You’ve no doubt seen miniature PCs — small sticks and blocks that scarcely take up room on a desk. The Kangaroo Mobile Desktop Pro is similar, but takes the idea of portable to a whole new level: this PC is small enough to slip into a pocket and it features an internal battery to keep things running when not plugged … Continue reading
Whether as James Bond or as Roger Moore, Roger could always be relied upon to help a lady in distress. I treasure a scene he played as he escorted Native American activist Sacheen Littlfeather to the wings of the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion stage following her appearance apparently to accept (but as it turned out, decline) Marlon Brando’s Best Actor statuette at the 1973 Academy Awards.
It was a bit tense since there had been audience boos, but she had completed her task graciously and courageously. Roger considerately had a reassuring hand at her elbow, but she was steady, having served Brando’s purpose and that of the plight of Native Americans with dignity. I had gone to meet Roger in the stage right wings, near the elevators which rose to the press rooms above.
Roger was long a client of my and my late partner Jerry Pam’s PR firm. A dozen or so members of the PR branch of the Academy watched the show in a holding room and divided up taking the winners and presenters up to the deadline press photo rooms and then to press conference in the electronic media and print press rooms. Because Roger was a client (as were Michael Caine and virtually every actor with a British accent since Jerry was Brit to the bone), this one was mine. As Ms. Littlefeather caught her breath, Roger and I discussed the alternatives and decided that there was no function for him in the press rooms. He and Liv Ullmann were presenters who very expressly had not presented. The Oscar was somewhere else, and his presence with Ms. Littlefeather in photos would only scramble the meaning of this moment in Oscar history. He would head to his seat. And, so, he wished her well in completing her task. Roger really had a way and a smile to put people at their ease.
It was at this moment that fate and Academy’s schedule of events for the evening interceded in the form of a six foot six security guy, who saw two other guys who were about to screw up the Academy’s stated (it was right there on the time-line sheet that he flashed us) plans for the evening. He grabbed my upper arm because I looked suspiciously like the troublemaker and I was pointing Ms. Littlefeather toward that elevator.
Let me explain first that Roger was always a friend in need and a friend indeed. Jerry and I had just started handling Sidney Sheldon’s first novel, “The Naked Face,” because his debut in the book world simply hadn’t taken off like Sidney’s Oscar-winning screenwriting career had. Jerry and I had devised a plan to announce that Roger Moore, the screen’s reigning 007, was acquiring the book for his own production company. “And how much am I acquiring it for?” Roger inquired, not that he didn’t trust us. “Nothing,” Jerry replied, “acquired can be done without any financial obligation.” Roger, with his great sense of why-not?, was game. The beauty of it was that having his first book about to be made by the contemporaneous James Bond gave Sidney a good running start on PR for his second book which turned out to be the biggest worldwide bestseller in decades, “The Other Side of Midnight.” Sidney’s sudden ownership of the bestseller lists put a lot of cred into Roger’s “acquisition” of the now number one author’s prior page-turner. Eventually with all of these positive forces interacting, Roger actually went ahead and made that film. That’s how publicity hustle does make the world go ‘round. Roger did it as nutty favor for two friends, which I suppose he did a lot in his life. Sir Roger and Sir Michael (their knighthoods still to come) co-hosted many crucial charity fund-raisers Guttman & Pam produced. Roger’s ready compassion benefited a lot of people including millions of third world kids he helped in his long and devoted years as UNICEF Ambassador. He did it all with such style and humor, the qualities which imbued and distinguished his Bond. We’re talking a guy with natural grace and lavish humor.
So, getting back to the stage right wings of the Dorothy Chandler, suddenly there’s this not-so-friendly-or-jolly tuxedoed giant challenging our plan to get Brando’s surrogate to and through the high-energy press rooms which lay immediately ahead. “She’s gotta stay here,” this fellow commands. His reason for the gotta is that it is planned that all of the winners will gather on stage at the finale to sing “God Bless America” in a tribute to John Ford. Roger and I explain to him that while it’s true that John Ford is very possibly the greatest director (and arguably most humane) who ever held a megaphone, it is also true that in his films he has probably killed more Native Americans than George Custer. This is not computing for this guy, who is trying to herd us back to the stage. “She’s not an Oscar winner,” Roger emphasizes, “do you see her holding any trophy?” “Yeah, but she made a speech,” the guy insists. “Yes,” Roger says, almost at smile’s end, “and did you HEAR that speech?” “A speech is a speech.” One thing the gods of the stage have is good timing. Suddenly a flat (a piece of scenery) is knocked over somewhere, and our security guy turns to see what the problem is, possibly also needing his alert devotion to duty. Roger gives me a nod, and Ms. Littlefeather and I take off for the elevator. The security guy turns and immediately espies this act of civil disobedience. He makes a move toward the elevator, but Roger… obviously trying to get out of his way… manages to stumble into it. From the elevator, so slow to close, we watch Roger and this guy doing what looks like a samba on the cable-crossed floor. Finally, the guy breaks free and runs toward us yelling, I swear to God, “Where you taking that Indian?” Behind him, as the doors slide slowly shut, we see Roger smiling and giving us a gentle wave of bon voyage.
Bon voyage, Roger.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Most high school students choose a photo studio or tranquil outdoor setting for their senior portraits.
Andrew McBurnie chose Taco Bell.
The student from Bourbonnais, Illinois posed for his glamour shots at the table where he sat with his friends throughout high school, he told BuzzFeed. And the images are magazine worthy:
McBurnie had his photographer friend Wesley Taylor set up the shoot, and Taylor says T-Bell was totally cool with it.
“We ordered a taco and a couple drinks at first and then realized we needed way more, so went back and got more tacos and nachos,” Taylor told HuffPost. “Fortunately we were able to polish it all off at the end! Andrew loves his Taco Bell.”
The setting turned out to be the perfect complement to McBurnie’s suit and bowtie.
“I loved combining the fashion magazine aesthetic with the retro vibes of the restaurant ― plus, Andrew’s basically a model,” Taylor said.
McBurnie’s not the only one with memories from chalupa-land: Other high schoolers have taken Taco Bell-themed portraits in years past.
But then again, they didn’t brave nacho cheese while sporting crisp white suit cuffs. Congrats, Andrew!
H/T Buzzfeed
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
When Donald Trump was elected president last November, the cast and crew of Hulu’s “Handmaid’s Tale” were already hard at work bringing Margaret Atwood’s gut-wrenching 1985 novel to the screen.
Much of the scripts had been written, the characters formed ― and then America voted in a leader who supports the kinds of oppressive, totalitarian policies that seem better suited for fictional Gilead than present-day U.S.
“It was horrible for the world but great for me,” showrunner Bruce Miller told The Hollywood Reporter.
His series was bound to be relevant anyway. (After all, Atwood said she based the story on very real, historical circumstances of women around the world.) But Trump’s election undeniably carried the show’s import to new heights. Since it debuted, audiences have not held back in drawing terrifying parallels between the show’s portrayal of Gilead ― a theocratic regime whose continued existence depends upon its ability to force women to surrender control over their own bodies ― and the divided state of America today.
Neither has the cast and creative team behind the series.
“[Joseph Fiennes and I] are the villains,” Yvonne Strahovski, who plays the commander’s wife Serena Joy, explained to THR. “Suddenly Trump is elected, and all this negative behavior comes to light. I start seeing these parallels between [my character’s] actions and what Trump’s doing. It’s in a weird way an inspiration but also a horrid parallel.”
”People were all of a sudden saying the venomous things that they had always thought out loud — things I didn’t think people thought anymore in my little bubble,” Miller added. “It made me change one or two things [in the show], but I’m not going to tell you what they are.”
Of course, in countless other interviews, series star Elisabeth Moss (who plays Offred) and director Reed Morano have reiterated that the story would be effective regardless of Trump’s position at the White House.
“The whole message that Margaret was sending in the book is that big changes like this don’t happen overnight,” Morano told audiences at 92Y in early May, “they happen very slowly over time, almost so that you don’t know that they’re happening until it’s too late.”
And yet, as Miller makes clear, the election had its effect. “I think that I definitely had personal feelings about [the election],” Moss told HuffPost in April. “All of a sudden I felt like [the story] was much more personal, much more relevant. It wasn’t so crazy. And this whole idea of ‘it couldn’t happen here’ kind of started to fade away. And that’s kind of what everyone else has felt as well.”
The parallels might be tough to stomach, but there’s hope, Samira Wiley (who plays Offred’s friend, Moira) told THR:
One of the things that’s so interesting about this show is the caste system, specifically within the women. It is, I think, a false sense of authority. We have Serena Joy and Offred, who are of two totally different statuses in the society, but how different it would be and how amazing it would be if they could see that banding together could be a revolution? Pitting women against each other is something that also happens in our world today. I hope people have conversations that they wouldn’t be having otherwise.
Miller agrees. In a previous interview with HuffPost, he said he wants the series to encourage people to “appreciate the freedoms that we have, and see little ways that they’re chipped away and what that can lead to.”
“There’s been just an unrelenting assault on […] women’s sovereignty over their own bodies,” he added, “that’s been happening at the state level and the national level, that’s been head-spinning.”
Moss put it best to THR. When asked which women’s right she thought was the most vulnerable in our current political climate, she responded:
Damn. How much time do you have? The easy one that comes to mind is sort of a blanket: the right to do with your own body what you want to do. Which covers a lot of things, frankly. It doesn’t just cover the right to have a child or not have a child.
type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=58ffb42de4b0073d3e7a1d0c,591db7d6e4b094cdba51e629,58fb7c79e4b00fa7de14c20c,58ef93ece4b0bb9638e1fcb5,5924d38ae4b0650cc01ff7fb,591b4a1fe4b07d5f6ba6d1b1
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
A homeless man credited with helping treat victims of Monday night’s deadly terror attack at an Ariana Grande concert will soon have a roof over his head after he was recognized for his heroism.
Stephen Jones, 35, was sleeping near England’s Manchester Arena when he heard a huge blast followed by the screams of crowds, ITV News reported.
Concert attendees, including small children, were fleeing from the stadium, some bloodied. Instead of running away himself, Jones said he came to their aid.
“Just because I’m homeless doesn’t mean that I haven’t got a heart and I’m not human still,” he told an ITV News reporter hours after the attack. “They needed the help. I’d like to think that someone would come and help me if I needed the help.”
In graphic detail, Jones recalled helping remove nails, glass and other shrapnel from victims’ faces, arms, and legs.
“It’s just instinct to go and help if someone needed your help. And it was children, and it was a lot of children with blood all over them and crying and screaming,” he said.
His harrowing story soon spread around the world, leading to an online fundraiser to afford him housing. As of Wednesday, the JustGiving account, created by a Manchester woman named Diane Moore, has raised more than $27,700.
His act of selflessness also caught the attention of an official with local soccer team West Ham United FC.
Co-chairman David Sullivan and his son, Dave Sullivan Jr., announced Wednesday that after a successful hunt to find Jones, they are bestowing six months rent upon him. They also plan to help him find work and supply him with extra money for clothing and other essentials.
“Dave and myself were both hugely impressed by the bravery shown by Steve, the emergency services and all those who rushed to the aid of those affected by the Manchester attack,” the team’s joint-chairman said in a statement. “This was a terrible incident, but the response of the people of Manchester has been one of bravery, togetherness and resilience – the hallmarks of what makes Britain such a fantastic place.”
The Sullivans said they will work with a local charity to determine how to best help him.
“Steve was just one of hundreds of people who forgot about their own safety and rushed to the aid of others, and we were both moved by his story,” Sullivan continued. “Steve deserves this chance to improve his own life after his selfless and heroic acts undoubtedly improved the lives of so many others.”
In a follow-up video shared by ITV News on Wednesday, Jones said he plans to use this opportunity to begin a new life for himself.
“This is my chance. I’ve done a few bad things in my life. I’ve been to prison, I was a drug user, so I want to get back on the straight and narrow and get back into working, sort out my life,” he said. “The donations, there was no need to. The kind words and acknowledgment was good enough for me, honestly.”
Jones wasn’t the only homeless man praised for rushing to help the victims of the violent explosion.
Thirty-three-year-old Chris Parker, told The Press Association that he was begging in the venue’s foyer with the bomb went off.
“I heard a bang and within a split second I saw a white flash, then smoke and then I heard screaming,” he told the U.K. news agency.
Racing to help, he said he found a child without any legs.
“I wrapped her in one of the merchandise T-shirts and I said, ‘where is your mum and daddy?’”
Parker said he additionally tended to a woman in her 60s who suffered fatal leg and head injuries.
An online fundraiser has also been set up for Parker. An online fundraiser has also been set up for Parker. Its organizer, a man named Michael Johns, reported that they are still working to make contact with him.
type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=59256eb4e4b00c8df2a04ea3,592545c5e4b0ec129d309d9e,59243cd4e4b03b485cb50e44,59244e02e4b094cdba57cfb1
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
WASHINGTON ― U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue faced heated questioning Wednesday over President Donald Trump’s new proposal to slash food stamps.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) asked Perdue at a hearing why he’d said last week that he didn’t favor cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which is overseen by Perdue’s agency, given that the Trump budget cuts the program.
Contrary to the budget, Perdue simply said that SNAP would be fully funded in the next fiscal year and that any changes would be up to Congress.
“The legislative proposal going forward is obviously something you and all of your members in Congress will deal with and have your stamp on that,” Perdue said. He also said he stood by his comment last week that SNAP isn’t broken and doesn’t need fixing.
It’s true that presidential budgets are basically just suggestions, and that it will be up to Congress to set spending levels, but it’s hard to reconcile Perdue’s sunny outlook on SNAP with the Trump administration’s push to cut the program by $193 billion over 10 years, or more than 25 percent of the program’s projected cost in that time.
One possible explanation for Perdue’s comment Wednesday is that he wants to pretend that Trump’s budget simply does not exist. A USDA spokesperson said the policy changes recommended in the budget would be considered by Congress when it next reauthorizes SNAP next year ― as in, not right now.
More than 42 million Americans receive SNAP benefits, making it one of the biggest safety net programs in the U.S. Benefits average about $125 per month and can be used only for food products in grocery stores.
The biggest way the Trump budget cuts federal SNAP spending is by gradually requiring states to cover 25 percent of the cost of benefits, which are currently funded completely by the federal government. The budget would also let states reduce benefit levels, which they would probably want to do if the program starts draining their budgets. A quarter of the cost of food stamps in Texas, for instance, is roughly equivalent to what the state pays 64,000 public school teachers, according to the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Another way the Trump administration has proposed reducing nutrition spending would be to restrict benefits to able-bodied adults who don’t have jobs or dependents, such as children or elderly parents. Federal law already limits benefits to able-bodied adults, allowing only three months of assistance. States are allowed to waive the limit in areas with high unemployment, but the Trump budget would raise the threshold so that fewer counties could qualify for the waiver.
Additionally, the Trump administration thinks retailers who accept SNAP benefits at their stores should be required to pay the USDA a modest fee for participating in the program.
“My hope is that this budget document is dead on arrival,” DeLauro said.
Other members of the appropriations committee’s agriculture subcommittee did not share DeLauro’s criticisms of the proposed SNAP cuts.
Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) described the program’s current spending levels as excessive given the nation’s declining unemployment rate.
“I’m glad the administration is returning sanity to this program,” Harris said Wednesday.
But anti-hunger advocates were quick to point out that both SNAP spending and caseloads have actually been trending downward in recent years, though spending on the program remains higher than pre-recession numbers.
That’s because many low-income working families continue to struggle to put food on the table and still meet the program’s requirements for support, according to Christine Melendez Ashley, deputy director of government relations at Bread for the World. She believes families like these, who are increasingly represented among overall SNAP participants, could be devastated by the proposed cuts to the program.
“Though the recession is over, many families are facing underemployment or might not be making as much money as they were before the recession,” Melendez Ashley told HuffPost. “Taking food out of the mouths of vulnerable families, children and seniors is not the way to balance the budget.”
The Trump administration is painting a different picture in how it’s described the proposed changes.
In response to questions about the program during the White House’s Tuesday press briefing, Office of Management and Budget director Mick Mulvaney described the cuts as “compassionate” to the taxpayers who are footing the program’s bills.
Craig Gundersen, an agriculture professor at the University of Illinois who has been studying SNAP for 20 years, said it was misleading for Mulvaney to characterize SNAP participants and taxpayers as mutually exclusive groups given that the average length of time a SNAP participant is on the program is about 10 months.
“These people have paid taxes at various points in their lives and then when they are in need, they can go to SNAP and receive benefits from it,” Gundersen told HuffPost.
The program, he added, is working as it was designed — to alleviate hunger, which remains a pressing concern for many Americans. A new report released this month by Feeding America, another anti-hunger organization, claimed that 42 million Americans remain “food insecure,” meaning that their eating patterns are disrupted or their food intake is reduced. Research has found a link between SNAP participation and reduced food insecurity.
“Not all government programs are successful, but SNAP is one that is extraordinarily successful,” Gundersen said. “I’m not sure why SNAP is being targeted.”
Other USDA programs are also bearing the brunt of a nearly 21-percent blow to the department’s overall budget outlined in the president’s spending proposal. The budget blueprint also outlines significant cuts to crop insurance, rural development, agricultural research and international food aid programs, among other funding reductions.
The cuts have proven unpopular with even conservative-leaning ag groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, whose president Zippy Duvall said in a statement that the proposal “fails agriculture and rural America.”
type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related… + articlesList=591c9aece4b094cdba50b033,58cac50fe4b00705db4d1364,582f4bd7e4b058ce7aaadea0
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
WASHINGTON ― Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said Wednesday that states should have the flexibility to decide whether schools can discriminate against LGBTQ students ― even if those schools get federal money.
During a testy exchange in a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing, Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) told DeVos about Lighthouse Christian Academy, a private school in Indiana that receives state voucher money but denies admission to students from families where there is “homosexual or bisexual activity” or someone “practicing alternate gender identity.” Clark asked DeVos, whose budget seeks a $250 million increase for projects that include vouchers for private schools, if she would step in if that Indiana school applied for such federal funding.
DeVos replied by saying she supports giving flexibility to states.
“For states who have programs that allow for parents to make choices, they set up the rules around that,” she said.
You would put the state flexibility over our students?
Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.)
Clark, who appeared baffled, pressed DeVos on whether she could see any situation in which she would overrule a school requesting federal voucher money ― if the school discriminated against students based on sexual orientation, race or special needs, for example.
“The Office of Civil Rights and our Title IX protections are broadly applicable across the board,” DeVos said. “But when it comes to parents making choices on behalf of their students….”
“This isn’t about parents making choices. This is about use of federal dollars,” Clark interrupted. “You would put the state flexibility over our students.”
“I think a hypothetical―” DeVos said.
“It’s not a hypothetical,” Clark snapped. “It’s a real school.”
As they talked over each other, the chairman stepped in and gave DeVos a chance to fully answer Clark, whose time was up.
“The bottom line is we believe that parents are the best equipped to make choices for their children’s schooling and education decisions,” DeVos said. “States and local communities are best equipped to make these decisions and framework.”
Clark managed to get in a parting comment: “I am shocked that you cannot come up with one example of discrimination that you would stand up for students.”
Watch the full exchange above.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
A new animated short film is in the works that tells the story of a gay boy falling in love with the most popular boy in school.
“In A Heartbeat” follows Sherwin, an awkward young teen who is unsure of his sexuality. After crossing paths with Jonathan, a classmate, Sherwin’s heart literally pops out of his chest and chases after his new Prince Charming. Sherwin then has to try and stop his heart from revealing its true feelings ― not only to Jonathan, but the entire school.
Slated to be completed and then debut this summer thanks to a Kickstarter campaign that raised over $14,000, “In A Heartbeat” is a completely dialogue-free and created by Esteban Bravo and Beth David.
“When we first started working on this film, we knew that we didn’t want it to be preachy,” the pair, both filmmakers at the Ringling College of Art, told HuffPost. “There isn’t even dialogue, so we never have the characters speak to persuade the audience of anything. We simply wanted to show the audience what growing up was like for us through this story about a sweet, red-headed boy who feels just as confused and scared about his feelings as we did. Hopefully, it’ll resonate with those who identify with this character – and for those who don’t, we hope they’ll gain an understanding for people who go through this experience.”
We can’t wait!
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
A black farmer has the internet talking after posting a powerful message on social media about race relations in Charlottesville, Virginia.
Chris Newman, owner of the Sylvanaqua Farms in Albemarle County, shared his thoughts on a recent “Love Trumps Hate” counter-protest on Saturday. The rally was held in response to white supremacist Richard Spencer leading a protest against the removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee.
“I’d like to appreciate [the Love Trumps Hate rally],” Newman wrote in a Facebook post published on May 17. “But frankly I just don’t.”
Newman went on to call out the subtle racism of his neighbors, who purport to be progressive and inclusive but have yet to acknowledge the fact that Charlottesville is, by his estimation, “the most aggressively segregated place” he’s ever lived in.
The farmer recounted that he’s been racially profiled and questioned by police several times after receiving “strange looks from a passerby.”
“It isn’t Richard Spencer calling the cops on me for farming while Black,” Newman wrote. “It’s nervous White women in yoga pants with ‘I’m with her’ and ‘Coexist’ stickers on their German SUVs.”
The farmer went on to suggest that residents of the town who are interested in racial progress should consider how to effect change in their own everyday lives.
“People are so busy going after that easy fix, going after that Confederate flag, that they’re not doing the hard thing, which is thinking, how did we get here, and how the hell do we dig out of institutional racism,” Newman wrote.
As of Wednesday, Newman’s post has received over 5,000 shares and hundreds of comments from people chiming in with their own thoughts on race in Charlottesville.
In an interview with CBS affiliate Newsplex on Wednesday, Newman said that the racial profiling he receives has gotten so bad that he has stopped doing food deliveries from his farm to wealthier neighborhoods in the area. He told the station that the fact he experiences racism on a day-to-day basis is the main reason he made the Facebook post.
“The thing that bothered me wasn’t so much the protests themselves, but the back-patting after it,” Newman said. “There’s a difference between confronting racists and confronting racism.”
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Well, hey, will you look at that: Twitter finally did some good for the world.
On Wednesday, Netflix used its Twitter account to suggest to Ellen DeGeneres that she get back up on the stand-up stage after a prolonged absence.
It seemed like a reach, even for a company as powerful as Netflix. DeGeneres, after all, has her hands full just getting through a week of “The Ellen DeGeneres Show.” But just 13 minutes later, she responded with, “I’m in.”
Now, was this actually a spontaneous decision by DeGeneres, or part of a larger publicity plan hatched behind closed doors? We’re going to guess the latter, but that doesn’t mean it’s not exciting. Should it become official, this would be DeGeneres’ first stand-up special since 2003’s “Ellen DeGeneres: Here and Now.”
Netflix has done everything in its power to try and corner the stand-up market in recent months, agreeing to deals with A-list comedians like Amy Schumer, Dave Chappelle, Louis C.K., Tracy Morgan and Chris Rock.
But considering the degree of DeGeneres’ fame, and the length of time since her last special, this might be Netflix’s biggest get yet.
HuffPost reached out to both Netflix and DeGeneres’ manager for additional information. We will update this post if we hear back.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
This is site is run by Sascha Endlicher, M.A., during ungodly late night hours. Wanna know more about him? Connect via Social Media by jumping to about.me/sascha.endlicher.
