Archive for October 8th, 2008


A Real Maverick

For those of you are confused, with John McCain and Sarah Palin calling themselves mavericks every chance they get, even when it isn’t appropriate to the topic at hand…this is a Maverick:

As in Brett Maverick, a charming gambler played by various actors in films and television, but probably most famously, entertainingly and roguishly by James Garner (pictured above) for the Maverick TV series.

In the big-screen remake, Mel Gibson (below) did a decent job in the title role:

These two are not mavericks.

(Incidentally, if they weren’t running a campaign with thinly veiled racism, trying to pit America against each other along class lines, telling outright lies about themselves and their opponents, and generally stooping to dirty tactics all the way around, maybe I wouldn’t harp on them so much.)

In case you need more help on this issue, let’s bring Mr. Webster into the mix:

mav·er·ick | Pronunciation: \ˈmav-rik, ˈma-və-\ | Function: noun | Etymology: Samuel A. Maverick 1870 American pioneer who did not brand his calves | Date: 1867 | 1: an unbranded range animal ; especially : a motherless calf | 2: an independent individual who does not go along with a group or party

You see, John McCain is apparently still trying to earn the respect of his grandfather and father, both accomplished admirals in the Navy. Maverick-y? Think not.

He ditched his first wife—while she was ailing, no less—for the current one, a beer distribution heiress, which allows him to have numerous homes and an obscene number of cars. All so he could be with the “in” crowd and have all that comfort and wealth. What a maverick there!

He sided with George W. Bush a hellaciously large amount of the time, even though Dubya was dead-wrong on most of his major policies over the past eight years. Way to go against the grain, McCain!

As for Palin, damn, she benefited from using the old boy’s network in her state and pretending to root out corruption, and she is using 50s and 60s style feminine flirting tactics to give boners to male voters (who fail to see the hypocrisy of standing up for family values and lusting after the VP candidate) so that there won’t be enough blood in their brains to see the McCain Palin ticket is empty of ideas.

Yeah, those are some real mavericks there…


Religulous Reviews

So, not having had a chance to see Religulous yet, and not sure if I will see it until it comes out on DVD (since it isn’t that easy to get to in my area and my time is tight), I have been limiting my comments to Bill Maher’s recent appearance on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart (here and here). But I want to revisit this documentary from a different angle that I found interesting.

The first real review I read about Religulous was at a blog called Vintage Faith, which is attached to the Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California. In this review by Dan Kimball, we see a fairly complimentary and accepting view of the film and Maher’s motives, even though the blog author is clear that the film is skewed and could have been much more a real documentary had Maher bothered to look up even one or two deep thinkers in the theological realm; people who could have answered many of the questions he posed.

So, the bottom line with this review is that the film is worth watching, if flawed, and Maher poses useful questions.

OK, I’m sure there are plenty of reviews out there on blogs and elsewhere by other Christians that probably hate what Maher did, but I don’t have to look them up. Know why? Because I found a scathing review of Religulous at Now, for those of you not familiar, Pajiba is a place where lots of things (often films, but also other media offerings) get reviewed, often with loads of attitude. This is a place where I think I can safely say the authors and audience are largely of liberal leaning. In other words, people who should, theoretically, be on board for Bill Maher to skewer religion.

Not so here. The reviewer is highly critical of Bill Maher’s attitude in the film, which he finds largely condescending, dismissive, shallow and self-serving. I can’t do justice to how much this guy hammers Maher and the film. Just go read the review using the link above, and please make sure you read the other one from Vintage Faith, too.

In the end, I will see this film at some point, whether soon or after it hits the shelves at the video store. I expect that it will be at times funny, at times thought-provoking and at times gut-wrenchingly painful and annoying.

But I just find it really interesting when I see a Christian saying you should probably see the thing and someone at saying it takes nasty potshots and isn’t a worthy film.

Can you say, “irony?”

Deacon Blue is the blogging persona of editor and writer Jeffrey Bouley. The opinions of Jeff himself on this blog, and those expressed as Deacon Blue, in NO WAY should be construed as the opinions of anyone with whom he has worked, currently works, or will work with in the future. They are personal opinions and views, and are sometimes, frankly, expressed in more outrageous terms than I truly feel most days.

Jeff Bouley


Jeff Bouley

To find out more about me professionally, click here. To find out more about me generally, click here.



You can reach Deacon Blue/Jeff Bouley at



For my public profile, click here.


Tales of the Whethermen

My superhero fiction blog, click here


Raising the Goddess

My parenting blog, click here

Copyright Info and Images

For more about images used on this site, and copyrights regarding them, as well as usage/copyright information about my own writing as posted here, click here.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 833 other subscribers
October 2008

%d bloggers like this: