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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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.

A quote in the Washington Post caught my attention when it dealt with a topic that is top-of-mind in the fallout from the leak of a potential U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

When are protests appropriate and, more to the point, where should they be allowed?

Even at the homes of Supreme Court justices in the wake of the leaked opinion?

Here is the Post’s story on the subject:

“Notable & Quotable: Homes

“We want people to protest peacefully if they want to—to protest.”

Press secretary Jen Psaki at a May 5 White House briefing:

“Q: These activists posted a map with the home addresses of the Supreme Court justices.  Is that the kind of thing this President wants to help your side make their point?

“MS. PSAKI: Look, I think the President’s view is that there’s a lot of passion, a lot of fear, a lot of sadness from many, many people across this country about what they saw in that leaked document.  We obviously want people’s privacy to be respected.  We want people to protest peacefully if they want to—to protest.  That is certainly what the President’s view would be.

“Q: So he doesn’t care if they’re protesting outside the Supreme Court or outside someone’s private residence?

“MS. PSAKI: I don’t have an official U.S. government position on where people protest.”

For all Psaki’s credibility as the president’s press secretary (in my opinion, she has done a good job in a tough position, but she is leaving the post to join MSNBC), I wish she would have gone firmly on record against protests outside justices’ homes.

Further, the Wall Street Journal reports this morning that an outfit known as Ruth Sent Us is inviting people to harass six “extremist justices.”  The group, named after the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, published the locations of the justices’ homes in a map on its website.

In one case the other day, a women walked through the Chevy Chase neighborhood and paused to stick fliers on her fence, a tree and utility boxes.  She was conducting her own protest right in in front of the home of Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

In another case – I don’t include this because it, in any way, rivals abortion protests — the Oregonian newspaper reported over the weekend that “dozens of mothers and their supporters gathered at Woodstock Park and walked to Governor Kate Brown’s house nearby.

“The group of mothers, many holding roses, formed a circle outside Brown’s house and held hands to share their stories about their child or loved ones.”

The location may have been suspect, but the good news here – if “good news” is the accurate description – is that this group of mothers, on Mothers’ Day, was peaceful and respectful.

Everyone has the right to protest, but protesting or demonstrating at the homes of public officials shouldn’t be allowed.

For me, all of this recalled to mind experiences I had during my time involved in labor dispute issues – two for the State of Oregon, and one when I lobbied for a major health care provider in the state.

In the State of Oregon issue, I was assigned to handle media relations for management during two different state employee strikes many years ago.  In both cases, some employees were so riled up that they protested at the homes of state management officials. 

Those protests should have been banned and the protesters should have been told to leave, or be subject to arrest if they refused.  Allow them to picket at state agency sites?  Yes.  But protests at managers’ homes?  No.

In the other example when I represented the major health care provider in Oregon, union leaders thought it would be a good idea, when the provider’s board members were staying at a Portland hotel, to protest at the doors of their hotel rooms.

These union leaders were demanding that provider hold a union election even though employees had not voted to hold such an election.

Should that have been allowed?  No.

There is a time and a place for protests. 

The time should be up to those who want to protest.  The place should be in the public square where such protests are legal, however over-the-top they may turn out to be.

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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.

No, the issue is not abortion, though the good word “roiling” applies to that, too, as the country reacts to the leak of a U.S. Supreme draft opinion scrapping Roe v. Wade.

I prefer not to write about abortion, but I have a chance to play a few holes of golf this week with retired Oregon Supreme Court Chief Justice Paul DeMuniz and, along the way, he bemoaned the loss of confidentiality for the top court in the land.

The issue for this blog, though, is college debt and whether to forgive it.

Columnist Matt Bai writes well about the issue in today’s Washington Post in a piece appearing under this headline:

“If Biden wipes out college debt, why work hard and play by the rules?”

Bai remembers a phrase uttered by none other than former President Bill Clinton who rescued a flailing Democrat Party several years ago by saying this:  “Government should reward those who work hard and play by the rules.”

Bai adds:

“If President Biden moves ahead with a sweeping executive order to wipe out college debt, it will mark a final repudiation of that ideal — and another step toward restoring the party to its pre-Clinton futility.

“One of Clinton’s core critiques of the party, which had lost three straight presidential elections, was that it had become known as the party of giveaways.  Democrats wanted to throw government money at every problem, but they asked nothing of people in return, demanded no accountability.”

Work hard, with no rules.

By contrast, Bai says Clinton believed government’s job was to incent work and personal responsibility, rather than penalize it.  From that belief sprang such policies as the vast expansion of the earned-income tax credit and welfare reform.

In terms of college debt, a lot of families made difficult decisions not to accrue such debt.  Parents chose to forgo retirement savings or nicer houses in order to sock money away for college.  Students chose cheaper state schools over private colleges, or they decided to pass on college altogether.

Millions of other graduates who did take out loans worked for years or decades to pay them off, making their own set of painful career and family sacrifices along the way.

Bai asks:

“What are we telling those families, if Democrats declare a one-time debt holiday in time for the fall elections?  That all their hard choices amounted to a sucker’s bet?

“These families followed Clinton’s advice — they worked hard and played by the rules.  Some Democrats would treat them now like fans who sat too far from the T-shirt cannon at a football game.”

Compromises could exist in the back and forth about debt.

Here are some that have struck my wife and I as we talked about the issue this morning:

• What about a proposal that knocked off a modest amount of debt for only the lowest earners and only for undergraduate study?
• What about a proposal to reward borrowers who chose careers in public service, or to expand an Obama Administration program helping those who got scammed by for-profit colleges?
• If a student took a low-paying job in an economically-deprived area on the premise that at least part of their college debt would be forgiven, what about a proposal to restore that incentive, especially if had been jerked away?
• What about a proposal to provide some relief for students, who, with their parents, chose less expensive state schools over high-priced private schools?

Bai’s conclusion: 

“If Biden makes college retroactively free for millions of borrowers, he’ll not only be sticking it to families who surely would have made less responsible choices had they known they’d never have to repay their debt. He’ll also be steering Democrats back to the 1980s, when they were branded as the party of the proverbial free lunch.” So, I urge the Biden Administration to be careful, even if some advocate forgiving debt as a campaign strategy in the upcoming mid-term election.  Find middle ground, which still would be controversial, though it does exi

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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.

Every once in a while, it makes sense for me to devote one of my blogs to someone else’s writing.

In this case, the someone else is Dana Milbank, a columnist for the Washington Post.

Over the years, I have not always agreed with Milbank’s opinions, but he is a good writer, especially when he goes after Donald Trump and his ilk.

This one of those times.  The subject is U.S. Representative Kevin McCarthy who wants almost more than anything to be Speaker of the House….if Republicans take over control after the next election.

On my own, the other day I wrote that McCarthy has shown the ability to do anything – lie, cheat, and steal to get what he wants, with no regard for the country.

Milbank agrees with me – or, perhaps better said, I agree with him.  This time, he writes about McCarthy’s trip to the Rio Grande to rail against immigrants.  He used the trip to deny again that, after January 6, 2021, he said Trump had committed such heinous acts that he ought to resign.  Yet, the New York Times has a tape recording of McCarthy’s comments.

No matter, McCarthy still denies he said what he said as he bows to the altar of Trump.

Enough from me.  Here is what Milbank wrote.

**********

The Great Prevaricator stood on the banks of the Rio Grande and released a mighty river of deceit.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, in a news conference Monday afternoon with fellow Republican lawmakers at the southern border and in a separate interview with Fox News, misrepresented the source of illicit fentanyl.  He grossly distorted a description of phones the federal government is using to track immigrants who crossed the border illegally. He teased the dubious notion that Democrats somehow obtained and leaked the audio of a private meeting he had with fellow Republican leaders.

And then there was this showstopper:  He dissembled about his own lie.

First, he claimed he wasn’t lying when he falsely denied a New York Times report that he had told colleagues after the January 6, 2021, insurrection that he would suggest President Donald Trump resign.  He suggested he misunderstood the question.

Yet McCarthy then appeared, in his garbled syntax, to repeat the original lie that he never told colleagues he planned to ask Trump to resign:  “If you’re asking now, ‘Did I tell my members that we’re going to ask?’  Ask them if I told any of them that I said to President Trump.  The answer is no.”  (According to the audio recording of that meeting, McCarthy in fact said he was “seriously thinking” of telling Trump “it would be my recommendation you should resign.”)

Telling a bald-faced lie, particularly one of such magnitude, is a sign of low character.  But repeating the very same lie just seconds after explaining you hadn’t told the lie in the first place is a sign of low brain activity.

Alas, this may well be the next Speaker of the House.

In the kerfuffle over McCarthy getting caught on tape saying exactly the thing he adamantly denied saying, the only surprising component is that some speculate that this flagrant dishonesty might somehow cost him the speakership if Republicans retake the House.

That’s crazy talk.  In this Trumpified Republican Party, lying is not a liability.  To the contrary:  The only truly career-damaging move a Republican lawmaker can make at the moment is to tell the truth.

McCarthy knows this firsthand.  He told the truth once in 2015 — and it cost him the speakership then.  He had been next in line for the job until he inadvertently said something truthful to Fox News’s Sean Hannity:  That Republicans launched a probe of the Benghazi terrorist attack for the purpose of harming Hillary Clinton.

Since then, it has been fairly easy to tell when McCarthy is lying:  His lips are moving.  He even banished fellow Republican Rep. Liz Cheney from leadership for telling the truth about January 6.

There was a time when getting caught on tape lying might have ended a career.  Sam Rayburn, the legendary House speaker of the mid-20th century known for his integrity, famously said that “any fellow who will cheat for you will cheat against you.”

McCarthy is the sort of man Rayburn warned of.  He has been a torrent of disinformation — about his statements immediately after January 6, about Biden’s tax proposals, about the January 6 committee, about the economy, about covid-19 relief and about the 2020 election.

In the caucus he leads, such deceit is standard.  McCarthy was joined at the border by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who in sworn testimony last week flatly denied calling Nancy Pelosi a “traitor to the country.”  A lawyer then displayed the quote of Greene saying exactly that.

“Oh, no, wait, hold on now,” Greene said, revising her account.  She also said she didn’t recall whether she advised Trump to impose martial law after he lost the election; text messages reported Monday by CNN show her telling Trump’s chief of staff that “several” lawmakers “are saying the only way to save our Republic is for Trump to call for Marshall (sic) law.”

Yet even Greene had a hard time keeping up with the Great Prevaricator on Monday.  As Greene hovered off McCarthy’s shoulder, the Republican leader declared that “all” fentanyl is coming “across this border” — which must be a surprise to China and to traffickers who bring most of their product through legal entry points.  

McCarthy announced he had seen just-apprehended migrants “opening up the iPhones that the government was providing them” and on which it would “pay for their calls”; in reality, the devices aren’t iPhones and don’t work for purposes other than monitoring.

McCarthy then moved on to repeat last week’s lie about January 6 and Trump’s resignation — which he dismissed as “something that happened 15 months ago on a private conversation.”

But 15 months later, the Great Prevaricator’s assault on truth has become a daily menace.

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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 guess this would be a “”logical day to write about the U.S. Supreme Court and abortion, given all the news about the leak of a draft opinion proposing to undo Roe V. Wade.

But, for me, there never is a logical day for such writing.  I will leave all of the discussion about abortion (at least almost all of the discussion) — not to mention vitriol — to the pundits and commentators.

For me, this is a good day to write about an long-timne reality in Oregon – the so-called “Two Oregons” – the urban one and the rural one that never can get together.  Or, at least they refuse to understand each other.

The division persists today. 

And the divide exists in other states, as well.

I encountered the reality when I worked as deputy director of the Oregon Economic Development a number of years ago.  For us, it was easier to recruit businesses to grow and expand in urban areas than it was in rural areas.

That’s just the reality of the economy.  But, at the risk of defending myself when no one is charging me with anything, my colleagues and I in the department made a variety of intentional efforts to reach out to rural Oregonians.

We traveled the state.  We welcomed interaction with rural residents.  We tried to understand their perceptions, though, to state the obvious, all of us in the department were from an urban area, either Salem or Portland.

On this subject, a solid story appeared in the New York Times early this week written by Chloe Maxmin, the youngest female state senator in the State of Maine’s history, and Canyon Woodward, who ran two of her campaigns.  They wrote a book – “Dirt Road Revival” – which offered some suggestions about how to bridge the urban-rural divide.Top of Form

Their notions are not magic answers, but they are worth considering. 

Here is how their essay in the NY Times started:

“NOBLEBORO, Maine — We say this with love to our fellow Democrats: Over the past decade, you willfully abandoned rural communities.  As the party turned its focus to the cities and suburbs, its outreach became out of touch and impersonal.  To rural voters, the message was clear:  You don’t matter.

“Now, Republicans control dozens of state legislatures, and Democrats have only tenuous majorities in Congress at a time in history when we simply can’t afford to cede an inch.   The party can’t wait to start correcting course. It may be too late to prevent a blowout in the fall, but the future of progressive politics — and indeed our democracy — demands that we revive our relationship with rural communities.

“As two young progressives raised in the country, we were dismayed as small towns like ours swung to the right.  But we believed that Democrats could still win conservative rural districts if they took the time to drive down the long dirt roads where we grew up, have face-to-face conversations with moderate Republican and independent voters and speak a different language, one rooted in values rather than policy.”

That’s good advice.

I put it this way.  State agency administrators and legislators from urban areas in Oregon should make an intentional effort to travel around Oregon to meet people in rural areas. 

Travel the “dirt roads.”

Talk to these citizens.  But don’t just talk.  Listen.

Maxmin and Woodward did this in Maine, and it worked.

“To us,” they say, “it was proof that the dogmas that have long governed American politics could and should be challenged.  Over the past decade, many Democrats seem to have stopped trying to persuade people who disagreed with them, counting instead on demographic shifts they believed would carry them to victory — if only they could turn out their core supporters.

“The choice to prioritize turnout in Democrat strongholds over persuasion of moderate voters has cost the party election after election.  But Democrats can run and win in communities that the party has written off, and they need not be Joe Manchin-like conservative Democrats to do so.”

In 2018, the two authors reported, with chagrin, that the chair of the Democrat National Committee, Tom Perez, told MSNBC, “You can’t door-knock in rural America.”

In effect, what he said was that rural America wasn’t worth a dime.  He wrote off hundreds of thousands of citizens throughout the country.

Maxmin and Woodward add this:

“That blinkered strategy is holding the party back.  When Democrats talk only to their own supporters, they see but a small fraction of the changes roiling this country.  Since 2008, residents of small towns have fallen behind cities on many major economic benchmarks, and they watched helplessly as more and more power and wealth were consolidated in cities.  

“The current Democrat strategy leads, not just to bad policy, but also to bad politics.  Our democracy rewards the party that can win support over large areas.  Ceding rural America leaves a narrow path to victory even in the best circumstances.

“What much of the party establishment doesn’t understand is that rural life is rooted in shared values of independence, common sense, tradition, frugality, community, and hard work.  Democrat campaigns often seem to revolve around white papers and wonky policy.  In our experience, politicians lose rural people when they regurgitate politically triangulated lines and talk about the vagaries of policy.

“Rural folks vote on what rings true and personal to them:  Can this person be trusted? Is he or she authentic.”

Some political scientists and many mainstream Democrats don’t believe their own strategies must change.  Rather, they believe rural Republicans are too ignorant to vote in their own best interest.  

“It’s a counterproductive, condescending story that serves only to drive the wedge between Democrats and rural communities deeper yet.” 

And, the two authors offer this anecdote:

“Chloe has knocked on more than 20,000 doors over the past two cycles, listening to stories of loss and isolation.  One man told her she was the first person to listen to him.  Most campaigns, he said, didn’t even bother to knock on his door; they judged him for what his house looked like.  Another voter said she had been undecided between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump until Election Day but voted for Trump because, she said, at the Republican convention, he talked about regular American working people and Clinton didn’t at her convention.”

Something has to change.

Democrats need a radically different strategy if they are to restore their reputation as champions of working people, committed to improving their lives, undaunted by wealth and power.

In their campaigns, the two turned down the party consultants and created their own canvassing universe — the targeted list of voters they talk to during the election season.

As for campaign signs?  They were hand-painted or made of scavenged wood pallets by volunteers, with images of loons, canoes, and other hallmarks of the Maine countryside.  Into the trash went consultant-created mailers.  Instead, the two designed and carried out their own direct mail program for half the price of what the party consultants wanted to charge while reaching 20 per cent more voters.

In addition, volunteers wrote more than 5,000 personal postcards, handwritten and addressed to neighbors in their own community.  And, they defied traditional advice by refusing to say a negative word about their opponents, no matter how badly they wanted to fight back as the campaigns grew more heated.

More from the two authors: 

“We heard some rough stuff, and we didn’t tolerate hate.  But through the simple act of listening, we discovered that we could almost always catch a glimpse of common ground if we focused on values, not party or even policy.

“If people said they were fed up with politics, we’d say:  ‘Us, too! That’s why we’re here.’  If they despised Democrats, we’d tell them how we had deep issues with the party as well and we were trying to make it better.  It was how we differentiated ourselves from the national party and forged a sense of collective purpose.”

It is possible to apply these lessons to Legislative and Executive Branch bastions, both of which have tended to ignore rural areas for too long.

If I was going to advise Democrats in charge of nearly all sectors of political power in Oregon, I would say – “Go to rural Oregon and listen.”

If I was going to advise the top brass in state agencies, I would say the same thing.

All of this reminds of one of the favorite sayings of one of my partners in my old firm.  He was fond of saying, “God gave you two ears and one mouth.  So, listen twice as much as you talk.”

That is a basic prescription for solving at least part of the urban-rural divide in Oregon – and elsewhere.

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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.

If you consider the games Republican leaders are playing these days, you would think politics is just that – a game, with not much at stake.

It’s not.

The very future of the form of U.S. democracy is at stake.

No one writes this better than columnist Thomas Friedman whose work appears in the New York Times.  One of his most recent pieces ridiculed “soulless” leaders in America who trash the country in favor of their own ends.

If you wonder about this, look no farther than Donald Trump or his sycophant Kevin McCarthy.

They want what they want because they want it – and the “it” is to be in charge of America and have thousands bow at their feet.

Here’s a summary of Friedman’s column.

“So, here’s my bottom line:  Several years ago, a Hebrew biography of Ariel Sharon was published with the title “He Doesn’t Stop at Red Lights.”  It is a fitting title for our times, too.

“What is so unnerving to me about the state of the world today are the number of leaders ready to shamelessly, in broad daylight — and with a sense of utter impunity — drive through red lights.  That is, to drive through the legal and normative gates that have kept the world relatively peaceful over the last 70 years, during which we had no great power wars, and have enabled more people to emerge from extreme poverty faster than at any other era in history.

“We will miss this if it ends.  To maintain it, though, it’s necessary that we help all those unnamed Ukrainians fighting for their freedom to succeed.  And it is necessary that we make sure that Putin’s quest to find dignity by crushing that Ukrainian freedom movement fails.

“But none of that is sufficient if all those politicians in America who also think that they can run through any red light to gain or hold power succeed.  Who will follow our model then?

“I can’t think of another time in my life when I felt the future of America’s democracy and the future of democracy globally were more in doubt.  And don’t kid yourself; they are intertwined.  And don’t kid yourself; they both can still go either way.”

Back to the games metaphor.

Republicans like Trump and McCarthy behave like children, just playing a game. 

• If they don’t get their way, they pout.
• If they don’t get what they want, they get mad.
• If they say one thing one day, they will say something else – probably the opposite – the next day.

But it is not only self-proclaimed Republican leaders who treat political governance as a game.  Many voters do, too.

On this subject, read words written by the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin this morning and take no solace in them – because solace is not warranted.

“One school of punditry postulates that the rise of the anti-truth, anti-democracy MAGA movement is all about its demagogic leaders (e.g., former president Donald Trump) and opportunistic enablers (e.g. Representative Kevin McCarthy of California).  

“The theory goes that if Republicans offered something ‘better,’ the GOP base would be happy to hop off the delusional, authoritarian bandwagon.

“Skepticism is warranted.  After years of marinating in right-wing media sewage — everything from birtherism to immigrant scaremongering to the ‘big lie’ — Republican voters unsurprisingly show no sign of discomfort with the MAGA mentality. 

“To the contrary, over half of Republicans say they buy into the QAnon child-trafficking conspiracy.  Over half remain convinced the 2020 election was stolen.  When Trump briefly tried to encourage coronavirus vaccination, his crowd booed.

“In other words, the GOP suffers not only from a supply shortage of patriotic, sober-minded, pro-democracy leaders willing to call out lies — but from a demand shortage, too.  If GOP voters were offered candidates ‘better’ than the likes of Trump or pale imitators such as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (who delights in using government to retaliate against corporate critics) or Missouri’s Senator Josh Hawley (who eagerly smeared Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson as soft of child pornography), would anyone vote for them?”

I suggest the answer is yes.  These voters would cast ballot for anyone who catered to their outlandish views.

The issue is not just stupid Republican leaders, though that’s true.  The label stupid also to those who follow them.

It’s time for smart Americans – yes, there are some – to reject political stupidity and take up the just cause of saving America…from itself.

In a spirit of equanimity, this admonition applies to both political parties.  Above, I have written most about Republicans, but Democrats, too, ought to practice high-minded political discourse, not gamesmanship.

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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 I write this, I have played my last golf round for the winter in La Quinta, California.

The location is The Palms, a great, 20-year-old track that sits on the border of PGA West, or as it is known, the Western Home of Golf.  The Palms is separate from PGA West, sitting near, as PGA West does, the San Jacinto Mountain Range.

Great views.  Great weather.  Great golf.

Here are a few highlights of my sojourn in the California desert.

• I had the privilege of playing four times a week with a great group of guys, some of whom live in the desert year-round – kudos to them for staying in the intense desert heat in the summer – and others are snowbirds like me.

I found a home with this golf group a couple years ago and it is great to be able to play every week.  Good golf is not necessarily the goal.  Score doesn’t matter.   Friendship does.

• I also experienced this year a first for me – getting hit by a golf ball on the course…a first in more than 40 years of golf.  The shot was a “hozzle-rocket” – read “shank” – hit by a friend of mine.  He’s still a friend!  The golf ball me in the head.  No lasting damage; just a lot of blood and a scare.

• In our four-times a week game, we play mostly “for the love of game,” though a little money changes hands.  Never more than five bucks, either winning or losing.

One of my friends said the other day that he suspected, over the winter, most of us came out about even.  Winning sometimes.  Losing sometimes.

All of us feel a great sense of good fortune to be able to play at The Palms, a course designed by golf pro Freddie Couples and his friend, Brian Curley.  I tell my friends who have not played the course that its main defense is the 18 greens – hitting them, holding them, and putting on them.

So much so that a common story is that Canadian golf pro Mike Weir, before he won The Masters’ Golf Tournament a few years ago, came to The Palms to practice putting.  Not to suggest that The Palms is as good as Augusta National, but I guess I would imagine it is the ballpark.

When I first joined The Palms four years ago, veterans told me it’s not possible to read greens effectively.  Rather, you have to memorize what putts do.  And, good luck with the short memories of old guys like me.

A few other Palms’ distinctives:

+  There are no tee times.  The pros work you in on the 1^st tee when you arrive at the course…which means there is always a pro on the tee.

+  The requirement is to play in three-and-one-half hours, easy to do if you focus on playing golf intentionally, but hard to do if you grow accustomed to “resort golf” where rounds can take up to five hours.

+  Cell phones are banned on the course.  Or, at least they are banned from producing out-loud signals.  In a nod to players who are working, the rules were adjusted a couple years ago to allow checking phones for texts.  But, still, phones are not supposed to ring on the course or in the clubhouse and you are not allowed to talk on a phone other than in the clubhouse parking lot.

So, my wife and I head north tomorrow morning.  In some ways, tough to leave given all that La Quinta has to offer.  But, overall, we are looking forward to being home – and Salem, Oregon is home. 

For me, the good news is that there is golf in Salem, too…at Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club.  Will be good to be home at my “forever track” with all of my friends from the Salem area.

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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’ve heard of dumb stunts by stupid Republicans, but what happened in Texas takes the cake. 

And, then I also hear about Madison Cawthorne, a member of congress, who almost outdoes Texas.

In Texas, Republican Governor Greg Abbott thought he had a brilliant idea.

Why not rattle the Biden Administration by busing migrants from the southwest border to the nation’s capital during a period of record crossings?  Then, he thought, Biden and company would see the immigration problem first-hand.

What happened?

Well, many of the immigrants said they were grateful for the chartered bus ride to Washington, D.C.

“In a way, it’s actually perfect,” said Bilal Askaryar, a spokesman for Welcome With Dignity, a collective of about 100 local and national groups that help migrants.  “Unintentionally, Governor Abbott sent them to one of the best places in the nation to welcome people.”

Thanks to the Washington Post, here is an account from another immigrant who had a State of Texas ticket to D.C.:

“I would like to say thank you to the governor of Texas,” Chadrack Mboyo-Bola, 26, said after he and 13 other migrants stepped off one of the chartered buses that had provided a 33-hour ride paid for by the State of Texas.

“Blocks from the U.S. Capitol, they were greeted by volunteers who would help them reach their desired destinations around the country to await their day in immigration court.

Three days earlier, Mboyo-Bola and his family had crossed into the United States from Mexico along the border in Central Texas after an eight-week journey from Brazil.  After spending a day in Border Patrol custody in Eagle Pass, Texas, they and about 20 other new immigrants accepted an offer to board a Washington-bound bus in nearby Del Rio.

No word on whether Abbott is considering reversing his stupid stunt. 

If he is smart, he will.  But, in fact, it appears he is stupid and, as it has been said many times in the past, “you can’t fix stupid.”

Speaking of “you can’t fix stupid,” consider this from Washington Post writer Dana Milbank about Cawthorn:

“The 26-year-old Republican congressman from North Carolina was caught bringing a loaded gun through airport security, his second such incident.  Police released footage of him getting pulled over for driving with expired tags and being told to surrender his revoked license.  The Washington Examiner reported allegations against him of insider trading.  Politico published photos of him partying while wearing women’s lingerie.  And a former congressional aide filed a workplace complaint against him.

“Most public figures would call a stretch like that good reason to resign. Cawthorn might just call it ‘April.’”

In conclusion, I just say this — Abbott and Cawthorn deserve each other.  The problem, at the moment, is that we’re stuck with them.    

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as 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 is one of three departments I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.  The others are the Department of Pet Peeves and the Department of “Just Saying,” which was open earlier this week.

See, I can run two departments at the same time.

Here are good quotes worth remembering.

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:  Is Joe Biden up to the job of being president?  That’s a question being asked by some political commentators, as well as, I suspect, by some voters.

Wall Street Journal pundit James Freeman got into the act this with a column entitled, “Don’t Laugh — Biden 2024.”

Freeman wrote:

“In a column recently, I suggested that President Joe Biden avoid public speaking, at least on weighty topics such as weapons of mass destruction. There’s no constitutional reason he can’t limit his communications to written statements, and his spontaneous remarks have proven to be especially troublesome.  

“Even before his disturbing recent series of misstatements on highly consequential issues, many voters had already decided that Biden is not up to the job of being president.”

Comment:  I understand why some questions have arisen about Biden’s capability to serve as president.  It’s not just age; it’s that sometimes he slips up and says stuff he doesn’t fully mean.

If we could be assured that there would be a real, genuine contest to see who would be the next president in 2024 – Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, another Democrat, or a slew of Republicans – then I’d be okay with the normal election process to choose our next leader.

But, a real election is not likely to occur with former president Donald Trump waiting in the wings.  He will stoke division, dishonesty, and hatred as he tries to rise again to the nation’s top political job without regard to the country he wants to lead.

As one voter, that prospect is more than I can tolerate.

MORE FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:  The newspaper carried a piece by columnist Peggy Noonan under this headline —  “Joe Biden Has a Presentation Problem; voters would be grateful if he stopped talking down to them and learned to be straightforward.”

Noonan went on:

“I want to talk about Joe Biden and his unique problems presenting his presidency.  You’re aware of his political position and the polls.  The latest from CNN has him at 39 per cent approval.  Public admiration began to plummet during the Afghanistan withdrawal.  That disaster came as it was becoming clear the president was handing his party’s progressive caucus functional control of his domestic agenda, which fell apart and never recovered.

“All politics grows from policies, and policies are announced and argued for through presentation, including, crucially, speeches. Joe Biden has a presentation problem.

“When he stands at a podium and reads from a teleprompter, his mind seems to wander quickly from the meaning of what he’s saying to the impression he’s making.  You can sort of see this, that he’s always wondering how he’s coming across.  When he catches himself, he tends to compensate by enacting emotion.

“But the emotion he seems most publicly comfortable with is indignation. An example is his answer to a reporter’s question in November about the Administration’s plans to compensate illegal-immigrant parents who’d been separated from their children at the border.

“Suddenly he was angry-faced; he raised his voice, increased his tempo, and started jabbing the air.  ‘You lost your child. It’s gone! You deserve some kind of compensation, no matter what the circumstances.’  Then, catching himself, he added mildly, ‘What that will be, I have no idea.’  He was trying to show presentness, engagement.  But there’s often an “angry old man yelling at clouds” aspect to this.

“There are small tics that worked long ago.  He often speaks as if we are fascinated by the family he came from and that formed him. Thus, he speaks of the old neighborhood and lessons.  And my mother told me, Joey, don’t comb your hair with buttered toast.

“This was great for a Knights of Columbus pancake breakfast in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, but not now.  For all the mystique of the presidency, people hired you to do a job and want you to be clear and have a plan. They aren’t obsessed with your family, they’re obsessed with their family.”

Comment:  Biden has some time to sharpen his approach and his delivery.  I agree with Noonan who says, “He should commit, when speaking, to ‘Be Here Now.’  He should be straightforward and modest.”

Biden’s entire presidency rides on his ability to change – and, whether he does or not, his re-election would be better than one of the alternatives, Donald Trump.

NEW YORK TIMES:  Columnist Thomas Friedman wrote a piece in the NY Times ridiculing “soulless” leaders in America – and I add that most of them label themselves as Republicans.  Here’s a summary of Friedman’s column.

“So, here’s my bottom line:  Several years ago, a Hebrew biography of Ariel Sharon was published with the title “He Doesn’t Stop at Red Lights.”  It is a fitting title for our times, too.

“What is so unnerving to me about the state of the world today are the number of leaders ready to shamelessly, in broad daylight — and with a sense of utter impunity — drive through red lights.  That is, to drive through the legal and normative gates that have kept the world relatively peaceful over the last 70 years, during which we had no great power wars, and have enabled more people to emerge from extreme poverty faster than at any other era in history.

“We will miss this if it ends.  To maintain it, though, it’s necessary that we help all those unnamed Ukrainians fighting for their freedom to succeed.  And it is necessary that we make sure that Putin’s quest to find dignity by crushing that Ukrainian freedom movement fails.

“But none of that is sufficient if all those politicians in America who also think that they can run through any red light to gain or hold power succeed.  Who will follow our model then?

“I can’t think of another time in my life when I felt the future of America’s democracy and the future of democracy globally were more in doubt.  And don’t kid yourself; they are intertwined.  And don’t kid yourself; they both can still go either way.”

Comment:  Friedman has it right.  One of my good friends has lamented lately about the tendency of some Republicans running for office (including in Oregon) to express fealty for the soulless Donald Trump as they – the Republicans – campaign.

Better if they would express honesty, forthrightness, and a soul, even if in so doing, they could lose an election.  Better to be honest that a soulless winner.

If they don’t rise to the occasion of better government for the people, they will have catered – or, read, cratered – to unethical behavior.  As Friedman writes, this will come at the risk of the America we have known for 70 years.

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I wrote yesterday about this subject, saying that “man’s inhumanity to man” confounds rationale understanding, especially given actions by Vladimir Putin, Adolph Hitler and other tyrants who have zero regard for human life.

Then, I came across an e-mail from my friend, Sam Skillern, who runs an excellent organization in Salem, Oregon, Salem Leadership Foundation, which works around town to help charitable organizations deal with a host of issues, including immigration.

With modesty, he wrote about how his organization uses “tables” to do its work – gatherings of community residents around a “table” so they can talk about what makes Salem and Keizer work – or propose commitments to make the area work better.

The “tables” idea is important, for it is an image used to indicate that people gather together to share perspectives and “talk with each other.”  No need to condemn or oppose.  Just open communication.  On some occasions, it might have been called “a round table” to connote the fact that there was no head, just equal participants.

In his e-mail, Skillern said he had just come from a meeting which featured comments from several community leaders:

“This month we heard from Josh Graves, CEO of Catholic Community Services.   In June we’ll hear from Osvaldo Avila, board chair of Salem-Keizer Public Schools.   Other speakers have included Pastor Ronnie Brooks, Keizer Mayor Cathy Clark, civic leader Gregg Peterson, and police chiefs John Teague (Keizer) and Trevor Womack (Salem).
 
“Josh shared about the key concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.   Now, before I lose some folks on theological or political grounds, please bear with me.   It’s good stuff.  And that’s exactly what Breaking Bread/Breaking Barriers is for:  Idea-sharing and productive dialogue with intelligence, goodwill, and candor in the Socratic tradition – a concept Chief Teague shared with us.”

So, here is the list of commitments Skillern shared:

Life and Dignity of the Human Person.  Every human is created in the image and likeness of God.

Call to Family, Community and Participation.  The human person is not only sacred, but social.  How we organize our society – socially, legally, economically, and politically – directly affects human dignity and the ability of every person to grow in community.
 
Solidarity.  We are one human family.  We are our neighbors’ keepers, wherever they may be.
 
The Dignity of Work.  The economy must serve people, not the other way around.  Work is more than a way to make a living, it is a form of continuing participation in God’s creation.
 
Rights and Responsibilities.  Every person has a fundamental right to life – the right that makes all other rights possible.  Each person also has a right to the conditions for living a decent life: food, health care, housing, education, and employment.
 
Option for the Poor and Vulnerable.  A fundamental measure of our society is how we care for and stand with our poor and vulnerable brothers and sisters.
 
Care for God’s Creation.  The world that God created has been entrusted to all of us.  Our stewardship of the earth is a form of participation in God’s act of creating and sustaining the world.
 

“In these precepts,” Skillern wrote, “I see both compassion and empowerment, not entitlement.  I hear ‘we’ rather than ‘us’ and ‘them.’   I perceive neither ‘left vs. right’ … nor ‘progressive vs. conservative.’”

I share Skillern’s perspective. 

Follow the precepts above and they will help to avoid more “man’s inhumanity to man” tragedies.

[Full disclosure:  As a lobbyist, I represented Catholic Community Services – CCC — and it was pleasure to associate myself with such a “community-centered organization.”  Josh Graves was the deputy director at that time and I worked closely with him.  So it’s good to see him elevated to the directorship.  My firm, now called CFM Advocates, still represents CCC.]

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 as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I wrote yesterday about this subject, saying that “man’s inhumanity to man” confounds rationale understanding, especially given actions by Vladimir Putin, Adolph Hitler and other tyrants who have zero regard for human life.

Then, I came across an e-mail from my friend, Sam Skillern, who runs an excellent organization in Salem, Oregon, Salem Leadership Foundation, which works around town to help charitable organizations deal with a host of issues, including immigration.

With modesty, he wrote about how his organization uses “tables” to do its work – gatherings of community residents around a “table” so they can talk about what makes Salem and Keizer work – or propose commitments to make the area work better.

The “tables” idea is important, for it is an image used to indicate that people gather together to share perspectives and “talk with each other.”  No need to condemn or oppose.  Just open communication.  On some occasions, it might have been called “a round table” to connote the fact that there was no head, just equal participants.

In his e-mail, Skillern said he had just come from a meeting which featured comments from several community leaders:

“This month we heard from Josh Graves, CEO of Catholic Community Services.   In June we’ll hear from Osvaldo Avila, board chair of Salem-Keizer Public Schools.   Other speakers have included Pastor Ronnie Brooks, Keizer Mayor Cathy Clark, civic leader Gregg Peterson, and police chiefs John Teague (Keizer) and Trevor Womack (Salem).
 
“Josh shared about the key concepts of Catholic Social Teaching.   Now, before I lose some folks on theological or political grounds, please bear with me.   It’s good stuff.  And that’s exactly what Breaking Bread/Breaking Barriers is for:  Idea-sharing and productive dialogue with intelligence, goodwill, and candor in the Socratic tradition – a concept Chief Teague shared with us.”

So, here is the list of commitments Skillern shared:

Life and Dignity of the Human Person.  Every human is created in the image and likeness of God.

Call to Family, Community and Participation.  The human person is not only sacred, but social.  How we organize our society – socially, legally, economically, and politically – directly affects human dignity and the ability of every person to grow in community.
 
Solidarity.  We are one human family.  We are our neighbors’ keepers, wherever they may be.
 
The Dignity of Work.  The economy must serve people, not the other way around.  Work is more than a way to make a living, it is a form of continuing participation in God’s creation.
 
Rights and Responsibilities.  Every person has a fundamental right to life – the right that makes all other rights possible.  Each person also has a right to the conditions for living a decent life: food, health care, housing, education, and employment.
 
Option for the Poor and Vulnerable.  A fundamental measure of our society is how we care for and stand with our poor and vulnerable brothers and sisters.
 
Care for God’s Creation.  The world that God created has been entrusted to all of us.  Our stewardship of the earth is a form of participation in God’s act of creating and sustaining the world.
 

“In these precepts,” Skillern wrote, “I see both compassion and empowerment, not entitlement.  I hear ‘we’ rather than ‘us’ and ‘them.’   I perceive neither ‘left vs. right’ … nor ‘progressive vs. conservative.’”

I share Skillern’s perspective. 

Follow the precepts above and they will help to avoid more “man’s inhumanity to man” tragedies.

[Full disclosure:  As a lobbyist, I represented Catholic Community Services – CCC — and it was pleasure to associate myself with such a “community-centered organization.”  Josh Graves was the deputy director at that time and I worked closely with him.  So it’s good to see him elevated to the directorship.  My firm, now called CFM Advocates, still represents CCC.]