Artist who painted Bill Clinton's portrait says he included "shadow of a blue dress"
Well, this one has certainly got to sting! The artist who painted Bill Clinton’s official portrait for the National Portrait Gallery at the Smithsonian says that he included a shadow of a blue dress to represent Clinton’s lies and duplicity during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.
Pennsylvania artist Nelson Shanks told the Philadelphia Daily News that he included a shadow of a blue dress in the 2006 portrait that hangs in the National Portrait Gallery. It’s an apparent reference to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, with Shanks adding that the 42nd president is “probably the most famous liar of all time.”
“If you look at the left-hand side of it, there’s a mantle in the Oval Office and I put a shadow coming into the painting and it does two things,” the painter said.
Shanks claimed that the Clintons have been lobbying the National Portrait Gallery to remove it, but a gallery spokeswoman denied that to the Daily News.
“It actually literally represents a shadow from a blue dress that I had on a mannequin, that I had there while I was painting it, but not when he was there. It is also a bit of a metaphor in that it represents a shadow on the office he held, or on him.”
…and Obama didn’t speak up because he’s not a Jew. Then they came for the Christians, and Obama did not speak up because he is not a Christian. Now, they come for western civilization and Obama will not speak up because he is not an advocate of western civilization. He believes that western civilization is exploitative and imperialistic, that terrorism is caused by imbalances between the west and rest, and that if only the west would minimalize its arrogance on the world’s stage peace would blossom.
Someone just started a feminism/women's rights group in my high school. There are posters all around the school with things such as, "Did you know that women make 77 cents to the male dollar? Join to help make a change!" Tempted to join just to share with them some real facts about gender equality. Love your blog.
You should. I would place little flyers underneath theirs debunking their BS including sources.
He lived in al-Zur village in the Marib province of Yemen, and in 2011 an
American drone strike killed his father and older brother while they were
herding their camels.
Since then, as
he told The Guardian last
September, he lived in constant fear of drones. They even appeared in his
nightmares. “I see them every day and we
are scared of them,” Mohammed said. “A lot of the kids in this area wake up
from sleeping because of nightmares from them and some now have mental
problems. They turned our area into hell and continuous horror, day and night,
we even dream of them in our sleep.”
The drone’s indiscriminate killing—remember, it’s
official US policy to count any military-aged male killed as a terrorist,
regardless of (the absence of) actual evidence)—was particularly concerning
and confusing to him: “They tell us that these drones come from bases in Saudi
Arabia and also from bases in the Yemeni seas and America sends them to kill
terrorists, but they always kill innocent people. But we don’t know why they
are killing us.”
“The elders told us
that it’s criminal to kill the civilians without distinguishing between
terrorists and innocents,” he added, “and
they kill just on suspicion, without hesitation.”
Just a couple months after the Guardian interview, Mohammed’s confusion would cease—not because of
a reformed American drone policy, but because he himself was
killed in a drone strike on January 26.
Predictably, Mohammed and the two men who were also burned
to death in the car the missile struck were
labeled terrorists. But he “wasn’t a member of al-Qaida,” Mohammad’s brother
Maqdad says. “He was a kid.”
The family is so dedicated to proving their brother’s
innocence that they’ve vowed to sue if need be. “After our father died,” Maqdad
continues, “al-Qaida came to us to offer support. But we are not with them.
Al-Qaida may have claimed Mohammed now but we will do anything—go to court,
whatever—in order to prove that he was not with al-Qaida.”
Maqdad is equally determined to get the American government to
admit its crimes against his family: “We live in injustice and we want the
United States to recognize these crimes against my father and my brothers. They were innocent people, we are weak,
poor people, and we don’t have anything to do with this.”
Though he still rejects allegiance to al-Qaida, after seeing
his brother’s body “completely burned, like charcoal,” it is no surprise if
Maqdad is no friend to the United States.
“Historians typically consider the Japanese-American internment, which they almost universally regard as the most egregious episode in the twentieth-century history of American civil liberties, separately from the military draft and the government’s imposition of economic controls during the war. Many applaud the draft and the economic controls while deploring the internment. In fact, all were forged from the same metal: governmental suppression of private property rights, including the right of innocent persons to control the use of their own bodies. Hence no one should be surprised that the Supreme Court allowed all these invasions of individual rights to stand… The Supreme Court is part of the government, and the government had committed itself above everything else to the prosecution of the war.”
Evidently Davis and his girlfriend had invited a coworker to stay with them while he was going through a rough time. One day, the girlfriend and the coworker got into an argument, and the coworker stabbed the girlfriend before fleeing the scene.
Davis called the police and was waiting with his injured girlfriend when he heard shots in his living room. Thinking the violent coworker had returned, he grabbed his gun and went to investigate.
But the shots were actually fired by the first police officer to respond to Davis’ 911 call. Multiple witnesses (neighbors in the apartment building) testify that on entering the apartment, the cop failed to announce himself and summarily shot the three-legged dog. These were the shots Davis heard. When Davis entered the room, the officer shot him twice before telling him to drop his weapon.
Davis was arrested and died alone in the hospital two days later as police refused to allow his family to visit him.
It’s finally happening. Today, the FCC votes on whether the internet is a free open service between you and the cable companies.
Groups funded by the likes of George Soros have already done a phenomenal job of pulling the hood over your eyes by getting internet users like you and me to believe that adopting new regulatory rules will keep the internet free, fair, and thriving—nearly 200,000 calls to Congress have been placed from Tumblr alone, hundreds of thousands more from a diverse coalition of partners, and 4 million total comments have been submitted directly to the FCC…but the CEO of Tumblr doesn’t even understand “net neutrality” himself. Today is your chance to raise your voice and see if the government gives a damn about what you think, considering the FCC has totally withheld their plans from the public. By all accounts, we know that Chairman Wheeler is prepared to do the wrong thing—a politically expedient thing that President Obama wants him to do —and enact firm net neutrality rules under Title II of the Communications Act.
If this happens, it’s the end of the free internet. It will be subject to all the rules and regulations that the government has taken over such as what they did with terrestrial radio and the open TV airwaves. Did we mention the introduction of a new internet tax that you will end up paying? So let’s make sure it doesn’t happen. If you haven’t called your representative yet,call your representative. If you’ve already called your representative, call them again.
Most importantly, call 1-888-225-5322 then choose #5 on the prompt to register your opinion to the FCC directly.
And with your help, we can stop an government takeover of the internet and insure an internet in which freedom is secure for generations to come.