2018 IN RETROSPECT: THREE REFLECTIONS

As this year hurtles toward its demise, we see value in reflecting while we contemplate the coming of 2019. Here, therefore, are our individual reflections on 2018.

 

Rob’s thoughts:

As many who know me understand, owing to having been a 
speech teacher, I often think in threes. Therefore, three  reflections on 2018:

•   Managing a career switch.  As I related in this space on June 22, 2018, I’m turning my professional focus from
  
  law practice to writing. I have fiction and nonfiction projects underway, I’m in a writing group, and my novelist daughter (www.BiancaSloane.com) serves as my coach and mentor. I believe I’m making progress, but the enormity of the task sometimes overwhelms me. More than once I’ve asked if this falls into the category of “seemed like a good idea at the time.” Still, tackling the challenge energizes me and I remind myself I shouldn’t belittle what I have accomplished.

•   The spiritual journey continues.  As I also wrote here this year (September 6), I’ve found a spiritual home
  in progressive Christianity as practiced in some Unitarian Universalist  churches and in the United Church of Christ. My life partner and I visited several wonderful churches this year during our travels, broadening our horizons and encouraging study about the faith I’ve adopted. Reflecting on those experiences with her, and looking toward additional spiritual exploration, I see this dimension of my life growing in importance.

•   Confidence in American institutions.  Many progressive
  
  friends lament the state of our politics, given our divisions Donald Trump's presidency.  In 2018, Democrats reclaimed the House of Representatives and the country reclaimed the House of Representatives and the country began seeing the fruits of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s work. Both renewed my confidence ridding the nation of this cancer, whether through impeachment or merely voting him out in 2020, will become one of our finest hours.

   

Woodson’s reflections:   

In reflecting on 2018, I catalog my thoughts under “Family”, “Faith” and “Future.”

Family: Hope and I have always dreamed of our adult children becoming our best friends.

While that dream remains a work in progress, we believe we have achieved that. During 2018, we celebrated an art exhibit in New York by one child, a graduation from divinity school in Princeton, New Jersey by another, and I spent a “Walker Men’s Weekend” in Mississippi with two sons and two grandsons. These encounters provided safe spaces for sharing past pains and future hopes. We understand our children much better and they better understand us.

Faith: I remain grateful for our church, Mosaic Church of Central Arkansas, where men and women of diverse racial, ethnic, and socio-economic backgrounds worship, walk, and work

together as one. This is my third year leading the church’s Racial, Ethnic, and Cultural Diversity Circle. The Circle creates a safe place where people of diverse backgrounds, from within Mosaic and the larger community, can discuss race, religion, ethnicity, and culture. Through this Circle, I have become friends with people I wouldn’t have met under any other circumstance.

Future: President Trump’s assaults on our democratic institutions have increased my awareness of the importance

of these institutions and reminded me we should not take take them for granted.  The American press has encouraged me, as it has performed admirably in exercising its responsibility for protecting our democratic institutions and values. While I still believe our country is both a country of men and of laws, I recognize other countries, to a greater or lesser extent, are too. But our democratic form of government provides for the greatest flexibility in correcting misdirection of both men and laws, something I believe the recent mid-term elections demonstrate.

I look to the future enthusiastically!

Henry writes:

The kindness of the universe let me fully live again this year. A cloud of sadness prevailed at times in years just past, though I don’t wish to remember how many. Yes, there was faith, hope, prayer, and thankfulness. But, when your spouse, love, lover, friend, and companion faces life threatening illness, life itself changes. Though joys remain, shadows loom, creeping into every crevice of time not filled.

We talked, of course, of happy times and good fortune, past and present, but the future

hung like a dark cloud invading our space, inhibiting the relaxed breath of life. We continued doing familiar things, but endless trips to medical facilities, hours of surgery, significant, repeated recovery times, and procedures sealed us in a suffocating, living envelope intent on crushing our spirits. The thought of losing Pat was a venture into hopelessness, as those twins, belief and unbelief, occupied me.

It was a time we appreciated small things, enjoying the once

insignificant occurrences. The love of family and friends overwhelmed and helped rush us through our deepest descent into the most spirit crushing moments. This year brought all we hoped for, prayed for, all we struggled to envision. Now, on the other side of that dark, impenetrable cloud, we are blessed, thankful, and renewed. My joy is unlimited.   

          

PLAYOFF TIME IN COLLEGE FOOTBALL: WHO’S IN AND WHO SHOULD BE

College football’s playoff (the CFBP), beginning Saturday, December 29, presents two compelling semi-final games and bruised feelings among supporters of teams left out. Fans and pundits disagree about who’s playing as opposed to who should be. At least college football, with this format, has moved closer to what every other sport does – determining its champion on the field, not by a voting process. Acknowledging imperfections in the system shouldn’t detract from the scheduled games and the possibility of riveting contests between the best in the sport.

For those who haven’t been paying attention, on the 29th, Clemson plays Notre Dame in 

Dallas (ostensibly in the Cotton Bowl) and Alabama meets Oklahoma and Heisman Trophy winner Kyler Murray in Miami technically the Orange Bowl).

The winners play the title game January 7 in Santa Clara, California. These three contests will settle who wears the national championship crown for the 2018 season.

Some history

For years college football fans lamented the  

way the sport determined its national champion. Generally, it was the team that finished number one in the polls, as voted by media or coaches. Sometimes polls agreed and sometimes they didn’t. That meant competing championship claims, shared titles, and outrage. Clamoring for a playoff increased annually. College presidents, however, claimed a playoff would unnecessarily lengthen the season and interfere with the academic calendar, among other excuses. Finally, the pressure grew unbearable and the television networks threw money at the problem, so the system changed.

The Bowl Championship Series (BCS) institutionalized pairing the number one and number two teams in a “plus one” game at the end of the season. The BCS lasted 1998 - 2013, satisfying few. The separation between the top two and the next two didn’t justify leaving out three and four. In 2014 the CFPB started.  Supposedly, this system stays in place until 2025 when the television contract expires.

Unlike the BCS, the CFBP doesn’t just match  the top ranked teams from the polls. A committee comprised of athletic directors, former coaches, ex-players, and other “experts” ranks the teams, pairing one against four and two against three in national semi-final games on New Year’s weekend. The winners meet a week or so later at a neutral site. Ohio State won the first crown after the 2014 season, Alabama captured championships for 2015 and 2017, and Clemson took its title after the 2016 season. 

This year’s games

The odds favor another Clemson – Alabama showdown. The Tigers and the Tide have met three times in the four-year history of the CFBP, with Alabama winning twice, including in last year’s semi-finals. Nick Saban’s team doesn’t look invincible, but most credible, experienced observers expect an Alabama win over Oklahoma. The Sooners own a dynamic offense averaging an insane 49.5 points per game.

Murray, who’s reportedly debating whether he’ll stick with his plans for giving up football in favor of a baseball career, will drive the Alabama defense nuts with his electric feet and accurate arm. Oklahoma boasts an experienced, accomplished offensive line, explosive receivers (just ask the Texas secondary), and very capable running backs. Unfortunately for coach Lincoln Riley and the Sooner faithful, Murray doesn’t play defense. For most of the year, the Oklahoma defense has been, putting it politely, just plain awful. Alabama turnovers probably represent Oklahoma’s best chance.

The Clemson-Notre Dame game presents a bit more intrigue.  Clemson, at times this year, has been off-the-charts dominant.  The Tigers sliced through the middle of their schedule, beating Wake Forest, 63-3, Florida State 59-10, Louisville, 77-16, and North Carolina State, 41-7.  A defensive line with three (or four) first round NFL draft choices will keep the Tigers in any game they play. Clemson, however, starts a freshman quarterback who, though incredibly talented, remains a freshman. Occasionally, the Tiger offense stagnates. Additionally, arch rival South Carolina torched the Clemson pass defense. Notre Dame, though unbeaten and solid, hasn’t been spectacular. Many are skeptical about the overall talent on this Irish squad. Can Notre Dame compete with the stud linemen, receivers, and defenders Clemson has? Look for a close game Clemson wins, setting up the next Clemson-Alabama bloodletting.

The left outs

When the CFBP began, everyone knew the format would leave out worthy teams (i.e. those ranked five, six, seven, etc.). The anger this year centered on  Big Ten champion

Ohio State, Southeastern Conference runner-up Georgia, and undefeated  Group of Five power Central Florida. A very good case exists for each, but each fell short in some way.

This is as good a place as any for advocating

an eight-team playoff – the Power Five conference champions and three at-large teams, with one spot tentatively reserved for a Group of Five member (this would operate as a presumption, not a hard and fast rule and some years no Group of Five team would get in).  This year, 1 seed Alabama (SEC) would play 8 seed Washington (Pac 12), 2 seed Clemson (ACC) would play 7 seed UCF (at large), 3 seed Notre Dame (at large) would meet six seed Ohio State (Big 10), and 4 seed Oklahoma (Big 12) would play 5 seed Georgia (at large). This wouldn’t stop all the complaining, but it would mean one thing: if you want in, win your conference championship or settle for what the committee give you.

Now, we’re headed for the television set. Who’s joining us?                            

THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY END GAME: DOES HE STAY? DOES HE LEAVE? HOW DOES HE LEAVE?

We aren’t there yet. In Robert Frost’s words, we have miles to go before we sleep. But, we are headed for the Trump presidency end game. We’ve been thinking about what that might look like. We see rough sledding and hard choices ahead – for Trump and for American Democracy.  

The Gathering Storm

On November 6, Americans resoundingly gave Democrats control of the United States House of Representatives. This poses potentially dire consequences for the Trump presidency. House Democrats can, and will, investigate Trump’s misdeeds as the current Republican majority wouldn’t. Most important, the new majority can initiate impeachment proceedings. The likelihood Democrats will conclude they have no other choice has recently increased exponentially.

After keeping quiet while the election unfolded, Special Counsel Robert Mueller re-emerged with a bang. Mueller’s recent actions, and others we might see soon, put Trump squarely in danger of facing impeachment in 2019. First, Mueller obtained a guilty plea from former Trump lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen for lying to Congress about the Trump organization’s plans for a hotel in Russia in 2016 while Trump claimed he had no business activities in Russia. Second, in sentencing memos for former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, Cohen, and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Mueller hinted he and other federal prosecutors continue investigating additional potential Trump crimes. Meanwhile, Southern District of New York prosecutors squarely accused Trump of directing Cohen in committing federal campaign finance felonies.   

Left Photo: Cohen/Right Photo: Manafort - PhotoCred: Business Insider

 

Eventually, it seems likely Mueller will tell Congress what he knows, if he follows the generally, though not universally, accepted

principle he can’t indict a sitting President. Assuming Mueller goes with this procedure, and believing as we do his report will contain significant evidence of Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the House Judiciary Committee will report out articles of impeachment and the full House will vote for impeachment. That requires only a simple majority. What then?

In search of 20 Republican senators

Under the U.S. Constitution, once the House impeaches a President, conviction and removal from office require a two-thirds vote in the Senate. The new Senate includes 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats. If all 47 Democrats vote for conviction, removing Trump from office could occur only if 20 Republican senators agree. Where would those votes come from and why? 

By the time the Senate votes—probably 2019 or early 2020 – election year politics will have intervened. How much political strength will Trump retain? How will that figure in the calculations of Republican senators soon facing the electorate? Richard Nixon’s experience provides clues.

In the summer of 1974, the House Judiciary Committee, after

Nixon family boarding Air Force One for last time Aug. 9, 1974

riveting televised hearings, voted out three impeachment articles. The outcome in the full House was clear, given the Democratic majority. Attention shifted to the Senate, even before the House vote. Nixon’s approval rating had fallen to about 25 percent. Republicans faced catastrophic losses in the upcoming mid-terms if Nixon remained in office. A delegation of “wise men” – senior Republican senators led by Arizona’s conservative icon Barry Goldwater and Pennsylvania’s moderate Hugh Scott -- trekked to the White House and told Nixon his Senate support had fallen below the Mendoza line. He couldn’t survive because Republicans couldn’t survive. Nixon resigned. 

For three reasons, we see the odds against this happening again. First, Trump probably wouldn’t listen. Second, no “wise men” with the stature of Goldwater and Scott remain in the GOP senatorial ranks. Who’d do that job now? Lindsey Graham? Mitch McConnell? Marco Rubio? With all due respect, we doubt it in each case. If he were here and if he were a Republican, Lloyd Bentsen might tell each one, “I knew Barry Goldwater. Barry Goldwater was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Barry Goldwater.”

Third, we question whether Trump’s approval rating ever falls into the 20s. He probably got it right when he said he could get away with shooting someone on Fifth Avenue in New York. We haven’t seen signs of Trump’s hard core 35-38 percent deserting him. That makes identifying 20 GOP senators who’d bail a stretch, especially since we see only two (Maine’s Susan Collins and Colorado’s Cory Gardner) facing re-election in 2020 in states Hillary Clinton carried in 2016.

The old fashioned way

Once upon a time, the brokerage firm Smith Barney ran a television campaign using the distinguished, if crusty, actor John Houseman as its spokesperson. Houseman ended the ads asserting Smith Barney made money for its clients, “the old fashioned way – they earn it.” Looking at the political realities, and the numbers, we conclude the United States probably can rid itself of the debilitating, destructive Trump presidency only in the old fashioned way – voting him out in 2020.   

Mueller’s probe now suggests Trump and his associates (1) colluded or conspired with Russia in interfering in the 2016 election, (2) obstructed justice by impeding the investigation into that collusion, (3) lied to the American people, and perhaps to investigators, about business dealings with foreign countries, and (4) committed numerous other still undisclosed crimes. Once Muller makes known the details of Trump’s “high crimes and misdemeanors,” we believe the evidence will demand conviction and removal from office. Republican senators and their Trump supporters will have to decide on making the ultimate bargain with the devil: leaving Trump as President, despite his assaults on the rule of law and possible destruction of NATO, all in exchange for more conservative Supreme Court appointees and retaining tax cuts for the rich.  As we’ve said, we doubt enough Republican senators vote for conviction. That leaves doing it the old fashioned way.