On occasion I will sprinkle commentary in my postings about being able to “see the game.” My reference for this, of course, is long ago participation in sporting competitions. Being undersized and below average, I never did develop a fully functional eye for the game around me on the football field. (Playing at a time and place where the game was 95% running the ball and the use of game film was still a rare novelty, my two years starting at safety allowed me to “watch” a whole lot of defensive football from a very unique position. I was able to study different player types…often contrasting the fast, powerful linebacker to the right who played at 150 mph and slobber-knocked the $&!t our of everything between him and the ball on every play and the slower, less powerful linebacker to the left who had an uncanny ability to get to where the ball was going as fast as the offensive players who knew the play ahead of time. I didn’t “see the game” as I use the term here but I learned quite a lot nonetheless.) The basketball court was another story. For the last year and a half of organized play, I saw it all. Such a skill offers certain advantages if one chooses to use it. Similar concepts apply in other “games.” I believe that thirty-five years of observing American politics from where I sit has conditioned me to see certain important aspects of that game. No doubt I have some blind spots…but I see the game fairly well.

Portions of the following are recreated here from my less than perfect memory banks:

___ ___ ___

…[trial by jury] would prove the most ingenious and infallible agency for defeating justice that human wisdom could contrive. For how could he imaging that we simpletons would go on using his jury plan after circumstances had stripped it of its usefulness … in our day…his plan compels us to swear in juries composed of fools and rascals, because the system rigidly excluded honest men and men of brains. …

In this age, when a gentleman of high social standing, intelligence, and probity, swears that testimony given under solemn oath will outweigh, with him, street talk and newspaper reports based on hearsay, he is worth a  hundred jurymen who will swear to their own ignorance and stupidity, and justice would be far safer in his hands than in theirs.  Why could not the jury law be so altered as to give men of brains and honesty an equal chance with fools and miscreants? – Roughin It by Mark Twain, Excerpts from Pages 346-348

On a long ago Wednesday morning I reported to the county courthouse as I was summoned to do. By early afternoon I was assigned to a case and send home for the day. The trial would begin first thing Thursday morning.

The execution of the trial – one involving a prior felony conviction, possession of a firearm, and possession of illegal substances – ate up all of Thursday and went into Friday afternoon. During that time there were short periods where I was able to get to know a little bit about my fellow jurors. Among them there was a engineer in his late 30s (very similar to me), a grade-school teacher in her mid-20s, a clear headed small business owner in his early 50s, and a woman in who appeared to be mid-30s with a very domineering personality. This major personality let it be known that she was leaving on a cruise on Monday and was very worried that this inconvenient duty was going to mess that up.

After what seemed to be very extensive instructions, we were closed-up in our room at about 3:30 in the afternoon to decide the case. Two of the three charges were adjudicated very quickly…the twelve of us agreed on much. The last charge started at 10-2 favoring “guilty”…and stayed right there through much discussion. I was among the “2” side of that tally and, over about a two hour period received many unapproving glances, condescending comments, and under-the-breath insults from those so cocksure of the “rightness” of their analysis of the situation: “This person was already going away, why not just get on board an make sure we get her on everything we can.” By about 6:15 PM the tally had shifted to 8-4 but there it seemed to stick.

At some point shortly after that, we were informed that we still had time that evening to complete this job and were urged to do so…but Monday was also an option. The strongest personality in the room commented again about her upcoming cruise. For a short period of time the deliberations against me became more urgent and even came across as desperate. At that point I sat back in my chair and ceased all attempts to convert others to my side…the clock was on my side. Over the next 45 minutes I watched as one of the most adamant votes for guilty until that point convinced every one of the other seven jurors who had been voting with her to change their vote. The game ended and we were on our way home shortly after 8:30 PM.

I still insist that justice was served that day…it just didn’t get there by the cleanest route.

I tell this story because I see our current game playing out in a similar manner over the next 14 months. Some of us will just have to sit through the condescension and arrogant cocksurety, then the desperation, and finally the capitulation (or petty abandonment) as the hands are played out as dealt. Circumstances have largely already laid out how this game is going to go…pissing contests between now and next August will only create hard feelings. I hope to avoid much of that…but, knowing me, there are certainly no guarantees.

Good day.