Bob Woodward, Pulitzer prize-winning author and associate editor of the Washington Post, is coming out with a new book. I guess, should be no surprise, that is coming out with a new book. He has written a book on almost every President since Nixon. The fact that I read his books on Bush and did not read any of his books on Obama probably says more about me than it does about Bob Woodward.
Today, the Washington Post published a conversation that Bob Woodward had with Donald Trump a couple of days ago. The book was finalized. There was no interview with Trump. You have Trump, and his defensive mode, repeatedly saying that he would love to sit down and talk with Bob Woodward. When in fact, it is clear that he would rather sit in a lion’s den then speak with Bob Woodward. The conversation is somewhat funny and also said. If you are not a fan of Trump, you will see a lot of the characteristics that you do not like in this conversation. He continually strokes his ego without any prompting. He lies. He lies because it is because that is his modus operandi.
Someone from within the administration is trying to retard (this word is used on purpose) Trump’s agenda. Basically, it is a little late for that, isn’t it? He/she has written an anonymous Op-Ed. Trump ain’t happy about it.
As many of you know, I used to write this blog every day. Nearly a decade ago, I was posting four and five times a day. I was trying to get exposure. I was trying to cover topics. I was trying to get traction. The more I wrote, the more it became clear that the only way I was going to get traction was to start shouting and start saying outrageous things. Cursing was another good way to get traction. I decided that I was not going to do either. I was going to keep this blog like a conversation between friends. There would be no shouting. There would not be any hyperbole (I think I stuck to this but I am not sure). I was not going to do other things that made other blogs popular.
Speaking of shouting, I am reading Keith Olbermann’s book about Trump. I am listening to the audio tape and I am wondering why he isn’t horse from yelling so much. I am also reading a book called Messing with the Enemy by Clint Watts. The book is basically about his time as being a counterterrorism analyst. It is this merge of analytical thinking and social media. It is pretty interesting. I am not even halfway through it yet. I will probably have more to say on that later.
I have been playing golf now for seven or eight years. I have been playing long enough to recognize nuances in a player’s swing. On a good day, when I am really swing it well, I will probably shoot in the lower 90s. It is kind of funny when you see announcers that avoid the obvious. A couple weeks ago at the Indie Women in Tech Championship Lizette Salas was in a playoff with Sung Hyun Park. Salas really has not played well in a couple of years. She sought a 62 in the opening round. She sought a 64 on Saturday. She kind of struggled on Sunday. Shooting a 70. Park has really played great golf for the last year and 1/2. She is young, she is strong. She is ranked #1 in the world. Basically, she turned pro last year and she is already won over 3,000,000 dollars in the tour. So, back to the playoff, both women were asked to play 18 which was a short par four. Both of them had driver off the tee and both of them were in the fairway. Salas had an awkward shot somewhere around 62 yards into the green. Park was much closer and had around a 45 yard shot into the green. Park your second shot within 10 feet of the hole. Salas had about a 20 footer for birdie. Salas missed her birdie putt. Park made hers. The announcers never said that Salas should not have taken driver off the tee which left her an awkward shot. Why didn’t she take her 3-wood or her 5-wood and leave herself a comfortable 80 – 100 yard shot which she should be able to get within 10 feet of the hole?
On the PGA champions tour, they were playing the Shaw Charity Classic in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Scott McCarron had somehow limped into the locker room in spite of having the unusual scorecard of a hole-in-one, bogey, birdie, bogey, birdie. That is an unusual way to end a tournament. He is done. He has a one-stroke lead. There are really only two people that are chasing him. They are one-stroke behind him. The 18-hole is a par five. I really do not want to talk about Joe Durant who was struggling down the stretch and I was surprised he posted as good a number as he did. Instead, I would like to talk about Kurt Triplett. He is one on the PGA Tour and on the PGA champions tour. He has had a distinguished career. He has been in the hunt multiple times before. This is a new to him. He hits his drive just off the fairway into the rough. He has a beautiful second shot which is a layup. He has 1/3 shot which is overwater which is approximately 110 yards. This is simple. This is easy. He has practiced this thousands of times. The lie is good. There is no reason to expect that he is going to hit this farther than 10 feet from the hole. This is the shot the PGA players and PGA Champion players dream of. He has the shot and it comes up not a little short but way short. Instead of having a 10 foot putt, he now has a 30 foot putt to tie in force a playoff. He misses the 30 foot putt. Scott McCarron wins. Golf is a hard game, even for professionals.
Brett Kavanaugh is President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. If you go back and look in my blog, I have talked about the Supreme Court leading up to the 2016 election. I really have not spoken about it since. Judge Brett Kavanaugh is an odd combination of political insider and high profile lawyer. He was front and center during the impeachment Clinton hearings. He was one of the lead cheerleaders. He is currently in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee saying nothing. Since the late 1970s, Supreme Court nominees have learned not to answer any questions. It is almost a military, name, rank and serial number. He is declined to say whether Roe versus Wade is settled law. Of course he has decided not to discuss ObamaCare and pre-existing conditions. Can a president pardon himself? Kavanaugh will not comment. He also will not comment on a decision, dissenting decision, that he made in which he questioned whether President could be criminally indicted or tried while in office. This hearing is a joke. The behavior of Supreme Court nominees in front of the judiciary committee has become laughable. There is no question that they will answer. What is the point of the hearing? If you are a Democrat or a progressive or anyone who believes that corporations should be held in check by our government and unions, Kavanaugh will make your life miserable. He is bad for everything that progressives stand for. If you can’t stand up against Kavanaugh then you can’t stand up for anything.