McCain, Maverick Or Madman?

This guy McCain first got on my radar one day, when after the Columbine or some other high school shooting, he got before the cameras on capitol hill and said, as best as my memory can recall, something to the effect that, “when we were kids we went out on the playground and slugged it out.” Implying, thereby, that it was OK for boys to “slug it out on the playground.”

John McCain, if that is what you said, I’ve got news for you. It IS NOT OK to “slug it out on the playground. First of all, if it is OK for someone larger than me to slug me on the playground, then it is OK for me to go get a gun or knife and stick it right back to him. I was always taught that while the Declaration of Independence said men were created equal, that Colt revolver actually made them equal. But it is the law that should protect us all not vigilante justice of any sort.

The point of this story is that there is and has always been too much violence in America. It is something we should not be proud of, or encourage by saying stupid things like, “It’s OK for kids to slug it out on the playground as an acceptable alternative to shooting it out on the playground. It is equally bad for someone to put their hands on you as it is for you to shoot them. Both acts are criminal assaults and differ only in degree.

As a matter of fact Common Law supports the right of any person when physically assaulted or battered to respond in whatever way protects them best, even if it means killing the attacker. As we have dumbed-down, and whittled-down, the right of self-defense we have seen a commensurate rise in violent deaths. I suspect one has something to do with the other.

Boys have long been taught it was OK to bully others and beat them to a pulp, breaking teeth and bones if they were the stronger. This was always wrong and worthy only of a Nazi, Fascist or Communist bully state. Despite the cowboy movies, which I basically like, that fueled a lot of this garbage thinking, it has always been the basis of injustice and crime.

Anyone who touches another person’s body with the intent to do violence to them should get the death penalty, either from the victim or from society. It is a lawless act, worthy only of the lowest dregs of society.

Enter John “Wayne” McCain on the political scene. Now, whether the above scene was he or another Senator makes little difference because “Some things are true even if they didn’t happen,” to quote from Ken Kesey’s little book “One Flew Over The Cookoo’s Nest.” McCain by his very nature is a bully on the playground. He tried to bully his fellow senators and they rejected and isolated him such that he had to go over the Democrat side of the aisle to find a few of them who would use him for their purposes. This was born his Senator Feingold relationship.

He got the nickname John “Wayne” McCain at Annapolis, where his family connections got him in, where his fellow cadets added the “Wayne” to his name because he was the most reckless and wild person in his class. Appropriately, he finished dead last scholastically.

Everything in life, because there is no perfection, is circumstantial. The evidence that convicts any criminal is entirely circumstantial. Even a case like Ruby shooting Oswald in front of millions of television viewers was a case based on circumstantial evidence. You say no?

Well, consider this: Suppose, for the sake of argument, it had only been someone who looked like Ruby, or that the picture itself was fake, or that the shot didn’t really kill Oswald and he was whisked away by the authorities, or that the bullet that Ruby fired did not kill him, but another bullet fired by some other person or persons actually did. This game could go on and on, because there is no such thing as absolute proof of anything, not even science.

So, when we are looking to evaluate a person’s character, we don’t just look at one thing but take the whole picture into view. If we don’t do this we are unfair to the person and our own intelligence. If we look at anyone thing concerning McCain we reach a wrong conclusion. We have to look to see if we can find a pattern. Everybody has these patterns in their life. In Clinton’s case it is skirt chasing to a fault, in Reagan’s case it is being a good guy to fault sometimes, and so on.

In McCain’s case he seems to have a pattern and it is not a pretty thing to behold, at least for me to behold. He, as I said has the stamp of a bully. He waves those short little arms around and hits and punches with them like a mean spoiled child who will get his way or else. His left-handedness only adds to the picture of a person out of control, or too much in control.

There is not much evidence on the effect of left-handedness but what there is makes one wonder if such a person should be president, inasmuch as we only have one president and have no need for overly emotional people in that job. Look at the evidence. Jefferson was a man with many faults, too many his critics, I among them, would say. He was left handed as was all three presidential candidates in the ’92 election. Bush, Perot, and Clinton were all left-handed. What are the odds this side of heaven, or hell, on that?

The verdict is out on left handedness and I have absolutely no scientific proof one way or the other, but I do think the nation deserves to look at everything when a person runs for president, family, health, religion, or lack of it, height, weight and previous condition of servitude. Let the light of day shine in and the truth shall set us free. Sweeping anything under the rug is looking for trouble.

McCain has this “white-knuckle” air about him that is disturbing, and an early indication that he does not have the gravitas said to be a prerequisite of presidential timber. He hardly smiles and in speaking shows just his lower set of teeth. His head is sleek like a snake or reptiles head, and this image is reinforced by the involuntary way he hisses his words. You know, that annoying way some people have of sounding a hiss, hiss, hiss as they say their words. On top of this, and the extent of this metaphor starts to become humorous, his tongue does this little darting out movement every sentence or so. That’s right, his tongue, you watch it, darts out to moisten his upper lip every sentence or two. Most people, of course do not so closely observe a candidate and I didn’t catch it until I turned off the sound on the TV so I could carefully watch his non-verbal signals. Are these important? No, not in and of themselves, but when they are all added together they may mean considerably more. For God’s sake, your or my next door neighbor my be left-handed or even some of our children, and if doesn’t mean a whole lot, if anything. But when you are electing a man to be head of the free world, to be the most powerful man on earth for four or eight years, then everything is fair game. We just need to add it all up and try to make as good a decision as we can.

Put all together the reptilian characteristics are quite astounding. In addition while I am at it, did you ever notice how the backs of his calves bend backward such as to make his pant legs bulge out at that point. Again, these are not overwhelmingly indicative of anything, but I just thought I would pass them on to you less than careful observers. Still, the way he shoves that head forward and the shell-like shape of his barrel back causes him to not cut the most desirable of poses.

And as to his wife, what a piece of work she is. She has the narrowest slits for eyes I have ever seen, and when you catch a glimpse of those eyes they have that robotic, hollow, otherworldly look that is fascinating but scary. Is she really an alien from another planet? He background is alarming to say the least. She worked some charity or children health facility where it is reported she stole drugs to feed her own habit, until she was caught. Do we really need a First Lady as a role model for our children who is a convicted drug addict and thief? We Americans believe in redemption, restoration and forgiveness, for most of us most of the time, but we are electing a First Lady of the world here. Shouldn’t a little higher standard apply?

Again circumstantial, but what do you think her personal vanity license plate says? Come on – guess. Ok, here it is, “Ms Bud.” That’s right Ms Bud. Her family is in the liquor distribution business, fine family to recruit a First Lady from don’t you think. Sure, selling addictive family destroying liquor is legal, but is it all that clean a way to earn a living? True somebody has to do it, but I don’t think I would want the job of pandering to human misery in that way. And then there is the double entendre of “Bud.” Most kids today, I found, think she means the “bud” of the Marijuana plant which is the most potent part of the narcotic plant When kids say that was sure good bud they mean good marijuana, not good Budweiser. Believe it, she is not unaware of the connection she is touting here.

If all this is not enough, there is more. She is the second wife replacing the first Mrs. McCain, whom John unceremoniously dumped as soon as he got out of the Communist jail. The first Mrs. McCain was a great lady who worked her heart out on Captitol Hill and with the POW-MIA groups to try to see that America did not leave its prisoners behind. She was injured in a car accident in a way that left her somewhat crippled. He promptly went out on her and dumped her for Cindy 20 years or so his junior. Older dumped wives should relate to this.

One more thing, he looks like an aging Charlie Chaplin.