As a spiritualist, I am not someone who necessarily believes in coincidences. Every person we interact with, major event, or circumstance finds its way into our lives for a reason, whether we understand that reasoning at the time, or not. Throughout my childhood, my mother struggled to keep a roof over our heads, causing us to relocate often, sometimes multiple times in a year. At the time, I deemed the instability and hardship as a misfortune, but I always had a knack for making friends and adapting to new environments with ease. Being exposed to all cultures and walks of life made it easy for me to understand others. I could relate to anybody in a room full of strangers. People have always naturally gravitated towards me, which I assumed to be simply because I was a nice person. Little did I know, the universe was only setting the stage for a greater purpose much larger than my circumstances, destined to be fulfilled.
It wasn’t until within the last couple of years that I realized why the Universe has put me on the journey I’ve experienced so far. My humanitarian nature of giving back and helping others has gradually intertwined itself with my spiritual practices, and my love for the psychology of humans. This, along with being easily relatable, has allowed me to explore and expand on my purpose of healing others around me. Whether it be through my tarot reading, spiritual guidance, or simple positive reinforcement, inner healing and balance is extremely important in the midst of this chaotic 3D reality. No amount of value could ever be placed on the genuine satisfaction it gives me to be able to guide others in their healing to become a better version of themselves. Past experiences I once saw as a burden, I now consider a blessing in disguise. A gift from the universe, if you will. A gift that has molded me into someone who is compassionate, empathetic, logical and raw, wrapped in high frequency vibrations meant to enlighten those I encounter.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR : Milan is originally from New York, now residing in Philadelphia. Aspiring model and real estate broker. Free thinker. Humanitarian by nature. Spiritual revolutionary in the making. To access previous articles by Milan Burnett, click here: https://tonywardstudio.com/blog/i-am_that_i_am/
Now that everyone is talking about guns and gun control, I figured ‘What the hell, I’ll throw out my thoughts and see what happens.’
I’ve lost my gun rights once, got them back, then lost them again. I lost them the first time in 1969 when I was convicted of possession of marijuana, a felony at that time carrying a possible thirty year sentence. I got ‘lucky’ and only got three years, suspended. I later petitioned the Governor of Virginia and had all of my rights restored.
Segue to 2007, when I was convicted of the charges that put me where I am now, when I lost my gun rights all over again. My first question in 1969 and again now is this, how can a state take away a constitutionally guaranteed right? I did not believe the State of Virginia had that right then, and I continue to believe that today. States simply have no right to infringe on any federal constitutional right. Why the US Supreme Court has never categorically stated that is a mystery to me.
That being said, I have owned only three guns in my life, a single-shot bolt-action .22 Remington rifle, a single-shot breach loaded .410 shotgun (I don’t remember the maker), and a semiautomatic 9 mm Beretta pistol. The rifle was a gift from my father at around age 16. We used to go squirrel hunting together, but mostly we did target shooting. He was a deadeye shot with no scope, and could knock a squirrel I could barely see out of a tree, something he said he learned in the army.
My grandfather gave me the shotgun, that he used to use for dove hunting, until he decided a Methodist minister shouldn’t hunt. All I ever shot with it were tossed tin cans, which I hit most of the time. I only fired the pistol, another gift from my father, a few times at targets. I did pretty well with it, but short barreled pistols tend to not be very accurate.
The first guns I’m aware of that could be fired relatively quickly without reloading were the ‘pepperbox’ pistols, that had multiple barrels on a manually rotated turret. I am not a firearm historian, so bear with me if my history is pretty general. The Bob Shell who writes the gun books you see on Amazon, etc., is someone else. I believe the first real fully automatic rifle was the Gatling Gun, which had multiple rotating barrels automatically reloaded from a magazine. Gatlings were used in the American ‘Civil War,’ but were very big and heavy and mounted on a carriage that could not be repositioned quickly. Modern Gatling Guns are like the one you see Jesse Ventura using in the movie ‘Predator’. Having multiple barrels keeps them from overheating and damaging themselves. Do I believe anyone with the money should be able to buy a modern Gatling? No, I do not.
I’m more conflicted about modern ‘assault rifles,’ which are descended from the automatic military rifles for which Adolf Hitler coined the term ‘Sturmgewehr’ — ‘storm weapon.’ The first other iteration was the Russian AK-47, named for Antonin Kalashnikov, its designer. Americans countered with the AR-15, used by American troops in Vietnam.
I believe there are rational reasons for keeping some military weapons out of the hands of those who might misuse them.
But, wait a minute. Isn’t the purpose of the Second Amendment to arm the populace and prevent an overreaching government from holding power over us? Yes, it is, and I’m conflicted.
Look at Ukraine, where poorly armed civilians have gone up against Russian soldiers equipped with modern weapons of war to defend their freedom. What if Russia, or some other autocracy tried to overrun and subdue the USA, or our own government ran amok? If the citizenry had only guns like I had, they’d stand no chance.
So what is the solution to gun violence, or is there one? Gun massacres have occurred in countries with strict gun control. Make guns illegal, and only the criminals will have them. I offer no solution to the problem, just hope to stimulate some thought about a difficult, polarizing problem to which neither side seems to have any answers.
About The Author: Bob Shell is a professional photographer, author, former editor in chief of Shutterbug Magazine and veteran contributor to this blog. He is currently serving a 35 year sentence for involuntary manslaughter for the death of Marion Franklin, one of his former models. He is serving the 13th year of his sentence at Pocahontas State Correctional Facility, Virginia. To read additional articles by Bob Shell, click here: https://tonywardstudio.com/blog/virginia-enters-the-dark-ages/
Is that a painting? No, it is a photograph. This is the question I have heard during my entire 35yr. photography career. Now in 2022, I only have clients I choose that give me full creative freedom.
Let’s start from the beginning. I am an artist, I do not think linearly, my mind works in an abstract way. I sees in colors and shapes not beginning to end. I was fortunate to have a fashion model as a mother so I was influenced by a creative field that could bring home the bacon and still be creative.
The creative side: I am fulfilled when I can explore the unknown and respond to the situation (did I just write my true self realized). It is like a puzzle. How can I create a photograph with a set, models, products, weather conditions, clients requests, egos, budgets and deadlines. This may not appear to be a creative process. As I write it, does seem more like a business negotiation. It is artistic, because we are in the moment creating and everything is evolving. I can create a photo set up in my controlled studio. Take notes, calculate the light and can document every angle and the next day it is different. I can’t explain it but it is never exactly the same. It is the unknown element. Maybe it’s the weather, the position of the moon, maybe it is everyone’s mood, maybe a bad hair day or the chemistry of the people I are working with.
Life is always shifting. Maybe it is just a new day and a different perspective. The plus side is that when I work with a creative team and creative directors, it evolves and we find our voice together. It may not be like the original layout but it’s better because it is ours as a team.
My Advice: In the beginning I tried to produce/create what I thought my clients wanted like a spread sheet. But the truth was they didn’t really know, they are looking for my inspiration. It is a creative process. Who knows what can happen. Create what you see and feel and you will be rewarded by using your own vision and delivering above exceptions.
What does this have to do with art and photography. Stay true to your self, take risks, stay in your power. Enjoy and respect your creative process.
About The Author: Amanda Stevenson is a professional photographer having over 25 years of experience. Amanda uses her diligent nature and artistic vision to collaborate with her clients to display the still and video imagery in various publications and exhibitions around the world. To learn more about Amanda Stevenson photographic services, click here: https://amandastevensonphoto.com
Portraits of Amanda Stevenson by Tony Ward. Creative Direction by KVaughn. Photographers assistant, Anthony Colagreco. Copyright 2022.
Can diverse works of art be understood by people who have little to no understanding of its origins? This is an ongoing conversation I am having with my daughter. Similar to the conversations I have had with her about abstraction versus representational art .
We meaning all of us has grown up in a culture dominated by all things white. We know Marilyn Monroe to be the most beautiful on film and the all American suburban story . The great men in political history was George Washington and Abraham Lincoln . Great women in society might be Eleanor Rosevelt or Jackie Kennedy . For the non white people these images were always iconic . Art reproduced these ideals .
When African Art was discovered and placed it was the mysterious other, until artists like Picasso and Brancusi came along. Other’s took the elements and made it theirs too. Will we ever see the day when art from people of color will be considered a part of mainstream society? Instead of just being the other.
At the moment it’s a novelty. A trend. It’s been a novelty and trend before . It’s 2022 . Our world is a melting pot whether you like it or not . It should include all of the varying cultures just as much as the necessity to be bilingual in language. The world is constantly evolving. We must be able to communicate and navigate our ways through varying cultures. Let’s catch up. The sooner the better.
About The Artist: Mikel Elam was born in Philadelphia. He attended the University of the Arts receiving his BFA in painting. He also attended the School of the Visual Arts in New York. He has been showing his paintings in numerous gallery spaces nationally and internationally for the last 25 years. Mikel is currently an artist in residence at the Fitler Club in Philadelphia.
True Believers and Tallywhackers (The Elephant’s Underbelly)
“Lord, lift us up where we belong….”
Oh no, it’s not a humming of a romantic theme from the film “An Officer and A Gentleman”, but, an undertone score of those who benefit from the perks of marrying well.
One might think that if someone mired in the off-the-wall conspiracy swamp of election lie lunacy tried to take one toe onto the grounds of the White House, that person would be turned around and be noted as persona non grata.
Yet, for a lady who married well, she is given carte blanche on not just entering the White House grounds; but, escorted into the office of oval. She comes with lists of ‘wants’, from suggestions for employees throughout an administration to propelling legal theories into overturning a failed re-election bid.
Some in the administration may humor this woman, while others may be humbled by which elite plateau she exists upon.
Oh yes, this lovely lady is a light in the darkness to show the way to victory. In fact, her maiden name was Lamp. But, that was before she wed a man in black. A black robe that is. Her name is Virginia and her beloved’s name is Clarence.
Virginia ‘Ginni’ Thomas is a conservative activist and her husband is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. In the land of D.C. power is a key. The accelerant of power is a key to unlocking doors that the commoners shall never hold.
A question: Who is more powerful, a President who serves four to eight years in office; or, a Supreme Court Justice who has a lifetime appointment?
Ding! Ding! Ding! I hear a symphony!
Answer: Justice is Supreme.
Some may see the attack of January 6th as an isolated event. But, the fact is that it actually was just a mid-way point in an ongoing scheme of fallacy involving a tiny man with a bruised ego of not wanting to admit his loss in an election. It didn’t begin one day in January 2021, but ten months prior.
Screeches from Donald Trump’s mouth on the campaign trail starting in April 2020 about a possibility of him not being elected as being due to fraudulence and outright theft in that upcoming election of that November were just the greasing of the wheels in getting his supporters to believe his lies were truth and the truth were lies.
With the panoply of titled configurations in the conservative bloodstream known as ‘Stop the Steal’, ‘The Madison Sweep’ and all other kind of calliope chaos under the circus tent to keep Donald J. Trump in office by any means necessary, the planning and operation of Trump’s Big Lie came vividly to life.
Sandwiched between two pardoned felons, Steve Bannon and Mike Flynn is pillow-pusher Mike Lindell. No, that’s not some sort of double-entendre. Mr. Lindell really pushes pillows for a living as CEO of a pillow manufacturing empire. Alongside as crisp pickle in this buffet of audacity was another pardoned felon, Roger Stone.
As to Mr. Stone, it seems Roger always has a way of inserting himself in the middle of one thing or another. But, I shall get back to him a little bit later in this article.
With that being said, there is another person in the linkage of this chain of conservatives. His name is Mark Meadows, former White House Chief of Staff to Donald J. Trump and former Republican member of Congress from North Carolina’s 11th district. Both of these titles of Mr. Meadows have placed him in quite an interesting position of being point-man in this see-sawing situation.
Ginni Thomas is not some over-eager, collegiate, campaign volunteer stuffing envelopes, door-knocking, lawn sign posting, and silk-screening t-shirts for the cause. Far from that lowly place, she is at the pinnacle of power; where all that is needed is the right name and right spouse to be granted anything that is sought after.
Days after the election of 2020 to before the inauguration in 2021, a back and forth of text messages numbering 29 was sent from Mrs. Thomas to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, proving one thing was clear; Ginni is a true believer in the labyrinth of ideological extremity. She isn’t even on the same page of working the type of self-aggrandizing grift that Donald Trump is. From jowl of Powell to the esoteric ofEastman, Virginia Lamp Thomas is earnestly all in for countering what she calls President Joseph R. Biden’s election win as ‘the end of liberty’.
Ginni Thomas being a true believer in whatever she believes in wouldn’t mean much to me or any other citizen of the United States of America, if she had remained Virginia Lamp. Yet, she is who she is and her husband just coincidentally happens to be one of nine persons who rule supreme.
The first black Supreme Court Justice was Thurgood Marshall, a legal lion who earned his roar from winning the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case, which desegregated public schools.As civil rights legend Marshall had announced his retirement, many wondered who would possibly be a replacement upon the bench.
“It was in this spirit in 1981 that I joined the Administration as an Assistant Secretary in the Department of Education. I had, initially, declined taking the position of Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights simply because my career was not in civil rights and I had no intention of moving into this area. In fact, I was insulted by the initial contact about the position as well as my current position.”– Clarence Thomas, Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1987
Back when Clarence Thomas was nominated and introduced as a nominee for his current position to the American public by President George H.W. Bush on a sunny July day in 1991, little did the majority of us know of the variables which would surface during his confirmation hearing later in that year.
On September 10th, 1991 when the Senate Judiciary Committee (whose chairman was Senator Joseph R. Biden of Delaware) began an average, advise and consent confirmation hearing of reviewing the then Judge Thomas’ rulings over the years, it seemed as plain as vanilla.
Nothing to see here, nothing to cause a rumble or grumble. It was just your mellow tedium of questions and responses over precedents, legal codes, law articles, and judicial philosophy.
By September 27th, 1991, the hearings had come to a successful end, as Thomas was voted out of committee for a full floor vote to a somewhat speedy confirmation for him to become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Preparing for the final Senate vote on Thomas’ nomination after debating on October 6th, 1991, suddenly everything was set off course for the heralding of a new Supreme Court Justice.
A leaked FBI interview with a former underling of Clarence Thomas when he chaired the EEOC named Anita Hill had been reported by NPR’s Nina Totenberg on October 6th. For the next five days until October 11th, the heat was on the Judiciary Committee to allow the University of Oklahoma Law Professor to testify on the character and fitness of a man who was to be exalted into a job with lifetime tenure.
Quite ironic it became when things turned unpleasant for Clarence Thomas, for although Anita Hill sat at the table giving her testimony about him; there was a shadow which hovered over the hearing room.
Daniel Arthur Mead played a part in how history of that moment in time now hangs in perpetuity for any retelling of the events of those days back in 1991.
Mr. Mead was mentioned only by his unforgettable stage name – Long Dong Silver. Anita Hill’s mentioning of this porn actor whose claim to fame was his above average asset was just part of what she had to deal with in being put-upon by her supervisor at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Clarence Thomas.
Oddly enough of what the EEOC is meant to prevent is not lost on anyone who still shake our heads in disbelief that Thomas wasn’t a protector of women, but more in the mode of a predatory archetype.
Anita Hill’s recollections of Thomas’ pornographic extravaganza of long dongs and amply bosomed women, down to just his creepy come-ons to her, hit a nerve for many women who were in her same position. Yet, even though Clarence Thomas was confirmed by members of the United States Senate, it was her courage and exposure of what kind of character that man actually is which has remained a lasting hallmark of Anita Hill’s heroism to this day.
The lives of Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas intersected in 1981 to 1983, when she was an attorney-adviser to him at the United States Department of Education Office Of Civil Rights and she served as his assistant when he became chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1982.
After exiting her job at the EEOC in 1983, Anita Hill went on to becoming an assistant law professor at Oral Roberts University until 1986 when she became a member of the faculty at the University of Oklahoma’s College of Law.
Professor Hill was dignified and determined to move on from the events she encountered with Clarence Thomas back in the 1980’s, yet a person who had no first-hand knowledge of her life or even his back in 1981 to 1983 decided to ring her up from out of the blue in October 2010. It was good ‘ol Ginni Thomas, who had married Clarence in 1987, leaving Hill a voicemail in requesting her to apologize for the testimony given back in 1991 at the confirmation hearings of her husband. What is funny about that telephone voice-mail message that was left for Anita Hill is that it is based off of what Clarence told his wife about whatever occurred back when he was alone with Anita Hill.
Well, I guess that proves Ginni is a true believer in all sorts of spheres; believing anything told to her from a man she wasn’t even with back in 1981 to 1983, as if he were Moses bringing down the tablets from off the mountain.
You would figure that some cases that are brought before the Supreme Court would be difficult for Judge Clarence Thomas to even touch with a ten foot pole. But, oh no – he goes chin forward without blinking or wondering whether it might make him look bad in the public eye. Public be damned! Decorum be damned!
One example of this is the case of Vance versus Ball State University.
Muncie, Indiana’s Ball State University was sued by Maetta Vance, a server who worked for Ball State University Dining under the catering supervisor, Saundra Davis. Vance contended that Davis made the workplace odious due to physical actions and racial harassment against her.
In a 5-4 ruling of the Supreme Court on June 24th, 2013 of a case involving workplace harassment which ruled in favor of the defendant, Ball State University; it proved once more that the little guy or in this case, little gal seems to always be up against it.
And, guess who was one among the five who voted in the majority against the plaintiff, a woman suing her employer for workplace harassment by a supervisor. Yep, you guessed it – Thom Ass. Oops, I think I worded that wrong. Or, did I? (lol)
“I join the opinion because it provides the narrowest and most workable rule for when an employer may be held vicariously liable for an employee’s harassment. “ – Clarence Thomas, re: Vance v. Ball State University
Odd isn’t it, to see a concurrent opinion of the Vance v. Ball State University decision from the Supreme Court about a rule for employee harassment is written by a man who has his own questionable past with a person when he chairing the EEOC.
Is Clarence just a man of such high morality and unimpeachable virtue that has been misunderstood by so many of us for so many years? Or, is this just a dirty talkin’, ass-grabbin’, long-dong envyin’, big boob admirin’ man?If you want to think, hmm, to each his own, then on the other side of that it means keep them hands to your damn self, grubby grabber.
Yet, first impressions have a way of being set in stone. In the case of associate Justice Thomas, it might be the marble of the Supreme Court where he is ensconced within.
As with the aforementioned dangle of hung Silver in the land of public virtue and private vices, there’s more to be seen of the elephant’s underbelly.
What’s in a name, some might wonder.
In the Republican cage-match otherwise known as “Who Can Be the Most Vile?”, there is one person who is in the running for the title. His name is Representative Madison Cawthorn. And, he is shining star and a thorn all rolled up into one.
“XX chromosomes, no tallywhacker” – Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-North Carolina
And, to think the man who followed in the tracks of Mark Meadows in representing the people of the 11th District of North Carolina is the same man who has such a way with words. I guess you could say Representative Madison Cawthorn is on a roll with letting it all hang out.
Speaking of which, Cawthorn’s big mouth has a way of getting his hand spanked by House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy and defended in a nice, long stroke by a man who knows of dirty deeds first-hand.
Referencing of ‘first-hand’ and ‘tallywhackers’ – wow, the elephant’s underbelly definitely continues to be stroked mighty well and mighty hard. Ha! Ha!!
The GOP and cocaine orgies? Oh, Madison, make them clutch their pearls in hearing their dirty little secrets being revealed by you. McCarthy dismisses you, not because what you say. But, the fact that you said what you said for public consumption. Now, just the opposite you get defended by Roger Stone.
“And I can see why Washington elites would now be scrambling to try to deny it because maybe the voters back home won’t like what they’re hearing.”- Roger Stone
Oh yes, that same Roger Stone, who’s dirty tricks and dirty deeds go back many a year. Having described himself as ‘try-sexual', raunchy Roger knows of what he speaks when he stands up in defense of Rep. Madison Cawthorn. Using pseudonyms of “Swash Buckler” and “Nikki”, the adventurous Stones have been a couple of extraordinarily friendly and social beings in havens far from the pristine crowd.
Snark-Boy Rep. Cawthorn isn’t alone on the crazy train of blabbering when he talks about coke orgies, as Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene tosses and stirs in some unappetizing words into the political pot also.
With fervor in her voice, trying to earn some political brownie points from the whacked-out right wing, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene spouts off in defense of some of the January 6th capitol rioters. Calling the jail where they are being detained a ‘gulag’, she attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over ‘gazpacho police’. No, you are not reading the wrong word. This is the word that came out her mouth. She said it and didn’t try to correct herself or even possibly stop the recording and then re-record what she wanted to say.
With both of these blockheads, one thing is for sure; if you say something with vigor and a sense of righteousness, then by God, it has to be held upward on the side of the angels. Ya’ both are lying like vipers in the pit; but, hey you guys keep on saying stuff over and over again. And, maybe just maybe you’ll believe your own hype one day. For now, ya’ll just keep thrashing your tallywhacker and swimming in your soup.
Right among the conspiracy cacklers and disuniting schemers is Ginni Thomas, who has an ace up her sleeve to be on the side of what she considers righteous. As the wife of a Supreme Court Justice, she needn’t have to tell her husband of her wishes and wants, for each knows the other’s heart.
With the loose ends of court cases involving that which happened before, during and after the election of 2020 making their way up through the courts of appeals and making the final landing before the Supreme Court of the United States of America, anyone who has a spouse that has a vested interest in the ruling of a case should step aside and let the other judges do the judging.
In a time where the American system of democracy has never been before, as an overturning of an election and systematic coup is too close to being fulfilled; there must be a rejoinder. And, even the rarified bubble in which the members of the Supreme Court exist must be pierced and a code of ethics needs be implemented.
All other levels of the judiciary have a list of standards for conduct for the men and women who sit upon the bench. Yet, the Supremes get to just make up their own rules as they see fit.
Being blunt, it is as if some of the justices who sit on that bench exemplify the RDA principle of ‘rules don’t apply’; just for the sake of because they can. They sit up there in their robes of black and act like their decisions that affect each and every person in this country are handed down from a Celestial plain. Yet, they are above it, for they need never live under the same standards, laws, regulations or coda that the rest of us have to.
But, in the end, when they are addressed by any of us common folk, they are bestowed a title before their surnames are mentioned – Justice.
Thus, Justice Clarence Thomas goes on grinning with a (cow) chip on his shoulder and gravitas because of his point of position.
Alas, as Thomas prepares to slide back onto the bench at the Supreme Court, he will have a new colleague before the new session begins. She is associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the first black women on the bench of nine.
During her Senate confirmation hearing, the then Judge Brown Jackson was asked about recusal in an upcoming case that would be before the Supreme Court, involving affirmative action admissions policy at Harvard from where she is a graduate of.
Without hesitation or playing a game of weasel-words in answering this question from Texas’ tacky n’ trollin’ Senator Ted Cruz, this forthright woman said she would recuse herself.
Now, the balls of his wife’s conspiracies, contradictions, and cravenness are in Clarence’s court, to show how stand-up or stand-above (the rest of us) he actually is.
I guess you could say her jewels of favor are in his hands. Or, maybe it’s his jewels of favor that are in her hands? Yeah, that’s the ticket. It’s all about friendship.
“My wife Virginia, my best friend in the world” – The Honorable Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice of The United States Supreme Court
Lucky by confirmation’s fateful thumbs up, a man of dubious honesty is granted an imprimatur of being honorable.
Will Justice Thomas set himself on a perch of propriety and judiciously stand on the side of recusal or, will he flip us the bird in the same fashion his late colleague, associate Justice Antonin Scalia did back in 2004, when giving a mocking retort during a conflict of interest dust-up over a case involving his duck-hunting buddy and then vice-President Dick Cheney’s role in the George W. Bush administration’s Energy Task Force policy. Never a shrinking violet, Scalia rubbed salt into the wound of those calling for his recusal of the case with a pithy quip of the following pair of words – “Quack, quack”.
A roadrunner may catch the worm, but an appearance of conflicted interest can’t make a person who thinks any sort of rules don’t apply to himself squirm.
If past is prologue, good ‘ol Clarence will take the road of the long dong or the dirty bird, and so-called equal justice shall be bastardized and splat downward from up where he and his ‘best friend’ Ginni soar.
Thinking about this cuckooing (or, coup-coup-ing) couple brings an apt lyric from the magnificent Cole Porter to my mischievous mind:
“If you’re ever in a jam, here I am
If you’re ever in a mess, S-O-S
If you ever feel so happy, you land in jail, I’m your bail.
It’s friendship, friendship, just a perfect blendship.
When other friendships have been forgot,
Ours will still be hot.” – “Friendship”, words and music by Cole Porter, 1939
“When the fringe becomes normal and normal becomes the fringe; it is sanity to all that it shall hinge.” – A.H. Scott
“True Believers and Tallywhackers (The Elephant’s Underbelly)” – The Footnotes:
1) –“Ginni Thomas Reportedly Pressed Trump’s Chief of Staff on Overturning the Election” – NPR