Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(NPR)   Now that you mention it, the Emperor does appear to be naked   (npr.org) divider line 109
    More: Obvious, City College of New York, Lech Walesa, orators, health law, banking regulations, President Bill Clinton  
•       •       •

4689 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Oct 2012 at 8:31 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-16 09:43:15 AM  

indylaw: "NPR is a communist propaganda outfit that is not worth a damn, except when they criticize Obama, they're a national treasure."


Just like those evil liberal polls.
 
2012-10-16 09:43:48 AM  

2 grams: [talking points]


Oh, look, yet another GOP shill coming out of cold storage.
 
2012-10-16 09:45:22 AM  
Is this "teleprompter" bugaboo among the GOP just an extension of their hate against literacy & education?
 
2012-10-16 09:45:24 AM  
Well that just cheeses it. The only reason I voted for Obama was because I thought he gave good speeches. Now that NPR says he doesn't, I guess I have to vote for Mitt Romney.

Yup, the emperor is naked, exposing his 4' teleprompter, standing proudly in front of him, erect and dark.

/i'll be in my bunk.
 
2012-10-16 09:46:46 AM  
What really blows my mind from the last debate is that Mitt Romney isn't even very good in a debate. Romney was beat down several times in the GOP primaries, but managed to slip through due to colossal moments of self destruction by his opponents.

That's how bad Obama was though...he didn't show up. If Mitt Romney has proven one thing it's that people don't give a shiat about facts, which Obama was trying to convey in rather dry matter of fact style. Just say positive stuff and disagree in a forceful way with the opponent. That's it. That's all he has to do tonight.
 
2012-10-16 09:47:55 AM  

Skleenar: Well that just cheeses it. The only reason I voted for Obama was because I thought he gave good speeches. Now that NPR says he doesn't, I guess I have to vote for Mitt Romney.

Yup, the emperor is naked, exposing his 4' teleprompter, standing proudly in front of him, erect and dark.

/i'll be in my bunk.


teleprompter porn? Rule 34?
 
2012-10-16 09:48:03 AM  
Obama's never been a great improviser, anytime he goes off the script he sounds bored
 
2012-10-16 09:49:26 AM  

Fluorescent Testicle: acad1228: He's good at reading from a telepromter, words that others have written from him. Without a teleprompter he's like Peanut without Jeff Dunham. (I woulda said Walter but that would be Biden.)

[www.solidprinciples.com image 500x271]

[flaglerlive.com image 500x333]

[leftcall.com image 500x337]


I think that we can agree that your last example probably wasn't actually reading those teleprompters.

/At least I hope to god he wasn't.
 
2012-10-16 09:52:48 AM  
Oh FFS, we're back to this shiat already?
 
2012-10-16 09:52:49 AM  

Alphax: Concern trolling, NPR?

That's why I'm not tempted to donate to your current pledge drive.


Having their pledge drive the month before a presidential election is really, really stupid.
 
2012-10-16 09:53:05 AM  

quatchi: Alphax: Concern trolling, NPR?

That's why I'm not tempted to donate to your current pledge drive.

Either concern trolling or lowering the expectation bar.

In an article earlier this year, Glastris argued that Obama has moved more in terms of "sheer legislative tonnage" than any president since Lyndon Johnson, but has been "surprisingly inept" at explaining to the country what he's up to and what he's achieved.

"It's like he doesn't want to brag about his own accomplishments - that's for others to do," Glastris says in an interview. "Dude, whose job is it to sell your stuff? Your job."

That noted, I find it hard to disagree with any of the above.


UNfortunately, you both are wrong. Because the other narrative the GOP and their racist undertones have sold this pathetic country on is that Obama "better not spike the football" when it comes to his accomplishments:

Link

And you know, he's prolly something a lot of people in his position aren't: HUMBLE. He doesn't need to BRAG, because he basically acts like you should when you are President: ACT LIKE YOU'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE.

For him, accomplishing the stuff he did is part of his job.....been there, done that, next objective. Only those with tiny dicks and even smaller egos need to BRAG about the stuff they did.

That's for others to do.
 
2012-10-16 09:55:42 AM  
You guys remember the last guy, right? The guy who spoke the equivalent of spitting cracker crumbs at the audience?
 
2012-10-16 09:56:14 AM  
Can we just make this video auto-post in all these threads?
 
2012-10-16 09:56:16 AM  
NPR is trolling the right wing bubble by giving them a link to circulate....

/all according to plan
// ;)
 
2012-10-16 10:06:07 AM  
Funny, freepers had the exact same line, directly after the speech. Want proof?

Link
 
2012-10-16 10:13:24 AM  
Why are the people the most concerned about Obama being a dictator are also the most concerned about him not have a strong charismatic leadership?
 
2012-10-16 10:15:35 AM  
i.imgur.com  i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-16 10:17:10 AM  
Here is another example of Obama not being able to handle himself without a teleprompter.
 
2012-10-16 10:18:33 AM  

I_C_Weener: He has one style of speech ing. And he is very good at that style. But it is probably viewed as old and busted by some. The UN speech was well done.


This. He's good at speaking, he's not so good at "presidential debating". Which is different than normal debating or normal speaking.
 
2012-10-16 10:27:40 AM  
I get the impression, from the convention and the first debate, that Obama would rather not expend the energy to campaign for this election. Not that he has it in the bag or he's taking it for granted, but that Romney is so clownshoes and there's so much important work to be done, running against this guy really isn't worth the time, energy or effort.

But, might as well rev it up for the home stretch. Then get back into actual governance.
 
2012-10-16 10:27:41 AM  
Here's a novel idea:

Maybe the election should be more about what the candidates actually believe in and propose to do and less about how good they look when they try to sell it.

Modern society is clearly in the crapper when absolutely nothing matters but presentation.
 
2012-10-16 10:32:04 AM  
I just want one thing from the debate: Obama to mention that Romney had a 33% approval rating in Mass. after governing for 4 years. And, I would like him to mention that Obama is leading in Mass. by 12%, so, clearly, the people who know Romney's leadership the most are not impressed. Okay, two things I would like him to mention. Also, that Romney spent over a year in office out of state and on personal business, rather than governing. So, three things.

Maybe something about Romeny's 800 vetoes and being overridden like 99% of the time. That would be good.
 
2012-10-16 10:35:14 AM  

RyogaM: I just want one thing from the debate: Obama to mention that Romney had a 33% approval rating in Mass. after governing for 4 years. And, I would like him to mention that Obama is leading in Mass. by 12%, so, clearly, the people who know Romney's leadership the most are not impressed. Okay, two things I would like him to mention. Also, that Romney spent over a year in office out of state and on personal business, rather than governing. So, three things.

Maybe something about Romeny's 800 vetoes and being overridden like 99% of the time. That would be good.


But he crossed the aisle to work with the legislature! He's got bipartisan credentials!
 
2012-10-16 10:37:19 AM  

PanicMan: I_C_Weener: He has one style of speech ing. And he is very good at that style. But it is probably viewed as old and busted by some. The UN speech was well done.

This. He's good at speaking, he's not so good at "presidential debating". Which is different than normal debating or normal speaking.


Obama did good against the other DNC candidates and arguably beat McCain in 3 debates.

I would suggest Obama is a very good debater. To the extent Romney beat him (I felt it was a draw BTW) you could say that Romney is an even better debater (or an excellent debater).
 
2012-10-16 10:43:20 AM  
Obama can give a fantastic speech - but he can give a fantastic speech that's about as deep as a puddle. Listen to any of his major addresses, from 2004 onward. They're all the same strung-together cliches - yes, they are executed exceptionally well, but when you read the content there's not much substance to them.

And that's Obama's problem. He can fill a room with lofty cliches, but he can't talk substance because he's not a substantive thinker. He's not interested in the minutiae of policy - but that's 95% of what a President does.

It goes back to the fundamental technical flaw of the Obama Presidency (putting ideology aside for the moment and focusing just on the day-to-day aspects of being POTUS) -- Barack Obama has never led a large organization before becoming President. He was never a governor, never an executive, never in any leadership positions other than with small organizations. Running a big organization is a highly specialized skill. Unless you've done it, you can't appreciate the inherent difficulties in getting groups of people with differing agendas on the same page. It takes both natural aptitude and a metric crapton of practice to get that right. And Obama has never done it in his life.

That's why Obama hasn't been effective as a President. His signature domestic achievement, ObamaCare, was written by Congress with the President being a cheerleader. His signature foreign policy achievement, killing bin Laden, was executed by the military with only him giving the final go-ahead (and apparently only after his advisors pushed him into overriding Valerie Jarrett). He didn't lead on either of those things.

Obama is unquestionably intelligent, but he doesn't have the skills that it takes to lead a large organization, and it shows. That's why his speeches haven't had much effect - because being President is not about lofty speeches, it's about being the chief executive of the United States. And that's not something that is amenable to on-the-job-training. It isn't that Obama can't give a great speech, it's that giving great speeches isn't enough to be a good or even a competent President.
 
2012-10-16 10:45:11 AM  

mrshowrules: PanicMan: I_C_Weener: He has one style of speech ing. And he is very good at that style. But it is probably viewed as old and busted by some. The UN speech was well done.

This. He's good at speaking, he's not so good at "presidential debating". Which is different than normal debating or normal speaking.

Obama did good against the other DNC candidates and arguably beat McCain in 3 debates.

I would suggest Obama is a very good debater. To the extent Romney beat him (I felt it was a draw BTW) you could say that Romney is an even better debater (or an excellent debater).


He is either a piss-poor debater, and can't debate effectively, which seems odd given his past history, or, he is a piss poor strategist, who believed appearing, calm, cool, professorial and presidential would beat the guy who lied repeatedly without correction, appeared energetic, sincere and car salesman-like. I think the answer will be clear tonight. If he suddenly puts in a command performance tonight, it will only be his strategy that is implicated.
 
2012-10-16 10:48:44 AM  
WombatControl:

And yet, Obama has a 50+% approval rating after four years in office, and Romney had a 33% approval rating after four years in office. If Obama has a problem with leadership, Romney must have been shiat-tastic!
 
2012-10-16 11:03:35 AM  

RyogaM: WombatControl:

And yet, Obama has a 50+% approval rating after four years in office, and Romney had a 33% approval rating after four years in office. If Obama has a problem with leadership, Romney must have been shiat-tastic!


Approval rating != leadership.

In 1945, Winston Churchill lost to Clement Atlee in the double digits. I guess that means that Churchill was a poor leader...
 
2012-10-16 11:11:04 AM  

mrshowrules: PanicMan: I_C_Weener: He has one style of speech ing. And he is very good at that style. But it is probably viewed as old and busted by some. The UN speech was well done.

This. He's good at speaking, he's not so good at "presidential debating". Which is different than normal debating or normal speaking.

Obama did good against the other DNC candidates and arguably beat McCain in 3 debates.

I would suggest Obama is a very good debater. To the extent Romney beat him (I felt it was a draw BTW) you could say that Romney is an even better debater (or an excellent debater).


I would say the expectations from the audience have changed since 2008. Maybe because everyone was panicing, calm and collected won back then. Now you have to wave your dick around and give unrealistic but appealing soundbites. Or at the very least prevent the other guy from getting his unrealistic but appealing soundbite out. It sucks but it's true.

Also you missed the perfect opportunity for a master debater joke.
 
2012-10-16 11:11:20 AM  

WombatControl: foxnews quality obfuscating


I hope you are being paid to write that same smoking heap in every thread.
 
2012-10-16 11:15:17 AM  

WombatControl: RyogaM: WombatControl:

And yet, Obama has a 50+% approval rating after four years in office, and Romney had a 33% approval rating after four years in office. If Obama has a problem with leadership, Romney must have been shiat-tastic!

Approval rating != leadership.

In 1945, Winston Churchill lost to Clement Atlee in the double digits. I guess that means that Churchill was a poor leader...


That would be an election result and not an approval rating.

It doesn't really affect your point, but, if you're going to start a post with "x != y", it would be nice to not include something in your post that could be rebutted with "x != y".
 
2012-10-16 11:17:14 AM  

mrshowrules: PanicMan: I_C_Weener: He has one style of speech ing. And he is very good at that style. But it is probably viewed as old and busted by some. The UN speech was well done.

This. He's good at speaking, he's not so good at "presidential debating". Which is different than normal debating or normal speaking.

Obama did good against the other DNC candidates and arguably beat McCain in 3 debates.

I would suggest Obama is a very good debater. To the extent Romney beat him (I felt it was a draw BTW) you could say that Romney is an even better debater (or an excellent debater).


I think actual debates require you to present facts and back up your arguments. Romney did not do that.
 
2012-10-16 11:34:52 AM  

WombatControl: RyogaM: WombatControl:

And yet, Obama has a 50+% approval rating after four years in office, and Romney had a 33% approval rating after four years in office. If Obama has a problem with leadership, Romney must have been shiat-tastic!

Approval rating != leadership.

In 1945, Winston Churchill lost to Clement Atlee in the double digits. I guess that means that Churchill was a poor leader...


Between 1940 and 1945 Winston Churchill was probably the most popular British prime minister of all time. In May 1945 his approval rating in the opinion polls, which had never fallen below 78 per cent, stood at 83 per cent. With few exceptions, politicians and commentators confidently predicted that he would lead the Conservatives to victory at the forthcoming general election.

Wow, good job rebutting me.
 
2012-10-16 11:36:26 AM  

PanicMan: mrshowrules: PanicMan: I_C_Weener: He has one style of speech ing. And he is very good at that style. But it is probably viewed as old and busted by some. The UN speech was well done.

This. He's good at speaking, he's not so good at "presidential debating". Which is different than normal debating or normal speaking.

Obama did good against the other DNC candidates and arguably beat McCain in 3 debates.

I would suggest Obama is a very good debater. To the extent Romney beat him (I felt it was a draw BTW) you could say that Romney is an even better debater (or an excellent debater).

I would say the expectations from the audience have changed since 2008. Maybe because everyone was panicing, calm and collected won back then. Now you have to wave your dick around and give unrealistic but appealing soundbites. Or at the very least prevent the other guy from getting his unrealistic but appealing soundbite out. It sucks but it's true.

Also you missed the perfect opportunity for a master debater joke.


To set-up the master debater and than take it for myself just seemed too self pleasuring.
 
2012-10-16 11:53:40 AM  

Alphax: Concern trolling, NPR?


Gotta be "balanced".
 
2012-10-16 11:57:38 AM  

EyeballKid: Alphax: Concern trolling, NPR?

That's why I'm not tempted to donate to your current pledge drive.

Yeah, they lost me after they became pussies about calling torture torture.


And always referring to Karl Rove's American Crossroads GPS as a "social welfare organization".
(Though they did air one story on that last night, so they've got that going for them.)
 
2012-10-16 11:58:57 AM  

doyner: Someone said "teleprompter." DRINK!!!


Someone made a Jeff Dunham reference! Drink until you go blind and forget it!!
 
2012-10-16 11:58:59 AM  
In every last sound byte I hear from Rmoney, he sounds like he's desperately trying to sound inspirational. His voice doesn't sound like he believes in what he's saying; he's just saying it to become President. This worries me greatly. What are his real plans? What will he allow his cigar-chewing prick friends to do to the country if he should actually win? Every election, we get handed what the politicians think will help them win. Once the election's over, we get their true agenda.
 
2012-10-16 12:35:33 PM  

RyogaM: WombatControl: RyogaM: WombatControl:

And yet, Obama has a 50+% approval rating after four years in office, and Romney had a 33% approval rating after four years in office. If Obama has a problem with leadership, Romney must have been shiat-tastic!

Approval rating != leadership.

In 1945, Winston Churchill lost to Clement Atlee in the double digits. I guess that means that Churchill was a poor leader...

Between 1940 and 1945 Winston Churchill was probably the most popular British prime minister of all time. In May 1945 his approval rating in the opinion polls, which had never fallen below 78 per cent, stood at 83 per cent. With few exceptions, politicians and commentators confidently predicted that he would lead the Conservatives to victory at the forthcoming general election.

Wow, good job rebutting me.


Gee, I wonder why Churchill's approval in May 1945 might be high...

And while you managed to copy from the first entry in a Google search (without attribution, no less!), you ignore the point: which is that Churchill and the Tories decisively lost the 1945 General Election by nearly 20%.

So again, if you want to argue that approval ratings are the sine qua non of leadership, that's a piss-poor argument. Because there are plenty of politicians who were noted for their leadership but had middling to poor popular approval ratings.
 
2012-10-16 12:52:19 PM  

WombatControl: And while you managed to copy from the first entry in a Google search (without attribution, no less!), you ignore the point: which is that Churchill and the Tories decisively lost the 1945 General Election by nearly 20%.

So again, if you want to argue that approval ratings are the sine qua non of leadership, that's a piss-poor argument. Because there are plenty of politicians who were noted for their leadership but had middling to poor popular approval ratings.



Which is not germane, because he remained popular EVEN THOUGH HE LOST! How can that be? Because he was a war-time Prime minister, and people did not want what his party was selling. He was still as popular on the day of of the election, because people recognized his leadership skill, but did not want to go where he wanted them to. And don't pretend you knew Churchill's popularity numbers. You've already embarrassed yourself.

Now, go ahead and name the very popular leaders with poor approval ratings. You know what you will find? Any great leader with poor approval ratings generally led his people in a direction that they needed to go in, but resisted, such as Lincoln in the Civil War. You know what else that means? That Obama's approval ratings are TOO LOW for what he has actually accomplished. His leadership is undervalued as shown in his middling approval ratings because half the country refuses to see we have to go in the direction he is using his leadership to go. Tough shiat for your side.

Now, as for Romney, you did not even know until I told you what his approval rating was leaving office. It remains abysmal. Was it because he was a good leader who has gone unrecognized? Ha! Of course not, don't even try to sell that bullshiat. He was recognized as a piss-poor leader because he spent a year of his office out of state on personal matters and not leading his state. He was absent while essential parts of Romenycare were being debated and created, and if he had dared to veto it, would have been overridden just like 90+% of his other vetoes.

So, instead of trying to pretend Romeny is some sort of Churchill or Lincoln, recognize that his piss-poor popularity ratings, and the fact that he is going to lose the state he was governor of, are proof that the man can't lead for shiat.
 
2012-10-16 12:57:19 PM  
During his first campaign I kept hearing what a great speaker he was. I didn't see it. His speeches always seemed rather juvenile. Then it occurred to me that the folks who thought he was a great speaker also thought Tupoc was a poet.
 
2012-10-16 01:12:09 PM  

acad1228: He's good at reading from a telepromter, words that others have written from him. Without a teleprompter he's like Peanut without Jeff Dunham. (I woulda said Walter but that would be Biden.)


Which is why he was able to walk into a meeting of republicans, field thier questions for over an hour, speaking impromtu, and biatch-slap them so badly that the GOP whined about how unfair it was that the meeting was televised and never invited Obama back?
 
2012-10-16 01:24:41 PM  

CMYK and PMS: During his first campaign I kept hearing what a great speaker he was. I didn't see it. His speeches always seemed rather juvenile. Then it occurred to me that the folks who thought he was a great speaker also thought Tupoc was a poet.


What was great about those speeches was the message. Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it. When you're selling delicious burgers to hungry people, it doesn't matter how you say it.

When you're trying to sell America on shiat sandwiches for the next 4 years, like Rmoney is, your pitch better be great.
 
2012-10-16 03:23:43 PM  

MrBallou: CMYK and PMS: During his first campaign I kept hearing what a great speaker he was. I didn't see it. His speeches always seemed rather juvenile. Then it occurred to me that the folks who thought he was a great speaker also thought Tupoc was a poet.

What was great about those speeches was the message. Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it. When you're selling delicious burgers to hungry people, it doesn't matter how you say it.

When you're trying to sell America on shiat sandwiches for the next 4 years, like Rmoney is, your pitch better be great.



A good message does not make a good speaker. How is "Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it." working out for you?
 
2012-10-16 03:35:58 PM  

CMYK and PMS: During his first campaign I kept hearing what a great speaker he was. I didn't see it. His speeches always seemed rather juvenile. Then it occurred to me that the folks who thought he was a great speaker also thought Tupoc was a poet.


You don't sound one bit racist. Not at all.

Because if there's one thing in the world that could never be considered even the slightest shadow of a hint of dog-whistle bigotry, it's saying that the people who like Barack Obama also like one of the most famous gangsta rappers of all time.

/by the way, that "poet's" name was "TupAc" -- with an "A," not an "O"
 
2012-10-16 03:40:39 PM  

CMYK and PMS: MrBallou: CMYK and PMS: During his first campaign I kept hearing what a great speaker he was. I didn't see it. His speeches always seemed rather juvenile. Then it occurred to me that the folks who thought he was a great speaker also thought Tupoc was a poet.

What was great about those speeches was the message. Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it. When you're selling delicious burgers to hungry people, it doesn't matter how you say it.

When you're trying to sell America on shiat sandwiches for the next 4 years, like Rmoney is, your pitch better be great.


A good message does not make a good speaker. How is "Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it." working out for you?


Working out great. It's that echo chamber of yours that's making you think I might have a problem.
 
2012-10-16 03:42:18 PM  

CMYK and PMS: MrBallou: CMYK and PMS: During his first campaign I kept hearing what a great speaker he was. I didn't see it. His speeches always seemed rather juvenile. Then it occurred to me that the folks who thought he was a great speaker also thought Tupoc was a poet.

What was great about those speeches was the message. Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it. When you're selling delicious burgers to hungry people, it doesn't matter how you say it.

When you're trying to sell America on shiat sandwiches for the next 4 years, like Rmoney is, your pitch better be great.


A good message does not make a good speaker. How is "Principles, optimism, a real desire to do good and a real plan to achieve it." working out for you?


Pretty good, though it would have been better without that whole, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president" thing.
 
2012-10-16 03:53:19 PM  

RyogaM: You know what else that means? That Obama's approval ratings are TOO LOW for what he has actually accomplished. His leadership is undervalued as shown in his middling approval ratings because half the country refuses to see we have to go in the direction he is using his leadership to go. Tough shiat for your side.


If there was an Academy Award for naked sycophantic shillery, that would be a nominee.

There's a reason why Obama's approval ratings are middling at best. Because he's a poor leader. He's not a great President. ObamaCare was not a grand achievement. He has failed to unite the country because he represents an ideological extreme, not the center.

And he may well lose the election because four years ago he repeatedly and stridently promised the American people that he would end the recession. Now he's arguing that this "new normal" is an accomplishment rather than a sign of failure. The American people rightly see that as pathetic, and no matter how many speeches Obama gives, he can't escape his own record.
 
2012-10-16 04:00:00 PM  

WombatControl: He has failed to unite the country because he represents an ideological extreme, not the center.


Yes, nothing screams "leftist extremist" like "what the Repubs did, but with a tad more attention to regulation." That's all America has gotten these 4 years, in part because the side you claim to represent has turned utterly toxic since 2000, and in part because President Cave-In McScaredypants was never going to be that happy warrior progressives have wanted. But I'm sure when I want to know the pulse of the American people, I'll consult a goddam troll.
 
2012-10-16 04:20:57 PM  

2 grams: He talks like he's the adult and we are all children


I think this interpretation may say more about your own self esteem than the president's speaking style. CLINTON spoke to us like children during the DNC and the country unequivocally declared him the greatest public speaker since Cicero. Bush used folksy idioms to communicate complex issues in "down home" ways and was accepted as a very approachable, identifiable candidate. Reagan told us over and over how special we were. Built up our confidence like we were kindergartners. And we *still* fawn over his oratory skills.

We LOVE to be treated like kids. Which is why we can't stand Obama.

In the meantime. I strongly encourage everyone to stop farking fixating on the debate BEFORE IT FARKING HAPPENS. You are going in with too much baggage to learn anything from it. And for this reason you will come away with whatever narrative the press tells you to accept as truth.

Stop worrying so god damn much about how *other people interpret* the debate. And maybe spend some energy on thinking about how you are interpreting the responses of the participants.

/Americans don't *deserve* debates anymore.
 
Displayed 50 of 109 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report