The beautiful game is a lovely and fitting phrase that has been attached to soccer for 60 or 70 years now.  The whole world plays fútbol, because all you need is a ball (any ball) and a field (any field).  That’s it.  The way the ball and the players move through that field is truly beautiful.  I only wish we, dues-paying members of the global tribe of golf enthusiasts, had come up with the phrase first.  Because golf is a beautiful game, too, simple in theory, confoundingly difficult in practice, played on all manner of fields.  Every true golf fan knows what I’m talking about here.
• Back in the day, pre-LIV, the money the Tour players made was the money the Tour players made, there in agate form for all of us to see. But it never made any particular impression on any of us, except as a convenient shorthand for who was playing best.  Yes, the fellas played for large sums of money but also, and much more significantly, handsome and often historic trophies.  These men played a game.  That’s all they did, and it was enough.
• Our golfing heroes played a difficult game well. They played the game we dreamed about playing.  That was and should be the glue of the fan-pro relationship. In that context, those LIV teams — the Crushers and the rest — were always going to be a tough sell.
• The answer to golf’s future lies in its past.  That is, professional golf, played the world over by the best players in the world, the gents playing the tours nearest to where they want to live, the whole golf world coming together a half-dozen times a year or so.

Good points all by Bamberger. 

It’s past time for LIV to die a quiet death.  Then, we can get back fully to golf as it should be played – by those who have to earn their way, every day.

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.

One of my business partners, Pat McCormick, often said this when he emphasized the skill of listening:

“Remember, God gave you two ears and one mouth, so listen twice as much as you talk.”

That was great advice in business when I was involved as a lobbyist on behalf of a variety of clients.  As I dealt with legislators at the State Capitol, I reminded myself every day to listen more than talk. 

So it was that I learned about legislators’ interests and perspectives, some of which could prompt them to support my firm’s clients’ priorities.  But I would have missed a lot if I had started talking first.

Listening also works great these days for me in retirement.

The emphasis on listening came to the fore for me last Sunday when the visiting pastor at the church we attend in La Quinta, California, WellSpring, delivered a message on listening.  It was and is memorable.

He used an acrostic to emphasize his points, but not just an acrostic for its own sake; an acrostic that embodied verses from the Bible to buttress the letters in the acrostic.

To plant this more firmly in my brain – often writing does that for me – here is a summary of the sermon. 

[In the case of the letters below, I have not listed the Bible verses that support them, if only for reasons of length, plus to avoid preaching a sermon.  Still, know that the letters aren’t just letters – they are buoyed by Scripture.]

The basic proposition is contained in James 1:19.  It delivers a practical directive to gain spiritual maturity by being “quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger.”

So, here is the acrostic.

• THE LETTER “L”:  Look at them

The point is to look others in the eye, not away, as you listen to what they have to say.

• THE LETTER “I”:  Involve your heart

The point is to listen with more than just your ears.  Focus with your heart.
 

• THE LETTER “S”:  Share the feeling of the moment

The point is to express sympathy, if not empathy, by feeling what the other person is saying as you listen.

• THE LETTER “T”:  Take time

Devote time to listening.  Don’t be in a hurry. 

• THE LETTER “E”:  Explore with questions

Don’t talk first.  Then, when you do talk, ask questions to verify your interest.

• THE LETTER “N”:  Never stop learning

And that includes learning from people who may disagree with you.

Good advice.  So, practice the art of listening.

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 some reason, I have not opened this department lately, even though there has been a lot of fuel for my fire.

I correct my oversight with this post.

This is one of five departments I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.  Just call me a management guru.

From the Washington Post:  “Trump says he sees shooting [the one at the Correspondents Dinner] as a reflection of his impact.  “I hate to say I’m honored,” the president says of his repeated brushes with violence.

Comment:  Of course.  No matter what happens, it’s all about Trump all time.  And, he added that, the shooting, represents a reason for him to be able to finish his new White House Ballroom, another honor he wants for himself.

From Michelle Goldberg in the Post:  “For those of us who have spent the past 10 years horror-struck at the mass delusion that Trump is a great man rather than a singularly rapacious and volatile charlatan, Tucker Carlson’s words might seem cathartic – [the words he used to distance himself from Trump].

“Over the past decade, conservatives have been angrily insisting that our mad emperor is elegantly clothed rather than obscenely naked.  Now, finally, there’s growing agreement about his obvious unfitness.  Indeed, some former Trump superfans are suddenly wondering if he might be the Antichrist.”

Comment:  I agree with Goldberg when she says it is hard to trust anything Carlson says, given his aggressive support for Trump for years.  Goldberg’s criticism — Trump acolytes believe “the mad emperor is elegantly clothed rather than obscenely naked” – are worth remembering.

From hill.com:  GOP senators are losing confidence in Pete Hegseth at the Department of Defense amid Pentagon turmoil. Several have said, “we’d like to see him move on.”

Comment:  It’s about time, given all the stupidity Hegseth caused, illustrating that he has no qualifications for the job he holds.

From Frank Bruni in the New York Times:  “President Trump may not be Jesus, but he’s performing a resurrection — of the Democrat Party.  It’s enough to give an agnostic like me religion.”

Comment:  As always, Bruni puts it succinctly.  For reasons beyond this, I hope he finds real hope in the real resurrection.

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 read another great article this week by a Christian writer, Peter Wehner, that was carried in Atlantic Magazine.

Given its quality, there is nothing better for me to do than to reprint here as “my blog” for today because I agree wholeheartedly with Wehner in his piece which appeared under this headline:  “The American Pope vs. the American President,” with this subhead…

“The pontiff has proved unwilling to subordinate his faith to politics, or to adjust his commitment to the Gospel in exchange for access to power.”

Wehner contends that Pope Leo is not afraid of Donald Trump and that Trump doesn’t know what to do about the “American Pope,” so, as is Trump’s wont, he goes off in strange circles.

Here is Wehner’s article in full.

*********

American presidents and popes have clashed before, but the battle of words and wills between Donald Trump and Pope Leo XIV is unprecedented.

The distinctiveness of their clash is not due mainly to the fact that Robert Francis Prevost is the first American-born pope, though that is significant. After all, Leo can’t be dismissed as a foreigner who is speaking about a country and culture he doesn’t understand. When he is critical of America, on matters ranging from war to mass deportation to those who “manipulate religions and the very name of God,” it comes from a place of love and devotion.

Nor does it have to do solely with the nature of the disagreements, most specifically the war waged by Trump against Iran. Past popes have criticized past presidents for going to war.

What makes the Trump-Leo collision most unusual is the manner of the disagreement, not on the part of the pope—whose criticisms have been direct but restrained—but on the part of the president.

No president has ever attacked the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church so directly and so personally. Trump called Leo “WEAK on Crime” and “terrible for Foreign Policy.” He attacked the pontiff for opposing his Iran-war policy, labeling him a “very liberal person” who is “catering to the radical left.” He also said Leo owed his papacy to Trump. It’s unusual, to say the least, for a head of state—in this case, of the most powerful nation in the world—to treat the bishop of Rome as a bitter political rival.

But beyond that, this conflict has a dramatic, even archetypal, quality to it, pitting polar opposites against each other. One is a religious man in the deepest sense; the whole of his life has been shaped by religious disciplines and a theological tradition. He is inseparable from his faith.

The other is completely secular—thoroughly of this age, thoroughly of this world. He measures success by wealth, by power, by sexual conquest. He admitted that he’s never asked God for forgiveness. He has no ties to any church and is in many ways contemptuous of the core teachings of the Christian faith.

Leo is disciplined, mild-mannered, calm, and deliberative. He is an Augustinian, part of an order founded in the 13th century. Augustinians are known as “active contemplatives” who combine a deep inner spiritual life with service to others. Members of the order commit to live together in harmony, “intent upon God in oneness of mind and heart.” Augustinians also take vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience.

From Augustine, Leo learned to be deeply skeptical of worldly power. He speaks about the “delusion of omnipotence” and is alert to the dangers of pride and grandiosity. The Augustinian tradition emphasizes fraternity, humility, and reflection on our disordered desires. Shaped by the Latin American church’s social vision—he served two decades as a missionary and Augustinian priest in Peru—Leo believes “the preferential choice for the poor is a source of extraordinary renewal both for the Church and for society.”

“Wanting to inaugurate a kingdom of justice, fraternity and solidarity,” Leo said in his first major papal document, “God has a special place in his heart for those who are discriminated against and oppressed, and he asks us, his Church, to make a decisive and radical choice in favor of the weakest.”

“A Church that sets no limits to love, that knows no enemies to fight but only men and women to love,” Leo continued, “is the Church that the world needs today.”

Leo’s commitments and life story are alien to Trump. Everything Leo cherishes, Trump holds in contempt.

But what has made the confrontation most electrifying is the way in which the pontiff is not just standing up to the president but transcending him. Leo has said he has “no fear” of the Trump administration, and no one can doubt him. He speaks as a liberated, confident man whom the president cannot intimidate. The pope is setting the terms of debate by relying on moral language and moral reasoning; on Catholic social teaching, the Church fathers, and the scriptures.

Leo has not lashed out, or gotten defensive, or allowed himself to be pulled down into the gutter. When the president goes low, the pope goes high. But going high doesn’t mean going silent. He said he will continue to speak out on matters of justice and against the war.

Even if one is not entirely convinced by Leo’s arguments, one can appreciate that he is speaking uncynically and without ulterior motives. He’s not playing political games, or trying to improve his poll ratings, or running for office. He’s not looking for access to power or seeking self-enrichment. Nor is the bishop of Rome trying to humiliate or dehumanize his opponent.

The things Leo appears to care about—faithfully serving God and the Church, caring for the vulnerable, speaking the truth as he understands it—are things Trump cannot touch, or even understand. There’s no target for Trump to hit, which is why his attack on the pope for being “WEAK on crime” was absurd even by Trump’s standards. Trump is quite skilled at knowing how to break politicians; he’s at a loss to know what to do with prophetic voices. He is punching at shadows.

I should add that, as a non-Catholic Christian, I have found what Leo has done vivifying. That reaction has less to do with the specific arguments Leo is making related to the war—though we should all welcome into the debate a discussion of just-war theory—than with his having reinjected serious moral arguments into our political discourse. Leo has shown that the Christian Church can once again be, as Martin Luther King Jr. put it, not the master or the servant of the state but the conscience of the state, its guide and critic and never its tool.

That so many people of the Christian faith, especially white evangelicals and prominent figures within that movement, have weaponized their faith to win the favor of an American president is among the most grievous things to have occurred during the Trump era. And they have sought the favor of not just any American president but one who is mendacious, lawless, cruel, and thoroughly corrupt. These courtiers have defamed Jesus while pretending they are acting in his name. The damage they have inflicted on the Christian faith is incalculable.

In a different category are evangelical ministers and faith leaders who know better, who see exactly the harm Trump is doing to the Christian witness, and yet have, for a variety of reasons, chosen silence.

Into all of this cometh the bishop of Rome. He is unwilling to subordinate his faith to politics, or to adjust his commitment to the Gospel in exchange for access to power. A man who served the poor in Peru during the Shining Path insurgency—he stayed when others left—is not particularly fearful of critical posts on Truth Social or of those within his church who might disapprove of his public stand in defense of justice and a Christian ethic.

He’s a person with deep moral convictions but who holds them with grace and ease. He comes across as calm, centered, and unhurried. He believes he answers to a higher authority; this allows him to offer a true Christian witness. This is a gift to the whole Church, and to the whole world.

“Even now, in sordid particulars,” T. S. Eliot wrote in Murder in the Cathedral, “the eternal design may appear.” What Eliot meant by this is that in the midst of a broken, chaotic world, where despair often abounds, there is an eternal design at play, even if we may not quite see it while we’re living through it. Nor is the divine set apart from human suffering. Christians believe that God entered into the suffering and violence of this world, redeeming even the “sordid particulars.” But that doesn’t happen on its own.

“Love obligates us to stay in the world,” the political philosopher Glenn Tinder wrote in The Political Meaning of Christianity, “where most of our fellow human beings are compelled by circumstances to stay.” A “prophetic stance,” he said, “can show us how to live in temporal society as citizens of an eternal society.”

Such a prophetic stance is rare in any time; for the past decade it has been almost entirely missing. Thankfully a native of the South Side of Chicago, who now resides in Vatican City, has shown us what a prophetic stance can look like.

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.

Why is the May primary election important in Oregon?

Well, it could be because, for the first time in about 40 years, a Republican is reported to have a chance in the general election next November.  First the primary in May, then the general in the fall.

I worked in Salem, Oregon, for the last Republican governor, Victor Atiyeh.  It was a great privilege of my professional life because Victor, as we were allowed to call him at times, performed very well in Oregon, so it was purposeful to be part of his team.

One reason he was effective is that he didn’t care who got the credit for good stuff happening back in the 1980s.  Unlike most politicians, he was happy to pass credit around to those in his Administration who deserved it, not to mention members of the general public who worked with those in government.

That’s not the only reason. 

Another was that he was a centrist.  Though a Republican, he operated from the center, working with political figures on both sides of the aisle to achieve solid results for Oregon. 

We don’t see that much anymore, either in Oregon or especially in Washington, D.C. as political figures operate from one side, not two, even though the best solutions to pressing public policy challenges often lie somewhere in the middle.

There are four main candidates bidding for the right to oppose the current Oregon Democrat governor, Tina Kotek.

They are:

• State Senator and past candidate Christine Drazan
• Private sector executive and past candidate Chris Dudley
• State Representative Ed Diehl
• Marion County Commissioner Danielle Bethell

Though both Drazan and Dudley lost when they ran before, here is the way the Oregonian newspaper describes their chances:

“…the two are among those leading this year’s primary field of Republicans vying for a chance to capitalize on Kotek’s unpopularity and pull off a historic upset this fall.  Both have said they believe they are the only Republican who can do so, despite their previous losses.”

Regarding the primary election in May, here are a couple excerpts from another Oregonian story that appeared under this headline:  NEW POLL SHOWS ONE CANDIDATE WAY AHEAD IN REPUBLICAN RACE FOR OREGON.

“A new statewide poll shows state Senator Christine Drazan with a commanding lead over her opponents in the Republican primary race for Oregon governor.

“Just over 31 per cent of respondents said they would vote for Drazan if the Republican primary were held today, while 15.6 per cent said they would back state Representative Ed Diehl and 14.8 per cent said they would support former Trail Blazer Chris Dudley.

“While the poll, conducted by Salem-based Nelson Research, showed that there is still time for candidates to make their case to voters ahead of the May 19 primary, it also indicated that the candidates behind Drazan have substantial ground to make up.”

This was the first major poll taken in the Republican race, so, to be confident in its conclusion, we’ll have to wait for more polling tests.

Republicans may have a general election chance this time around for several reasons:

• Kotek has not fared well in national polls testing the effectiveness of the nation’s governors.
• She favored a gas tax and other transportation funding increases that have not been popular with Oregonians.  A measure to impose the taxes and fees will be on the ballot in the primary, so the result, a likely defeat, may not stay top of mind for voters by next fall.  Republicans wanted the measure to be on the same ballot with Kotek, but their tactic did not succeed, so Kotek will be able to run on her own in November.

• Mismanagement allegations in a variety of state agencies have plagued Kotek, but we never know for sure if such allegations translate effectively into a political campaign for Kotek.  In other words, will voters pay attention?

The Republican challenger who wins the May primary will face a key general election issue:  How to relate to President Donald Trump who remains very unpopular in a blue state like Oregon.

That test won’t arise much in the Republican primary.  But just wait for the general election.  It won’t be far from the top of the agenda.

I don’t bet on elections, even privately.  But, if I did, the safe bet might be Kotek, since for years Democrats always win in blue Oregon.  But, betting aside, my sense is that Republicans have a genuine chance this time around to take the top political race in Oregon, so bets on them could make sense.

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 this blog headline heralds, new golf courses in the Scottish Highlands beckon those who love golf, including me.

Not sure I’ll get there, but here is the way writer Martin Dempster put it in an edition of Links Magazine:

“Scotland’s golf-rich north is being energized by exciting new projects and timely additions to time-honored classics, beginning with venerable Royal Dornoch.”

Royal Dornoch is one of my favorite golf courses.  I have had the privilege of playing there three times, so much so that I echo what pro golfer Tom Watson said about it after he played it the first time – “It was the most fun I’ve ever had on a golf course.”

Rather than write too much myself about the new developments, I’ll cite highlights from Dempster’s great article.

• It would be silly to suggest that the Highlands — the most northerly region on the Scottish mainland — is a newcomer to golf.  We’re talking about an area deservedly famous for Royal Dornoch, as well as highly regarded courses like Nairn, Brora, Boat of Garten, and Fortrose & Rosemarkie, to name but a few.  [I have played all of them.]
• The Scottish Highlands is proving more popular than ever for visitors to the Home of Golf.  The opening of what was originally called Castle Stuart in 2009 — and its subsequent staging of four editions of the Scottish Open, including network coverage in the U.S. — helped raise the area’s profile, along with Nairn hosting the Walker Cup in 1999 and the Curtis Cup in 2012.

Castle Stuart is now called Cabot Highlands, having been added to the ever-growing Cabot Collection, and recently debuted a second course, called Old Petty, designed by Tom Doak.

• There’s also a lot happening at Royal Dornoch.  A new $18.5 million clubhouse will be fully operational for the start of the 2026 season.  So, too, the new par-three 9th hole on the club’s other course, the Struie:  The 175-yarder is the only hole on either course to face southeast toward the Dornoch Firth and already has been hailed as “a real cracker.”
• “Usually, the opening of a new clubhouse, which has been mooted for 30 years or more, would mark the end of the journey for any golf club.  But for Royal Dornoch, it is about what the next step is going to be,” says general manager Neil Hampton.  “The investment being made will pave the way for even greater economic and employment benefits for the wider community. “
• The same reasoning was behind the decision to build the second course at Cabot Highlands.  In 2015, Arnold Palmer was commissioned to create what would have been his first layout in Scotland; when The King passed away the following year, the task fell to Doak.  Aimed at complementing the original Castle Stuart course, Old Petty — its name paying homage to the 187-year-old church on the right side of the 2nd hole.
• New and exciting development isn’t just happening in and around Inverness.  To the south, in the area commonly known as the “Heart of the Highlands,” Discovery Land Company — the real estate developer and operator of private communities like Idaho’s Gozzer Ranch, Baker’s Bay in The Bahamas, and New York’s Silo Ridge — is turning the five-century-old Taymouth Castle into a luxurious place to live and play, starting with a just-completed renovation of its 100-year-old James Braid course.
• It is widely believed by people in the golf industry that the Highlands would get a further boost if the much-publicized Coul Links project ever gets the green light from the Scottish Government. Whether or not that happens remains to be seen in the face of strong opposition from environmentalists and wildlife groups.

To close this blog, Dornoch’s Captain Neil Hampton, who has lived and worked in the area for most of his life and is the chair of Golf Highland, a collective of 30 clubs and courses across the region, says this:

“No other area in Scotland offers such a variety of golfing experiences and price points, coupled with amazing scenery and the warmest of welcomes.  I am very proud of what we have to offer and how everyone comes together to make the golfing experience second to none.”

Okay.  One more visit to the Scottish Highlands and Royal Dornoch.  Perhaps.

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 headline is mine, though some of the words also appeared over a column essayist Thomas B. Edsall wrote for the New York Times.

Excerpts from the essay are worth reading because they point out the damage Trump is doing to our country.

So, read on and keep the barf bucket handy.

*********

• The damage President Trump has inflicted to the United States and the world is so enormous and wide-ranging that it is hard to grasp.  It runs the gamut from public and private institutions to core democratic customs and traditions, from the legal system to universities, from innocent targets of fraud to those duped into believing vaccines do more harm than good.
• Projections suggest there will be millions of dead men, women and children as a result of his budget cuts, which were made without direct Congressional approval.  A study published in The Lancet, the London-based medical journal, found that Trump administration cuts in U.S.A.I.D. funding “would result in approximately 1,776,539 all-age deaths and 689,900 deaths in children younger than 5 years” in 2025 alone.

“Over the remainder of the period,” the study continues, “the complete defunding of U.S.A.I.D. would cause an estimated 2,450,000 all-age deaths annually, leading to a total of 14,051,750 excess all-age deaths and 4,537,157 excess under-5 deaths by 2030.”

• There are the fraud victims who will never get court-ordered restitution because Trump pardoned the guilty.  In a June 2025 report, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee found that “Trump’s pardons cheat victims out of an astounding $1.3 billion in restitution and fines, allowing fraudsters, tax evaders, drug traffickers to keep ill-gotten gains.”
• It doesn’t stop there.  America can thank the president for environmental deregulation that could sicken and kill people by the tens or even hundreds of thousands.  If successful, the E.P.A. would gut pollution rules that were estimated, according to The Associated Press, to save “more than 30,000 lives annually.”
• At the same time, the administration has been canceling funding for lifesaving scientific and medical research.   In November, JAMA Internal Medicine published “Clinical Trials Affected by Research Grant Terminations at the National Institutes of Health.”  It said that “in the first half of 2025, the N.I.H. terminated grants supporting 383 unique clinical trials, affecting 74,311 individuals.”
• Trump’s threats to pull out of NATO, his tariffs, not to mention his endless carping against and routine faulting of European leaders, have alienated allies who have stood with us for more than seven decades.  Over the Trump years, European views of America have nose-dived.
• Trump has assaulted the integrity of the presidency, turning the White House into a corrupt enterprise, pardoning donors as his family’s companies receive millions through cryptocurrency purchases from foreign companies and crypto operators subject to U.S. regulation.
• He’s fundamentally undermined the idea of an annual budget process and the concept of a balanced federal budget. These ideas were teetering before his presidency, but the Trump administration gave up on any pretense of seeking balance or an annual spending plan.

Michael Bailey, a political scientist at Georgetown, prefaced his assessment of Trump’s consequentiality by pointedly noting that he would rank Trump “as easily the worst president in U.S. history. The corruption and damage to long-term U.S. institutions and reputation are far beyond anything we’ve seen before,” including Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan and Rutherford Hayes.

So, the foregoing indicates that many American voters have elected a terrible president who operates the Oval Office as if it is a fiefdom.  Trump is corrupt and narcissistic. 

I only hope that we have enough fortitude to last the next two years.