Monday, August 6, 2012

Editorialist Weighs Value Of Open Secrecy

MURPHY BROWN Essay Series, starts with BILL KELLER’s The Leak Police

    Sunday’s online The New York Times edition ran editorialist BILL KELLER’s essay The Leak Police, which didn’t appear in the print version that some New Yorkers still hold dear enough to give their attention. Writing – In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, this newspaper famously published a number of stories regurgitating the Bush administration hype about Saddam Hussein’s supposed arsenal of mass destruction. A few journalists elsewhere — notably Jonathan Landay and Warren Strobel, then of the Knight Ridder newspapers — dug deeper, discovered contrary intelligence, and challenged the official line. Later, The Times also published some excellent work on how an administration eager to justify its decision to go to war cherry-picked the intelligence to make its case.
  Mr. Keller’s case is that the journalists who got it right, got it from government officials, with access to classified information, who risked their jobs to confide the truth to journalists. Critics call these “leaks,” although such stories hardly ever spill out unbidden, and they are painstakingly assembled by teasing out bits of information, triangulating, correcting, testing, confirming. I’d call them a public service.
  Then Mr. Keller keeps stepping on toes. He writes – Washington is currently going a little nuts on the subject of leaks. The Obama administration has already surpassed all previous administrations in its prosecution of leakers. Congress has mandated surveillance systems that make it easier to identify leakers and prevent unauthorized downloads of classified material.
  He asks – Is this latest outbreak of leak panic just another mood swing? Or is something else going on? Mr. Keller theorizes more secrets are spilling these days, in part, because so much material is automatically, needlessly classified that officials tend not to take classification as seriously. He suspects another factor is the enthusiasm with which senior officials contribute their notes and self-serving recollections for behind-the-scenes books, setting a permissive example for those farther down the official ladder. Assuring top officials their place in history while the juniors are prosecuted.
  And then Mr. Keller points out how this is the game as usual. “Presidents make ‘secret’ decisions only to reveal them for the purposes of frightening an adversary nation, wooing a friendly electorate, protecting their reputations. Military services conduct ‘secret’ research in weaponry only to reveal it for the purpose of enhancing their budgets, appearing superior or inferior to a foreign army, gaining the vote of a congressman or the favor of a contractor. The Navy uses secret information to run down the weaponry of the Air Force. The Army passes on secret information to prove its superiority to the Marine Corps. High officials of the government reveal secrets in the search for support of their policies, or to help sabotage the plans and policies of rival departments. Middle-rank officials of government reveal secrets so as to attract the attention of their superiors or to lobby against the orders of those superiors.”
  Mr. Keller is quoting Max Frankel, the then Washington bureau chief of The New York Times, in a 1971 deposition defending the paper’s publication of the secret Vietnam War history called the Pentagon Papers. Frankel acknowledged the self-serving nature of these transactions on both sides, but concluded that this “cooperative, competitive, antagonistic and arcane relationship,” as he called it, was essential to the working of democracy. Without this trafficking in secrets, he said, “there could be no adequate diplomatic, military and political reporting of the kind our people take for granted, either abroad or in Washington, and there could be no mature system of communication between the government and the people.”
  Which should leave us wondering about this era’s leaking Internet celebrity(ies), care of that medium that has changed the nature of privacy, secrecy, fame and obscurity. Where anyone becomes a star. Well not quite. Did you know the notorious scourge of government secrecy Julian Assange has his own Julian Assange Show broadcast by Russian government financed English language broadcaster Russia Today? That picked the U.S. apart calling us the America Surveillance Society. And interviewed our own government’s leaker, Thomas Andrews Drake, who went public on 60 MINUTES after spending years defending his American right to speak freely about the covering up of bureaucratic mistakes. Still, it’s hard to not feel the government shouldn’t give up on holding Mr. Assange responsible, while wishing him well avoiding the federation’s clutches. Because government boundaries, by the people for the people, make sense only when the truth comes out.
George W. Bush Please Simply Help and Apologize Clock
Editorialist Weighs Value Of Open Secrecy
8/6/2102 concluded: Which should leave us wondering about this era’s leaking Internet celebrity(ies), care of that medium that has changed the nature of privacy, secrecy, fame and obscurity. Where anyone becomes a star. Well not quite. Did you know the notorious scourge of government secrecy Julian Assange has his own Julian Assange Show broadcast by Russian government financed English language broadcaster Russia Today? That picked the U.S. apart calling us the America Surveillance Society. And interviewed our own government’s leaker, Thomas Andrews Drake, who went public on 60 MINUTES after spending years defending his American right to speak freely about the covering up of bureaucratic mistakes. Still, it’s hard to not feel the government shouldn’t give up on holding Mr. Assange responsible, while wishing him well avoiding the federation’s clutches. Because government boundaries, by the people for the people, make sense only when the truth comes out.
September 18, 2018 - 9/12, 2019
Freedom of the Press, Yes
This view greeted my arrival for work the last few weeks before 
The New Murphy Brown premiered.
  Replaced, October 1st, by beer ad. Vodka, early December. ...
  I even succumbed to photographing the front of one of many MTA buses, staring New Yorkers down in the streets, that Stephen Colbert brought up in Ms. Bergen's interview (3:59), (discontinued link), the Wednesday night before Thursday's first show. 
  So, no simple humongous bus-length broadside for New York City that a stars' celebrants are drawn into trailing as shown below the next picture in LA. Just Candice Bergen, as Murphy Brown, baronially styled, staring at your watching her channelling the male association with an imagining of Walter Cronkite's reincarnation in a woman's suit? Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters, Connie Chung, Sue Simmons, all wore versions of women's male business attire to blend with the patriarchical standard of forthright respectability. Long overduedashikis on The News? 
PRESS EXPOSURE for The New Murphy Brown included the Washington Post headline, 
'Murphy Brown' once sparked a feud with Dan Quayle. 
Now the reboot is courting one with President Trump
  Other ASSORTED PRESS reiterated the "game's afoot" Sherlock Holmesian pitch. Such as CBS, The New York Times, TIME, after a fashion Fox News, and nice of them, FOX-Dumpster Exchange, remembering Robert, in retrospect, ending their piece with - Robert Pastorelli, who played Eldin the housepainter, died in 2004.  Even Robert can appreciate a little of the Dumpster's self-worth in publicity's illustration of there being no such thing as bad press. Right, Right? Or is it not possible to deliver the United States of America from the shallow portrayal of CONSERVATIVE NONSENSE. If you were even half as Conservative as me I'd be held in JAIL now for irresponsibly standing up to you load of midget-heads sarcastically
More Murphy Brown Press from then. -
CBS Sunday Morning
"activism in a sitcom" - "expecting backlash"
This happened in LA.
  American politics taken seriously in a comedy will either be seen, or enough of us will hold perceptions dear enough that the point's not worth wanting realized by a broader public. Another commercial enterprise biting the dust happens every day. Why it's a luxury to spread out daily press coverage so as to always be a major conveyor of any news. However unreal the fabrication is, is often lost to explanation, that's just meandering talk, that can, when endless, foster embellishment. rendering public discourse a mere backdrop to droning chants.
  My 1998 Total TV essay, The Unsinkable Murphy Brown, concluded using the character Jim Dial's - "You'll" still "get em, Slugger," without knowledge there'd be others. Point being, Murphy Brown's independent women's voice was worth carrying on. CBS, premier week, advertised that role of the original show. 
  Advertising "now's the time," the Established Press echoed this Murphy Brown's not just a mere remake. By embarking on that fortuitous, but tortuous, goal of courting public relevance, a brand new bold statement was made. Betting the franchise's legacy? You betcha. Murphy even mentions that in Episode 1. Promising to not just be another Murphy Brown 2, the time-lapse being just an hiatus.
  So, now(then), in this one programming instance, in the vastness that's all media, the ever more distracted public canvas conveyed, in contrast, much about American obsessions with however narrowly twisted flashy imagery clouding substance. Better sentence? Better equation. Again Murphy probably highlighted what the country senses is worth knowing. Maybe become more aware of where unreasonableness lies? Could have found more time to explore Eldin's Industrial Revolution painted theme ceiling. Didn't develop more than just nostalgic meaning from remembering Marion Seldes' character, Murphy's Aunt Brooke. A window through which, is visualized, our critical mass of entertained discrepancies becoming thoroughly, regurgitatingly, analyzed political sport? 
  Because, as expected, in response to the show, something derogatory wasn't said, by the public relations confetti thrower, about liberal icons in that flippantly arrogant self-righteous archaic tone of indifference to this country's complete economic and political evolution? Roy Cohn dart repellent's not a real bargain for the country at any price? Too cryptic a description of the manipulation of public sentiment? Finishing this essay, these months later, on September 11, 2019, what's clear is professionals mold what America thinks and broadly seems recklessly nowhere in the equation.
  The Washington Post review's thrust was that the president wouldn't appreciate the gist of The New Murphy Brown show. Possibly just whitewash some anti-religious fervor across her brow while, of course, shrugging off the rest as if insight were worthless without marketing punch directed at a punch drunk American Electorate? Hooray? Because by not facing all that's reality, and because the word treason's been so loosely thrown about, is sitting on our hands. Disloyal Americans in the eyes of self-righteousness? The Soapbox View, as well, has been reduced to abandoning a middle ground and openly taking offense at all the willy-nilly liberties taken in disregarding upright morality's perversion in the face of common sense. Embellishment's abuse is a real question. Serial Waffling
  I wrote May 1998's The Unsinkable Murphy Brown after seeing an Entertainment Tonight announcement that the original Murphy Brown was concluding alongside the mobile throne coffee enthusiast, and quasi-ish-ly-renounced cyclist, Seinfeld. And though The New Murphy Brown production studio was nearby, this time, all the necessary extra insight for this new essay was also had hearing Ms. English at the Museum of Television and Radio, in New York City, in 1993.
September 27, 2018 Premier
  Pursuit of truth's often muddled. Thursday, 9:30 PM EST, Murphy Brown premiered. While that same day a woman testified, before the US Senate Judiciary Committee, symbolizing the country's partisan divide more than the country's awakening to an improved civility.  As per usual weighing logic's difficult. But the game of toying with public perception's fairly clear when Senators Ted Cruz and Graham are incensed. Calling a soap opera a soap opera doesn't necessarily convey innocence. Colbert on Kavanaugh Hearing
  Republicans For Merrick Garland! 
  So I watched at 9:30, without verbatimly recalling back when Diane English personally, online, reprimanded me for my accusation that one of her shows used a laugh track. My brief experience, before on-line was split open by the World Wide Web, led me to wanting out because of the unencumbered nature of participants' dialogues that clearly pushed boundaries less easily crossed face-to-face. However, hooked up's what's happening. And Murphy Brown's back because of her obligation to never give up on the hopes and dreams of everyone everywhere.
What's New
  Episode 1 started, as advertised, direct and, throughout, wasn't wishy-washy about its' political sympathies. But however received, that first episode, "Fake News," spoke volumes of the value of a writer's vision. Not just another remake, Murphy Brown put her foot down.    
  It was fun to again watch the writer's  (writers) covered bases. Corky "totally wore the wrong shoes" to a demonstration. Times march shows a daughter answering her mother's awed delight with, "Who's Murphy Brown?" And Murphy used that, not yet forgotten, expressionist noun, saying, "I'm going back on the air." Maybe not fascinating, but there must be people who don't know air meant medium, except in reference to hot air?
The show's best lines were Frank's, answering Murphy's referring to disheveled producer Miles' bundle of nerves, making uncomfortable sense. "A facility. What like public storage?"
  Sounding dear to the heart Murphy In The Morning is supposed to be, as Frank expressed, "talk about politics without treating it like a sporting event." 
  (... arrogantly flippant ... deliriously self-promotional ... hazard-ly boisterous ... self-reverential ... Free news is the best advertising's been proven time, after time, and time again. ...) 

  The over-the-top plot's sentimental conclusion almost covers up the confrontational highlighted word - lies. Shadowing probably not as effective as the tawdriness covering the newest Supreme Court Justice's political partisan role. If only figures of supreme leadership, raking in adulation, solved anything. Off point, but relevant plea. Bear the rough parts, and the episode's a tickler. And, after all, it seems time for more antidotes to sycophantism? 

  I need to think a little more. The schlocky sitcom manner didn't knock me for a loop, but has me wondering what I do want to say. Unlike the first two, I'll have to watch again. I want to say what I should and not go on and on just soaking a celebrity topic. Not a fan of that. The show emphasized the reality of the male privilege that power abusers relish as their justification for shrugging off responsibility. The show's plot delved deeper and while it's taken so much time, thank God/Allah we continue growing up. Please.  

  Best yet, and nearly as important as the 3rd. The show's showing traction. Though there's the sense the little snippets of dramatized points of dialogue come sitcomishly quick rendering them frivolous for a portion of the country. The Jeff Sessions joke, for example, being a low blow. While not exposing his lowest position, which is the Attorney General's pedestal of devotion to the immoral Criminal Enterprise System. Regarding the fracturing of truth, "Don't you Giuliani me" was not just thrown out but insightfully spot on. And Miles should ride a bike to work. I've eaten at the Anchor Bar in Buffalo

  Don't have to pinch myself to be reminded I'm watching a sitcom as they are banter as far as the eye can see.
The Second Scene's character assassination, and Brown joke, in the bar is - priceless. Because as much as a party faithful want to believe the conservative's depiction isn't accurate, then look again as that's all the show or anyone can even ask. 
Technically I'm not one of the "three Republicans" watching Murphy In The Morning as a whole show's not been shown. Just the mannerisms of commercial lead-ins and the signing-off tidbits enticing viewers back. Perhaps highlighting the public forum's actually being a competition of lights, bells and whistles and, all too often, why we've fallen short tethered to that. Simplified fascinations are a nationalism we shouldn't prefer. 
  Now everyone's using Trump Hotels? Of all places to choose a rendezvous. Ah. Playing with racy prose. ... If only tolerating adversaries' prejudices were the path to a happy family. Could our simplistically contrived political conundrum end or even have happy notes? ... As commonplace as its become the notes of confusion, ending this episode, encapsulated the era and clarified reality's confused inevitability. No matter how trustworthy the machines. 
  Timely pre-midterm election theme. How'd the competition fare polishing the intimidating manner of the self-righteous culture war? Glistening, I'd speculate.
  The Murphy Brown show's straight parody of the media-esque-ishy/presidential relationship, while uncomfortably accurate, at least confronts what's bent for home audiences. The soap opera-iness of it all. If only the reality show description weren't just the tip of the iceberg. The satire's boldness is commendable. 
  "and, by the way, no collusion" from The Greatest Comedic President of All Time? Bold enough to describe the naked leader. America's truly great when proving we'll not fall victim to misdescription. Please?  
  Knives vs. Spatulas is uncomfortably accurately, revealingly so. For the choir? Yes of course the exploitation of God's image deserves facing too. Shallow's an offensive human trait and that arrogance applied to everything's why we face authoritarian mis-mash. Discombobulating shoulder shrugs over ruthlessness' rule.
  The Avery Brown character verges on fantasy. No one's competitively threatening, from within, Fox's flagship's domain. 
  "sea to shining she" Brilliant.
Elections Have Consequences
  An over the top expressive Bette Midler. An underlying symbolism to the romantic threads, palpably modulating our harder edges in comedic expression. An we can get through this uncomfortable facing the truth about distorted social norms exploitably enforced. People don't go to jail for adultery scored one for not superseding God's judgment. And personal life facing for Ms. Brown. 
  "In that outfit. Right." Whether or not people can absorb this, a tolerant culture is what God/Allah wants. Judge-mental ones have proven tragic. Just because wars are in the Holy Books doesn't mean we're encouraged to always carry them out. An obvious flaw still left about "modern life."  
  Jim Dial's acceptance speech is touchingly sentimental as the other characters appreciated. But why completely cut his prepared First Amendment lecture? Sitcom shorthand's tight dialogue demand. 
  Bette, Ms. Midler, closes callously self-reverential per the added ownership's character's design. And bear with Miles America. Well. Provocative and light-heartedly sophisticated.  
  The slightly unexpected romantic developments lend another where's this going layer of curiosity so necessary to episodic commercial television. Despite, or perhaps because of, the show ignored The Me Me Me Movement and didn't bother mentioning the president once. The quality of ambition leaves me ecstatic filming's done in my fairly huge neighborhood. Though I'd normally not ever express ecstatic, preferring un-embellishment, contrary to abnormal norms.  

  "An aging white Angela Bassett," inclusions more than a wonderful beautiful thing, but also better than an exaggerated claim of greatness ingrained in the belief in superiority based on winning at violence that's never an end in itself?
  America chose coma too, Ms. Shields? Harsh yes. Perhaps there should be more assessing the show's appealing qualities or calculate the number of social ideologies being pandered to? 
  So the sentimental hospital reunion's fractured by Murphy's hard-nosed realism and made a splash by commercial spectaculars' inevitabilities. While, I thought misdirection, during the commercials, after Ms. Shields revealed her first controversial remembrance.
  Wondering if the President's and Vice-President's, and our culture's conversational protagonists, ignoring of whether Murphy's working this time is a sound strategy? After all, in MURPHY BROWN's case, it is not just another remake as the trend has been strategically demeaned. So what. Nothing's new.   

  She's wearing heels I'm not a fan of seeing After the "Renew your gym memberships people" was delivered in the show's particular trademarkedly traditional sound bite par excellence way. Staging, the hallmark of sitcom television. While Murphy's obliviousness to catering's extremely over-the-top when feeding each other is capitalism's socialism at its' best. 
  "Hope they like pizza"'s delivered sitcom speak suave. American Football. 
  "Parade of cars towed away" is some line. But the over-done kitchen incompetence streamlined the storyline's setup. Yet the ditziness was quite a bit much. Squeezing content's the game. However the campiness was mere prelude to deeper representations of understanding how compassion's sabotaged. The show certainly represented this era's particular oblivious theme. For decades businesses afforded something and can't any longer so we'll rescind portions of their lives they'd no right to live. Only be victims, again, and again, and again.
  "It's hard to believe he grew up at all" was delivered sweetly authentic. Then as slowly as televisionly possible, what evolved was a real slap in-the-face tearjerker. Reminding us who you know is all we have. And moral outrage can't be meant to be the problem it's been covering for the sins of exploitation that have done us in. Cleaning up corruption is a war that can only be solved by dissolving the Criminal Enterprise Systems' roots. 
  What's not good for business any longer is shallow. Where's the announced plan in place to reculturize the criminal classes where the illegal immigrants had to originally flea from? Sure, there are programs. But, oh yeah, we can't solve that. Sure as the world's missing the picture on harmonious use of the Earth's resources, responsibility for the ruthless nonsense is the result of a ruthlessly applied morality of a game riddled farce of corruptions as unnecessary as never taking a walk. 
  America should be doing a lot better than blaming the symptoms. A shame. 

  In fact I'm one of the few Republican viewers the show hasn't lost. Having spoken in The Great Hall of Cooper Union and am unwilling to shirk my symbolic responsibility. But can admit to daily discomfort resulting from the daily sycophantic adoration of a charlatanism that was President Washington's nightmare
  So my concern isn't about attacking, but shaking the mental lethargy The Murphy Brown show's undertaken in using the literary license to portray the president in a manner he's molded and would outright deny if forced to face. Notice he makes a point of being see reading speeches now, as evidently the stories of his level of understanding has reached the the level of cover-up.
  Right the show I'm not necessarily wanted to criticize either as I'm not particularly of the bandwagon persuasion. But definitely, obviously I don't appreciate the bandwagoneer-in-chief. And find the entire family's crafting an above it all image - reprehensible. Entitlements? It's downright creepy what's been gotten away with. 
  Now about the irreverent cannoli. At least Ms.English's writers work to not portray themselves with Jesus on their chests covering up pride and prejudice. Besides holier than thou agnosticism's covered by Free Speech. 
  Has the show gone too far in its' portrayal of some Americans as having falling down a sycophantic pit of desperation born of ignorance is bliss. Not when the president's over-the-top juxtaposition of all his faults being the vocabulary by which he accuses before accused. Saw a Trump sicker in a car window last night. It is a shame Americans find refuge in the most self-centered opportunist since Stalin. Putin? Naw. he's the creation of an entire bureaucracy dedicated to rule. Basically the game as it's always played. Proof's how despite the claim the same can be said of the American president's advocates. Don't wonder why I look forward to God's judgement. Wonder why it's really not a more profound fear, despite the redundant pontificating from the pulpits. A game? In Buenos Aires this morning the president began the event with, "We are gathered here." The language of the ministry. The code? Use and abuse everything. What a guy. And Murphy Brown's at fault for criticizing? When ... never mind. On and on hypnotizing listeners is a despicable game. 
  Wonder what'll be left when this reaches a future draft?   

  I really hope people like this episode and get a charge from it. As eloquent as others are, if you only see one - this is it. 
  Their ritual broadcast desk intro noted ours is the first president since McKinley not to have a pet. As the better part of our world progress would really mean their universal welfare as well. 
   What's more relevant than a choreographed food safety inspection? 
  Independence guy, wonderfully put. Our space management's led to not enough for the trees or the pets. Episode made me cry more the second time watched. Truly the coolest yet by the second set of commercials. 
  Miles is some character. Funny how people didn't fit. But let that symbolism take hold and you'll be seeing from somewhere how the pieces do. How today's tomorrow and the sun hasn't shone on everyone near enough the same. Such that disparate health costs just aren't confronted as something to solve. Paying each other lucratively enough to swing the big bats that near enough only solve half the problems of price. It's not just the digital world's fault life's so entrenched, and detached.
  Meanwhile there's clearly the crafty pop of the long drum roll by the story's 3rd set of commercials. Wow. Professionalism, and content. This episode's amongst the best in TV, ever, leading into and out of commercials. And confronting what's threadbare about how contrived political dramas' well practiced capacity to be an imprecise bandwagon's a not necessarily benignly imprecise art. 
  The show is peaking.  
And Yeah, But, This Is Murphy Brown. 
  The other new era business. About how the younger characters would have to catch on and become more central for the show to succeed. That age-group purchasing power central premise. But no matter where CBS leans, in light of where the business has gone, the potential for new distributorships is probably, pretty much, a point of indisputable fact. Rumors? Too many are perceived fact. Political lone wolves for instance. 
  No, Murphy Brown is not just of another era speaking of bygone years' concerns. The age of a grandmother? Some of the best people anyone will have ever met throughout history were, and are, grandmothers. Everyone knows how precious youth is. It's really no time to hide from them what's happened and not completely faced. Murphy Brown not only has the right to voice contradictory sentiments to the president's, but the duty. 

  Gilbert Gottfied and Mike Tyson. A name dropping bonanza. 
  Life is too many treats. Notice commercial television's public service announcements didn't evolve into a cultural phenomenon? 
  Episode brings home how unfortunately dangerous the world is. All the anger stewing's what there seems to do. What's wrong is aggressive revenge we can't get past.
  Think the bar's new employee becomes Murphy Brown's new roommate. The coding expert an on-air personality as well as whoever the stage manager wants. 
  Yes. The ambition of the original Murphy Brown is shining through. 

Fall Season Finale
  Of course the son coming back's overly pat with that sitcommy sense of rounded off nostalgic good feeling. 
  The executive kissing Miles?. Who didn't see that coming? 
  Mr. Dial calls her "Slugger."

Episode ...  
  No one could ever explain to me Murphy Brown's not coming back. Though I get it now that, maybe, after all, nah. ...
To Conclude
  To the consternation of many observers, people aren't realizing the hazards facing our country. Of course that rhetoric can come from any direction. But, despite known reality, an alarm hasn't completely sounded. No Uncle Walter Cronkite, with a definable mass of Americans watching, removing his glasses and, once and for all, saying, "good grief" for the American Public. Or at least to enough of us so the muddled aspects become apparent to everyone out there. Ha. No Edward R. Murrow nodding at the hysterical hypnotization and relaxing the choking grip of Big Brother's screens. But, learning from history aside, this era's broadening of the public sphere's voices has to be a good thing or complete hypocrisy survives. 
  So there's the situation, faced by a fictional Murphy Brown, of an un-skeptically manipulated public of pure imagination. Or at the least - historical gobble-dy-gookSuch that the noble dream of broadened understanding hasn't become near the enemy described, as has the twisting of fables become political entertainment. When imagery's everything, facts go poof? 
  Was Ms. Brown's, first episode, Twitter altercation with President Trump's Twitter Feed a questionable tactic? Fictionalizing the real President of the United States? Still, facing issues is priceless. Though that literary license probably cut off the celebritized oxygen the president could have supplied if he'd been left open terrain to attack from. Nah. No one would say or face it, but the president retreated. Hands down the Celebrity stalking Entertainment Complex himself, whether you like it or not, avoided battle. Ooo ooo, but he taunted Debra Messing
  Once the idea of the real-time screen to screen dialogue occurred, it obviously had to be thought out and applied. However, as the show's obscured public notoriety attests, literary license can't necessarily open a jar's can of worms. And so it goes. Despite and because of people's invariable flaw of being told, while not listening, your return's so very welcome. Slugger. 
  How difficult is it perceiving a Stalinesque aura's cult of personality only registers sycophantism as political loyalty? Aaaaaaagh! 
And downright nowhere near skeptical enough.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your participation.