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.

(Washington Post)   Breaking: Boehner, McConnell, Pelosi and Reid will be meeting at the White House with President Obama at 5:30 ET today. Will this standoff end?   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 625
    More: Unlikely, President Obama, White House, Boehner, McConnell v. FEC, no solutions, government shutdown, House Republicans, House Minority Leader  
•       •       •

1135 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Oct 2013 at 2:03 PM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-02 03:37:03 PM

AngryDragon: [i.imgur.com image 375x347]

It's coming.  You know it is.


I really hope you're wrong.
 
2013-10-02 03:37:40 PM

Cyclometh: Evil High Priest: Cyclometh: The meeting had better go like this:

"You will pass a clean CR. There is to be no negotiating. There is only one option for getting out of this, and I want to make it clear that you have no others. You can grandstand, go to the media, cry and whine, but neither the Senate nor myself will consider anything but a clean funding bill with no riders. You will do it now, or you will do it later, but you will do it. Now get the fark out of my office and go do your jobs."

If that were the plan, they wouldn't need to have a meeting.

Sure they would. It is to make it utterly clear where things stand and shred any notion that the GOP gets anything from this. Tell them face to face, man to man, exactly what the situation is and there is literally only one path forward.


At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.
 
2013-10-02 03:38:43 PM
Who cares at this point. We're going through this same shiat in two weeks over the debt ceiling then again in 6 weeks when this CR is up. The psychos run the asylum and they won't be happy until they crater the economy and default on the debt. "Moderate" Republicans are to scared to vote against them
 
2013-10-02 03:39:15 PM

Weaver95: The GOP should just turn everything back on and pretend the shutdown never happened.


They need one of these:

thaevolutionofosiris.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-10-02 03:39:42 PM

parasol: Bontesia:
The below article suggests that we'll likely see a deal when the stock market reacts.
www.mercurynews.com/digital-first-media/ci_24222884/why-shutdown-has n t -hit-your-401-k-yet

seems like further proof who and what really run the show


Agreed.
 
2013-10-02 03:39:43 PM

NFA: According to recent polls, 50% of the country thinks the shutdown is the fault of Democrats.


tanasinn.info
 
2013-10-02 03:40:16 PM

NFA: Yet when we have an elected official who publicly states her party planned and succeeded in shutting down the US government, this ISN'T treason?


No, it isn't

  Then we had Senator Lee who said he wanted to "bring the house down" to force a rewrite of the US constitution, this ISN'T treason or at least sedition?

No, it isn't.

Any other questions?
 
2013-10-02 03:40:29 PM
No matter what happens all the blame for this lies in Beohner's lap.  Don't make the mistake of thinking the American people aren't watching this very closely.  Oh and by the way, the rest of the world is laughing at us.  I hope you're happy.  I hope it was worth it.
 
2013-10-02 03:40:38 PM
I just realized what they want. The GOP, I mean.

They are hoping that if they're loud enough and annoying enough, that the American people will demand that Obama give in.

Like a frazzled mom telling dad to just give the little shiat what he wants so he'll shut up.
 
Bf+
2013-10-02 03:41:22 PM

incendi: Evil High Priest: If that were the plan, they wouldn't need to have a meeting.

How are you supposed to tell someone to get the fark out of your office and go do their jobs if they're not in your office?


lolz.


I wouldn't be surprised if Obama offers unpopular concessions (birth control access, etc)
If the Republicans agree, not only did they shut down the government, but for unpopular reasons.
If they don't, it's more of "They shut down the government and won't even compromise." and they grow more unpopular by the day.
Hell, he could even tell Boener all of this this, possibly ending with "now go get your farking shine box."
 
2013-10-02 03:41:31 PM

jst3p: At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.


If Obama can successfully negotiate with the leaders of Russia, Israel, and Iran, but can't negotiate with the Republicans, maybe Obama isn't the problem.
 
2013-10-02 03:41:58 PM
It is really crappy theatre.

Expensive, OMG, EXPENSIVE!, but, still, crappy.

/it just keeps getting tougher to serve both masters
 
2013-10-02 03:42:49 PM

Ned Stark: Feeling has a lot more weight when it comes to accurately predicting human behavior.


And even more weight if you can replace critical thought with feelings to control human behavior.
 
2013-10-02 03:42:58 PM
way south: The Republicans,who stood the most to lose in a shutdown,have no reason to go begging Obama's forgiveness at this point. They'll get blamed the same regardless, so they've got plenty of time.

 The Tea Party Republicans don't feel any blame.
 Those more "moderate" GOP members who understand they may be blamed should understand that there really isn't "plenty of time" when voters are waiting for pay and, in some cases, food.

  There really should be some sense of urgency to "fix" if you recognize "blame"
 
2013-10-02 03:43:04 PM

cameroncrazy1984: dwrash: Mrtraveler01: dwrash: Mrtraveler01: dwrash: They both need to compromise... and to be honest, the House holds all the cards

And that is based on...?

The house has exclusive power of the purse... period.

That doesn't mean that the Senate is just a rubber stamp for the House.

Republicans and Tea Partiers seem to think otherwise for whatever reason.

Agreed, but all the Senate has the right to do is propose amendments to bills that the House already passed.  One could argue that the Bill that Harry Reid got passed in the Senate the other day is unconstitutional because it is not the Senates job to write new legislation.

You're kidding, right. Please tell me you're kidding. No one can actually write this seriously.


We heard the same thing back with the Stimulus when the Senate took a funding bill from the House, gutted it, and put their proposal in there to send to reconciliation.

People really have no clue how legislation is done.
 
2013-10-02 03:43:05 PM

FeFiFoFark: I have concluded that Fark is a liberal echo chamber.


/NTTAWWT


Perhaps you should unskew it.
 
2013-10-02 03:43:18 PM

anfrind: jst3p: At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.

If Obama can successfully negotiate with the leaders of Russia, Israel, and Iran, but can't negotiate with the Republicans, maybe Obama isn't the problem.


Oh, he is.
But, just a bit player.
This is for "real" money.
 
2013-10-02 03:43:19 PM

Mercutio74: flondrix: The president and the heads of both parties in both houses of the legislature in one place at the same time?  Will Biden be there too?

You'd best slap an "only joking" tag on the end of that or you might get a visit from a government agency NOT affected by the shutdown.


There's a difference between pointing out a potential security lapse, and acting on it.

"Hey, you may want to rethink this plan, are you sure it's a good idea?" vs. "Gotta run to 1600 Penna Ave by 5:30 with my gear!".
 
2013-10-02 03:44:09 PM

parasol: Bontesia:
The below article suggests that we'll likely see a deal when the stock market reacts.
www.mercurynews.com/digital-first-media/ci_24222884/why-shutdown-has n t -hit-your-401-k-yet

seems like further proof who and what really run the show



who did Obama meet with earlier today before any congresspeople ?

Wall St.

(President Obama met with JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs  and other top financial industry leaders today to discuss the shutdown as well efforts to raise the federal debt ceiling. )
 
2013-10-02 03:44:25 PM

way south: The shutdown is a show being put on to try and shock the public. We can tell its falling on deaf ears since the people haven't charged at congress with torches and pitchforks.


What color is the sky in your world?
 
2013-10-02 03:44:32 PM

NFA: dr_blasto: NewportBarGuy: NFA: If Obama has any balls at all, he'll have Boehner arrested for treason and then go on TV and announce the rest of the GOP is next.

I don't know how America would react to a coup, because that is what that would be.

The mouthbreathers have been calling everything tyranny. Health care? Tyranny. Highways? Tyranny. State of the Union speech? Tyranny. Moved Hannity's show off prime time? Tyranny.

So, if there were actual tyranny, would they even recognize it?

Yet when we have an elected official who publicly states her party planned and succeeded in shutting down the US government, this ISN'T treason?  Then we had Senator Lee who said he wanted to "bring the house down" to force a rewrite of the US constitution, this ISN'T treason or at least sedition?


A shutdown? nah. Thats legitimate hardball politics. Defaulting on the debt? If that shiat really goes down treason charges don't sound unreasonable.
 
2013-10-02 03:44:44 PM

Gonz: Mercutio74: flondrix: The president and the heads of both parties in both houses of the legislature in one place at the same time?  Will Biden be there too?

You'd best slap an "only joking" tag on the end of that or you might get a visit from a government agency NOT affected by the shutdown.

There's a difference between pointing out a potential security lapse, and acting on it.

"Hey, you may want to rethink this plan, are you sure it's a good idea?" vs. "Gotta run to 1600 Penna Ave by 5:30 with my gear!".


A security lapse? It's the White House for chrissakes. How is that a security lapse?
 
2013-10-02 03:45:01 PM

SkinnyHead: the article says that Obama is the one who summoned the congressional leaders to the table. That means he's got to put something on the table


Yeah, but I don't think the Republicans are ready for it yet

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2013-10-02 03:45:12 PM

dwrash: Mrtraveler01: dwrash: They both need to compromise... and to be honest, the House holds all the cards

And that is based on...?

The house has exclusive power of the purse... period.


No they don't. Pretty funny you suggesting other need civics classes. Or maybe your problem is not knowing the meaning of words.
 
2013-10-02 03:45:17 PM

Lando Lincoln: AngryDragon: [i.imgur.com image 375x347]

It's coming.  You know it is.

I really hope you're wrong.


I really hope I am too.  The Democrats have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory though.
 
2013-10-02 03:45:21 PM

jst3p: At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.


Two weeks ago, Republican breath stunk of Putin's cock.  It was bizarre.

It would be hilarious if they're now back to referring to him as an antagonist.  I think you may mean Iran, in which case, Jon Stewart put it best:  if Obama can make a deal with a bunch of Iranian Muslim hardliners, maybe he's not the problem.
 
2013-10-02 03:47:07 PM

AngryDragon: Lando Lincoln: AngryDragon: [i.imgur.com image 375x347]

It's coming.  You know it is.

I really hope you're wrong.

I really hope I am too.  The Democrats have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory though.


Old, tired and stupid meme is old, tired and stupid.

How many successful election cycles do we need before we bury that retarded meme?
 
2013-10-02 03:47:31 PM

Ned Stark: NFA: dr_blasto: NewportBarGuy: NFA: If Obama has any balls at all, he'll have Boehner arrested for treason and then go on TV and announce the rest of the GOP is next.

I don't know how America would react to a coup, because that is what that would be.

The mouthbreathers have been calling everything tyranny. Health care? Tyranny. Highways? Tyranny. State of the Union speech? Tyranny. Moved Hannity's show off prime time? Tyranny.

So, if there were actual tyranny, would they even recognize it?

Yet when we have an elected official who publicly states her party planned and succeeded in shutting down the US government, this ISN'T treason?  Then we had Senator Lee who said he wanted to "bring the house down" to force a rewrite of the US constitution, this ISN'T treason or at least sedition?

A shutdown? nah. Thats legitimate hardball politics. Defaulting on the debt? If that shiat really goes down treason charges don't sound unreasonable.


So, default is your hard line in sand?
Downgrading was OK, eh?
 
2013-10-02 03:47:47 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: SkinnyHead: the article says that Obama is the one who summoned the congressional leaders to the table. That means he's got to put something on the table

Yeah, but I don't think the Republicans are ready for it yet

[encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 252x200]


Ginger ale through the nose hurts.
 
2013-10-02 03:48:11 PM

Zerochance: jst3p: At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.

Two weeks ago, Republican breath stunk of Putin's cock.  It was bizarre.

It would be hilarious if they're now back to referring to him as an antagonist.  I think you may mean Iran, in which case, Jon Stewart put it best:  if Obama can make a deal with a bunch of Iranian Muslim hardliners, maybe he's not the problem.


Yeah, I meant Rouhani I think, I get all Sarah Palin when it comes to foreign policy.
 
2013-10-02 03:48:16 PM
incendi:
Barack wouldn't be the first....
[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x914]
/yes, there is zero evidence for my tawdry innuendo...


Who is that with Kennedy?
 
2013-10-02 03:48:21 PM
The GOP keeps wanting to turn this into some kind of populist uprising, but that's complete bullshiat.

If the House speaks for the people then perhaps they could just hold a vote on a clean CR and see if it passes.

If it does, isn't that the will of the people? Or would that not count simply because it would largely be Democrats and a few Republicans voting for it?

The Tea Party has the audacity to claim that they speak for the people while at the same time demanding the squelching of other freely elected representatives.

So fark 'em.
 
2013-10-02 03:48:27 PM
Boner and Turtle ...
Turtle  and Boner .
Boner  and Turtle  ...
Turtle  and Boner
[Choo Choo Toot] Boner  and Turtle  ...
Turtle  and little brother Boner
Kids: Boner  and Turtle !
 
2013-10-02 03:49:03 PM

Gyro the Greek Sandwich Pirate: Who is that with Kennedy?


That's a much younger and reasonably pretty Nancy Pelosi.
 
2013-10-02 03:49:49 PM

Infernalist: AngryDragon: Lando Lincoln: AngryDragon: [i.imgur.com image 375x347]

It's coming.  You know it is.

I really hope you're wrong.

I really hope I am too.  The Democrats have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory though.

Old, tired and stupid meme is old, tired and stupid.

How many successful election cycles do we need before we bury that retarded meme?


Farking obamacare, man. You've earned the grandest loser title for another century at least.
 
2013-10-02 03:50:25 PM

dwrash: cameroncrazy1984: dwrash: cameroncrazy1984: dwrash: Mrtraveler01: dwrash: Mrtraveler01: dwrash: They both need to compromise... and to be honest, the House holds all the cards

And that is based on...?

The house has exclusive power of the purse... period.

That doesn't mean that the Senate is just a rubber stamp for the House.

Republicans and Tea Partiers seem to think otherwise for whatever reason.

Agreed, but all the Senate has the right to do is propose amendments to bills that the House already passed.  One could argue that the Bill that Harry Reid got passed in the Senate the other day is unconstitutional because it is not the Senates job to write new legislation.

You're kidding, right. Please tell me you're kidding. No one can actually write this seriously.

It is noted that you think the Constitution is inane.

Where did I say that? You don't actually believe that the Senate was written into the Constitution as a rubber-stamp for the House, do you?

I never said they were to be a rubber stamp... they can only propose amendments, they cannot create NEW legislation, NEW legislation has to originate in the House.


Ladies and gentlemen, I think we've discovered the elusive "Area Man".
 
2013-10-02 03:50:29 PM
KA-BLAM! - Right in the Kisser
img543.imageshack.us
 
2013-10-02 03:51:18 PM

Infernalist: AngryDragon: Lando Lincoln: AngryDragon: [i.imgur.com image 375x347]

It's coming.  You know it is.

I really hope you're wrong.

I really hope I am too.  The Democrats have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory though.

Old, tired and stupid meme is old, tired and stupid.

How many successful election cycles do we need before we bury that retarded meme?


Probably when it stops being accurate.  I WANT the Dems to succeed.  They're just so damn good at having the momentum and then pissing it away in the name of "compromise"

Filibuster rules, fail.
Single payer momentum, fail.
PATRIOT sunset, fail.

I guess we'll see by about 6:30 or so.  I'll meet you right here.  If I'm wrong I will happily apologize.  I have a bad feeling about this though.
 
2013-10-02 03:52:49 PM

Infernalist: AngryDragon: The Democrats have a habit of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory though.

Old, tired and stupid meme is old, tired and stupid.

How many successful election cycles do we need before we bury that retarded meme?


Political memes have a surprisingly long shelf life.  Considering that "France surrenders" and its variants remain quite popular despite being almost 70 years out of date, you might be waiting a long time.
 
2013-10-02 03:53:37 PM

BMulligan: birdmanesq: That's like the White Sox asking the Twins to trade Joe Mauer in return for four whole fried chickens and a coke.

Throw in some dry white toast and we have a deal.


You better think about what you're trying to do.
 
2013-10-02 03:54:05 PM

snocone: Ned Stark: NFA: dr_blasto: NewportBarGuy: NFA: If Obama has any balls at all, he'll have Boehner arrested for treason and then go on TV and announce the rest of the GOP is next.

I don't know how America would react to a coup, because that is what that would be.

The mouthbreathers have been calling everything tyranny. Health care? Tyranny. Highways? Tyranny. State of the Union speech? Tyranny. Moved Hannity's show off prime time? Tyranny.

So, if there were actual tyranny, would they even recognize it?

Yet when we have an elected official who publicly states her party planned and succeeded in shutting down the US government, this ISN'T treason?  Then we had Senator Lee who said he wanted to "bring the house down" to force a rewrite of the US constitution, this ISN'T treason or at least sedition?

A shutdown? nah. Thats legitimate hardball politics. Defaulting on the debt? If that shiat really goes down treason charges don't sound unreasonable.

So, default is your hard line in sand?
Downgrading was OK, eh?


Being a such a group of clowns that the credit rating agencies think you can't run your country, resulty in a downgrading, is a warning.
Showing the world you are a group of clowns that can't run your country, is the real problem.
 
2013-10-02 03:54:22 PM

snocone: Ned Stark: NFA: dr_blasto: NewportBarGuy: NFA: If Obama has any balls at all, he'll have Boehner arrested for treason and then go on TV and announce the rest of the GOP is next.

I don't know how America would react to a coup, because that is what that would be.

The mouthbreathers have been calling everything tyranny. Health care? Tyranny. Highways? Tyranny. State of the Union speech? Tyranny. Moved Hannity's show off prime time? Tyranny.

So, if there were actual tyranny, would they even recognize it?

Yet when we have an elected official who publicly states her party planned and succeeded in shutting down the US government, this ISN'T treason?  Then we had Senator Lee who said he wanted to "bring the house down" to force a rewrite of the US constitution, this ISN'T treason or at least sedition?

A shutdown? nah. Thats legitimate hardball politics. Defaulting on the debt? If that shiat really goes down treason charges don't sound unreasonable.

So, default is your hard line in sand?
Downgrading was OK, eh?


My hardline? Naw I don't really care, torch the place.

I just wouldn't find it unreasonable for others to draw it there. Because not paying bills already incurred really is an attack on America in a way that just not spending money isn't.
 
2013-10-02 03:55:01 PM
If the shutdown continues past a debt ceiling expansion would we be able to sell the bonds?
 
2013-10-02 03:55:08 PM

jst3p: At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.


The only reason Obama was forced to talk to the Republicans is that they have shown the leadership and steely resolve needed to lead this country to greatness.
 
2013-10-02 03:55:11 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Gonz: Mercutio74: flondrix: The president and the heads of both parties in both houses of the legislature in one place at the same time?  Will Biden be there too?

You'd best slap an "only joking" tag on the end of that or you might get a visit from a government agency NOT affected by the shutdown.

There's a difference between pointing out a potential security lapse, and acting on it.

"Hey, you may want to rethink this plan, are you sure it's a good idea?" vs. "Gotta run to 1600 Penna Ave by 5:30 with my gear!".

A security lapse? It's the White House for chrissakes. How is that a security lapse?


I don't personally think it is. However, the guy who initially asked the question was pointing out that the President and the individual #2 in the line of succession are going to be in the same room, along with three other powerful politicians. If the VP was also in the same room, then you have the Big Three all in the same place.

When this happens for States of the Union and such, contingency plans kick in, and some guy who's further down the line watches the speech on TV at Camp David. At least, that's what I read into it.
 
2013-10-02 03:56:33 PM

Gonz: cameroncrazy1984: Gonz: Mercutio74: flondrix: The president and the heads of both parties in both houses of the legislature in one place at the same time?  Will Biden be there too?

You'd best slap an "only joking" tag on the end of that or you might get a visit from a government agency NOT affected by the shutdown.

There's a difference between pointing out a potential security lapse, and acting on it.

"Hey, you may want to rethink this plan, are you sure it's a good idea?" vs. "Gotta run to 1600 Penna Ave by 5:30 with my gear!".

A security lapse? It's the White House for chrissakes. How is that a security lapse?

I don't personally think it is. However, the guy who initially asked the question was pointing out that the President and the individual #2 in the line of succession are going to be in the same room, along with three other powerful politicians. If the VP was also in the same room, then you have the Big Three all in the same place.

When this happens for States of the Union and such, contingency plans kick in, and some guy who's further down the line watches the speech on TV at Camp David. At least, that's what I read into it.


It was on an episode of The West Wing.
 
2013-10-02 03:56:38 PM
The only thing I can think is the Republican moderates are attempting to use this episode to purge themselves of the Tea Partiers, much the way Buckley purged the John Birch society in the 60's. I think they may have finally figured out that they will require extensive rebuilding in order to form a relevant party. What they should have done is to point out a few times the significant weaknesses with ACA, in specific the fact that the whole plan requires the young single people to be willing to pay more for health care then they are currently paying or will pay in case of a penalty. Also the fact of EMR requirements for all physicians by 2015 without having any standards addressed for this or specific requirements for HIPAA compliance or certification. Or the physician shortages that are almost sure to follow. Then say nothing and silently rebuild the party and wait for the ACA governmental costs explode which will require a tax hike and then they would be poised to take advantage.
 
2013-10-02 03:57:52 PM

Skleenar: jst3p: At the very least it should put an end to "Obama will talk with Putin and Netanyahu but won't even talk with Republicans"? That I keep hearing on AM radio.

The only reason Obama was forced to talk to the Republicans is that they have shown the leadership and steely resolve needed to lead this country to greatness.


Can't tell if ignorant or Poe...
 
2013-10-02 03:59:31 PM

Nunya_Bizness: The only thing I can think is the Republican moderates are attempting to use this episode to purge themselves of the Tea Partiers, much the way Buckley purged the John Birch society in the 60's. I think they may have finally figured out that they will require extensive rebuilding in order to form a relevant party. What they should have done is to point out a few times the significant weaknesses with ACA, in specific the fact that the whole plan requires the young single people to be willing to pay more for health care then they are currently paying or will pay in case of a penalty. Also the fact of EMR requirements for all physicians by 2015 without having any standards addressed for this or specific requirements for HIPAA compliance or certification. Or the physician shortages that are almost sure to follow. Then say nothing and silently rebuild the party and wait for the ACA governmental costs explode which will require a tax hike and then they would be poised to take advantage.


The validity of your specifics aside, if you think that anything in this debate has anything to do with the specifics of the ACA, you're sadly illusioned.
 
2013-10-02 03:59:50 PM

dwrash: it is the HOUSES RIGHT to deny funding to whatever it sees fit.


ALL legislation - which by definition includes funding legislation - has be passed in both the House AND the Senate.  That legislation must then be signed into law by the President.   If the President vetos the legislation, then the House and the Senate may overturn that veto with the approval of 2/3 of the members of EACH chamber.

So while the House has every right to keep trying to deny funding to the ACA, the Senate and the President have every right to keep telling them no.  The Sentate has told the House "No!" 41 times by not taking up the House's previous efforts to repeal the ACA.

Even IF the bill passes the House AND the Senate, President Obama has already said he would veto anything except a clean CR.  Unless the Republicans can muster 2/3 of the House and the Senate to override a Presidential veto, it is FUTILE for them to vote on anything except a clean CR.

In my opinion, a minority portion of the minority party in control of government is acting irresponsibly when they pursue an action which they know is FUTILE at the expense of the well-being of the rest of the country.
 
Displayed 50 of 625 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report