mindoverchatter.com

Today everything changed for the better: Barack Obama became the 44th President of the United States.  As soon as he (’faithfully’) spoke that last word from the Oath of Office there was a shift.  Could you feel it?

If you missed the exact moment, just put your attention on the Obama Inauguration and the difference is still in the air. I figure it’s from the overwhelming lightness of raised expectations, or even the feeling of all nations uniting under a new,  intelligent leadership aimed at keeping our planet alive. (Imagine that.)

Whatever the reason, with Obama comes a noticeably strong feeling for good change—strong, not only for our nation’s future but for the future of the entire world.

We could look at it like this. Once again, there are more possibilities for education, advancement and achievement in all things good. Plus these pathways have opened up for many more people who had little chance for self improvement during the last 8 years.

In other words, where there was weakness, there is now strength.

The difference between the weakness of the Bush/Cheney regime versus the strength of the Obama presidency is palpable. And I am not using this word lightly, either. I know most of you can feel the difference in your body.  Just shut off your mind and switch back and forth between the two presidencies with the idea of feeling.

Pause to feel.

OK, everybody, this is where you might want to pay attention. What if this simple concept of strong and weak could be applied to everyday life with its everyday circumstances? What if anybody could tap into those feelings of strong and weak at anytime?

To put it bluntly, you would know the best choices for yourself and your loved ones: This would include  the best solutions to any of life’s problems.  Here’s the good part.  With this knowledge comes the realization of your own potential along with optimum health in body, mind and spirit.

All answers to life’s questions would be based on the simple feelings of strong and weak. It would be like a pulse you could easily check in on at any time, at any place.

Think about it……correction…feel it.

OK, I admit it.  I’m worried—worried that in spite of the ‘L’ word (landslide), John McCain and his McManiacs might still win.  Worried that traditional Republican swift-boating will once again undermine everything we’ve lived for these past eight years—this time with offensive mailers and cheap robocalls:

“Hello. I’m calling for John McCain and the RNC because you need to know that Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge’s home, and killed Americans.”

Can anyone blame me for worrying? Republicans know how to make terrorists out of loyal Americans and baby killers out of decent men, not to mention cowards out of heroes (Remembering John Kerry). And let’s never forget that the Supreme Court can decide elections (Remembering Bush v Gore).  How is this 2008 presidential election going to be different from the last two? Not to paraphrase Rod Stewart, but do we have enough reasons to believe?

Happy to say, I’ve found a few dozen and invite everyone to find more.  I’m sorry. I still need more. There’s strength in more.

Last night my friend Chris, who predicted an Obama landslide way back in July, asked me, “Is this one of those college basketball games that you can’t enjoy till the final second, even though your team is whipping butt?”  “Yea, it is,” I had to admit.

That’s why I’ve spent the whole day crawling the Web in search of why Senator Obama is gonna be our next President, no matter what happens. Face it, folks, he won’t win because it’s FAIR. If there’s any justice in this silly world, it happens over millenniums, and sometimes we’re just lucky enough to be alive during a fair stretch.

We’re just lucky that the ‘08 Democratic candidate is smarter, younger and cuter, ’cause that gets votes.  With Obama we can even throw in more honorable, along with a fearless ability to stay on-message while standing next to an enraged bull.

I mean, shouldn’t everyone want to have a beer with the dude who won’t fly off the handle and cause a ruckus?  Heck, folks, it’s pretty bad when a presidential candidate blasts a neutral debate moderator in the guts: “Not you, Tom”. (Remembering Tom Brokaw.)

I’ll tell you what I really like about Barack Obama—the tone of his voice, especially in comparison to that other one.  When Fox News had to admit that Barack Obama is the better speaker of the two, you know it’s got to be true.  Follow the link to a YouTube video called ‘McCain Leaves Fox Speechless’, for their impromptu assessment.  “Awful! Pathetic! Painful! Hopeless,” the mediabots cried.

Shouldn’t we feel sorry for McCain? We are liberals. My answer is a simple We don’t dare! The fact is, folks, the dude was so spoiled as a child that he would hold his breath to get his way—for which his family found the perfect solution—-they dunked him in ice water. No wonder he was against waterboarding before he was for it. (Remembering McCain and the torture bill.)

Tim Dickinson of Rolling Stone calls McCain a Make-Believe Maverick and sheds some light on early childhood:  “Trailing his hard-charging, hard-drinking father from post to post, McCain didn’t play well with others. Indeed, he concedes, his runty physique inspired a Napoleon complex: ‘My small stature motivated me to . . . fight the first kid who provoked me.’ ”

Which brings me back to another reason Obama should win besides the obvious.  Generally speaking, the taller candidate prevails, and John McCain at 5′6″ can’t look 6′1″ Obama in the eyes without a neck adjustment. Sad to say, we have only to think of John Kerry and that argument flies out the window.  There are some, however, who insist that Ohio’s electoral votes were stolen (Remembering Dennis Kucinich.)

That’s why the count for Obama has to be so far ahead in the first returns that any attempts at thievery will be a mute joke.  This time, the Democratic candidate has to be prepared for anything. This time, he needs to see where the Republicans are headed before they get there.

Maybe that’s what’s already happening. Witness the fact that the Democrats are calling for an investigation into the probability (correction inevitability) that the Bush Administration Justice Department is in league with John McCain’s campaign over the Acorn investigation.  Robert Bauer, chief counsel for the Obama campaign, is on it.  Doesn’t that prove that Democrats are smarter this time? (Remembering hope.)

The fact is folks, Obama should be smarter.  He was so better educated, plus nothing was ever handed to him.  And can remind everyone that he’s younger, peppier and way more elegant.  Saturday Night Live likened ‘town-hall’ McCain to some kind of decrepit nut-ball.

During Weekend Update, Seth Myers questioned John McCain’s sanity for wanting more town hall debates and yells out to McCain through the TV: “I mean you were lurching at people and walking around like you should have been wearing a hospital gown!”

It seems like there’s so many factors on our side. Could even the gasping Economy be playing into our hands? I’m pretty sure it is.  But at what cost?  Sad to say, there’s not much hope there.

Here’s what gives me the most joy:  The Republicans are divided! Yea, that’s what I said.  D I V I D E D!   When’s the last time we came across divided Republicans?

For a hint at the cause, check out this rather odd McCain Palin Photo circling the Internet. Almost everyone says that that one in the squatting position is the main reason for all the division. David Brooks called that one a “cancer on the Republican Party“.

Ooops, did I say everyone blames Palin?

Not the poor ’starburst’ deprived creature of National Review; not the former, presidential candidate Pat Buchanan—that old dude wants to be in John McCain’s shoes and says the economy is the only reason not to call her the best VP choice ever.

Here’s what the conservatives who truly put their country first say about the Sarah Palin choice:  Shall we start at the very beginning with Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy?  Checkout the link for a video of those two trashing the newly ensconced Palin while thinking they were off-camera.

Then there’s the conservative columnists like George Will and Kathleen Parker. Pulitzer Prize winner George Will blasts McCain in his article ‘McCain Loses His Head‘.  Parker begs Sarah Palin to resign:  “Do it for your country, Sarah,” she pleads.

Speaking of resigning, William F. Buckley Jr, had to resign from the very establishment  his own dad founded (National Review) because Junior posted his opinion in the Daily Beast—‘Sorry, Dad, I’m Voting for Obama‘.

Buckley Jr. artfully sums up many of our opinions in a nut-shell: Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.

So you see, folks, even the staunchest McCain supporters are jumping ship.  Last Saturday, Governor Crist of Florida, who gave his state to McCain in the primaries, skipped a McCain football rally. When questioned about this diss, Crist implied that a trip to Disney World was more important than helping McCain win the Presidency:  ”When I have time to help, I’ll try to do that,”Crist said.

The list of ship-jumpers is endless.  Follow this link and see for yourself. I am beside myself! Republicans with a conscience are giving me so much strength.

And so does this Late Breaking News!

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is siding with Ohio’s top elections official in a dispute with the state Republican Party over voter registrations.

The justices on Friday overruled a federal appeals court that had ordered Ohio’s top elections official to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility.

Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, faced a deadline of Friday to set up a system to provide local officials with names of newly registered voters whose driver’s license numbers or Social Security numbers on voter registration forms don’t match records in other government databases.

Ohio Republicans contended the information for counties would help prevent fraud. Brunner said the GOP is trying to disenfranchise voters.

Here’s what this means, folks. Two hundred thousand Ohio voters are safe! And essentially, this is the same Supreme Court that gave the election to Bush in 2000.  This is obviously what I’ve been waiting for!  A real sign that this time it’s gonna be different.

(Remembering an audible sigh of relief.)

Take heart and repeat after me:  My energy spins in a positive spiral, my energy spins in a positive spiral, my energy spins in a positive.…  (Hypnotic moment, courtesy of the AOML Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory.)

Spinning on.  As our country threatens to make landfall somewhere in the vicinity of social capitalism, people are putting all sorts of spin on the phenomenon.  I’ve listened to many different takes on our nation’s financial meltdown and here’s my conclusion:

Spin, like religion, is a mater of choice, so why not be proactive? In other words, don’t let the spin choose you, get out there and find the one you like. I’m happy to say, you’re allowed to bounce off as many final conclusions as you like on the way to settling down.  Senator McCain does it all the time.

Take it from me, folks, this is one presidential candidate who knows all about the bouncing technique—in a matter of days, he went from the ‘economy is fundamentally strong‘ to we’ve gotta drop everything and fix it.  If someone standing in the brightest limelight can change his position faster than a tweaking hoebag, then so can those of us standing out here in the dark.  No need to be an expert on economic meltdowns.  In this youtube video, McCain says he’s no expert, either.

Generally speaking, economics is touted as too complex and dry for the likes of us taxpayers, and, therefore, better left to folks like comrades Paulson, Greenspan and Bernanke.  But you might be surprised how simple and juicy the subject of economics can be for the common person.  Just imagine all that juicy emotion out there on the web waiting for your clicks.  I urge everyone to visit the minds of other folks, i.e. tap into what the experts are feeling about Bailoutgate.

Wanna feel riled up?  Bill Perkins is definitely your man.  This 39 year old dude took out a $139,104 full page advertisement  in the New York Times depicting Mr. Bush, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke trampling on the graves of private enterprise and capitalism. “I see it as trickle-down communism,” Mr. Perkins said. “We have a communist action where everybody is paying for the benefit of the few and hoping the benefits will trickle down to everyone else.”

Wanna feel less riled up?  Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post is standing by with his more genteel take, A Bailout or a Bonanza: “The uber-capitalists of Wall Street are all socialists now. Free- market ideology, it turns out, doesn’t pay the mortgage. That appears to be a job for, ahem, Big Government.”

Wanna gloat a little?  Read “McCain Loses His Head” by conservative columnist George F. Will:  Mr. Will likens Senator McCain’s threat to fire the head of the SEC (Chris Cox) to the fat-cat Queen of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. “The queen had only one way of settling all difficulties, great or small. ‘Off with his head!’ she said without even looking around.”

I choose to remember the words of George F. Will, however. To hear a conservative diss his own candidate makes me smile: “It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?”

Friends, Californians, Countrywomen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Palin, not to praise her.  There’s  enough folks out there singing her praises.

But not the largest newspaper in the state of Alaska, thankfully.  In its September 5th editorial, the Anchorage Daily News called for the truth to come forth in the attempted firing of Sarah Palin’s ex-brother-in-law.  The whole mess is affectionately known as Troopergate and the Anchorage Daily (unlike others) isn’t afraid to pull its punches. Here are a few key paragraphs:

Governor is stonewalling the Troopergate investigation

“Gov. Sarah Palin is taking the wrong approach to Troopergate. She should be practicing the open and transparent, ethical and accountable government she promised when running for governor and boasts about now that she’s on the national stage.

Instead, Gov. Palin has begun stonewalling the Legislature’s attempt to get the bottom of allegations that she, her family or staff violated ethical or state personnel rules.”

“The allegations are that she, her family or administration improperly pressured then-Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan to fire Gov. Palin’s ex-brother-in-law, state trooper Mike Wooten, who has been in the middle of a custody dispute with Palin’s sister.

In July, when legislators started talking about conducting an investigation, Palin denied any wrongdoing and said she welcomed an investigation.

“Hold me accountable,” she said.

The Legislature took her up on that offer. But this week, she basically told the Legislature, “Never mind.”

Wow, folks!!! We’re not done yet.  Here is how the editorial wraps up, but, by all means, follow the link and read the entire piece:

“When this investigation into Troopergate started, Gov. Palin’s response was refreshingly open. Since she became the Republican candidate for vice president, her approach has changed for the worse. America deserves the same openness and ethics from vice-presidential candidate Palin that she promised to Alaska voters in 2006.

BOTTOM LINE: Gov. Palin is stonewalling on Troopergate; the Legislature should issue subpoenas.”

Letting the smoke clear…They did issue subpoenas but it remains to be seen if they will be honored.

As far as I can tell, Sarah Palin is not in the habit of honoring anything but herself and a select group of friends and family members.  If you don’t count the Miss Alaska Beauty Contest, her rise to fame began in a step-aerobics class involving the power elite of Wasilla. That almost sounds like an oxymoron, but now we know how far one exercise step can take you—all the way to the top of the Republican Party.

Speaking of which, I see a nasty little pattern here, and it all has to do with vengeance—you know, that thing Born-Agains assign to the Lord.  Sad to say, folks, Sarah Palin fires people for any reason at any time.  Where I’m from the Bible-Thumpers call that vengeance.

I don’t know. Maybe it’s just a knee-jerk reaction when little Sarah feels threatened.  I only know Palin pulls the old power punch and tries to ruin people’s lives at the drop of a non-political hat. The firings began with those who didn’t support her mayoral rise, then moved on to the librarian who wouldn’t censor books, and now there’s this brother-in-law thing.   Who knows how many victims lie between?

I figure this Troopergate thing is just the one that tripped her up.

one of the proposed bridges to nowhere

“We ought to do away with $24 billion dollars  worth, not just one bridge,” said Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.

McCain also said that “if we don’t stop the earmarking, we’re not going to stop the abuses of power here in Washington.”

He even blamed his own party for the huge earmarking mess. “In 1994, when the Congress was taken over by Republicans,” McCain said, “there were 4,000 earmarks on appropriations bills. Last year there were 15,000. It’s disgraceful, this process.”

McCain’s efforts to introduce anti-earmarking legislation are well known on Capital Hill. For more information, follow the links:   New York Times November 17th, 2005 and Washington Post, January 25, 2006.

Well, folks, I never thought I’d say this, but John McCain was and still is right when he called earmarking ‘disgraceful’. It truly is! And Alaska should be declared the earmarking champions.  Not only are there two of the bridges to two separate nowheres, Sarah Palin, John McCain’s chosen running mate, supported both of these pet projects and still favors the Knik Arm Bridge by all accounts.

Have you been keeping up with this?  If not, it’s really pretty simple.  One of the two bridges is Don Young’s Way or the Knik Arm Bridge; the other is the Gravina Bridge, often referred to as The Bridge to Nowhere.  Both arose through ‘earmarking’, the legal process by which multi-billions of dollars are anonymously secured by congresspeople for their pet projects.

The following excerpt which blasts this congressional practice as the potential downfall of the Republican Party hails from The Wall Street Jounal (Feb 7, 2006):   “Earmarks represent a looming political disaster for the GOP. Last year (2005) Congress authorized a record 13,999 earmarks. The scandals surrounding just a few of them involving disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and ex-Rep. Duke Cunningham have sent reporters scurrying to find what other nuggets of news might be buried in the remainder. If just 1% of the earmarks turn out to be embarrassing, that’s 140 stories. If a mere 0.1% turn out to be legally questionable, that’s 14 front-page exposés between now and the November election.”

We’ve only got 7 weeks left, fellas. Could you step up the exposés, please—pretty please with bacon on it.

The Wall Street Journal went on to say that ever since Bush took office back in 2000, earmarks have multiplied by leaps and bounds. For example, Republican hero, President Reagan, once vetoed a highway bill (1987), complaining that it contained a then-unprecedented 152 earmarks. Whereas, the 2005 highway bill alone contained 6,371 earmarks. That’s 42 times as many, if you’re multiplying.

But just who was in charge of the Transportation Committee back then?  What person in his right mind would draft such an excessive bill?  —Republican Don Young of Alaska, that’s who.

Shouldn’t a lawmaker of Republican conscience, be a little embarrassed or upset about his spending?  Not this Republican dude—he’s only upset for important reasons:  Upon hearing that another Congressperson had outdone him in securing pork barrel projects, Young told the New York Times, “I’d like to be a little oinker, myself. If he’s the chief porker, I’m upset.”

Now, now, Donnie, don’t get worked up (stroke stroke).  And don’t you listen to those big bad reporters, either.  Hasn’t mama always said, you’re the best oinker in the whole world?

Don’t mind me, folks. We have to treat Don Young with kid gloves. The little oinker came to Washington representing loggers, drillers, trappers, miners etc. and has been known to cry real tears in Congress when any part of his Alaska gets set aside as a wilderness area.  Sad to say, this is a true story.

Also sad to say, some of the worst Oinkers in the World hang their fur hats in Alaska.  They are very proud of this oinking tradition, too.  The following is a nice prideful example from the 2005 Transportation Bill itself:

SEC. 4411. DON YOUNG’S WAY.

(a) Designation- The Knik Arm bridge in Alaska to be planned, designed, and constructed pursuant to section 117 of title 23, United States Code, as high priority project number 2465 under section 1702 of this Act, is designated as `Don Young’s Way’.

(b) References- Any reference in law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the bridge referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to `Don Young’s Way’.

This bridge would be Don Young’s way in more than name only, plus it goes somewhere—not nowhere like everybody wants us to think. The Anchorage Daily News reports that Young’s son-in-law (Art Nelson), is part owner of 60 acres of the so-called ‘beautiful’ land that would be opened up to development by the bridge.

“A bridge would change everything,” reported the Daily News. “Don Young’s Way would . . . make the land much more valuable.”

It just gets worse, folks. According to the Wall Street Journal, one of the other owners of this land-in-waiting is fisheries lobbyist Trevor McCabe, a former legislative director for none other than Sen. Stevens of Alaska.  “Until last October, Mr. McCabe was partners with state senator Ben Stevens, the son of Ted Stevens, in a consulting firm called Advance North that represents salmon fishermen who are regulated by the state Board of Fisheries, which is chaired by none other than Mr. Nelson, Rep. Young’s son-in-law.”

If you’re confused by this can of newly emerging worms, folks, join the crowd.  Even the Alaskans are joking that sooner or later all the relatives of its politicians will get bridges for Christmas.  Some are recommending that the state cut back on its pork consumption. The Anchorage Daily News is one such animal: “….Alaska cannot afford to fulfill the dreams of grandiose politicians and connect every dot on the state map.”

I don’t think Alaskan lawmakers are listening to the voice of moderation, though.  There’s a state proposal for a “long overdue” public relations campaign that would “accurately portray Alaska to the rest of us Americans.”  And what do you want to bet, Don Young is going to market to bring home a federal earmark that would pay for it?

‘Oinker Don’ isn’t the only Alaskan lawmaker of the porker variety, though.  Let’s not forget Oinker Theodore: Ted Stevens, longest serving Republican Senator and a major figure in Alaskan politics since before statehood (January 3, 1959), once threatened to resign when the Senate entertained a move to shift funds earmarked for the two Alaskan bridges to the victims of Hurricane Katrina.

In retrospect, Congress should have called this little oinker’s bluff.  Senator Stevens was indicted back in July of this year on seven felony counts: He is reported to have concealed more than a quarter of a million dollars in gifts from an oil contractor that lobbied him for government aid.  At the ripe old age of 84, Stevens is the first sitting U.S. senator to face federal indictment since 1993.

Which brings me to the all important question:  What is the upshot of all this oinking corruption? Sad to say, I don’t really know the answer. I only know that Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, the very same McCain who hates earmarking with a passion, picked himself a little Alaskan Oinker as his running mate.

Who says you can’t put lipstick on a pig?

UFO over Mount Shasta~captured by Chris Tatro (www.sendoutcards.com/site)

Speaking of leaders, we’ve got eight weeks till we pick, or get saddled, with a new one.  Not a very comforting thought, folks, but I’ve been percolating on it all morning.  Hello World!  This is my first posting on mindoverchatter, and I’ve got some news from Mount Shasta.  John McCain might not be a maverick.

Let’s jump back a couple hundred years to the source of the dilemma: Once upon a time in 1803, Samuel Augustus Maverick was born to some well-off, genteel folks in South Carolina.  Gus, as his family called him, enjoyed all the advantages that a fine upbringing could afford: He was home-schooled, tutored, sent to Yale, allowed to dabble in the family business and so on, but still he had trouble putting down roots in southern society.

Finally, though, Samuel Maverick Sr. apprenticed Gus to an attorney at law, Henry St. George Tucker, Sr. of Virginia, so that his son could become a lawyer.  It was this profession that allowed Samuel Augustus Maverick the freedom of expression, which included calling himself ‘Sam’.

Now you might not think that a lawyer was cool, but back then they were more valued as a species, especially if they were educated.  There weren’t nearly as many, you see.  Plus, a lawyer was just like a policy maker, ’cause not much of our Constitution had been interpreted yet.

Folks were so naive that they thought creating policy from scratch, sans corruption, would be a breeze.  Heck, we were a brand new country full of irrational exuberance.  Nobody even knew where our borders lay. Men spent a lot of the time arguing, everything from the small issues like women’s rights to the larger ones like slavery and state’s rights.

Speaking of which, as a practicing lawyer in Charleston, Maverick ran for a seat in the South Carolina legislature.  He took a peaceful stand on the tariff issue (a federal tax levied to hurt the South), plus he was against nullification (the right of a state to obey or disobey the feds). Sad to say, this stance was not the least bit popular, nor practical, amongst the many Southerners crying for Yankee blood, so Maverick placed 9th out of 13 candidates. Presumably discouraged, Sam moved to Alabama where he tried to console himself by running a gold mine.  Sad to say, the goldmine almost went belly up.

Unsuccessful entrepreneur? Unable to envision war as the answer?  How can you not like this misfit underdog!

OK, so now we know Samuel Maverick was somewhat of a pacifist.  But where did Sam, the born and raised Southerner, stand on owning folks?  Happy to say, he didn’t like that much, either:  After his stint at goldmining, Sam took 25 of his father’s slaves and headed for Alabama to try his hand at ‘plantationing’.  According to historian, Paula Mitchell Marks (Turn Your Eyes Toward Texas: Pioneers Sam and Mary Maverick) being a slave master wasn’t to Maverick’s liking, so he threw down his whip and headed for Texas.

There was a political problem with this choice, folks.  Texas was part of Mexico, an openly rebellious part.  Naturally, Samuel Maverick, the American, got involved in the fracas.  Seen as an instigator, Maverick, along with about sixty other Anglo-Americans, were seized by the Mexican Army and taken on a three month march to the motherland (Mexico). Although the journey was difficult and the men were forced to sleep in manure filled sheep pens, Maverick writes in his journal that he “’saw and experienced a thousand new thrills.”  To each his own, I suppose.

Not too thrilling, however, was the treatment he received upon arrival at the Mexican prison in Perote. Men were chained together in pairs and put to hard labor. On behalf of his comrades, Maverick complained about the meager food amounts and was thrown into solitary confinement (January 5, 1843).

Despite the fact that he was incarcerated and called Fayette county ‘home’, Maverick was elected by the people of San Antonio to the Seventh Texas Congress.  Needless to say, he was not allowed to attend.  Maverick was, however, offered his freedom several times, provided he would publicly support Mexico’s claim to Texas.  He refused: “I cannot persuade myself that such an annexation, on any terms, would be advantageous to Texas, and I therefore cannot say so, for I regard a lie as a crime, and one which I cannot commit even to secure my release.”

Wow, folks!  Since when has any politician considered a lie to be a crime!

Moving on. The Mexican government finally released Mr. Maverick on March 30,  the same day his wife gave birth to daughter, Augusta.  Two months later Maverick returned home, toting the chain that had bound him.

Now it gets even more interesting, ’cause Samuel Maverick was elected to the Texas State Legislature (1851-63) and served as a Democrat.  And what was his main focus as a Democrat in this state legislature?

According to Paula Mitchell Marks (the historian), he worked “to ensure equal opportunity for his Mexican and German constituents, to foster fair and liberal laws for land acquisition and ownership, to develop transportation and other internal state improvements, to provide protection for the frontier, and to ensure a fair and efficient judicial system”.

Marks goes on to say that Maverick did not support a War between the States, but, seeing that the conflict was inevitable, threw his support behind the Confederacy.  During the Civil War, he was elected Chief Justice of Bexar County and served a second term as San Antonio mayor. “After the War, he received a presidential pardon and was active in attempts to combat the radical Republican regime in Reconstruction Texas.”

Which reminds me… back to the word for which he stands—maverick:  During his hopping about from Alabama to Texas, Samuel Maverick left a herd of unbranded cows roaming the countryside. It was this wandering herd that gave rise to the term maverick.

Can’t you just imagine some cowpoke like Clint Eastwood riding the range and coming across a little unmarked ‘dogie’.  “Oh that’s just a Maverick,” he’d say to his partner, “sling the little feller over yur saddle, Routy. We’ll take him home and brand him.”

It wasn’t long, folks, til the word ‘maverick’ became the generic term for an unbranded cow. How an unbranded cow then evolved into a free/independent thinking human is unclear; because, by dictionary definition, a maverick is an independent thinker, or an unbranded calf that’s free pickings.

Which brings me back to my original thoughts—although they might have seemed a bit murky at the onset: What part of the Republican Presidential Candidate, John McCain, is unbranded?  And what part of his brain is thinking freely?

By all counts, the man didn’t even select Sarah Palin for his running mate–he wanted Lieberman, his buddy but caved in to advisers. This cave-in thing seems like a pattern, folks. The worst was to Bush about torturing prisoners. I guess pandering to the religious right was pretty bad, too.   Enough, I say!

John McCain may have once roamed the Washington range unbranded, but that was a long time ago.  He’s done been slung over the saddle and corralled in the bosom of the Republican Party.  Heck, the dude voted with Bush 100% of the time in 2008.

I don’t see a free thinker.   I don’t even see an unbranded calf.  Do I have to tell you where I see that big fat ‘R’?

Happy tales,

Laura signing off

p.s. Hold onto your fate, folks!  it’s gonna be a rough ride.

Ba