SOME OF YOU REGULAR READERS MAY HAVE BEEN UNABLE FROM TIME TO TIME TODAY to access The Exaggerator because, as it turns out, traffic to recent postings of this blog has wound up overloading the servers @ BlogDrive, who hosts this weblog.

For that, I apologise.

And with that in mind, I would like to issue an appeal to you readers:

In the interest of accomodating heavier traffic loads without triggering problems in the bandwidth department, I have decided to upgrade my account so that more bandwidth (and, hence, more traffic) can be accomodated for month by month.

But then again, bloggers can't live on traffic alone.

Which explains why I have to include online shopping and the Virtual Tip Jar here--i.e., to cover the costs of blogging beyond what I'm able to afford with my disability benefit and my being otherwise unable to find honest work. That, and a distrust on my part of "work-from-home" scams only exploiting my sort and their lot.

So, I would welcome and appreciate it if you would please contribute to the cause, as it were, every time you visit. How much you choose to contribute doesn't matter, so long as it helps this blog.

Be it as a donation to the Virtual Tip Jar, as in online shopping (for which I can get commission on your purchases) or in joining affiliate programmes (again, I get commission on the sales you generate on your weblog), such support would go a long way.  

And would be greatly appreciated.

(However, I should caution that any contributions you make through the Virtual Tip Jar are NOT tax-deductible.)

=============

AND ONE THING MORE: If you're able to see this posting, readers, please let me know--either by e-mail or in the comments section. I want to know if this upgrade is actually working. 

YOUR CORRESPONDENT, WHEN HE LAUNCHED THE BLOG YOU ARE NOW READING TOWARDS THE NEW YEAR, made what could best be called an unconscious decision to not post any items on Sunday, or otherwise backdate them for Sunday issue.

The item from last week announcing the start of the one-year countdown for the Digital Transition of FreeVee transmissions is, for all purposes and intents, a rare exception to the case.

But then again, a few interesting items in the news requires Your Correspondent to post today, notwithstanding his not being the kind to observe the Christian Sabbath goodthoughtfully (in Orwellian Newspeak, being orthodox in its observance). I trust you'll understand.

*************

THE RELIGIOPOLITICAL RIGHT'S GOING TO HAVE AN EVEN TOUGHER TIME HARRASSING THE FCC, let alone encouraging "harrassment by proxy" (as it were) so targeting, when it comes to real or suspected instances of obscenity or indecency on TV and radio henceforth:

The FCC announced in passing that new and tighter standards will be in place to handle complaints (and assess any ensuing penalties) against broadcasters suspected of broadcasting obscene or indecent material on the "morally superior" American airwaves (technically the property in trust of Die Amerikanischer Volk, notwithstanding the implied and subtle claims of the Broadcasting Trust); the better to discourage what amounts to prepared, "cookie-cutter" form complaints generated en bloc by special-interest groups with connexions weird and unwholesome as may tend to the insincere (especially where it turns out that the complainants didn't exactly watch or listen to the offending programme, further worsening the risk of insincerity as certainly wastes the FCC's time and resources to the point of diverting attention from More Pressing Matters).

Put another way, any penalties assessed in future will be applied only against broadcasters in such markets where valid and sincere complaints were generated, placing the onus upon the complainant to show that s/he watched or heard the offending content in question; prepared form e-mails sent via "action alerts" will no longer receive priority attention.

I say "in passing" inasmuch as the news was, shall we say, buried in a larger item announcing that the FCC had revised an earlier action against what are now 13 Fox network affiliates as screened an episode of Married by America in 2005 containing explicit anatomical details; each such was fined $7,500, and the Fox network announced that it would appeal in the courts, claiming that the standards the FCC used in rendering the decision are "constitutionally vague and suspect."

=============

NO WONDER KEITH RUPERT MURDOCH, THE PONTIFEX MAXIMUS OF THE FOX NETWORK (AS IT WERE), isn't nicknamed "the Dirty Digger" for nothing: His mass-market tabloids in his native Australia have a nasty little reputation for featuring soft-porn cheesecake pinups known as "page three" (for the location of same in a typical issue).

The which would be adapted in England when Keith Rupert purchased the tabloid daily The Sun in 1969, two years after entering Fleet Street when he acquired the long-established Sunday gazetta News of the World (perhaps the most inapproriate name for a newspaper anywhere, methinks, what with its traditional emphasis on highly-sensationalised coverage of crime, sex scandals, Naughty Scoutmasters and sport as was well-established even before "the Dirty Digger" came along ... and a close rival in these sweepstakes would have to be the Montréal daily Le Devoir--whose name translates as "The Duty"--itself rather infamous in its day for blatant anti-Semitism and excusing such as one with the need for Québecois nationalism).

Before long, "page three" would become a household word between Land's End and John O'Groats, quickly making The Sun top seller in Fleet Street among the British Lower Classes who, heretofore, usually relied on the Daily Mail or the Daily Mirror for their dose of prolefeed.

And would inspire numerous imitators, but not without controversy:

• When the Daily Star was launched in 1977 to compete with The Sun (right down to the page three cheesecake, which they called "the Starbird"), women's groups protested what they saw was nothing less than cheap sexual gratification and titillation, even displaying picket signs with slogans like NEWS, NOT NUDES and A STAR IS PORN (a play on the launch slogan).
• In more recent years, the Daily Sport (and its Sunday edition, the Sunday Sport) has attracted notoriety for featuring in their version of page three bare breasts on occasion, howbeit stopping short of outright full-frontal nudity. But then again, the Daily Sport has this nasty little repute for being tastelessly lurid while concurrently expressing moral outrage.

Now you know what motivates such distractionary excesses on a rather distractionary example of FreeVee....

*************

IN WHAT APPEARS TO BE CHEAP DESPERATION TACTICS ON THE GOP'S PART TO ENSURE CERTAIN VICTORY in Indecision 2008, Wall Street's Own Worst Nightmare (otherwise known as Ralph Nader) has announced another Presidential bid on the Green Party ticket.

Which begs the question of whether the Green Party is really a cheap front for the GOP to further divide and conquer the electorate towards further maintenance of the Greater Conservative Agenda as may really be the ruin of American soverignty and soverign identity "antient and pecuilar" all the more.

(There does happen to be precedent in American political history for one political party setting up a "front" party for deceptive purposes: The Communist Party set up the Progressive Party to run former Agriculture Secretary Henry Wallace as the latter's Presidential candidate in the 1948 elections; Wallace, for his part, was unaware all along that he was really a "patsy" for the Communists.)

*************

GOP PRESIDENTIAL MAVERICK MIKE HUCKABEE, FOR HIS PART, parodied himself on Saturday Night Live last evening, acknowledging that he intends to "fight the good fight," in the words of an old hymn, until John McCain wins the requisite number of delegates for formal nomination in the Twin Cities this fall.

But then again, how do we know that Camp Huckabee, with the help of his dear and trusted droogs on the Pseudoreligiopolitical Right, isn't really seeking to disrupt the GOP's convention for to bring such into not so much disarray as its own Presidential chances for Indecision 2008 being discredited?

(After all, there's plenty of juicy material galore for to swiftboat the GOP with. Do a Google.)     

23 February 2008
10.01 hours

Governor Tim Pawlenty
State Capitol
St. Paul, MN 55155-0001

Dear Governor Pawlenty:

IN YOUR RECENT VETO OF BADLY-NEEDED LEGISLATION to revamp the transportation network in Minnesota, you claim such was necessary to "protect the good taxpayers" of Minnesota--even with a deteriorating infrastructure of roads, bridges and transportation which was made all the more evident when the I-35W bridge over the Mississippi River near St. Anthony Falls in Minneapolis collapsed on 1 August.

As if that weren't enough, your very Department of Transportation has found serious deficencies in a number of bridges across Minnesota, the most blatant example being the US 61 bridge over the Mississippi @ Hastings--the busiest two-lane bridge in Minnesota, know--which has a deteriorating superstructure that's so bad, a 40-ton limit will likely be imposed on same. Until it collapses.

Once that happens, Governor Pawlenty--what will be your next patsy?

After all, you have this nasty little reputation for being a Zealot and True Believer (hard-wired, even) in the discredited socioeconomic theorem known as "supply-side" or "trickle-down," which suggests that, by keeping taxes all the lower, companies would be compelled solely from the goodness of their hearts to create REAL jobs for REAL people paying REAL money which, in turn, would be repayable as REAL taxes.

Not to mention the interrelated belief, perhaps based on the same flawed exponential maths used by those promoting the so-called "five reports" chain letters a few years back, which suggests that low taxes=jobs=socioeconomic stability--articles of faith held dear by the likes of pro-business groups such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation and (all the more so) the so-called "Club For Growth," among others on K Street.

Of particular concern is the likelihood of your agenda and policies being influenced--perhaps even manipulated--by the Club For Growth, perhaps the most blatant advocate of such platitudes you hold dear. Come to think of it: 

• How do we know that your agenda, and those influencing same through the old whispering-in-the-ear game, isn't really being influenced by the Club For Growth or advisors working in their behalf (perhaps even in the guise of the "Taxpayers' League of Minnesota")?
• How do we know that your "real" agenda for repairing the transportation infrastructure based on keeping taxes all the lower isn't really based on "public-private partnerships" awarded more than likely to major campaign contributors expecting reward for Good and Loyal Service? Isn't this what they used to call "the spoils system"? What would be your preferred defence therefor?
• Are you not (un)consciously (un)aware of the clear and present danger such a mindset based on equally-defective and even discredited socioeconomic thought could pose upon the good name and repute of Our Beloved Minnesota, as manifested in the likes of:
• corruption;
• fraud and waste;
• inefficency;
• increased bureauracy;
• risk of mismanagement;
• discouraging transparency and oversight; and
• potential moral harm among all involved?
• What kind of influence, "talking points," "guidance," etc., are you receiving from the Club For Growth when it comes to such policies you hold dear as articles of faith?
• How do we know you're not resorting to, or likely to resort to, misadventures tending to moral debauchery or perversion (including use of sexual favours, heterosexual and/or homosexual) as an agency of coercion or co-optation? What lengths will you resort to to avoid attracting scandal as could cause moral harm to Our Beloved Minnesota as much as yourself as a byproduct of said misadventures?
• Is your real desire in keeping the fuel tax, etc., all the lower "to protect the good taxpayers" really nothing short of code to encourage wasteful and inefficent driving and commuting practices translating into more frequent fill-ups @ gas stations (the argument here, so to speak, being that more frequent gas sales will translate into increased tax volume while maintaining current tax rates)?

=============

AND ANOTHER THING OR TWO:

What would be your reaction if it just so happens that the major credit-rating agencies of Moody's, Standard & Poor's, Dun & Bradstreet and Duff & Phelps place all State of Minnesota debt securities and equities On Credit Watch because of your misguided Zealotry and True Belief in "supply-side" socioeconomic thought--with a subtle warning that they could reduce your state's bond rating dangerously close to "junk" status in the end?

And what will it take to convince you to consciously recognise that, sometimes, tax increases, no matter how severe you may deem them, may be all the more necessary to finance reconstructive efforts on the transportaion network--another high-traffic bridge collapse with substantial casualties? A significant and measurable traffic jam (with substantial tailbacking) on one of the Twin Cities' major freeways, with substantial waste of fuel, ensuing air pollution and frayed nerves?

And what prevents your acknowledging the involvement (howbeit subtle) of potentially weird, unwholesome and/or dangerous elements in excusing your discredited low taxes=jobs=socioeconomic stability argument and agenda, unaware all the while of the possible consequences far-reaching for Minnesota's good name, repute, honour and credit rating--consequences which can easily be exploited by Very Dangerous Persons and Elements of Society for potentially dangerous ends?

How do we know that you're not insane or otherwise mentally unstable?

How do we know that you're not an alcoholic, drug addict or sexual fiend?

How do we know that you're not suffering from such conditions as could affect your capacity to capably discharge the powers and duties of your office, as defined in the Minnesota Constitution?

Have you forgotten that the Legislature could have you removed from office for not just "treason, felony or other high crimes and misdemeanors," but also for incapacity to discharge the powers and duties entrusted you? Likewise with the voters, through the agency of a recall election?

Remember the old saying: "Nero fiddled while Rome burned." (If truth be known, it was more than likely that the Emperor Nero played the lyre while the Eternal City was going down in flame.)

  sincerely,
ILUDIUM PHOSDEX
(die egte artikel--aanvaar geen plaasvervangers)

*************

MEMO TO READERS, ESPECIALLY THOSE RESIDENT IN MINNESOTA: You are strongly urged to share this with not only Governor Pawlenty's office, but also with members of the Minnesota Legislature. Make sure they "get the message" that "we're as mad as h***, and we're not going to take it anymore," and then some.

Remember: "There is strength in numbers." 

WITH THE RELIGIOPOLITICAL RIGHT'S ARTICLES OF FAITH FOREVER SEEING HOMOSEXUALITY AS A MENTAL AND MORAL ABERRATION of the Highest Order Requiring the Utmost Vigilance and Attention of All Right-Thinking (read: poor, undereducated or homeschooled and easily-influenced) Americans, you could just imagine their response to what the New York-based tabloid Brevities ("America's First National Tabloid Weekly") reported on its front page in the issue of October 10, 1932:

MINERS' HOT HOLES

Coal Holes Hot as Gals Dig Deep
Underground Love True to Form

Sweat and Sex Mingle Freely as
Working-Men Demand Diversion in Love

The story thus headlined suggested that employers were secretly hiring prostitutes to prevent their blue-collar employees from becoming "girlie men" or otherwise developing "tendencies" (to use the preferred term of choice back then for those suspected of homosexuality), explaining thus:

But the horny-handed sons of toil that roll up the shekels for the big boys must have their women. This is especially true of the coal miners, steel mill workers and other labor hogs who do the nation's dirty work. Gals give this class of citizen his only kick. And gals this bozo must have if he is going to keep on whooping up production while his wages and chances of getting ahead go to the devil.

But then again, Brevities was never really credible to begin with, considering its highly-sensationalised and @ once salacious tone of reporting attracting the attention of the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice, as frequently took Brevities to task for Publishing Obscene Material--oft followed by Vice Squad seizures of copies from newsagents.

Equally interesting is the fact that Brevities was, more or less, the continuation of Broadway Brevities and Society Gossip, a gossip weekly as ran from 1916 until 1925, when editor Stephen G. Clow was found guilty of using same for blackmailing purposes--but not before publishing a series of no less than thirteen articles under the collective title "A Night in Fairyland" as sought to depict New York's nascent homosexual community in crude and unsparingly offensive terms rivalled by the Religiopolitical Right's dark Satanic propaganda mills in our "more enlightened" times.

In other words, using overzealous sensationalism in service to a warped and twisted vision of Morals and Decency, with little or no regard for Truth--but then again, conservatives don't want the Great Unwashed to handle the truth, instead expecting them to accept prolefeed cheap and cheerful.

Not to mention pornographic, as need be, if only to pacify them.