She might not be well educated for whatever reason but she is very smart. She knows exactly what the defense attorney is trying to do and she has successfully blocked him a number of times.

Who can blame her for rolling her eyes when he repeatedly asks the same question, obviously hoping she comes up with a different answer than the first or second or even the third time he asked that question earlier. She recognizes the traps he sets for her and successfully navigates her way out of them. I cannot believe how many times she simply looked at him and said, "I do not watch the news" after he prefaced several questions with "When you heard on the news" implying she was testifying to information she heard broadcasted as opposed to information she had from her own personal knowledge.

The so-called legal experts on cable have said he has made some inroads on painting her as a liar. She did not tell the truth to the victim's mother about why she did attend the funeral service. She said she went to the hospital. She did not go to the hospital but simply used this as a reason for excusing her absence. The truth of the matter was that she did not want to see her friend's body on display in a casket. So imagine if she gave the literal truth as the answer to the mother's question -- that would have shown a lack of sensitivity for the mother. So instead she gave a false statement to avoid making a cold-hearted statement to Trayvon's mother. I call that a compassionate untruth.

And yes, she did mislead initially about her age but that was in the interest of protecting her privacy. I certainly can understand that. That is also the reason she signed the letter to Trayvon's mom with a "pen" name. When listening to the reasons she has given for the issues the defense attorney has chosen to discredit her credibility, her responses to him have come across as extremely reasonable, not deceptive or vicious.

For anyone here to call her stupid as I have read is to deny this young woman the credit she deserves for deflecting the defense attorney's moves to put words in her mouth, trick her into changing prior statements or simply changing her story.

Not only did she serve herself well but in so doing, she also served the best interests of her slain friend by refusing to allow the defense attorney to derail her efforts to help achieve justice for that friend and and all those that loved him.

Sam

In the South, an often heard term is the word “corker.” That slang term is defined by the Urban Dictionary as “something that will stop any debate on the subject.” Merriam-Webster prefers to define that term as a “hummer, knockout, lollapalooza, lulu.”

In recent times when I visited with my step-mother in Tennessee and she made flattering remarks about Bob Corker, all I could think to say was I would imagine it would be awkward being a politician in the South having the last name “Corker.” She laughed and shrugged it off. Bob Corker is a fine, Christian man and everyone loves him, she said.

My silly wisecrack came to mind this evening as I watched the rerun of Chris Hayes’ show. He covered the latest compromise being floated which might allow passage of the Immigration Bill.

Chris Hayes tossed the idea around with Ezra Klein trying to explain why the inclusion of all of the additional border guards and equipment (which costs a gazillion million dollars) has suddenly appeared as a compromise in order to try to promote Republican support of the bill. The humorous part came when Hayes' initial focus zoomed in on Bob Corker. To illustrate the bizarre incongruity of the possible inclusion of a gazillion million dollars to the Immigration legislation, Chris showed several video clips of Corker "preaching" austerity. "We all know Washington has a spending problem ... yada, yada, yada. Onward with the cuts!"

Whoa, politicos! Suddenly Corker no longer has an inclination to continue down the austerity road because he might be willing to get on board with the Immigration legislation as long as this compromise is included. The compromise in Corker’s small mind will send the right signal to all the right people, thus providing political cover for Corker's posterior (loosely paraphrasing here) to support this bill! Apparently, dollars for food stamps are Biblically forbidden like the fruit from the forbidden tree but a gazillion millions dollars to cover Corker's political posterior is manna from political heaven! Forget austerity!

So to eliminate possible political exposure in the next election, the appeasement platform may be mounted by Corker and other like-minded Republicans. Consequently, Republicans supporting the legislation can point to the increased border guards and equipment to prove to the people who really matter the United States Government has got that border covered to squash future crashes from people wanting to come here illegally to take our jobs or to smash us like a bug.

When quietly questioned, one unnamed person (perhaps an unidentified Union official?) interviewed in connection with this sudden willingness by Corker and others to sign on to the spending of the gazillion million dollars despite our dire financial straits was quoted as having said words to the effect, "We don't think this is the perfect solution to this problem; however, it will add a lot of jobs and create a stimulus to the economy, something the Republicans have been unwilling to do up until now. So we are just going to roll with it.”

It is a lollapalooza of an idea but perhaps that is what Washington needs to get the real Corkers and other Republican hummers onboard…so I am just going to roll with it as well.

Sam