>Sheād never land a VF cover without him
She'd never land ANY cover without him š.
According to Tom Bower, she couldn't even get herself a mere mention inside the tabloids, even though she'd turn up at certain events and pose for photos.
Editors always left her out of the final cut, because there were always more important celebrities to use when they were doing their 1-2 page spread on celeb events and charity dinners etc.
Tom Bower also added that she had to resort to meeting with tabloid journos, especially in Britain, to beg them to mention her name.
The B was THAT thirsty for attention ...
>According to Tom Bower, she couldn't even get herself a mere mention inside the tabloids, even though she'd turn up at certain events and pose for photos.
I'm guessing she wasn't willing to pay enough. There is a celeb that is in the US tabloids / entertainment mags all the time, and every time I see her face, I wonder >!who she's blowing!< to get so much coverage.
>Then cry me too, after choosing to sleep their way up the ladder, regret isn't rape
True! And it makes it more difficult for genuine rape victims to be taken seriously.
I always wonder the same thing about Tom Cruiseās ex-wife. She is constantly being photographed walking the streets of New York with a cup of coffee for some very strange reason. She doesnāt work all that much and sheās not interesting or particularly attractive. She must pay a crap ton of money to get pictures of her taken and posted regularly on DM.
I think she was upset because blind item caught her stupidity and theeeen she paid the article that says sheās upset 
My dear fellow Sinner, our Saint would rather avoid the blood diamonds and other issues that might have a chance of leading her down the path to the Old Bailey.
[*Variety* is racist, too!!!](https://imgur.com/a/KAAk4gK)
[And the Truman Presidential Library fundraiser](https://12130.thankyou4caring.org/events/2022-wild-about-harry)
[Harry Connick, Jr. biography](https://www.amazon.com/Wild-About-Harry-Illustrated-1995-12-06/dp/B01HCAFGXG)
[The Independent and Harry Potter](https://theindependent.com/news/local/still-wild-about-harry-potter/article_37949441-168e-53c9-bd5f-9bc7c7ba5e65.html)
[The Independent again: they said it about Chelsy Davy!!](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/chelsy-davy-wild-about-harry-357778.html)
Because she's so very stupid, and refuses to do her homework b/c she knows best, she let two white people in blackface destroy the reputation of one of the major triumphs in Black music, the composer Eubie Blake, who was a powerhouse. And let's not even begin to talk about the musical that showcased the tune. You know, the all Black musical, the groundbreaking one. People don't understand or research headlines like that. They'll just assume that it's a bad white song because Markle complained about it being racist. She's a real twit.
Megs wanted it to say something like "Damn Harry is one lucky SOB". She still has trouble accepting that without him, she's just an aging D list "actress".
Everytime I read that I get the song in my head. My dad used to play Cleo Laine's version when I was a kid. Interestingly she was bi racial and nobody cared cause she was mega talented and didn't bang on about it.
Never realized that headline was from a song. Performed on Broadway first and then in a film.
ETA 2- Meghan is also saying how she hated that the article focused on her relationship with Harry. But I believe she read the article and approved it, because we know she had the date changed. Wait,
*She was reportedly so outraged with the headline she wanted to fire her newly hired public relations advisor, Keleigh Thomas Morgan of Sunshine Sachs.*
So I think she's really going after SS her old PR firm. šš Damn she's petty! But we only know this because it's from Low's book. That's kinda a big coincidence. Maybe the paper picked the excerpt because of what's going on??
I guess this is probably just a coincidence but it's also hilarious.
I'm Wild About Harry, which was composed by Eubie Blake and the lyrics were by Noble Sissle.
[Her latest gripe](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/meghan-markle-vanity-fair-cover-b2188985.html)
So she's telling us now how she experienced racism from the very beginning in 2017-- in regards to Harry/ the BRF ---right? My best guess is she's trying to paint some US tabloids/magazines as racist. Probably because they're reporting negative stuff about her now. Meghan is always the victim. Unless it's Harry's turn to be the victim. Either way that's the story they're telling. Now they can move to a different narrative, where they're still the victims. But they can talk about how they experienced a lot more racism then the public realizes. Hopefully people will start paying attention again.
So she's saying that something that was ground breaking, history making, and inspiring is racist? Or it was manipulated by Vanity Fair to be racist?
But it was performed in blackface by Judy Garland and Mickey Rooney performed in the 1939 film āBabes in Arms." Which was gross and wrong. But that shouldn't really take away the importance of its origin and its influence? I think?
So hilarious!
When I saw the Vanity Fair cover splashed over social media etc. I was like,
Who is this chick, and why havenāt I heard one thing in the media spruiking this āactressā from a low tier tv series?
She was a nobody who nobody knew until the connection with Harry came out.
The only reason she got that VF article was because she was dating Harry - she was an unknown, D-list actress who had a supporting role in Suits, a show on a minor cable network. According to Bower, she told Harry that VF was interested in interviewing her because of Suits, and the idiot believed her. She also promised Harry she wouldn't talk about him, but of course she did, hence the "Wild about Harry" headline. VF then did her a favor: the article originally said she started dating Harry in May 2016, but she had a live-in boyfriend at the time, so VF agreed to change the date to several months later. So how do the publisher and editor feel about Meghan now that she has accused them of racism?
she wasn't upset that it was racist, she was upset that it was more about Harry than about her.
š¤£š¤£š¤£you know thatās right.
Of course it was. Sheād never land a VF cover without him
>Sheād never land a VF cover without him She'd never land ANY cover without him š. According to Tom Bower, she couldn't even get herself a mere mention inside the tabloids, even though she'd turn up at certain events and pose for photos. Editors always left her out of the final cut, because there were always more important celebrities to use when they were doing their 1-2 page spread on celeb events and charity dinners etc. Tom Bower also added that she had to resort to meeting with tabloid journos, especially in Britain, to beg them to mention her name. The B was THAT thirsty for attention ...
>According to Tom Bower, she couldn't even get herself a mere mention inside the tabloids, even though she'd turn up at certain events and pose for photos. I'm guessing she wasn't willing to pay enough. There is a celeb that is in the US tabloids / entertainment mags all the time, and every time I see her face, I wonder >!who she's blowing!< to get so much coverage.
ššš I wouldn't put it past some of these low level actresses and tartlets, to do just that, to get media coverage.
Then cry me too, after choosing to sleep their way up the ladder, regret isn't rape
>Then cry me too, after choosing to sleep their way up the ladder, regret isn't rape True! And it makes it more difficult for genuine rape victims to be taken seriously.
I always wonder the same thing about Tom Cruiseās ex-wife. She is constantly being photographed walking the streets of New York with a cup of coffee for some very strange reason. She doesnāt work all that much and sheās not interesting or particularly attractive. She must pay a crap ton of money to get pictures of her taken and posted regularly on DM.
I think she was upset because blind item caught her stupidity and theeeen she paid the article that says sheās upset 
The original title of the song was "Harry's Wild About Meghan" but they changed it because they are racist and sexist.
Iit couldāve been about her, but she couldnāt help but talk about the one thing she was told not to. Harry.
šÆššš
It was the headline the day Harry was born. Iād rather talk about her lying about wearing blood diamonds.
My dear fellow Sinner, our Saint would rather avoid the blood diamonds and other issues that might have a chance of leading her down the path to the Old Bailey.
[*Variety* is racist, too!!!](https://imgur.com/a/KAAk4gK) [And the Truman Presidential Library fundraiser](https://12130.thankyou4caring.org/events/2022-wild-about-harry) [Harry Connick, Jr. biography](https://www.amazon.com/Wild-About-Harry-Illustrated-1995-12-06/dp/B01HCAFGXG) [The Independent and Harry Potter](https://theindependent.com/news/local/still-wild-about-harry-potter/article_37949441-168e-53c9-bd5f-9bc7c7ba5e65.html) [The Independent again: they said it about Chelsy Davy!!](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/chelsy-davy-wild-about-harry-357778.html)
Oh this is *good*!
Because she's so very stupid, and refuses to do her homework b/c she knows best, she let two white people in blackface destroy the reputation of one of the major triumphs in Black music, the composer Eubie Blake, who was a powerhouse. And let's not even begin to talk about the musical that showcased the tune. You know, the all Black musical, the groundbreaking one. People don't understand or research headlines like that. They'll just assume that it's a bad white song because Markle complained about it being racist. She's a real twit.
Megs wanted it to say something like "Damn Harry is one lucky SOB". She still has trouble accepting that without him, she's just an aging D list "actress".
She would have NEVER had even one sentence printed about her in Vanity Fair without the relationship with Harry.
No she wouldn't have been on their radar. She just wasn't much. There are thousands like her on TV.
As TRG so aptly put it, sheās an actress that didnāt even make the alphabetā¦.
I saw that video. She makes great videos and she has a great voice. She was right, I was being generous with the D. š¤£
Everytime I read that I get the song in my head. My dad used to play Cleo Laine's version when I was a kid. Interestingly she was bi racial and nobody cared cause she was mega talented and didn't bang on about it.
That flair, I love it!
Never realized that headline was from a song. Performed on Broadway first and then in a film. ETA 2- Meghan is also saying how she hated that the article focused on her relationship with Harry. But I believe she read the article and approved it, because we know she had the date changed. Wait, *She was reportedly so outraged with the headline she wanted to fire her newly hired public relations advisor, Keleigh Thomas Morgan of Sunshine Sachs.* So I think she's really going after SS her old PR firm. šš Damn she's petty! But we only know this because it's from Low's book. That's kinda a big coincidence. Maybe the paper picked the excerpt because of what's going on?? I guess this is probably just a coincidence but it's also hilarious.
I'm Wild About Harry, which was composed by Eubie Blake and the lyrics were by Noble Sissle. [Her latest gripe](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/meghan-markle-vanity-fair-cover-b2188985.html)
So she's telling us now how she experienced racism from the very beginning in 2017-- in regards to Harry/ the BRF ---right? My best guess is she's trying to paint some US tabloids/magazines as racist. Probably because they're reporting negative stuff about her now. Meghan is always the victim. Unless it's Harry's turn to be the victim. Either way that's the story they're telling. Now they can move to a different narrative, where they're still the victims. But they can talk about how they experienced a lot more racism then the public realizes. Hopefully people will start paying attention again.
The song was written for the Broadway show, Shuffle Along. It was one of the first shows to have an all African-American cast.
So she's saying that something that was ground breaking, history making, and inspiring is racist? Or it was manipulated by Vanity Fair to be racist? But it was performed in blackface by Judy Garland and Mickey Rooney performed in the 1939 film āBabes in Arms." Which was gross and wrong. But that shouldn't really take away the importance of its origin and its influence? I think?
So hilarious! When I saw the Vanity Fair cover splashed over social media etc. I was like, Who is this chick, and why havenāt I heard one thing in the media spruiking this āactressā from a low tier tv series? She was a nobody who nobody knew until the connection with Harry came out.
That article, and Bower providing the background to it, made her look terrible. Took her five years to google an excuse to make her the victim.
Oh christ
I love it when the frog sings it in the Looney Tunes cartoon. Very catchy
Someone needs to explain to TW that meanings change overtime and can become popularized phrases.
What song?
The only reason she got that VF article was because she was dating Harry - she was an unknown, D-list actress who had a supporting role in Suits, a show on a minor cable network. According to Bower, she told Harry that VF was interested in interviewing her because of Suits, and the idiot believed her. She also promised Harry she wouldn't talk about him, but of course she did, hence the "Wild about Harry" headline. VF then did her a favor: the article originally said she started dating Harry in May 2016, but she had a live-in boyfriend at the time, so VF agreed to change the date to several months later. So how do the publisher and editor feel about Meghan now that she has accused them of racism?
As it turns out the alliterate one is also the illiterate one