AUSTIN, Texas -- The John Wesley Hardin Died for You Society has a theme song that goes: "He wasn't really bad. He was just a victim of his times." I sometimes find this useful in trying to explain Texas political ethics to outsiders.

My theory is that few Texas pols are actual crooks, they just have an overdeveloped sense of the extenuating circumstance. Woodrow Wilson Bean once warned himself that he was skatin' close to the thin edge of ethics. After a moment, he concluded, "Woodrow Wilson Bean, ethics is for young lawyers."

We had a governor who was caught in a big, fat lie about a football scandal (serious stuff) and explained, "Well, there never was a Bible in the room."

Some civilians believe the definition of an honest Texas pol is one who stays bought. But among pols of the old school, the saying was, "If you can't take their money, drink their whiskey, screw their women and vote against 'em anyway, you don't belong in the Legislature." Many of our pols have the ethical sensitivity of a walnut. All this has led many to conclude erroneously that Tom DeLay, an alumnus of the Texas Legislature, is somehow our fault.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Calling all conservatives. Yo, libertarians. Also, wing-nuts, believers in black-helicopter conspiracies and mouth-foaming denouncers of government and all its works -- yoo-hoo. Where are these people when you need them?

THEY are making us pay to have ourselves brainwashed. All good conspiracy theories begin with "they" -- and in this case, it's the usual suspect of the right wing: the ever-evil federal government. Rush Limbaugh, get on this case. Stealth propaganda now goes by the beguiling moniker "pre-packaged news." And our government, the one supposedly run by us, is using our money to secretly brainwash us. Is this gross, or what?

No joke, this is seriously creepy: The U.S. government is in the covert propaganda business, and it's not aiming this stuff at potential terrorists, it's aiming it right square at your forehead.

The New York Times did a huge Sunday take-out on the practice of "pre-packaged news" by government agencies. "The government's news-making apparatus has produced a quiet drumbeat of broadcasts describing a vigilant and compassionate administration."

Very few ex-cons get sentenced to house arrest in a $16 million, 153-acre estate or receive a standing ovation when they return to work. But then again, very few convicted criminals manage to convince the public that their crimes were worth applauding.

Home decorating maven Martha Stewart appears to be the exception to this rule. Despite having served a five-month prison sentence for her conviction of obstructing justice and lying to the government about an insider-trading stock scandal, the 63-year-old Stewart has reappeared on the nation’s television screens looking better than ever and poised to restart her march towards winning the hearts and emptying the pocketbooks of millions of Americans.

Which raises the question: When it comes to celebrity trials, why do we even bother? After all, whenever there’s a celebrity crime—and truth be known, there are enough of them these days—the end result invariably seems not to be punishment but simply be more wealth, adulation and fawning media coverage for the convicted celebrity than ever before. Not to mention the fattening of someone’s bottom line.

We sure have our priorities right in this country of ours. According to my daily habit, I flipped on the TV after an early lunch at about 11:45 this morning, E.S.T. Thought I’d check on the latest developments in Iraq, Lebanon, and Capitol Hill. I started with CNN, then flipped over to Fox, then MSNBC.

None of three had anything to say about international or domestic affairs. All were maintaining a breathless vigil outside a courtroom in Santa Maria, California, because Michael Jackson, whose name is somehow still preceded by the adjective “superstar,” had decided to stop at a hospital en route to his trial for child molestation. It seems the single-gloved wonder was suffering back pains that had required emergency treatment; unfortunately, he didn’t have permission from the court to show up late.

Wow, what a tangled web you weave!  George H.W. Bush "took over" the CIA under Gerald Ford!  I actually think Ford appointed him, he was CIA director only briefly (less than a year, if I recall), and at that point, there was no consideration of the former one-term Congressman as a vice presidential candidate.  In fact, he only became vice president under Reagan due to Reagan's (misguided) belief in compromise after the 1980 nomination fight.

  And to tie Prescott Bush into it, along with the various 1950s CIA coups, really strains credulity.  Guys, that all happened almost 50 years ago!  Yes, a few folks tried to call John Kennedy a Fascist because his father was pro-Hitler, but that didn't stick, and neither will your charges.

  Bush won, he's president.  Get over it.  You'll have another chance in four years.  In the meantime, stop wasting other people's time and money on court challenges to the election results.  I hope Ohio disbars your lawyers.

Randolph R. Resor
Merchantville, NJ