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.

(The Daily Caller)   Wikileaks founder Julian Assange calls Rand Paul the "only hope" for US politics and Matt Drudge a "news media innovator"   (dailycaller.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Matt Drudge, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, Assange calls, extrajudicial killings, Internet culture, innovators, Lewinsky scandal  
•       •       •

948 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Aug 2013 at 11:35 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-08-18 01:44:11 AM  

gingerjet: anfrind: I think Snowden deserves more respect than Assange.  Yes, they both leaked classified information, and in doing so might have "compromised American interests" (whatever that actually means).  But Snowden knew exactly the consequences of leaking classified information (and was subject to more severe penalties due to having been entrusted with a security clearance), and he did it anyway.  That doesn't make it right, but it takes a lot more guts than publishing a data dump from a naieve army private half a world away.

Snowden is incredibly naive and I would call him out as a coward.  And based on his public comments - he clearly isn't that bright of an individual and beyond knowing to leave the country (to China no less) - he clearly didn't think any of this through.

Too bad - the US government has been able to deflect from the material that he released and focus all the attention on Snowdens idiotic antics.

/don't get me started on the Guardian reporter that Snowden has been dealing with


Actually, seems to me the deflection we were all afraid was gonna happen really hasn't.  Huge numbers of stories in major and minor publications bashing the NSA and domestic spying continue to come out every day.  There have already been several legislative attempts to fix things, and I expect there to be more.

The fact that none of this will actually accomplish any meaningful reform or protections against domestic spying I attribute more to the ever-growing dysfunction in our system of government and the ever-continuing trend of our government never, EVER giving back any power once it's gained it.
 
2013-08-18 01:50:52 AM  

Zeppelininthesky: Rand Paul is an idiot and a fraud.


azmoderaterants.files.wordpress.com
Who's the bigger idiot?  The idiot or the idiot who follows him?
 
2013-08-18 01:53:12 AM  
I do wonder what a Democratic Congressional sweep with a Paul presidency would look like. Just as Obama changed his views far more towards the right, perhaps some of Paul's views would change towards being more centrist/leftist? That, combined with a Democratic Congress (hopefully) being very motivated at checking his ass all the time as well as having power to pass plenty of social legislation I do wonder if it would turn out for the better in the end.

Nevermind, I was delusional to think that Congressional Democrats would get off their ass and do something meaningful, even with someone as foolish as Paul to point at. Although I still do think Paul would gravitate back towards sane viewpoints once he realized what power the presidency does and does not have.

/A man can dream, can't he?
 
2013-08-18 01:59:05 AM  
So a guy who has the US federal govt all over his ass supports a politician who hates the US federal govt. Shocking.
 
2013-08-18 02:06:58 AM  
Now that my lads is how you troll.
 
2013-08-18 02:11:19 AM  

Zeppelininthesky: Rand Paul is an idiot and a fraud.


I'm inclined to think Assange is the fraud. I don't think either is an idiot, but Rand Paul is definitely the smarter one. He's not stuck living in an embassy.
 
2013-08-18 02:13:52 AM  

propasaurus: Satanic_Hamster: TuteTibiImperes: There's a reason libertarians enjoy support from college kids in near perpetuity - they like the idea of legal pot, but once they graduate and enter the real world they realize the rest of the platform is complete bunk fairly quickly.

But Rand Paul isn't in favor of legalizing pot.

And I think Assange is just trolling us now.  Or else he's just a crazy mofo.

Rand Paul isn't in favor of legalized pot or same sex marriage but you'd be surprised how many "libertarians" think he is.


Yep, one thing to keep in mind about the Pauls isn't that they oppose things at the Federal level because they oppose them. It is because it is easier to get their agendas forced and maintained through the state and local levels.
For gay marriage, it is pretty clear that nation-wide recognition is on its way, however if he can keep it out of the Federal government's hands (legislative, executive, or judicial), states will continue to discriminate. The same applies to the Civil Rights Act. He wants it gone so that state and local governments (which are easier to control with a few wing-nuts) can discriminate to their pleasure.

TuteTibiImperes: I'd have thought Assange would be trying to keep a low profile though, hoping that the US and UK eventually stop paying as much attention so that he can just slip onboard a plane to get out of the embassy.


The only way he gets out is if the UK government decides to let him out. If people forget about him there is no reason to do that.
 
2013-08-18 02:18:27 AM  

gingerjet: anfrind: I think Snowden deserves more respect than Assange.  Yes, they both leaked classified information, and in doing so might have "compromised American interests" (whatever that actually means).  But Snowden knew exactly the consequences of leaking classified information (and was subject to more severe penalties due to having been entrusted with a security clearance), and he did it anyway.  That doesn't make it right, but it takes a lot more guts than publishing a data dump from a naieve army private half a world away.

Snowden is incredibly naive and I would call him out as a coward.  And based on his public comments - he clearly isn't that bright of an individual and beyond knowing to leave the country (to China no less) - he clearly didn't think any of this through.

Too bad - the US government has been able to deflect from the material that he released and focus all the attention on Snowdens idiotic antics.

/don't get me started on the Guardian reporter that Snowden has been dealing with


One could certainly argue that Snowden is a fool, but sometimes the line between courage and foolishness is extremely blurry.  I wouldn't call him a coward, though, as he knew exactly what could happen to him if he leaked classified information--everyone who is approved for a security clearance is briefed on the responsibilities that come with a clearance and the extremely harsh penalties for not upholding them (up to and including the death penalty, if an intentional leak results in the deaths of Americans).

I'm not sure whether or not he did the right thing by going public, but I can understand why he fled the country.  And I'd certainly agree that he didn't think his cunning plan all the way through.
 
2013-08-18 02:21:01 AM  
I'm still at a loss as to what Snowden told us that we didn't already know about. I mean fark sake Swordfish a movie that came out in 2001 had a plot point about the NSA reading your emails.
 
2013-08-18 02:24:09 AM  

cameroncrazy1984: Yeah, sounds about right for a crackpot.


If there was any question as to the man's sanity, this pretty much is it.
 
2013-08-18 02:25:01 AM  

Triumph: Zeppelininthesky: Rand Paul is an idiot and a fraud.

I'm inclined to think Assange is the fraud. I don't think either is an idiot, but Rand Paul is definitely the smarter one. He's not stuck living in an embassy.


They are both a fraud.
 
2013-08-18 02:36:01 AM  

SenorBenedict: I'm still at a loss as to what Snowden told us that we didn't already know about. I mean fark sake Swordfish a movie that came out in 2001 had a plot point about the NSA reading your emails.


And the Simpsons were joking about it in '06. The only difference now is that we know the official name of the program. And the vast majority of Americans will, once again, stop caring (assuming they haven't already) for another few years. The NSA knows it, and the rest of the government knows it, and they know there's no actual political pressure for them to quit this shiat.
 
2013-08-18 02:37:40 AM  

LordJiro: SenorBenedict: I'm still at a loss as to what Snowden told us that we didn't already know about. I mean fark sake Swordfish a movie that came out in 2001 had a plot point about the NSA reading your emails.

And the Simpsons were joking about it in '06. The only difference now is that we know the official name of the program. And the vast majority of Americans will, once again, stop caring (assuming they haven't already) for another few years. The NSA knows it, and the rest of the government knows it, and they know there's no actual political pressure for them to quit this shiat.


Well to be honest I like where Henry Rollins took it. Google has more of my direct personal information and no public accountability. So farked if I care what the NSA knows, they don't send me targeted spam messages about needing dick pills because I read the fark politics tab...
 
2013-08-18 02:46:15 AM  

Stibium: I do wonder what a Democratic Congressional sweep with a Paul presidency would look like. Just as Obama changed his views far more towards the right, perhaps some of Paul's views would change towards being more centrist/leftist? That, combined with a Democratic Congress (hopefully) being very motivated at checking his ass all the time as well as having power to pass plenty of social legislation I do wonder if it would turn out for the better in the end.

Nevermind, I was delusional to think that Congressional Democrats would get off their ass and do something meaningful, even with someone as foolish as Paul to point at. Although I still do think Paul would gravitate back towards sane viewpoints once he realized what power the presidency does and does not have.

/A man can dream, can't he?


The thing is Rand Paul isn't a social liberal.  He's called himself pro-life, and believes that life begins at conception, and has called abortion murder.  He's supported laws to ban same-sex marriage.  He's voted against environment protections.  He's actually not quite as derpy as most GOP candidates on immigration or the drug war, but overall he's not a libertarian when it comes to social issues by a long stretch.

The Democrats in congress are hamstrung right now.  They have control over the Senate, but not enough to override a filibuster, and other than approving federal appointments the Senate can't do much without the House, and the GOP controlled house is dead set against doing anything Obama or the Senate wants.  It's not do-nothing by choice, it's by circumstance.
 
2013-08-18 02:49:42 AM  

NFA: [i1221.photobucket.com image 253x300]

The false idol Libertarians love to worship


I dont find that to be true.  More like "the idol false Libertarians love to worship".
 
2013-08-18 02:50:12 AM  
I can't imagine what kind of hellish American landscape would elect a democratic congress but Captain Derp Rand Paul as president. That's the kind of crazy even Stephen King would say is unbelievable in fiction.
 
2013-08-18 03:09:42 AM  

SenorBenedict: I'm still at a loss as to what Snowden told us that we didn't already know about. I mean fark sake Swordfish a movie that came out in 2001 had a plot point about the NSA reading your emails.


*THAT* is what you remember about Swordfish? Nothing else? Imma give you a hint, and phrase it in the style of J.K. Rowling to help you understand: 'Halle Berry And The Bosom Of Symmetry."
 
2013-08-18 03:15:06 AM  

LordJiro: SenorBenedict: I'm still at a loss as to what Snowden told us that we didn't already know about. I mean fark sake Swordfish a movie that came out in 2001 had a plot point about the NSA reading your emails.

And the Simpsons were joking about it in '06. The only difference now is that we know the official name of the program. And the vast majority of Americans will, once again, stop caring (assuming they haven't already) for another few years. The NSA knows it, and the rest of the government knows it, and they know there's no actual political pressure for them to quit this shiat.


You think because it was in a movie, people thought it meant anything? Hell the guy who ran covert assassinations for the CIA, E. Howard Hunt, confessed on tape that he was involved in the Kennedy assassination and the press acts like it never happened. That was a limited hangout job, just like Snowden is.
 
2013-08-18 03:18:29 AM  
It was never clear to me why a douchebag like Assange had so many white knights on Fark in the first place (other than Fark tends to be somewhat nutjobby too.)  But the wingnut cognitive dissonance is rather bemusing.

Assange steals and reveals private banking records and government emails:  Wingnut reaction - "Assange is a hero!!!!"

Assange compliments a republican: Wingnut reaction - "Assange is a crazy trolling nutjob!!!!"

I don't know if that's an epic facepalm or a lol.
 
2013-08-18 03:24:03 AM  
Sorry to hear Assange has gone full retard.
 
2013-08-18 03:24:50 AM  

Triumph: Zeppelininthesky: Rand Paul is an idiot and a fraud.

I'm inclined to think Assange is the fraud. I don't think either is an idiot, but Rand Paul is definitely the smarter one. He's not stuck living in an embassy.


Also not living in an embassy:
www.crazyengineer.net

Your standard for intelligence is lacking.
 
2013-08-18 03:32:10 AM  

ThrobblefootSpectre: It was never clear to me why a douchebag like Assange had so many white knights on Fark in the first place (other than Fark tends to be somewhat nutjobby too.)  But the wingnut cognitive dissonance is rather bemusing.

Assange steals and reveals private banking records and government emails:  Wingnut reaction - "Assange is a hero!!!!"

Assange compliments a republican: Wingnut reaction - "Assange is a crazy trolling nutjob!!!!"

I don't know if that's an epic facepalm or a lol.


I think the cognitive dissonance is happening because most people assumed Assange was a liberal. His public persona is about transparency and freedom of information, and while both parties have had trouble with that in the US, those are usually qualities associated with liberals more than conservatives.

Plus, Rand Paul is a kook.
 
2013-08-18 03:44:34 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: I think the cognitive dissonance is happening because most people assumed Assange was a liberal. His public persona is about transparency and freedom of information, and while both parties have had trouble with that in the US, those are usually qualities associated with liberals more than conservatives.

Plus, Rand Paul is a kook.



I agree Rand Paul is an odd combination of odd ideas.   Which is why my opinion of Assange has gone from "deeply hypocritical criminal douchebag" to "kooky deeply hypocritical criminal douchebag". Which is not, after all, such a radical shift of opinion.

It's the 180 degree about face of some because of this one comment that I think is strange.
 
2013-08-18 03:46:56 AM  
There is no facepaw huge enough.
 
2013-08-18 04:55:24 AM  
"I think the cognitive dissonance is happening because most people assumed Assange was a liberal. His public persona is about transparency and freedom of information, and while both parties have had trouble with that in the US, those are usually qualities associated with liberals more than conservatives.

Plus, Rand Paul is a kook."

That being the case, perhaps Assange is doing this to make Paul look bad?
And if he is being honest in what he's saying, how long before the right wing blogosphere makes the same claim?
This is odd though, kind of like if Michael Moore started campaigning for Jeb Bush.
 
2013-08-18 05:08:26 AM  
And we all know he said these things, right?
 
2013-08-18 05:15:51 AM  
 
2013-08-18 05:18:13 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Okay, NOW he's a douche.


Why is Snowden a good guy and Assange is a bad guy?
 
2013-08-18 05:24:57 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Okay, NOW he's a douche.

Why is Snowden a good guy and Assange is a bad guy?


Because Snowden got the idiot public talking about the NSA again. At least until some celebrity dies, or something else grabs the news cycle.

/The dumbass could've at least waited 'til  closer to the election season, instead of leaking this crap when there's not a damn thing we can do about it.
 
2013-08-18 05:26:47 AM  

Apik0r0s: And we all know he said these things, right?


Well, I'm certainly not taking the Daily Caller's word on it.
 
2013-08-18 05:29:30 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Okay, NOW he's a douche.

Why is Snowden a good guy and Assange is a bad guy?


as far as I'm concerned, neither are good or bad. Just gigantic douches.
 
2013-08-18 05:37:58 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: they like the idea of legal pot, but once they graduate and enter the real world they realize the rest of the platform is complete bunk fairly quickly.


That's why I stick to being a civil libertarian, libertarian economic policy is ridiculous.
 
2013-08-18 05:48:06 AM  
Think living cooped up in an Embassy so long has affected his brain.
 
2013-08-18 05:51:35 AM  

Kurmudgeon: "I think the cognitive dissonance is happening because most people assumed Assange was a liberal. His public persona is about transparency and freedom of information, and while both parties have had trouble with that in the US, those are usually qualities associated with liberals more than conservatives.

Plus, Rand Paul is a kook."

That being the case, perhaps Assange is doing this to make Paul look bad?
And if he is being honest in what he's saying, how long before the right wing blogosphere makes the same claim?
This is odd though, kind of like if Michael Moore started campaigning for Jeb Bush.




Not necessarily.

Assange's agenda only has one big thing on it at the moment: government transparency. Rand Paul happens to be going in his direction on that particular issue.

We in the general public have a habit of voting for presidents based on an overly lengthy list of promises which never seem to pan out. Meanwhile we ignore their misbehavior on things that should be more important.
We're like a kid consistently running up to rusty vans with too_good_to_be_true promises painted on the side. Ignoring an obvious trap because, maybe this time, it'll be legit.

/Assange says: "Dude, maybe you should reassess your priorities".
/FARK says: "You didn't see the sign? Free Candy AND Puppies!!"
/What's behind the door? (Six months after elections) Oh look, its more sodomy!
 
2013-08-18 06:04:24 AM  
Well, to be fair, Drudge was sort of innovative-ish... in 1997... and not in a good way. He was a pioneer for douchebag partisan hackery news aggregation on the web. If that's your cup of disgusting tea, then sure.
 
2013-08-18 06:48:44 AM  

dywed88: TuteTibiImperes: FTA:
Responding to questions during a Google Hangout session, Assange praised the college-aged supported libertarian faction of the Republican Party as the "only hope" for U.S. electoral politics.

There's a reason libertarians enjoy support from college kids in near perpetuity - they like the idea of legal pot, but once they graduate and enter the real world they realize the rest of the platform is complete bunk fairly quickly.

In general it has a lot of the same appeals as Communism. The young idealists fall for it, but as they move into reality and understand that the ideals don't actually work in the real world they move to more reasonable positions.


Really? Ahh, the utopia of not being spied on or unreasonable searches. Not fighting never ending foreign wars. What a crazy idea!
 
2013-08-18 06:52:21 AM  

Gyrfalcon: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Okay, NOW he's a douche.

Why is Snowden a good guy and Assange is a bad guy?


Snowden revealed secrets about spying on the American people. Assange revealed secrets about spying on the enemy. Two very different things. Well, before the American people became the enemy.
 
2013-08-18 07:00:23 AM  
The benefit of transparency is that people can theoretically be held accountable for their actions.
The problem with transparency is that people can theoretically be held accountable for their actions.

Lol, sounds 1984-ish, but think of the 'reindeer games' the alphabet agencies play. They run hundreds, if not thousands of successful ops, and then they get caught doing something stupid. Without transparency they can run the same op multiple times because... the scam isn't known by their mark - think grift (eg Spanish Prisoner) played on an international scale. One problem the agencies have with transparency... maybe the scam has worked for decades but on this one particular case it went south... Once the cat is out of the bag, the scam is either retired, set aside for a while, or 'polish the turd' so to speak, (Nigerian Prince, omg bff's (hacked) fb says he's locked up in a foreign country and needs cash wired.) With true transparency, money trails become a problem, assets are compromised, and the ability to reuse scams is effectively impossible.

Oversight is absolutely necessary. Accountability is absolutely necessary - and imo not enforced nearly enough - too much career cya/whitewash (and this is nothing new). Transparency is simply not doable in some things -  hence the redacted documents that are decades old, and even with the best intentions there are serious consequences; revealing little things has compromised people's lives. Do people/administrations use this as an excuse to abuse the release of information? Hells, yeah. But too far the other way... and bad things happen.

Point the finger at corporations, hack/compromise their documents and release them publicly to expose their evilnessness may not be overly ethical, but I 'get' what Assange hoped to accomplish, but it's my understanding he released intel that blew ops and got people killed - whatever his intent - that's not cool. Rand P. seems to be a cynical kool-aid salesman, moreso than your run-of-the-mill politician, so I have no idea where the admiration comes from. I have some sympathies for the libertarian state of mind - at the town/county level. I'd think you'd have to drink some serious kool-aid to truly believe it's remotely feasible at a larger level.
 
2013-08-18 07:01:34 AM  

SlothB77: Julian assange is a neocon now? Whatever will the far lefties do?


a) there are no far lefties anywhere in American politics.
b) Whatever "they" do will scare you badly, so badly you have to lie about it. This includes putting arugula in their salad.
c) Now go change you pants, because I'm sure something has scared you badly enough in the last 5 minutes that they need changing.
d) Why does anyone anywhere think either Paul is anything other than a Republican?
 
2013-08-18 07:02:48 AM  

Tired_of_the_BS: Point the finger at corporations, hack/compromise their documents and release them publicly to expose their evilnessness may not be overly ethical, but I 'get' what Assange hoped to accomplish, but it's my understanding he released intel that blew ops and got people killed - whatever his intent - that's not cool.


Did he?  That's the first I've heard of that.
 
2013-08-18 07:06:38 AM  
So, he's anticipating being captured, and he's working on his insanity defense?
 
2013-08-18 07:28:05 AM  
...  but it's my understanding he released intel that blew ops and got people killed - whatever his intent - that's not cool.

Alphax: Did he?  That's the first I've heard of that.


Straight copy/paste from Assange's Wiki:

Despite withholding some 15,000 incident reports for "safety reasons," thousands of documents in the Wikileaks Afghan war log do identify Afghans by name, family, location, and ideology. The Taliban issued a warning to Afghans, alleged in the log to have worked as informers for the NATO-led coalition, that "US spies" will be hunted down and punished, indicating they will investigate the named individuals before deciding on their fate.

Asked what he thought of the dangers to those families created by the release of their personal information, Assange claimed that many informers in Afghanistan were "acting in a criminal way" by sharing false information with NATO authorities. He insisted that any risk to informants' lives was outweighed by the overall importance of publishing the information.


So he was either stupid, reckless, or recklessly stupid - he put a lot of families at risk for the 'importance' of publishing the info...
 
2013-08-18 07:29:32 AM  

TheXerox: Assange is best ignored. He can only do so much being holed up in the Ecudorian embassy so he says these kinds of crackpot things every now and then to get attention. Both Assange and Snowden are nothing but attention whores, they can yammer on all day about how they're idealists, but idealists actually suffer for their causes, these guys just ran and can now only hide in third world hellholes because they burned too many bridges and weren't capable of planning things out well in advance.


THANK YOU
 
2013-08-18 07:35:54 AM  
What Assange is really saying....is that most Americans are too ignorant to realize Democrat and Republican parties are not really different...when it comes to many issues they agree on the same thing

Look at all the things Obama is doing that Bush did
 
2013-08-18 07:41:12 AM  

FloridaFarkTag: What Assange is really saying....is that most Americans are too ignorant to realize Democrat and Republican parties are not really different...when it comes to many issues they agree on the same thing

Look at all the things Obama is doing that Bush did


Like breath, drink water, and put on pants.

Granted Obama puts his pants on his legs and not on his head, but why split hairs?
 
2013-08-18 07:53:07 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: So a guy who has the US federal govt all over his ass supports a politician who hates the US federal govt. Shocking.


Pretty much that. He's a hero until and unless he has an opinion that is counter to the popular opinion. Shame on everyone who's bashing him (now) because he thinks for himself.

Not supporting Rand or that butthole Drudge. Just saying.
 
2013-08-18 07:57:22 AM  

phenn: Not supporting Rand or that butthole Drudge. Just saying.


Not sure about Drudge but Rand Paul doesn't seem that bad compared to his fellow members of the Congress. Sure he's full of shiat but not any more than his peers and he does seem to actually have some sort of principles.
 
2013-08-18 07:58:55 AM  

GhostFish: Rand Paul, the guy who openly complained that disaster relief wasn't leaving enough money left over for defense?

Right.


I think that sums it up nicely.
 
2013-08-18 08:03:38 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: gingerjet: anfrind: I think Snowden deserves more respect than Assange.  Yes, they both leaked classified information, and in doing so might have "compromised American interests" (whatever that actually means).  But Snowden knew exactly the consequences of leaking classified information (and was subject to more severe penalties due to having been entrusted with a security clearance), and he did it anyway.  That doesn't make it right, but it takes a lot more guts than publishing a data dump from a naieve army private half a world away.

Snowden is incredibly naive and I would call him out as a coward.  And based on his public comments - he clearly isn't that bright of an individual and beyond knowing to leave the country (to China no less) - he clearly didn't think any of this through.

Too bad - the US government has been able to deflect from the material that he released and focus all the attention on Snowdens idiotic antics.

/don't get me started on the Guardian reporter that Snowden has been dealing with

Well, it did prompt Obama to give an address and promise reforms on how information is collected from US citizens, so it did have some effect.

The problem I have with Snowden and Manning is that they both broke their oaths for the government agencies that employed them.  While I think that's something possibly worth doing for the right reasons, having the courage to do it should also mean having the courage to face the consequences.

Assange isn't a US citizen, so I can't really fault him for being pissed off that the US is trying to get him.


I don't think snowmen swore an oath.

However what I think the import distinction is that snowmen 'leaked' things he thought were illegal. That can arguably be whistle blowing. Manning otoh dumped whatever he could get. I hope he gets 90 years.
 
2013-08-18 08:05:13 AM  

TheJoe03: phenn: Not supporting Rand or that butthole Drudge. Just saying.

Not sure about Drudge but Rand Paul doesn't seem that bad compared to his fellow members of the Congress. Sure he's full of shiat but not any more than his peers and he does seem to actually have some sort of principles.


He has a long way to go to understand the role of government and I'm not fond of his flip flopping on certain things (drones come to mind).
 
Displayed 50 of 146 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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