If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   President Romero on his first debate with Romney: "I was too polite"   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 246
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2002 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Oct 2012 at 8:37 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



246 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-11 06:06:45 AM  

Gunther: EVERYONE plays the lower-the-expectations game.


I just heard a Paul Ryan soundbite on the CBC about an hour ago in which he said...

"Joe Biden is one of the most experienced debaters we have in modern politics,"

So... yeah. 

/We gonna have some type of a thread fer that gig?
//BYOB&P?
 
2012-10-11 06:19:51 AM  
"Governor Romney put forward a whole bunch of stuff that either involved him running away from positions that he had taken, or doubling down on things like Medicare vouchers"

I think that was the strategy - give Romney enough rope to hang himself, while avoiding giving him any ammunition. At the moment though it doesn't look like it was the right tactic, but maybe Obama is playing chess against Romney's checkers... or maybe that's just wishful thinking.
 
2012-10-11 07:09:38 AM  

Wyalt Derp: "Governor Romney put forward a whole bunch of stuff that either involved him running away from positions that he had taken, or doubling down on things like Medicare vouchers"

I think that was the strategy - give Romney enough rope to hang himself, while avoiding giving him any ammunition. At the moment though it doesn't look like it was the right tactic, but maybe Obama is playing chess against Romney's checkers... or maybe that's just wishful thinking.


I think you're right. People are either over estimating him by saying "Oh, this is just a clever ploy to lower expectations for the next debate!" or underestimating him by saying "He he was speechless without his teleprompter!", but it's more likely he thought that Romney repeatedly lying all through the debate would be enough to sink him, and that he just needed to hang back and let him dig his own grave. 

Passivity is almost never the right choice in a debate, though. He should have known better.
 
2012-10-11 07:23:07 AM  

Wyalt Derp: "Governor Romney put forward a whole bunch of stuff that either involved him running away from positions that he had taken, or doubling down on things like Medicare vouchers"

I think that was the strategy - give Romney enough rope to hang himself, while avoiding giving him any ammunition. At the moment though it doesn't look like it was the right tactic, but maybe Obama is playing chess against Romney's checkers... or maybe that's just wishful thinking.


Wishful thinking is when you imagine something unlikely will happen. We know for a fact that Obama uses a variety of very potent ways to get to his opponent. Remember Donald Trump? Remember the failures of the Republican Congress to stop Obamacare?

The Republican trolls really want to push their narrative because they have so little else: Romney is not the type of Republican anybody in the Base wanted: their criticisms of him not being 'a Republican' are pretty much true. So they're using their standard projection tactics to push Republican flaws onto Democrats. You can even see it in this very thread, proving Republicans simply believe in nothing anymore except this nebulous idea of 'winning' which results in more Dubya-era nonsense.

But the Republicans are scared because they know they can't run anybody that their Base really likes. There will be no more Palins because someone without that much power will run rampant and stomp on the Republican brand more into the mud. So they have to go for the McCains and the Romneys who are safe moderate bets. The Republican Party stands for nothing, but what they want is that middle ground that Carter, Clinton, and Obama have successfully taken in the last few decades.
 
2012-10-11 07:28:25 AM  
Thanks Mr. Prez. I'm sure that will bring you great comfort when you're packing your shiat in December.
I have no faith in Joe Biden. Anyone can look like a Rhode Scholar next to Sarah "Mama Grizzly" Palin. I think I'll watch reruns of Wheeler Dealer tonight instead. I find their brand of British wit amusing.
 
2012-10-11 07:35:53 AM  

Mugato: shotglasss: Obama is going to go on the strategy of lying. Foreign affairs will be discussed, and the testimony we heard today from the State Dept. is going to be devastating to him when Romney asks why the Libyan ambassador was refused security he requested that might have saved his (and others') life. Obama's backed into a corner and the debate isn't until next week.

You really think they're going to resort to the Libya thing? That's just sad.


Scott Brown did in his debate with Elizabeth Warren last night. So, sure Romney will.
 
2012-10-11 07:37:04 AM  

wooden_badger: Mugato: shotglasss: Obama is going to go on the strategy of lying. Foreign affairs will be discussed, and the testimony we heard today from the State Dept. is going to be devastating to him when Romney asks why the Libyan ambassador was refused security he requested that might have saved his (and others') life. Obama's backed into a corner and the debate isn't until next week.

You really think they're going to resort to the Libya thing? That's just sad.

Scott Brown did in his debate with Elizabeth Warren last night. So, sure Romney will.


And he went out of his way to bring it up because the question was about our future involvement in Syria and Iran.
 
2012-10-11 07:55:23 AM  

FormlessOne: FlashHarry: ya think?

He expected an actual debate, and got a two-ring circus managed by a half-deaf ringmaster, cheered by the type of folks that would cheer because a quarterback was knocked unconscious on the field.

Next debate, Romney's getting an ass-whupping. Bet on it.


Do we know who's "moderating"?
 
2012-10-11 08:28:18 AM  

BunkoSquad: People have been slagging the President all week, but in his defense, it's hard to prepare for a debate against someone who believes in nothing and who will say literally any goddamn thing he can think of to sound impressive.


Well, for starters, you could tell this person exactly that.
 
2012-10-11 08:31:22 AM  

wooden_badger: wooden_badger: Mugato: shotglasss: Obama is going to go on the strategy of lying. Foreign affairs will be discussed, and the testimony we heard today from the State Dept. is going to be devastating to him when Romney asks why the Libyan ambassador was refused security he requested that might have saved his (and others') life. Obama's backed into a corner and the debate isn't until next week.

You really think they're going to resort to the Libya thing? That's just sad.

Scott Brown did in his debate with Elizabeth Warren last night. So, sure Romney will.

And he went out of his way to bring it up because the question was about our future involvement in Syria and Iran.


Yeah, he's not going to "resort to" it. It's going to be the cornerstone of his debate performance.
 
2012-10-11 08:33:22 AM  

officeday: in my 50+ plus years, I have never experienced such blind loyalty/ignorance to an elected official.


Really? Two words, all caps.

RON PAUL
 
2012-10-11 08:36:10 AM  
Glad you understand that now, Barack. Now get mad & take him to the farking woodshed next week.
 
2012-10-11 08:38:15 AM  

Gunther: BunkoSquad: People have been slagging the President all week, but in his defense, it's hard to prepare for a debate against someone who believes in nothing and who will say literally any goddamn thing he can think of to sound impressive.

Richard Dawkins stopped debating creationists a few years ago because he realized if your opponent isn't bound by basic logic, you can't win. It devolves into two men on a stage calling each other liars, both dismissing the other's evidence.

We should have seen it, in retrospect. We saw how shiatty Romney's performance was in the primary debates, and assumed he'd be exactly as stiff and awkward, and Obama would easily school him (hence why he used Kerry as a debate partner). But all it took was a few debating lessons to rid Romney of his debate awkwardness and his willingness to say anything, take any position, made him pretty much unbeatable. He looks like a charlatan to anyone who is aware of his positions, but that's probably 10% of the electorate. Everyone else watches the debate and sees a confident guy outwitting a befuddled guy. They don't get that Obama is befuddled because the guy he's arguing with has flipped his position on everything he claimed to believe the day before.


This x1000.

Some Farker said the other day "how do you debate that which has no consistent position?", and that is the problem that Obama faces. Romney could come out and say virtually anything. How do you prepare for that? Even when Romney is caught lying through his teeth his campaign staffers just "walk it back" the next day.
 
2012-10-11 08:43:58 AM  

schubie: And when he comes up swinging and tears into Mitt and Granny Oklahoma and Grampy First Baptist say "He seems like a very angry negro," you'll understand why he was too polite the first time.


Yep.

And I challenge every single motherfarker who says the president lost the debate to read a transcript of the thing. The only thing anyone has to complain about is farking *inflection*. He didn't sound like he was calling Romney a liar so he never called him out on his lies?

Oh, except all the times he did. Calmly. And you were all drinking, I guess.
 
2012-10-11 08:50:16 AM  

Aarontology: FlashHarry: see... you guys never admit fault, so when you see somebody else do it, it's alien to you. obama isn't making excuses. he's saying that he farked up. he was too polite. it's pretty simple. he's not blaming the altitude or a cold. he's not blaming the fact that, unlike rmoney, he has a country to run and may be distracted by real problems. no, he's admitting fault.

I believe it's called "taking personal responsibility for his actions"


Go easy on them, its a foreign concept to many on the left.
 
2012-10-11 08:54:33 AM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Michelle better cut his tie in half right before the debate starts.


que?
 
2012-10-11 09:02:20 AM  

TalenLee: BunkoSquad: People have been slagging the President all week, but in his defense, it's hard to prepare for a debate against someone who believes in nothing and who will say literally any goddamn thing he can think of to sound impressive.

Obama's presidential history has been a fascinating mirror of racism in America. It's like by committing one vaguely unracist act - by electing a non-white - the American culture has decided to embrace its other racist wing. They bullied this black man into working ridiculously hard to achieve his goals; they roadblock his progress then berate him for performing badly; they made his political environment that he has to be above even the suspicion of reproach (Sherrod) and they'll berate him for that anyway; they bully him into showing his farking papers, and now the climate is such that they will wave their privilege in his face and bellow and cow and he dare not raise his voice, because he knows the second he does, he will be judged more harshly than them. They'll be able to really cap it off if they somehow prevent him from voting come November.


Of all the comments about race during the last four years, this is the most on point opinion I have read.
 
2012-10-11 09:08:53 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Michelle better cut his tie in half right before the debate starts.

OK, that's an awesome image.


GAME ON, BOYFRIEND!
 
2012-10-11 09:11:22 AM  

DirkValentine: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Michelle better cut his tie in half right before the debate starts.

que?


Wet Wing Reference.

Game on,boyfriend.
 
2012-10-11 09:12:04 AM  
West, even.

/Yeesh.
 
2012-10-11 09:20:32 AM  

quatchi: DirkValentine: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Michelle better cut his tie in half right before the debate starts.

que?

Wet Wing Reference.

Game on,boyfriend.


Riveting scene, for sure, but what was the outcome?

Was it strictly to get the blood pumping?
 
2012-10-11 09:21:53 AM  
And, like, you know, I was, you know, too easy on him, like, really, it's hard to, you know, say, you know, the same thing, like, over and over again and, you know, Romney was like, you know, saying things that were, like, not true, you know?

Holy fark, whatever happened to having a modicum of eloquence?
 
2012-10-11 09:23:47 AM  
Here is how Obama should start out the next debate.

"Before we begin here, I have an important question to ask the governor. Which version of Mitt Romney am i debating this evening? Is it the one that is for abortion, or against it? Is this the Romney that is for tax cuts for the top 20% or against them? Is this the Romney that is for gun control or against it? Is this the Romney with a health care plan that covers pre-existing conditions, or the one who doesn't? is the Romney who believes in increasing minimum wage or the one against it? Is this the Romney in favor of privatizing Social Security or the one against it? Is this the Romney in favor of bailing out banks, or the one against it? America needs to know which Romney is on the platform here."
 
2012-10-11 09:26:30 AM  

DirkValentine: what was the outcome?


Jed goes on to destroy his opponent in the debate.

S'beautiful. 

/I don't think his faith in lucky ties is shattered however he just has a new lucky tie is all.
//Lucky ties are srz business.
 
2012-10-11 09:38:11 AM  

officeday: I understand that in this forum it will not be a popular opinion, or even acknowledged as "acceptable", but it is important that you understand that President Obama is not the transcedental (sp?) leader that you thought. Normal, well educated people can honestly disagree with is "vision" and not by that fact alone be considered racist or ignorant. He appears to be/sound completely condescending to anyone who doesn't blindly follow his "vision". in my 50+ plus years, I have never experienced such blind loyalty/ignorance to an elected official.


That's a mighty nice strawman you have there.
 
2012-10-11 09:38:39 AM  

Sm3agol85: Here is how Obama should start out the next debate.

"Before we begin here, I have an important question to ask the governor. Which version of Mitt Romney am i debating this evening? Is it the one that is for abortion, or against it? Is this the Romney that is for tax cuts for the top 20% or against them? Is this the Romney that is for gun control or against it? Is this the Romney with a health care plan that covers pre-existing conditions, or the one who doesn't? is the Romney who believes in increasing minimum wage or the one against it? Is this the Romney in favor of privatizing Social Security or the one against it? Is this the Romney in favor of bailing out banks, or the one against it? America needs to know which Romney is on the platform here."


Me likey.
+10
 
2012-10-11 10:00:59 AM  

Zerochance: BunkoSquad: People have been slagging the President all week, but in his defense, it's hard to prepare for a debate against someone who believes in nothing and who will say literally any goddamn thing he can think of to sound impressive.

Well, for starters, you could tell this person exactly that.


Like when Obama called Romney on his self-contradictions and Romney flat out lied about it AND had the unmitigated gall to tell Obama that he (Obama) was not entitled to his own facts.

Look, I think the president lacked energy. He really did look down too much. But how would he have looked if the debate became a series of "You're lying!" met with "No, YOU'RE lying about me lying!"? Frankly, this is where the moderator should step in.
 
2012-10-11 10:14:57 AM  
Umm...when one person is spewing that many lies and utter bullshiat it is really hard to wrap your head around, let alone counter.

Romney is a liar and a coward who has apparently held every policy position possible on abortion, women's rights, and the economy, but hey he loves JESUS (maybe), is white, and says he is a fiscal conservative (despite evidence to the contrary) so let's elect him of the black guy.
 
2012-10-11 10:15:39 AM  

quatchi: DirkValentine: what was the outcome?

Jed goes on to destroy his opponent in the debate.

S'beautiful. 

/I don't think his faith in lucky ties is shattered however he just has a new lucky tie is all.
//Lucky ties are srz business.


I'm confused by your first slashy.

It seems to imply that the First Lady destroyed the President's "lucky tie" with the scissors before the debate.

During the episode the President was lamenting the loss of his original lucky tie (which, if I remember correctly, was damaged when it was being cleaned). The tie was lucky because he borrowed it from Josh at the last minute before a debate he won.

The First Lady cuts his "tested for TV" replacement tie so the President would have to borrow a last minute tie again.... thereby making it lucky.

His faith in lucky ties was never in question, he just needed help finding a new lucky tie.
 
2012-10-11 10:19:56 AM  

Sm3agol85: t it? Is this the Romney in favor of privatizing Social Security or the one against it? Is this the Romney in favor of bailing out banks, or the one against it? America needs to know which Romney is on the platform here."


God, I'd love it if he said this verbatim.
 
2012-10-11 10:25:18 AM  

aedude01: Sm3agol85: t it? Is this the Romney in favor of privatizing Social Security or the one against it? Is this the Romney in favor of bailing out banks, or the one against it? America needs to know which Romney is on the platform here."

God, I'd love it if he said this verbatim.


Well, hopefully not verbatim since I accidently a word or two.
 
2012-10-11 10:34:42 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: shotglasss: Hell, Romney showed Obama for the pretender he is.

By telling 27 lies in 38 minutes?


That's the best almost-The Nails reference I've heard all day.

/"Brenda's strange obsession was for certain vegetables and fruits."
 
2012-10-11 10:40:15 AM  

officeday: I understand that in this forum it will not be a popular opinion, or even acknowledged as "acceptable", but it is important that you understand that President Obama is not the transcedental (sp?) leader that you thought. Normal, well educated people can honestly disagree with is "vision" and not by that fact alone be considered racist or ignorant. He appears to be/sound completely condescending to anyone who doesn't blindly follow his "vision". in my 50+ plus years, I have never experienced such blind loyalty/ignorance to an elected official.


No farking shiat. I don't agree with everything he's done. But seriously, have you seen the alternative?

Yeah, Obama hasn't fulfilled the bullshiat meme of a "messiah" as right wing morons parrot constantly. He's done things I don't like, NDAA, pushing for Copyright B.S., etc. So, yeah, sure I'll vote for a serial liar who's "job" was gutting American companies and shipping the money to the Caymans. A man who dodged the draft four times to live in luxury in France as a missionary. A man who returned and protested for the farking war he dodged. A strange little man who can't get his story right, so he just says what people want to hear, no matter the lie.

I would rather have a condescending man who is likeable and has a positive vision for my country than a robotic turd who's only desire is to become CEO of America Inc. and do the same thing he did at Bain: sell off everything of value so him and his buddies will benefit.

Seriously, your statement is not unpopular. It's utterly irrelevant when you compare President Obama to Mitt-farking-Romney. I would rather not have a windsock backed by an Eddie Munster cosplayer in the White House.

/Sorry if I came off too harsh, but most of us "lieberals" do disagree with Obama on many issues. But the alternative is far, far, far worse.
 
2012-10-11 10:49:19 AM  

Zerochance: officeday: in my 50+ plus years, I have never experienced such blind loyalty/ignorance to an elected official.

Really? Two words, all caps.

RON PAUL


I forgot to add this to my rant. Thanks. RON PAUL is seen as a god by weed smoking college students everywhere. Funny thing is that he's a GOP Congressman from a solidly red state who never actually takes a stand on issues when his ass is on the line. He doesn't actually break off and run as an independent. In fact, I would say he's a fairly boring proto-Tea bagger with a limited streak of "independence" in him that gets quelled when the RNC tells him to back down. At least GARY JOHNSON has a set of balls to run as an actually Libertarian.

Man, this is such a good comparison, I wish I had thought of it. People genuinely believe in what Obama offers. The only reason RON PAUL is so popular is because weed.
 
2012-10-11 10:54:56 AM  

AFKobel: quatchi: DirkValentine: what was the outcome?

Jed goes on to destroy his opponent in the debate.

S'beautiful. 

/I don't think his faith in lucky ties is shattered however he just has a new lucky tie is all.
//Lucky ties are srz business.

I'm confused by your first slashy.

It seems to imply that the First Lady destroyed the President's "lucky tie" with the scissors before the debate.

During the episode the President was lamenting the loss of his original lucky tie (which, if I remember correctly, was damaged when it was being cleaned). The tie was lucky because he borrowed it from Josh at the last minute before a debate he won.

The First Lady cuts his "tested for TV" replacement tie so the President would have to borrow a last minute tie again.... thereby making it lucky.

His faith in lucky ties was never in question, he just needed help finding a new lucky tie.


Yes, that is a far better explanation of events.

You are now Faved as "WW fan".

Hope ya like cyan.
 
2012-10-11 11:06:28 AM  
It had nothing to do with him not being polite, it had more to do with him not being able to handle someone with a different opinion that he couldn't just ignore for the first time.
 
2012-10-11 11:10:42 AM  

trotsky: Funny thing is that he's a GOP Congressman from a solidly red state who never actually takes a stand on issues when his ass is on the line.


That's the beauty of RON PAUL. The Paultards can endlessly biatch and moan and whine all they want about how his holiness Dr. Paul can wipe out our deficit with a swipe of his dick, because his ideas will never be put into practice. They can afford to be feverish about RON PAUL because they will never see the repercussions of his economic policies in particular.
 
2012-10-11 11:17:53 AM  

DeaH: Zerochance: BunkoSquad: People have been slagging the President all week, but in his defense, it's hard to prepare for a debate against someone who believes in nothing and who will say literally any goddamn thing he can think of to sound impressive.

Well, for starters, you could tell this person exactly that.

Like when Obama called Romney on his self-contradictions and Romney flat out lied about it AND had the unmitigated gall to tell Obama that he (Obama) was not entitled to his own facts.

Look, I think the president lacked energy. He really did look down too much. But how would he have looked if the debate became a series of "You're lying!" met with "No, YOU'RE lying about me lying!"? Frankly, this is where the moderator should step in.


What was troubling for me is that Obama didn't actually fact-check Romney on a number of his lies, contradictions, and just plain bullshiat statements, and that is, practically speaking, a way of validating them. It's troubling because I got the sense Obama simply didn't know Romney was lying through his teeth.

Forget looking "presidential" and being "the only grown-up in the room". We all know Obama is capable of all of that. What we need the guy to do is to realize that this shiat is personal. This isn't a disagreement over policy; he is facing a political opposition that absolutely hates his guts for no other reason than presidentin' while black, and he keeps bringing strongly worded letters to a knife fight.
 
2012-10-11 11:37:39 AM  

Vindibudd: It had nothing to do with him not being polite, it had more to do with him not being able to handle someone with a different opinion that he couldn't just ignore for the first time.


yes, being a neophyte in politics, this was an entirely new and challenging experience for him
 
2012-10-11 11:38:02 AM  

Vindibudd: It had nothing to do with him not being polite, it had more to do with him not being able to handle someone with a different opinion that he couldn't just ignore for the first time.


When Mitt said his plan covers preexisting conditions do you think he was being intentionally misleading? I not why not?
 
2012-10-11 11:45:40 AM  

Vindibudd: It had nothing to do with him not being polite, it had more to do with him not being able to handle someone with a different opinion that he couldn't just ignore for the first time.


Lies are not "different opinions"; they're lies
 
2012-10-11 11:50:33 AM  

quatchi: You are now Faved as "WW fan".

Hope ya like cyan.



My grandfather was killed by cyan... but I've since found forgiveness.

I'll allow it.
 
2012-10-11 12:11:36 PM  

Zerochance: DeaH: Zerochance: BunkoSquad: People have been slagging the President all week, but in his defense, it's hard to prepare for a debate against someone who believes in nothing and who will say literally any goddamn thing he can think of to sound impressive.

Well, for starters, you could tell this person exactly that.

Like when Obama called Romney on his self-contradictions and Romney flat out lied about it AND had the unmitigated gall to tell Obama that he (Obama) was not entitled to his own facts.

Look, I think the president lacked energy. He really did look down too much. But how would he have looked if the debate became a series of "You're lying!" met with "No, YOU'RE lying about me lying!"? Frankly, this is where the moderator should step in.

What was troubling for me is that Obama didn't actually fact-check Romney on a number of his lies, contradictions, and just plain bullshiat statements, and that is, practically speaking, a way of validating them. It's troubling because I got the sense Obama simply didn't know Romney was lying through his teeth.

Forget looking "presidential" and being "the only grown-up in the room". We all know Obama is capable of all of that. What we need the guy to do is to realize that this shiat is personal. This isn't a disagreement over policy; he is facing a political opposition that absolutely hates his guts for no other reason than presidentin' while black, and he keeps bringing strongly worded letters to a knife fight.


Actually, what we really need is for someone to realize that this shiat isn't personal. It's very public, and it affects all of us. Look, I really would have enjoyed it if Obama had summed up the debate by saying, "The only true thing Governor Romney said tonight was his name, and he only gets half a point for that because his real first name is Willard." I understand that a lot of people take silence as acquiescence, but it's not. Every time Obama called Romney on anything, Romney called Obama a liar. And Romney had won the closing coin toss. There is a reason there is a third party at debates. Obama is not blameless here, but the failure of the moderator is the biggest problem I see. Obama did need to put up more of a fight. but Romney was writing the rules as he went along. He needed to be checked on that by an outside party.
 
2012-10-11 02:24:11 PM  

Vindibudd: It had nothing to do with him not being polite, it had more to do with him not being able to handle someone with a different opinion that he couldn't just ignore for the first time.


Are you saying that McCain had the same opinion, or that Obama could just ignore McCain?
 
2012-10-11 02:36:58 PM  

radioshack: randomjsa: No, you weren't 'too polite', you had to actually stand on and defend your record without a bunch of platitudes and you had to deal with conservative ideas, something that will always confound liberals as they have never been able to do that very well.

This. They live in an echo chamber. "Rmoney lied!!" never probably once reading all the lies Obama spewed.


Citation needed from both of you.
 
2012-10-11 04:39:55 PM  

radioshack: randomjsa: No, you weren't 'too polite', you had to actually stand on and defend your record without a bunch of platitudes and you had to deal with conservative ideas, something that will always confound liberals as they have never been able to do that very well.

This. They live in an echo chamber. "Rmoney lied!!" never probably once reading all the lies Obama spewed.


I'll bite. Name a few lies Obama told during the debate. See if you can match the 27 lies Romney told in the 38 minutes he was speaking.
 
Displayed 46 of 246 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report