When I was a little girl, about 8 years old, the father of one of my friends cornered me at her house and gave me a long nasty kiss. My friend consistently bragged about her father being on the high council of the Mormon church.

When I was 12 and at another friend’s home on Christmas morning, her father trapped me in their kitchen and groped me.

As a young, newly married woman in the working world, sexual harassment was constant and unrelenting. You learned not to go in the break room alone, or the stock room alone and to stay farther than arm’s length away from any male in the vicinity.

Because I worked around a lot of attorneys, I came to think of them as the worst of the worst. I did have one very strange request from one of them. He suggested that since he was married and a good Mormon, that he would just like to go somewhere up the canyon with me and make out, but not “go all the way.” I laughed in his face.

I have two daughters. They had a paternal grandfather who always wanted a kiss, on the mouth naturally. I told them every time we went there to stand behind me and I would protect them from this and I did. My mother-in-law once asked me why they wouldn’t give grandpa a kiss, and I told her it was disgusting and they were never going to do it.

I knew how disgusting it was because he managed to surprise me on my wedding day.

Mothers, I implore you teach your daughters and your sons early on how to protect themselves from these predators. I never told my parents what happened to me, because my dad had a temper and I was afraid he would have beaten those guys to a pulp and ended up in prison.

To this day, my stomach turns just thinking about it and I am an old woman now.

Micki Moulton, Taylorsville

At times, Utah cities along the Wasatch Front have the worst air pollution in the entire nation. Yes, we live in a bowl where our air pollution gets trapped by inversions in winter, inversions are unavoidable and natural, but trapped pollution would not be a problem if there were no pollution to trap.

We can, should and must fix our air pollution problem, both here and worldwide. Air pollution is harming our health, killing people, shortening all our lives, blocking our view of the great beauty around us and hurting our state’s tourist-reliant economy. Who wants to visit, or live, in a polluted environment? Air pollution causes changes to the environment which in turn are causing extremely costly, harmful and increasing climate-related problems both here in the U.S. and around the world; including droughts, wildfires, famine, sea level rise, species die-offs, sever weather events and a warming planet. Again, we can, should and must fix the problem. But how?

The solution is obvious: Stop polluting. The main cause of our air pollution both here in Utah and worldwide is the mining, processing and burning of carbon energy — petroleum products, coal, gas and wood. We burn pollution-producing carbon to power our vehicles, heat, cool and light our homes and power most everything we do. To actually fix our air pollution problem we can, should and must replace polluting carbon energy and fuels with clean, safe renewable energy.

How can this happen when we are so dependent on carbon energy? In what we call a market economy and representative democracy, our leadership can and should take strong, effective steps to make clean, safe renewable energy, such as solar and wind power, sufficiently less expensive than polluting carbon energy.

This can be accomplished by (1) imposing an effective fee on carbon energy (think of it as a “sin tax” on harmful, polluting behavior, like the tax on tobacco) and (2) incentivizing the production and consumption of clean, safe renewable energy, such as solar and wind power. (The “sin tax” on carbon energy and fuels can be returned to the public equally in the form of household tax credits or checks.) If clean renewable energy is much cheaper and plentiful, the switch to clean power and clean air will happen relatively quickly.

The key to implement the switch to clean energy and clean air is the will of the public and the will and ability of our leadership to make this switch. That’s were we, the public, come in. We need to get the anti-democratic, anti-common-good influence of big money out of politics and also to elect good, smart, responsible, effective leaders who have the guts, motivation and ability to make happen the switch to clean, safe renewable power. The majority of our current political leaders are lacking in those qualities and, because of the corrupting influence of money in politics, are beholden to those who benefit from the our current dependence on polluting carbon energy and fuels.

If we want clean air, we need to clean up our own acts, and to vote for and demand effective leadership to do the same. Call your representatives today and make your voice heard loud and clear! And be sure to vote for clean air, clean energy candidates next November and in all elections. It also would help for the religious leadership of all faiths to urge strong effective action to stop polluting and switch to clean energy and clean air.

James Westwater, Spanish Fork, is chair of the Utah Valley Earth Forum.

One night at dinner, 10-year-old dinosaur fan Kenyon Roberts asked a family guest — state Sen. Curt Bramble — why Utah had made the Allosaurus its official state fossil.

“I didn’t know we had a state fossil,” Bramble says.

So Kenyon launched into a long argument about why Utahraptor should have that designation instead. As he explains now, “Its name has ‘Utah’ in it, and it’s only found in Utah. The Allosaurus has been found in Europe, Africa and other states. The first Allosaurus skull was found in Colorado.”

Utahraptor also helped save original “Jurassic Park” filmmakers from a flaw. The Velociraptors that it featured “are really only the size of turkeys,” Kenyon says. Amid complaints about that, the related Utahraptor was discovered “and is actually larger than the raptors the movie uses.” So it became a star of later movies and video games.

“He convinced me,” Bramble says. So Kenyon — son of Republican activist Jeremy Roberts — asked him, “Are you going to open a bill file?” His dad adds, “It says something about my politics that I’ve raised my kids to know what a bill file is.”

Bramble, R-Provo, indeed is drafting legislation to make the change official — setting up a battle between Allosaurus and Utahraptor that may have been millions of years in the making.

When Kenyon was asked who would win a real fight between the two dinosaurs, he says without hesitation, “Utahraptor. It might be slightly smaller than the Allosaurus, but smarter.” He adds that scientists believe Utahraptors hunted in packs, so Allosaurus may have been outnumbered in any confrontation.

Kenyon loves dinosaurs, obviously.

The nightstand in his bedroom, he notes, “is a dinosaur world. It’s full of plastic dinosaurs.” The fifth-grader also has some real fossils, including prehistoric plants and the tooth of a Tyrannosaurus rex — and resin replicas of other dinosaur bones.

If anyone chooses a letter of the alphabet, he can name a dinosaur (or many) that begin with that letter and details about them.

When asked for one that begins with the letter “K,“ he quickly said, “Kentrosaurus. It’s from Africa, really Kenya. Jurassic period, 480 million years ago. It walked on four legs. It’s a relative of Stegosaurus. It ate plants.”

After Kenyon went through other examples, his father said, “He may have a small problem with dinosaurs.”

Bramble said he doesn’t like the debates that often occur to create new state symbols, but noted Utah already has a state fossil. “And if we’re going to have a state fossil, then it ought to be something unique to the state.”

Meanwhile, Bramble and state drafting attorneys asked young Kenyon Roberts to review an early draft of the bill to honor Utahraptor. His father notes that he told drafting attorneys, “The bill’s fine, but Utahraptor needs to be one word, not two.”

Bramble said drafting attorneys “confirmed that this little 10-year-old could talk your arm off about dinosaurs and fossils.”

Someone who is generally supportive of the idea of better honoring Utahraptor is Utah State Paleontologist James Kirkland — but there’s a special reason for that.

“The main reason I am the state paleontologist is that I discovered Utahraptor. Utahraptor has been very, very good to me,” Kirkland said. “I am the world authority on Utahraptor.”

He said that discovery was made about 1990 near Arches National Park. He, Robert Gaston and Donald Burge described the dinosaur and named it in 1993 — not long after the original “Jurassic Park” film was released that year. That turned into a godsend for the movie.

Filmmakers had doubled the size of Velociraptors, leading to complaints from dinosaur lovers. “About the same time, we announced our animal,” which was twice as large as any known raptor, Kirkland said.

“And the press said, ‘Steven Spielberg’s giant raptors are vindicated.’ So it made the No. 7 science story of the year in Time magazine, and the cover of Discovery magazine,” he said. “It was pretty exciting stuff.”

As Smithsonian magazine later wrote, “Utahraptor rode the wave of dinomania generated by ‘Jurassic Park’ and became the star of several documentaries and video games.”

“A lot of people around the county already think Utahraptor is the official state fossil,” Kirkland said, adding that could be a reason to change the designation. But he explained there are plenty of reasons for Allosaurus to have that title, too.

“The first state paleontologist, Jim Madsen, was the world’s authority on Allosaurus,” Kirkland said, and “it was largely through his work that Allosaurus became the state fossil” in 1988 — a few years before Utahraptor was discovered.

He adds that the Cleveland-Lloyd quarry in Utah provided more than 50 Allosaurus specimens, from 3-foot-long juveniles to 35-foot-long adults. The high number of specimens there made Allosaurus the best understood large carnivorous dinosaur.

“There are historical reasons for keeping the Allosaurus,” Kirkland said. So he proposes a compromise.

“Some states have both a state fossil and a state dinosaur, so how about keeping the Allosaurus as the state fossil and make Utahraptor the state dinosaur?” he said.

While 43 states have a state dinosaur or fossil, Utah is the only one to honor Allosaurus, and none has selected Utahraptor.

Utah has 27 official state symbols.

Among them are the state bird (seagull), flower (sego lily), cooking pot (Dutch oven), insect (honeybee), rock (coal), tree (quaking aspen), winter sports (skiing and snowboarding), firearm (Browning M1911 pistol), vegetable (Spanish sweet onion) and historic vegetable (sugar beet).

Kirkland notes that a move is also afoot to make a state park out of quarry where Utahraptors have been found. Also, he said scientists have started a GoFundMe account to raise money to work on an excavated 18,000-pound block of petrified stone that contains several well-preserved Utahraptor fossils.

As wave after wave of allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct crash over Hollywood, the media and Washington, D.C. — and, locally, against Utah County Commissioner Greg Graves — it’s time to take a look at Utah’s track record over the past three decades of politicians caught up in sexual misdeeds or, in some cases, the misbehavior of associates.

Rob Miller, 2017

The longtime Democratic activist dropped out of the race for state party chairman after being accused of sexual harassment and misconduct by seven women.

Allegations from these prominent party insiders — including a former Salt Lake County Democratic chairwoman — included unwanted hugging, kissing, stroking hair, pulling down his pants to show his Mormon undergarments and using a supposed job interview to seek a date.

Miller denied any inappropriate behavior, blaming political opponents. He withdrew from the race and, he said, left the party after decades of activism.

Chris Burbank and Ralph Becker, 2015

Salt Lake City’s popular police chief was pressured to resign by Mayor Ralph Becker for mishandling substantiated sexual-harassment complaints brought by three women officers against a former deputy chief.

The alleged misdeeds by one-time Deputy Chief Rick Findlay included him sharing a nude photo he said was one of the women and a photo of the other two in bikinis. The officers said they were discouraged from complaining and retaliated against when they they did.

Burbank, who had placed Findlay on administrative leave but did not fire or demote him, alleged Becker was trying to make the chief a political scapegoat when the scandal exploded into public view in the middle of a mayoral election.

For months, Becker had previously remained silent about the harassment allegations, saying he was protecting the victims’ privacy until they went public with a lawsuit against the city.

The controversy was widely believed to play a role in Becker’s re-election loss a few months later.

Greg Peterson, 2012

The longtime Republican activist who hosted an annual conservative forum/barbecue that drew Utah’s GOP elite (Sens. Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee, Gov. Gary Herbert, Reps. Mia Love, Chris Stewart and Jason Chaffetz and Attorney General Sean Reyes were all attendees) was charged with rape and kidnapping in the alleged attacks of five women. The 37-year-old committed suicide while out of jail on bond.

Kevin Garn, 2010

The Republican majority leader took to the floor of the Utah House on the final night of the annual legislative session to confess to a 25-year-old nude hot-tubbing outing with a then-15-year-old employee. His admission to assembled colleagues came as The Salt Lake Tribune was about to publish a story about the incident and his payment of $150,000 to the woman, who threatened to go public with the past relationship during Garn’s failed 2002 congressional campaign.

The veteran lawmaker resigned from office two days later.

But the House’s standing ovation for Garn that night, led by then-House Speaker Dave Clark, also contributed to Clark’s ouster as speaker a few months later.

Instead Becky Lockhart, who walked off the floor in disgust during the Garn applause, was elected the state’s first woman House speaker. She died of a rare brain disease at age 46 after serving two terms.

Ozwald Balfour, 2005

The GOP activist, founder of the Utah Republican Black Assembly and a talk-radio host, was arrested and accused of groping three women during job interviews for his Salt Lake City media production company. Nearly six years later and after repeatedly denying the allegations, Balfour pleaded no contest to three counts of sexual battery, reduced from original felony charges. He was sentenced to 90 days in jail and ordered to undergo a psychosexual evaluation on the trio of class A misdemeanors.

Kay and Katherine Bryson, 2004

A contentious divorce between two prominent elected Republican leaders from Utah County turned into scandal — with allegations of infidelity and invasion of privacy through government surveillance — leading to a civil suit and criminal investigation, but ultimately, no criminal charges.

Kay Bryson, the elected Utah County attorney, suspected his wife, state Rep. Katherine Bryson, of adultery and set up surveillance equipment borrowed from the county sheriff and installed by a county employee at her Salt Lake City condo.

The lawmaker complained to Salt Lake City police, who investigated but concluded there was “not sufficient basis” to file charges. The decision was reviewed and upheld by the Salt Lake County district attorney, partly based on the grounds that the condo was being rented by the Brysons’ son, who consented to the covert taping.

Katherine Bryson retired from her House seat that year. Kay Bryson stood for re-election in 2006, but lost to current County Attorney Jeff Buhman.

Charles Warren, 1997

The chief of staff to then-Congressman Chris Cannon, R-Utah, resigned after acknowledging an improper sexual relationship with another congressional staffer, a subordinate who alleged he coerced her into an unwanted affair.

The woman sued the congressional office, the Cannon campaign and Cannon’s private company — all entities in which the two had worked. That suit was later resolved with a confidential settlement agreement.

The issue was reignited when Cannon, one of the House Judiciary Committee members who recommended the impeachment of President Bill Clinton, told The Tribune that neither he nor taxpayers paid any money in the settlement and denied any impropriety or ‘hostile environment’ in his office.

The woman’s subsequent lawsuit for defamation and breach of contract dragged on in court for nearly a decade — most of the congressman’s tenure — and Cannon ended up paying $22,000 in settlement and legal fees.

Warren continued to work in politics, although generally behind the scenes.

Ted Cannon, 1986

The elected Salt Lake County attorney, an anti-pornography-crusading Republican, was indicted and ended up pleading no contest to two misdemeanor assault charges, reduced from felony sexual assault, and three other misdemeanors. He spent 25 days in jail and stepped down a few months shy of finishing his second term.

Cannon also was sued for sexual harassment by two former secretaries, who alleged he made sexually oriented remarks and attempted to grope them, later disciplining or demoting them when they complained.

He settled one case and a jury found him liable in the second after a trial in which a deputy county attorney told jurors that the victim contributed to the atmosphere in the office by wearing provocative clothing and telling off-color jokes.

Federal Judge J. Thomas Greene set aside the jury verdict and entered a “no cause of action” ruling.

Cannon later sued one of the secretaries for libel for a magazine article titled “My boss ordered me to sleep with him.” A few months later he dropped the suit.

He died in 2009 at age 77.

In the thick of Wasatch Front air quality problems last week, many residents looked out their windows and asked: Is it really so polluted I can’t see across the street? Or is that just fog?

The answer is complicated. Fog is mostly what obscures visibility. But pollution is at least partly what is causing the fog.

After an inversion settled into the valley early last week, visibility plunged, and Salt Lake County exceeded federal standards for small particulate pollution on several consecutive days, climbing into the “unhealthy” or red air quality range. A weak cold front then blew much of the hazy, polluted air out Thursday, and with storms forecast over the weekend, Utah’s air should stay clearer for at least the next few days — until the next soupy inversion sets in.

Fog, of course, is made of thousands of tiny droplets of air-borne water vapor. When the air is humid enough, water condenses around little grains of dust — or whatever else might hanging in the atmosphere — to form a visible mist.

In northern Utah, inversions create the perfect conditions for forming fog. Wintry weather often combines with the Wasatch Front’s geography to create these inversions, where warm air traps colder air over the region’s valleys — along with everything airborne, including tiny particles of pollutants.

These particles are so small that they are able to bypass defenses of the human respiratory system and become lodged deep within the lungs, where they act as an irritant and, with repeated exposures, potentially cause permanent lung damage.

It turns out, particulate pollution also attracts water vapor.

“When there is a bit of water vapor” in the atmosphere, said Mark Struthwolf, a forecaster for the National Weather Service in Salt Lake City, “it will collect on pollution particles, and that’s when the fog will form.”

The inversion also helps accelerate the process because pollution isn’t the only thing that gets trapped when Wasatch Front air stagnates. Though it may seem cold and dry, humidity also builds up gradually in the air as the inversion persists. Soil, snow, plants, even cars all release small amounts of water vapor and, over time, this vapor, like the pollution, accumulates beneath the inversion, Struthwolf said.

“It builds up because you’re not changing the air at all,” he explained. So when Utah experiences a long-term inversion, “sooner or later, you’re going to get the fog.”

Mist, however, doesn’t necessarily mean the air is polluted, Struthwolf said. Though fog will typically form during an inversion, it can also occur without it.

So how do you know if that misty air outside is polluted? There’s little visible difference, Struthwolf said. Both fog and particulate pollution reflect light — fog more so than the pollution — which results in that grainy, misty murk that obscures visibility.

Fog also can interfere with pollution sensors, said Bo Call, who oversees air monitoring for the state Division of Air Quality.

Some air monitors, called particle counters, use lasers or other means to count particles to measure their concentration in the air. But fog can artificially boost those measurements, making it seem the air is more polluted than it actually is, Call said, when monitors erroneously count water droplets as pollution.

Call said the DAQ is currently testing some of its particle-counting sensors, “and we notice that they are higher, especially in high humidity, so we think this is common for those kinds of instruments.”

Other monitors that use filters to trap and detect pollution are typically more reliable, but may also experience difficulty during fog.

“If it’s really cold and humid, I have seen instruments flatline for a while,” Call said. “I have instruments that will go negative.”

Most of these problems occur in monitors that report air quality levels in continuous, real-time data feeds, which the state in some cases makes available to the public. To correct for these errors, the DAQ regularly removes and analyzes monitor filters in a laboratory to verify the accuracy of the real-time data.

If you can’t wait for the data check, the best way to determine whether that fog is the dirty polluted kind or regular old water vapor may be to check the weather forecast, Struthwolf said.

It takes time — usually a few days — for an inversion to trigger fog formation, the meteorologist said. On the other hand, humid, stormy weather may also form fog.

So if there’s been a recent storm, Struthwolf said, the fog is probably pretty clean. But if the weather has been cold but clear for several days, it’s probably polluted.

President Trump visited Utah for four hours last week to rob protections from more than 2 million acres of the Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears national monuments. For those of us who love these places, the illegal act was made more bitter because it was delivered with a dose of preposterous nonsense.

As he slashed two magnificent national monuments into bite-size pieces for digestion by the oil and gas, coal and uranium companies, Trump announced that, “Our precious national treasures must be protected, and they, from now on, will be protected.” On demolishing the Bears Ears Monument, whose protections Native Americans have sought for a generation, he benevolently said that he was giving them back their “rightful voice over the sacred land.”

One suspects that, beyond repaying a political favor to Sen. Orrin Hatch, the president scarcely knew why he was in Salt Lake. Trying to talk sense to him is truly howling at the moon.

I am far more interested in starting a conversation about why this happened in Utah and nowhere else. After all, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke was tasked with reviewing 27 national monuments created by three presidents, and the only ones he teed up for presidential destruction so far are in Utah. Underscoring the focus on Utah, the very next day Zinke put out a press release saying he had heard the American people and they want their lands protected. He then recommended establishing three new monuments, including one in his home state of Montana!

Of course, Hatch led the charge here. His support of candidate Trump in 2016 helped secure the nomination for him, giving Hatch a magic wish from the president. The voters in a state that is vastly dependent on its spectacular public lands ought to ask him why he chose to use his wish to ruin two of our great treasures. Couldn’t he think of something else that might have provided greater benefit to Utah?

New Utah Rep. John Curtis inadvertently admitted the illegality of the president’s action when he immediately introduced legislation to codify Trump’s minuscule version of Bears Ears. Rep. Chris Stewart then did the same for the gutted Grand Staircase-Escalante, saying, without intending irony, that we should not have each new president changing designations. If this is what they mean by a transparent public process to replace the Antiquities Act, then I’ll take my chances with the many years of debate that preceded President Obama’s designation of Bears Ears.

In most contexts, Utah’s leaders and businesses work tirelessly to normalize our state to the rest of the country. We are not an odd theocracy, they say, we are Welfare Square helping the less fortunate, we are the Winter Olympics, we are the Mighty Five national parks, we are Mitt Romney running for president. But, if we want to seem normal, then we should pay attention to what Zinke learned from the millions of public comments on national monuments: More than 99 percent of Americans who spoke out told him they want the monuments protected. When Utah’s politicians claim that the federal land is rightfully ours and only local people should have a say in the management of our national commons, we brand ourselves as incorrigible weirdos once again.

Further, I’d like to ask all those who are basking in Trump’s action what their vision for our country is? You’ve had your victory this week based on endless misrepresentations and dangerous separation of people into those who matter and those who do not. You cheered for a president who obviously couldn’t find either monument on a map and who couldn’t care less, because he did your bidding this time.

What will you do when you are no longer convenient or necessary to the schemes of our mercurial, budding autocrat? How will you respond when he doesn’t feel like obeying the laws or the parts of the Constitution you cherish? What will you say when he tweets vile hatred about your race or religion? If you support him in his world where there is no objective truth, then there is nothing left to assure you that everything you love won’t someday be tossed on the bonfire of his ego and narcissism. By then, it will be far too late.

Bill Hedden is the executive director of the Grand Canyon Trust and a former councilman for Grand County. He lives in Castle Valley.

Is forgiveness totally out the window now? With Minnesota Public Radio dropping Garrison Keillor, one wonders.

Keillor put Minnesota Public Radio on the national map with his Prairie Home Companion show. Now that he is in trouble, he is out, just like that.

The Salt Lake Tribune quoted Keillor recently in an account of his unacceptable behavior and subsequent apology to the woman involved in which he said something to the effect that, “She said it was all right and not to worry about it. I thought we were friends, until I heard from her lawyer.”

It’s a real shame that one stupid offensive behavior episode can destroy friendships or careers without the possibility of redress before punitive actions go into effect. Heaven help us all to dodge the stones that are flying now.

Who among us is not a potential target?

Mary Johnson, Millcreek

I would like to know how many Utahns voted for their representatives in the U.S. Congress for these reasons: To increase the national debt; to significantly cut business taxes; to provide greater tax relief to small business so there is no longer a tax advantage to provide employee retirement plans; to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and Obamacare; to support the moral and ethical vacuum in Congress; to ignore funding for infrastructure, health care and national parks and monuments; to rescind protections for the people in the realm of finance, transportation safety, food safety, air quality, retirement security and just our general well-being.

Who voted for our congressional representatives to take away our happiness? And, are you going to vote the same way again?

Janelle Heck, Millcreek

For the record, I have the utmost respect for members of law enforcement and consider the profession both difficult and dangerous. Thank you for your service to our country and community, David G. Lord. It appears you have built a legacy of which you should be proud.

Thank you, too, for questioning my loyalty to our country. It has been 45-plus years since being similarly accused by civilian protesters outside the Oakland Army Terminal, having just arrived wearing my dress greens. It is the first time, however, I’ve been so accused by a fellow service member. I had almost forgotten the feeling. Admittedly, it took years of study and introspection for me to reconcile my confusion upon the first occurrence but today I have no such hesitation.

The fact that the Oakland protesters felt empowered then, and that you, Mr. Lord, as well as many NFL players, feel empowered today to protest or accuse or kneel during the playing of the national anthem affirms for me purpose for having served in the military. Thank you for reinforcing my advocacy for peaceful protest and the right to speak without fear of retribution as means to bring attention to injustice or, “given his attitude toward our flag, anthem, our country our Constitution and our veterans,” to a traitorous enemy of the people posing as a fellow veteran.

As for your “right to comment on the un-American conduct by the NFL players,” to clarify I would never dispute your constitutional right to state your opinion on any matter. I do, however, continue to take issue with your position that NFL players should be fired for kneeling before games during the national anthem in protest over perceived injustice in their communities.

While I personally disagree with their choice of venue, is it possible the NFL players are merely attempting to bring public attention to their position by exercising their “right to comment,” just as you have done in your letters?

Jim Riter, Holladay

“How did he do it?” That’s the question I was asked more than once by European friends the day after Alabama’s Senate election: How did Doug Jones win?

The question was not idle. In many ways, the electoral challenge Jones faced in Alabama was strikingly similar to the challenge facing European politicians of the center-left and even — or maybe especially — the center-right: How to defeat racist, xenophobic or homophobic candidates who are supported by a passionate, unified minority? Or, to put it differently: How to get the majority — which is often complacent rather than passionate, and divided rather than unified — to vote?

This was the same question asked after the victory of Emmanuel Macron in the French elections, and part of the answer, in both cases, was luck. Nobody predicted a Roy Moore sex scandal. Nobody predicted that the French political establishment would fold so quickly either. France’s previous, center-left president was so unpopular that he discredited his party; France’s center-right leader, François Fillon, was knocked out of the race by a scandal. Macron wound up as the leader of a new centrist coalition, the electoral arithmetic was in his favor, and he won.

But beyond luck, both Macron and Jones also tried to reach across some traditional lines, in part by appealing to traditional values. Macron, fighting a nationalist opponent in the second round of the elections, openly promoted patriotism. Instead of fear and anger, he projected optimism about France and its international role. He spoke of the opportunities globalization brought to France instead of focusing on the dangers, and he declared himself proud to be both French and a citizen of the world.

He wasn’t the only European to take this route: Alexander Van der Bellen, the former Green Party leader who is now president of Austria, used a similar kind of campaign to beat a nationalist opponent. Van der Bellen’s posters featured beautiful Alpine scenes, the Austrian flag and the slogan “Those who love their homeland do not divide it.”

In Alabama, Jones used remarkably similar language. Jones’ Facebook ads (archived by ProPublica) used the slogan “restore honor and civility,” emphasized his background in law and order and, like Macron and Van der Bellen, projected patriotism instead of nationalism. “I believe the United States of America is a land of laws, justice, freedom, equality and opportunity,” he said. He also described his own fight against racism as an important civic achievement with benefits for all: “I prosecuted KKK terrorists, getting justice for the four young girls who were murdered. Join our campaign and bring civility and compassion back to Alabama.”

Of course, there were other factors in all of these victories. A successful voter turnout operation in Alabama, for example, as well as more-targeted advertising, helped Jones win. Macron was also helped by timing: French awareness of the Russian and online alt-right role in the U.S. election strengthened the resolve of both media and voters to ignore their attempts to influence the result in France.

Still, if they hadn’t reached for something higher, victory might have eluded them. Modern democracy is by definition an exercise in coalition-building, whatever the voting system. In big, diverse, complicated countries, where people have vastly different interests and backgrounds, politicians seeking national office (or in the United States even statewide office) have to find common denominators as well as specific messages for particular groups. The nation that we all share, our common history and aspirations, is the most obvious.

As these elections prove, an appeal to national pride doesn’t have to be xenophobic or close-minded. At least some Alabamians — as I know from my family there — voted for Jones because they want to see their state as part of an American story that includes the civil rights movement and the emancipation of women. They want to live in an America that is tolerant and open. An appeal to that strand of the American tradition can win them over.

Even Europeans, many of whom live in countries that really are - unlike the United States - defined by a single ethnic group, can be reached by this kind of appeal. You can be French, Polish or Dutch and still be a citizen of the world. You can love your country because it’s a part of an international community. And you can refuse to let xenophobic nationalists define what it means to be patriotic, too.

Anne Applebaum writes a weekly foreign affairs column for The Washington Post.

Like most Brits of a certain age, Gary Oldman grew up learning about Winston Churchill.

“When I was growing up, and the syllabus was very much that history was the great wars, World War I and World War II, he was and is the hero, the man who saved us from tyranny,” the actor said in a phone interview. “Although it obviously took more than one man, to us he’s the guy that won the war. He’s very much our savior.”

Oldman said he has “always been fascinated by him, but I never thought I would play him, only because of the physicality.”

Churchill was 5 feet 6 inches tall and resembled, in girth and demeanor, a jowly bulldog. Oldman, at 5 feet 9 inches tall, is lean and a bit gangly — as anyone knows who saw him in his starmaking role as punk rocker Sid Vicious in “Sid and Nancy” (1986) or as Commissioner Gordon in the “Dark Knight” trilogy or the fugitive Sirius Black in the “Harry Potter” films.

“It wasn’t really something that I was chasing,” Oldman said. It was Eric Fellner, the co-chairman of the English production company Working Title Films, who was determined to make a movie about Churchill, and Oldman at first said no. “It’s like a dog with a bone — he wouldn’t let go,” Oldman said.

The result is “Darkest Hour,” a dynamic profile of Churchill’s early weeks as prime minister, at the beginning of World War II, that is rolling out across the country. (It opens Friday, Dec. 22, in Salt Lake City.) The movie already has earned Oldman a Golden Globe nomination and made him a favorite for an Academy Award for Best Actor.

At Fellner’s urging, Oldman started studying Churchill, reading and listening to his speeches and consulting with a Churchill scholar. But, still, “the roadblock to it [was] the physicality,” he said. Only when Oldman approached a retired makeup artist, Kazuhiro Tsuji — whose work turned Jim Carrey into The Grinch, Ron Perlman into Hellboy and Brad Pitt into Benjamin Button — and “seduced him out of retirement. … It was partly contingent on Kazu being able to do the makeup that tipped it for me.”

Oldman spent a year researching Churchill, “soaking it up like a sponge,” he said. “Actually, [it was] to the point where my wife said, ‘I go to bed with Winston Churchill, but I wake up with Gary.’ It was just immersing myself into the world and hoping that, by osmosis, it would happen. I think it’s like most parts, in that respect. There’s always that period of thinking, ‘What the hell have I gotten myself into?’”

Oldman joins a long list of actors, most of them Brits, who have played Churchill. He fondly recalled Robert Hardy, who played Churchill frequently (particularly in two 1980s miniseries), and Albert Finney, who portrayed him in a 2002 TV movie.

“The thing about Winston Churchill is, someone on the street, you would say ‘Winston Churchill,’ and they’ve all got an idea of who he is,” Oldman said. “I don’t know how much of that is contaminated by their memory. Are they remembering Churchill, or are they remembering Albert Finney as Churchill?”

Studying the newsreels of Churchill, Oldman said, “he was a man who was always marching. He was always ahead of everybody else. He was sort of skipping around. He was energized, cherubic, and had a sort of smile on his face and a twinkle in his eye.” That runs counter to the public image of a “man [who] was born in a bad mood, a curmudgeon, a grumpy old man with a cigar and a drink in his hand,” he said.

In “Darkest Hour,” director Joe Wright (“Atonement,” “Pride & Prejudice”) and screenwriter Anthony McCarten focused entirely on a brief period in Churchill’s life: the weeks in May and June 1940, as Churchill ascends to prime minister and fends off politicians on his own side wanting to make a peace deal with Hitler in the days leading to the Allied retreat at Dunkirk.

McCarten had a book about oratory, Oldman said, that said “there are three or four speeches that were considered some of the greatest speeches in the English language, and realized that they were all written in a very small space of time. He then looked into and researched why that would have been, what would have motivated such rhetoric in a very concentrated period? … It wasn’t a life, it wasn’t a whole life. It was a window, a snapshot of a very, very specific moment in time, when it would have all gone very pear-shaped.”

As it happens, “Darkest Hour” is the third movie this year to depict Dunkirk, after Christopher Nolan’s war drama “Dunkirk” and Lone Scherfig’s wartime comedy/romance “Their Finest.” But Oldman doesn’t feel his movie is in competition with them to tell the story.

“If anyone here is the winner, I think it’s history is the winner,” he said. “It is an absolutely thrilling piece of history that I think people have forgotten. It just became a name, Dunkirk.”

“Darkest Hour,” Oldman said, “is certainly a film about leadership, and above all about statesmanship. … I think every generation looks for great leadership in the world. Anywhere. It’s a universal thing. We didn’t set out to make anything topical or relevant. … If it connects and it resonates, than it’s a good thing.”

C’mon, who doesn’t love “A Christmas Story”?

No, it wasn’t a hit when it was released in 1983. But it has become a holiday TV classic.

Ralphie. The Red Ryder BB gun. “You’ll shoot your eye out.” Santa’s boot. The “major award”/leg lamp. The pink bunny pajamas. “I triple-dog-dare you.” The Bumpus hounds. Skut Farkus the bully. Beheading the duck.

If you loved that stuff — if you even liked it — the folks at Fox would like you to get all excited about “A Christmas Story Live!” Well, they want you to tune in and watch on Sunday (6 p.m., Ch. 13).

They’re promising a big, splashy production, beamed (to some viewers) live from the Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank, Calif. (It will air on a one-hour delay in Utah.)

“It’s one of those movies that you grow up loving, and we were so excited to get the opportunity to work on it as a musical,” said Benj Pasek, who co-wrote the songs with Justin Paul. “We’re thrilled to be able to do it as a live broadcast.”

It’s a TV version of the 2012 stage adaptation of the 1983 movie based on Jean Shepherd’s short stories, and it comes complete with singing and dancing. It’s the familiar story of Ralphie (newcomer Andy Walken), who wants a Red Ryder BB gun for Christmas. But his mother (Maya Rudolph) is sure he’ll shoot his eye out.

And, yes, the leg lamp makes an appearance.

The cast also includes Chris Diamantopoulos, Jane Krakowski, Ana Gasteyer, David Alan Grier and Ken Jeong. Matthew Broderick is the narrator — the grown-up version of Ralphie.

“Audiences have such an expectation coming in to see the show,” said Paul. “They know the movie back and forth. They know every scene that they’re excited to come in and see how we’re going to be able to imagine it onstage and, here, how we’re going to be able to imagine it in a live TV event.”

It’s a tricky task. And there’s an additional problem with “A Christmas Story” — the 2012 musical is, well, underwhelming. It’s not exactly memorable in its own right, and the music is, well, OK.

But there might be reason to hope. This was Pasek and Paul’s first Broadway show, written before they went on to win an Oscar for “La La Land” and a Tony for “Dear Evan Hansen.” And they’ve written some additional songs for this TV version of “A Christmas Story.”

We’ll find out on Sunday if they were able to pull this off. And where “A Christmas Story Live” fits on the list of of live TV musicals in recent years, which looks like this:

1. “Grease” (Jan. 31, 2016, Fox)

perfect, but the musical numbers were handsomely mounted and well produced, the performances were decent and the direction brought the kind of energy needed to turn a stage production into entertaining TV.

2. “Hairspray” (Dec. 7, 2016, NBC)

NBC mimicked Fox’s “Grease” with a production very much in the same vein — albeit with several technical glitches that detracted from the overall effect. The musical numbers were better than the narrative segments, but that’s pretty much the norm for these live airings.

3. “The Wiz” (Dec. 3, 2015, NBC)

It was big, bright and colorful, with some great performances. And it was a considerable improvement over the wildly disappointing 1978 theatrical film. But it felt like it was trapped in a box — a static telecast of a stage show, which is not good TV.

4. “The Sound of Music” (Dec. 5, 2013, NBC)

Carrie Underwood can sing, but she was miscast as Maria because, well, she can’t act. And when your lead can’t act, that’s a big problem. The musical numbers were fine, but this overlong production was flat.

5. “Peter Pan” (Dec. 4, 2014, NBC)

Wow. About the nicest word associated with this would be “ponderous.” It was way too long, disjointed, clunky and dull.

Tommy used to work on the docks, Gina worked the diner all day, and Eric was once as big a Bon Jovi fan as you’ll ever meet.

Moving past my regrettable self-reference in the third person, those are, indeed, harrowing words for a music reporter to reveal publicly, cringeworthy and eminently mockable as they may be, but there they are.

At the risk of incurring yet further scorn, I will double down: I regret nothing.

The first album I ever owned was Bon Jovi’s “New Jersey,” a now-gloriously dated cassette tape that was the prized centerpiece of a birthday haul all the way back in 1988.

Yes, I still have it.

In fact, I have most of what Bon Jovi’s released over the decades, being as close to a “completionist” as finances and effort ever allowed, though I’m sure the diehards out there would scoff at my utter lack of Japanese imports featuring B-side rarities. I guess, if I’m being honest, I’m an incomplete completist.

Whatever. Let’s get to the news du jour and to the point.

Bon Jovi, torchbearer of that ’80s subgenre variously (and sometimes ignominiously) known as hair metal, pop metal, and — ugh — butt rock, has been elected to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.

This is either a tremendous honor or further unequivocal confirmation of the institution’s irrelevance, depending on your perspective.

For the sake of forgoing further digressions, for now we’ll eschew all arguments that the Hall of Fame’s very existence — the very premise of determining which music is “best,” for that matter — is an antithetical affront to the rebellion originally inherent in the very fibers of rock ’n’ roll.

Let’s instead, for now, agree that the Rock Hall is a thing, even a valid thing, and shift the debate to the more pertinent question: Does Bon Jovi deserve to be there?

For the sake of comparison, the band’s fellow Class of 2018 inductees are The Cars, Dire Straits, The Moody Blues, Nina Simone and Sister Rosetta Tharpe. Not the most progressive bunch, I think we can all agree. So, perhaps, in that respect, Bon Jovi fits right in.

And yet …

Despite more than 120 million albums sold, despite Bon Jovi still ranking among the top-grossing touring bands annually, despite the murderers’ row of radio hits that you know you sing along to, there is that segment of the music-loving populace who will forever be loath to concede that even the most benignly milquetoast praise of the band is valid.

My wife, who is one of these people, forwarded me an article the other day in which founder and frontman Jon Bon Jovi declared he would be amenable to performing at the induction ceremony with longtime guitarist and songwriting partner Richie Sambora, who departed the band suddenly and unexpectedly in 2013, and who has not yet returned and perhaps never will.

Along with the link came a bit of commentary from her: “Mutual destruction. That’s the only option.” She later clarified: “I’d settle for a hair-drenching bloodbath. … Actually, let’s not say ‘hair-drenching bloodbath.’ Maybe just have them beat the s--- out of each other. I don’t want to sound like a psychopath!”

OK, then.

Why such venom for a hair metal/pop metal/ butt rock band?

You know what? It doesn’t matter.

Here’s the thing — I believe Bon Jovi belongs. You may chalk this Pollyanna-ish opinion up to unbridled fanboyism, if you wish. But — and here’s where I heretically invoke that infamous third-person reference one last time — please remember I started this whole ill-fated exercise off by stating: “Eric was once as big a Bon Jovi fan as you’ll ever meet.”

Yes, I still buy every new album when it comes out, but this is partly attributable to my proclivity for nostalgia and partly attributable to my aforementioned completism.

Being perfectly candid, their last exceptional effort was 1995’s “These Days,” and, beyond that, I haven’t particularly enjoyed much the band has done since 2005’s “Have a Nice Day.” Furthermore, I kinda agree with the critics that the now-well-worn formula of verse/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/solo/chorus/chorus — all featuring increasingly eye-rolling schmaltz and insipid platitudes (“Where memories live and the dream don’t fail/This house is not for sale” … Really?!) — is doing Bon Jovi no favors.

And yet …

“Slippery When Wet” is a classic. “New Jersey” was a stellar follow-up. “Keep the Faith” changed the creative tone but continued the run of success. And “These Days” remains one of the most heinously, egregiously underappreciated albums of all time — an opinion I got to share personally with longtime Bon Jovi bassist Hugh McDonald this past June (and which he smilingly agreed with).

But I know, I know — Bon Jovi is formulaic, uninventive cheese.

It’s also fun. (God forbid rock ’n’ roll ever have that stigma attached to it.)

Come induction day, April 14, me, Tommy and Gina will be wearing our acid-washed jeans and having a party, with old Bon Jovi tracks on repeat ad nauseam.

Sorry, cynics — your invitation must’ve gotten lost in the mail.

Video: Melissa Richmond thought she’d lost out on a career in politics after an encounter with former congressman Trent Franks (R-Ariz.). Now she works for a nonpartisan group that helps women start political careers.(Kate Woodsome, Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

I’ve always been proud of the ways I’m independent. So when a middle-aged man stopped me in a parking garage and asked me to jump-start his car several years ago, I was happy to help. As we worked to get his car running, we talked. I mentioned I was a first-year law school student who had worked in politics. He said he was impressed that I had jumper cables (he didn’t) and that I knew how to use them. He also said he was a member of Congress and asked me to follow up with him if I wanted a summer internship.

I half-expected that the person I had helped wasn’t really a congressman. But, sure enough, he was. I called the number he gave me (it was his cellphone) and said I would like to be considered for an internship.

For first-year law school students, securing a summer job is stressful. Naturally, I was excited when I was invited to the congressman’s office to interview with his senior staff. For a 23-year-old, I had extensive political experience. I had worked in a governor’s office, on a PAC and on a presidential campaign. After the interviews, the congressman’s office offered me a summer internship focusing on his Judiciary Committee work.

Several weeks went by. Then something unusual happened. The congressman called me on my cellphone — from his cellphone — late on a Sunday night. He mentioned that his family wasn’t home and asked me whether I could come over that night for a “final one-on-one interview” with him.

I was stunned. Senior members of his staff had interviewed me weeks before and offered me the position. After speaking with my family, I called the congressman back and told him I didn’t feel comfortable going to his house. In that case, he told me, the internship offer was rescinded.

I should have marched back into the congressman’s office the next morning and demanded that they honor their offer. Or I should have gone to House leadership and made a formal report. But I didn’t want to ruffle any feathers, and, at that point, I didn’t want to work for a member who would rescind a job offer because I wouldn’t go to his house alone late at night.

Eight years later, that lawmaker — Arizona Republican Trent Franks — has resigned, in the wake of reports that he asked two female staff members to be a surrogate mother for his child. In his resignation letter, Franks said, “I have absolutely never physically intimidated, coerced, or had, or attempted to have, any sexual contact with any member of my congressional staff.” I can’t say for certain what would have happened had I gone to his house that night. I do know that I never should have been put in that uncomfortable position or been penalized for refusing.

Looking back, I’m struck by my own lack of action. An opportunity was taken from me because I declined to put myself in a situation that felt wrong and dangerous. But I also didn’t demand that the opportunity be reinstated, nor did I report the behavior that made me uncomfortable.

I have spent the past five years at Running Start, a nonpartisan nonprofit that trains young women to run for political office. The research that underlies our mission finds that women win at the same rates as men when they run but that there aren’t enough women running and that women lose their political ambition and confidence in their qualifications in high school and college. Congressmen such as Franks aren’t helping young women feel politically ambitious or confident in their qualifications.

At the time, I think I felt simultaneously that the harm done to me was not enough to report and that I was not powerful enough to report it. I’m thankful to, and inspired by, the women who did speak up. And I am especially cognizant of the additional barriers to speaking up faced by some women, such as women of color, LGBTQ folks, people with disabilities, mothers, immigrants and others.

So, to all young women who want to run for office, you also inspire me. I hope to one day have daughters who will look up to elected leaders such as you. To my future daughters, here’s my advice: If something feels wrong or unsafe, speak up. Speak up even if it makes you seem unlikable. Speak up even if you’re young or if the other person is far more powerful. Speak up even if, in doing so, you are perceived as less credible. Speak up even if you think it will hurt your political career. Speak up because you deserve to be heard and because, in speaking up, you will make it easier for other young women to run for office someday.

- - -

Editor’s note: Former representative Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) provided the following statement via text message to The Post in response to the account in Melissa Richmond’s op-ed: “I can categorically state that I have never invited any person applying for any job in my office to be interviewed in my home.” Asked whether he recalled meeting Richmond, discussing a summer job with her, inviting her to his home or withdrawing an internship offer, Franks responded, “With all due respect, my statement was unequivocal and will have to stand as my final response to the query.”

- - -

Richmond is vice president of Running Start.

Provo • A Utah woman has been sentenced to at least five years in prison for her role in the fatal shooting of a man at a house in Provo in March.

Maria Hernandez was one of four people charged in the death of Gustavo Ramirez.

The Provo Daily Herald reports she was sentenced Wednesday for manslaughter and aggravated burglary.

The man accused of actually shooting Ramirez, Jesse Gourdin, has been charged with capital murder.

Another accomplice, Brayden Marshall, also has pleaded guilty to manslaughter and aggravated burglary. His sentencing is set for Jan. 3.

Los Angeles • Thousands of firefighters tried Sunday to shield coastal communities from one of the biggest wildfires in California history while a funeral procession rolled past burn-scarred hillsides in honor of one of their colleagues who was killed battling the flames.

Crews cleared brush and dug containment lines above hillside neighborhoods in Santa Barbara County, taking advantage of slightly calmer winds a day after gusts fanned a flare-up that prompted more evacuations.

“Everything’s holding really well,” fire information officer Lisa Cox said. “Thousands of homes have been saved.”

While gusts had eased somewhat, even lower intensity winds were still dangerous, she warned. The fire northwest of Los Angeles was 40 percent contained.

Television news footage showed at least one structure burned on property in the wealthy enclave of Montecito, and authorities said damage assessments could take days.

Mourners stood on freeway overpasses to pay respects to firefighter Cory Iverson, 32, who died Thursday of burns and smoke inhalation. His funeral procession was scheduled to wind through five Southern California counties before ending up at a funeral home in San Diego, where he was based with a state fire engine strike team. He is survived by his pregnant wife and a 2-year-old daughter.

The blaze is also blamed for the death of a 70-year-old woman who died in a car crash on an evacuation route.

The fire that started nearly two weeks ago has burned more than 1,000 structures, including at least 750 homes. Some 18,000 more homes are still threatened.

Some evacuation orders were lifted to the east in Ventura County, where the blaze erupted, and officials reported making progress protecting the inland agricultural city of Fillmore.

Jim Holden returned to his neighborhood in the city of Ventura to find his home still standing amid widespread destruction. He told KABC-TV that at the height of the inferno, when it appeared his house would be lost, firefighters risked their own safety to retrieve his belongings.

“They broke in and they saved my family photos,” Holden said, wiping away tears.

Mike and Dana Stoneking lost their Ventura home while many of their neighbors’ properties were spared. The Stonekings planned to rebuild and found some solace after retrieving Mike’s wedding ring from the ashes.

The 420-square-mile blaze called the Thomas Fire crested a peak just north of Montecito, where evacuation orders remained in effect. Known for its star power, the enclave includes the mansions of Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres and many other celebrities.

“Still praying for our little town,” Winfrey tweeted. It was not clear if the former talk show host was in Montecito.

A portion of the city of Santa Barbara was also evacuated as a thick plume of smoke blew through city streets. At the city’s zoo, workers put some animals into crates and kennels to ready them for possible evacuation.

Everything about the fire has been massive, from the sheer scale of destruction that cremated entire neighborhoods to the legions of people attacking it. About 8,300 firefighters from nearly a dozen states battled the third largest wildfire in state history, aided by 78 bulldozers and 29 helicopters.

The cause remains under investigation. So far, firefighting costs have surpassed $117 million.

During Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annual press conference on Thursday, a friendly journalist asked Putin whether the escalating tension in relations with the U.S. and the crumbling of arms control treaties would draw Russia into an unsustainable arms race. “We will ensure our security without engaging in an arms race,” the president replied, citing widely diverging dollar numbers for the U.S. and Russian defense budgets.

That’s a simplistic answer from a politician starting an election campaign (of sorts: Putin is headed for re-election in March without giving anyone else a chance). The more pointed question that should be asked is this: How, with a relatively small and decreasing military budget — 2.77 trillion rubles ($42.3 billion) for 2018, down from some 3.05 trillion rubles this year — is Russia is still a formidable military rival to the U.S., with its enormous and increasing budget of almost $692.1 billion in 2018, up from $583 billion this year?

The equalizing value of the two countries’ well-balanced nuclear deterrents is enough of a reason to avoid direct confrontation. But leaving that aside, Putin may well understand the nature of modern military challenges better than U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. legislators — and Russia’s authoritarian system may be more efficient when it comes to military allocations. Note that Russia is now almost an equal to the U.S. as a power broker in the Middle East, where the Russian military has just helped Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad effectively win a civil war — in which the U.S. was helping the other side. At the same time, Russian defense spending numbers are deceptive. The country is far more militarized than its defense spending suggests. That level of security spending is only sustainable at the expense of Russia’s future.

Trump’s military spending hike, which makes it necessary to remove the existing cap on defense expenditure, is a dubious and likely outdated response to decreased global security.

Quite aside from the cost of maintaining the world’s most powerful military, the U.S., according to the Washington think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies, has spent at least $2 trillion on its wars since 2001. But, considering the less transparent costs, such as those of caring for veterans, war-related increases to the Department of Defense base budget and interest on the debt taken on to cover defense spending, it’s closer to $4 trillion at the very least. The Afghan conflict has cost the U.S. at least $840 billion — more than four times Afghanistan’s cumulative GDP since 2001. Since the 2018 U.S. defense budget contains additional funds for sending 3,500 more troops to Afghanistan, the results of the massive outlay over the years are clearly suboptimal.

Today’s wars aren’t fought with fat wads of money. The adversaries are mostly small, agile forces that aren’t as well-resourced as nation states. Fighting them requires a combination of local knowledge, brute force applied only at important points in a conflict and ability to shift risks onto the shoulders of irregular fighters. Russia kept cutting its defense budget all through its participation in the Syrian war. Yabloko, an opposition party, earlier this year put the cost of the Syrian operation for Russia at about 140.4 billion rubles ($2.4 billion at the current exchange rate) since September, 2015; that’s some 4 percent of what the U.S. allocated to overseas contingency operations in 2017 alone — and the outcome is as good as Russia could have expected.

The U.S. is pumping money into comparatively inefficient warfighting — and into preparing for the kind of large-scale war that’s not likely to take place because of existing nuclear arsenals and unauthorized nuclear proliferation. Even North Korea, with its unknown but probably small nuclear capability, is dangerous enough to deter the U.S. from attacking. At his press conference, Putin made the point that the U.S. couldn’t know for sure where to strike in North Korea — and if the Kim regime managed to get a single long-range, nuclear-armed missile in the air, the results could be catastrophic.

U.S. defense budgets, of course, feed a large, powerful domestic industry; even the indirect U.S. involvement in a conflict lifts the stock prices of major defense contractors, research has shown. In Russia, the biggest contractors are state-controlled; they have far less lobbying clout, and the technocratic Russian government has kept them on a short leash, though some of the military’s purchasing decisions have served regional development rather than defense purposes. Such an arrangement, which would have been inefficient in most other industries, probably reduces wasteful spending in the budget-dependent military-industrial complex.

That said, in relative terms, Russia is spending more on force-related functions than the U.S. does. Trump’s budget proposal allocated $71.8 billion to the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department. Add that up with the defense spending, and the total security budget will stand at $764 billion, less than 19 percent of total federal spending. Russia will spend a combined 29 percent of its federal budget — some 4.8 trillion rubles — on defense and domestic security. That’s probably not all of the security-related outlay either, as Mark Galeotti pointed out earlier this year: Even some of the education and development spending in Russia goes toward military goals.

In the U.S., federal law enforcement outlay is a fraction of defense spending. In Russia, the two areas of government expenditure are almost equal. That’s the difference between a country with a relatively liberal domestic order and a near-dictatorship, which relies heavily on the suppression of dissent and must keep large law enforcement agencies under centralized control.

Russia could show the world how to spend efficiently on more than adequate defense — but instead it is engaged in an arms race against its own development. For years, it has been underfunding areas such as education and health, undermining what Putin told the press conference was his vision of the country’s future — flexible, technology-driven, highly productive. Judging by Putin’s answers to reporters on Thursday, he still prefers not to notice that.

Bershidsky is a Bloomberg View columnist. For more columns from Bloomberg View, visit http://www.bloomberg.com/view

Bragging rights aside, the biggest loss the Utes suffered last week wasn’t Saturday night’s game against rival BYU.

The loss of freshman forward Donnie Tillman will have a much more far-reaching effect. Tillman, who’d become a mainstay in the Utah rotation in the first nine games, sat out the BYU game with a sprained left foot. The 6-foot-7, 225-pound hard-nosed forward watched from the sideline with a protective boot as Utah fell 77-65 in the Marriott Center.

“That’s the nature of a basketball season,” Utes coach Larry Krystkowiak said. “I know for us in a game like this, he might be the first person that I would say we need, you know, when you’ve got that physical nature to you and you like this [type of game].

“You look at games of this nature – our UNLV loss, our Butler loss – he was really our leader in both those games. He’s a guy that gives you a little presence. That one hurt. No doubt about it, but no excuses. We got out butts beat, didn’t deserve to win.”

Utah forward Tyler Rawson: "You can't make this atmosphere up." pic.twitter.com/7MV6RqFyTz

— Lynn Worthy (@LWorthySports) December 17, 2017

Tillman has seemed like a one-man bench brigade at times. Despite coming off the bench in each of the first nine games, Tillman played an average of 22.9 minutes per game and scored 10 points or more in seven consecutive games, including a 20-point game on the road against Butler.

Krystkowiak said Tillman’s foot sprain initially occurred against Butler on Dec.5. Tillman played against Utah State in the Beehive Classic, but dealt with foul trouble in the first half and went scoreless in 16 minutes in the game. It’s not clear how much time Tillman will miss.

Tillman went into the weekend as the team’s third-leading scorer (10.7 points per game) while shooting 53 percent from the field and 87 percent from the free throw line. He was also tied for the team lead in rebounds per game (6.2).

The way Tillman has played – he brought a rugged nature and provided a second low-post scoring option along with senior big man David Collette – will be as difficult to replace, if not more, as his statistical production.

“We’ve tried to make the game plan this week about having some guards play bigger spots and trying to adjust match-ups,” Utes senior forward Tyler Rawson said. “We had a good plan prepared coming in. We obviously missed Donnie, his post presence, his physical play, but we need to do better to step up and fill his shoes.”

Larry Krystkowiak on the setting: "Look around. This is what it's all about." pic.twitter.com/I9RLS3UQiq

— Lynn Worthy (@LWorthySports) December 17, 2017

Utes forward Chris Seeley, a super athletic 6-foot-8 redshirt freshman, remains sidelined following gallbladder surgery on Dec. 1. Seeley was also watching Saturday’s game from the bench and not in uniform. Krystkowiak has not given a timetable on Seeley’s return.

Sophomore wing Kolbe Caldwell played 18 minutes against BYU, his most playing time since he played 19 minutes in the season opener against Prairie View A&M. Caldwell scored two points and grabbed two rebounds.

Rawson, who fell two rebounds shy of a triple-double against BYU, has been utilized as a perimeter-oriented forward stretching the floor and providing space for post players like Collette and Tillman. Rawson seems likely to remain in that role.

Sophomore center Jayce Johnson would appear to be the Utes next best interior scoring option. Johnson, who missed the first two games of the season with an ankle injury, has battled a penchant for piling up fouls this season (28 in 120 minutes). However, Johnson has averaged 7.1 points and 5.1 rebounds off the bench while shooting 56.4 percent from the field.

Kearns • As she prepared for the final day of trials at the Utah Olympic Oval, Jessica Kooreman had to wonder.

Is this it? Is it over?

Kooreman, 34, had struggled through the first of two days of the U.S. short-track speed skating trials and knew going into Sunday that there was only one spot still open, one chance to get back to the Olympics.

By the end of the day, as she drenched her teammates with sparkling wine on the ice, Kooreman could finally relax.

“This was probably one of the most stressful competitions of my entire career, to say the least,” she said. “Nothing like leaving it until the very end, the very last race.”

Kooreman, of Melvindale, Mich., was one of three U.S. skaters on Sunday to punch their tickets to Pyeongchang, South Korea, as the United States’ short-track team was finalized. Ryan Pivirotto, of Ann Arbor, Mich., and Thomas Hong, of Laurel, Md., clinched the final two spots on the men’s short-track team.

“I’m super happy to finally qualify for the Olympic team,” the 20-year-old Hong said. “This was a dream years in the making. I’m just proud to be here.”

They will join U.S. skaters J.R. Celski (Federal Way, Wash.), Aaron Tran (Federal Way, Wash.), John-Henry Krueger (Pittsburgh), Maame Biney (Reston, Va.) and Lana Gehring (Glenview, Ill.) in Pyeongchang in February.

“It’s a great team,” U.S. coach Anthony Barthell said. “The team we’re going with is an extremely strong team.”

Pittsburgh’s John-Henry Krueger completed his weekend sweep, taking first place in the 500-, 1,000-, and 1,500-meter races.

“John-Henry’s been a talent ready to be unleashed,” Barthell said, “and he did it this weekend.”

Celski, the three-time Olympic medalist, qualified for a spot on the team Saturday but struggled throughout the weekend with equipment issues that caused multiple crashes. Nevertheless, Celski performed well enough to qualify for the both the 1,000- and 1,500-meter races.

Perhaps no skater, though, was feeling more pressure Sunday than Kooreman.

A fourth-place finisher in Sochi in 2014, Kooreman needed a strong Sunday to earn a trip to her second Olympic games. She won the first 1,000-meter final of the day and put herself within striking distance of earning the final roster spot with a win in her second semifinal race Sunday. But when she was taken out and crashed into the padding at the oval in her second final, Kooreman again had to wonder if her dream of getting back to the Olympics was over.

Kooreman picked herself up off the ice and finished in the third place, good enough for the final women’s spot.

“I went to battle this whole entire week and I fought through everything that came my way. Every challenge,” Kooreman said. “This definitely challenged me going into the end of the my career. I didn’t know if it was going to be over today, or if it was going to be over after Korea.

“Now I get to finish my career where I wanted to.”

U.S. short-track skating Olympic team<br>Men<br>John-Henry Krueger, Pittsburgh<br>J.R. Celski, Federal Way, Wash.<br>Aaron Tran, Federal Way, Wash.<br>Thomas Hong, Laurel, Md.<br>Ryan Pivirotto, Ann Arbor, Mich.<br>Women<br>Maame Biney, Reston, Va.<br>Lana Gehring, Glenview, Ill.<br>Jessica Kooreman, Melvindale, Mich

Midway through Utah’s loss to the Cleveland Cavaliers on Saturday night, Rodney Hood let out a slight chuckle when he looked at the guys wearing Jazz uniforms.

He recognized them as his teammates, that much is obvious. But he was on the floor with teammates who he hadn’t been on the floor with much this season. And teammates who were playing different positions for the first time this season.

“It was weird, I admit,” Hood said. “It was tough, but we made it work. I think a lot of guys have been able to pitch in and step up.”

For Hood and the Jazz, it goes to show how creative coach Quin Snyder has had to become with his lineups, as the Jazz have been one of the most injury-ridden teams in the league for a third consecutive season.

As Utah’s six-game road stretch continues in Houston on Monday night with a matchup against the league-leading Rockets, the Jazz’s situation is different, and unique, and challenging.

There’s no Rudy Gobert, as the all-NBA big man is sidelined with a significant knee sprain for the second time this season. He was injured in Friday night’s win over the Boston Celtics, and is out for at least two weeks.

And now, there’s no Derrick Favors, who took an elbow from Boston forward Jaylen Brown and received six stitches above his left eye. He tried to play Saturday night, but complained of a headache while warming up and was diagnosed with a concussion.

The Jazz have had injury issues with their big man duo in the past, just not at the same time. So, on Saturday night, Jonas Jerebko and Joe Johnson each played minutes at center. Part of this concerned matchups: Cleveland typically downsizes, especially with its second unit.

But beyond Ekpe Udoh, who blocked six shots against the Cavaliers, the Jazz simply don’t have many healthy big men remaining. Utah recalled rookie Tony Bradley, but he doesn’t have the experience just yet to be a rotation guy. Jerebko was Snyder’s best center option off the bench.

“We had to adapt to having a next-man-up mentality,” Johnson said. “We had to go with what we had. Whatever lineup coach threw out there, it’s on us to go out there and play hard.”

What it means is this: For the second time this season, the Jazz are going to have to play a completely different style of basketball, which can be traumatic for any NBA team. With Favors and Gobert, Utah plays slow and deliberate offensively. Defensively, the Jazz funnel opposing ballhandlers into the waiting arms of their shot blockers.

When Gobert missed 11 games previously, the Jazz played at a faster pace. They played smaller lineups and took more perimeter shots, taking advantage of more space.

For two weeks, Utah’s been trying to get used to having Gobert back in the lineup. And now, the Jazz have to go back to another style. In a year when big change has come to the roster, the Jazz are having to adjust on the fly during the season.

That’s not easy.

“It’s definitely different for all of us, but it is what it is,” Jerebko said. “This is what happens when you’re short-handed. You have to do what’s needed. We’re not used to it, but we have to go out there and make the best of the situation.”

For the first time this season, the Jazz have a healthy wing rotation, so that helps. That allowed Snyder to get a bit creative. Royce O’Neale — who didn’t play against the Celtics — scored a career-high 12 points. Thabo Sefolosha provided a lift, as did Johnson and Jerebko.

But the Jazz are going to be a small team in the short term. And that will hurt on Monday night against Houston, as Clint Capela has established himself as one of the best centers in the league. Wednesday night brings Oklahoma City and Steven Adams. Thursday brings San Antonio and the duo of LaMarcus Aldridge and Pau Gasol. OKC visits Vivint Smart Home Arena on Saturday. So, the Jazz are going to face a number of teams where they will be at a size disadvantage, if Favors can’t shake his concussion in the next few days.

“I think we made a few mistakes, but it’s just because guys haven’t played together as much. But we have a lot of focus and commitment, so we’re going to be fine.”

Utah Jazz at Houston Rockets<br>When - Monday, 6 p.m. MST<br>Where - Toyota Center, Houston<br>TV - AT&T SportsNet<br>Radio - 97.5 FM, 1280 AM<br>Records - Utah 14-16; Houston 24-4<br>Last Meeting - Houston 112-101, Dec. 8<br>About the Jazz • Utah has lost five of its last six games. … The Jazz are on the fourth of a six-game road stretch. … Utah’s 0-2 against the Rockets this season. … Jazz guard Donovan Mitchell (18.1 points per game) leads all NBA rookies in scoring.<br>About the Rockets • Houston is 14-0 this season with point guard Chris Paul in the lineup. … The Rockets are on a 13-game winning streak, with 10 coming by double-digits. … Houston will be playing its fourth game in six nights. … James Harden leads the NBA in scoring and is second in assists.