my friends call me a maverick

if john mccain were still this cute i might actually vote for him. ACE! seriously, though. i respect a lot of what he has done, or tried to do, in his many years in public service.

i have enough objections to his proposed policies to send my vote elsewhere, but i appreciate that his speech (unlike mitt romney's) did not rely so very heavily on pity and fear as rhetorical tactics. i know it worked for the greeks, but they had better handling. nor did he categorically blame "liberal democrats" (a title romney gave mccain, incidentally, during the primaries) for the consequences of the last 8 years under the bush administration. mccain is famously congratulated for trying to cooperate with members of congress from both parties. whether or not that's true or even remarkable, it sounds pretty good and i'd like to give him full credit for it. i don't blame him for tragedy of this war, only for planning to extend it.

if you believe mccain when he says that he hates war--and i do (he has good reason to)--you have to wonder why he would support its extension. i haven't heard him talk about a humanitarian crisis ensuing from our rapid withdrawal--i have only heard him play to an audience that can't bear the idea of defeat any more than his predecessors could bear to leave vietnam.

his words: "i'd rather lose an election than see my country lose a war." it seems a lot of people would give up a lot of things to avoid losing what is largely viewed as an unwinnable war. things like civil liberties for all people (including US citizens). things like constitutional protection for the few as well as the many. things like social welfare programs that could, and often do, thrive under efficient leadership and judicious, not gratuitous, spending. things like nonrenewable environmental resources. things like the lives of our soldiers and the people they are sent to destroy. again, i can't lay all of this at one man's feet. at least not this man's. but why not break from this dangerous path?

as i listened to the speech i thought of another arizona native, spencer w. kimball, who called us a warlike people. he didn't mean it as a compliment. how the word "warrior" became synonymous with "righteous" or "patriotic" is confusing to me. Here are his words:

"We are a warlike people, easily distracted from our assignment of preparing for the coming of the Lord. When enemies rise up, we commit vast resources to the fabrication of gods of stone and steel—ships, planes, missiles, fortifications—and depend on them for protection and deliverance. When threatened, we align ourselves against the enemy instead of aligning ourselves with the kingdom of God; we train a man in the art of war and call him a patriot, thus, in the manner of Satan’s counterfeit of true patriotism, perverting the Savior’s teaching:

“Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.” (Matt. 5:44–45.)

it's a beautifully written sermon and i feel both uplifted and condemned every time i read it. but i especially love president kimball's words of optimism. he asked himself this question: "'if you were going to create a world, what would it be like?' Now with a little thought, the answer seems so natural: 'just like this one.'"

someone at the convention held up a sign that said, "peace through strength." i think i know what they meant by that, and i also think it just doesn't work that way.

this is how i am feeling tonight. in closing, please join me, linda ronstadt, and aaron neville in my theme song for today: "i don't know much, but i know i love you. and that may be all i need to know..." (enjoy)