I don't really mess with conspiracy theories: if you study enough history, you'll find that what they say is true: history really is stranger than fiction. It has to be that way: the creative power of so many minds across so many years could hardly be expected to stand inferior to that in the confines of a single thinking head. History, politics, society, culture, and whatever else are already interesting enough without going to the fringe theories. So, this isn't a serious conspiracy theory. It's more of a satire born out of fleeting curiosity.
That being said... I'm beginning to think that there's something fishy going on with Dictionary.com (and its subsidiary website, Thesaurus.com). The suspected culprit? Sarah Palin.
Now, I don't recommend or endorse giving two shits about Sarah Palin: she seems too dim-witted and gung-ho to be anything other than a politico-corporate puppet (excuse all the hyphenation). However, even if she only has the appearance of importance, her previous campaigns have been anything but immaterial (as a real (self-deluded) philosopher, it pains me to perpetuate that word's use in this context, further obscuring a truly useful distinction). What I mean, is that there has been real weight and money behind these, giving them life and force.
This is where the conspiracy begins. How much life and force? Just how far did her campaign extend its cancerous reach? What did it touch? What did it destroy? What did it corrupt?
If you'll remember back to whenever it was that this insignificant woman ran for vice presidency, you might recall that the term maverick was part of her media packaging. That was her selling point: she doesn't do things the traditional way; she doesn't follow the trodden path; she isn't just a sheep. This is also a critical point of connection in the conspiracy, because a maverick is a rebel, a renegade. From this connection, there springs a risk that was intolerable to her political party (republican, I guess): couldn't the opposing party simply point out that these are the traits of a traitor? That a renegade, a maverick, is inherently against the system? That its very meaning is contrary to the conservative ideals of the party she is supposed to represent?
Action had to be taken by the republican party, the risk was just too great. They had to bribe Dictionary.com to remove a connection between these words: mavericks couldn't be tied to the treasonous rebels, renegades, turncoats, or any treachery of the sort, and therefore the connection between them on Thesaurus.com was severed. Even now, despite the inescapable logical connection, they remain so. If searching for rebel, many mediating words will appear, but there will be no maverick; and, it's the same the other way around. A true travesty for all thinking people. Is there no end to the cruelty of the political machine?
