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.

(Townhall)   "Honestly, what does being a Libertarian mean beyond legalizing drugs, banging hookers and sitting by while the rest of the world blows itself up?"   (townhall.com) divider line 499
    More: Fail  
•       •       •

1805 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Nov 2013 at 9:43 AM (35 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-07 10:36:51 AM

super_grass: Fart_Machine: slayer199: It's a pretty simple philosophy:

You can't even get Libertarians to agree what a Libertarian is in their own party.

I doubt any party completely agrees about its philosophy unless it's a party of one.


This. People act like the Libertarian Party is unique in this regard. It's not. Show me a single political party ever that didn't have fights over "He's not a real [fill-in-the-blank]!"

Sarvis was one of the best candidates the LP has ever had. He ran as a pragmatic libertarian, keen on socially liberal issues and not a strident holier-than-thou ideologue. He's in the mold of Gary Johnson and Jim Gray, and in my opinion the LP is definitely headed in the right direction with them.

/just got my Libertarian Party of Wisconsin membership card in the mail
//so yes, I'm a card-carrying Libertarian
 
2013-11-07 10:37:00 AM

Muta: Libertarian are also for the gold standard even though they have no idea what problem they'd solve by switching and are oblivious to any possible negative repercussions the switch may cause.


B-b-but inflation! False value! Objectivism! Fiat currency is just paper! Gold has intrinsic value, not a value set by market prices! Wait... what? I'M CONFUSED AND ANGRY. RON PAUL!
 
2013-11-07 10:38:17 AM
Around here it means you likely own land with the mineral rights and cattle.
 
2013-11-07 10:38:47 AM

BMFPitt: Are you saying that you think the federal government should have unlimited power over everything, or just that you didn't understand what you were reading?


Limited within the scope of what is necessary at the time, up to and yes included unlimited should the republic need it

We fought that war already and settled this argument some time ago
 
2013-11-07 10:41:40 AM
It's worth noting that the "Sarvis is a fake libertarian!" crap isn't really coming from the usual suspects within the LP. It's coming from unabashed right-wing conservatives who are made the Republican lost, because a majority of voters cast ballots for social liberals. It's not even true that Sarvis cost Cuccinelli this election (though if it were that would be part of the point). All you have to do is compare the results from the Lt. Gov. election- the exact same voters cast ballots with only a Republican and a Democrat to choose from, and the Democrat won in a ten point blowout.
 
2013-11-07 10:41:42 AM
Libertarians are just plutocrat-wannabes who like weed. Authoritarian shiatheels with a stolen name.
 
2013-11-07 10:42:31 AM

BMFPitt: kxs401: All the Libertarians I know are either 20-something dudes who love weed and have very little idea what the federal government actually does or brilliant sociopaths who believe they would flourish in a country without a strong central government and therefore, screw you.

Anecdata!

I'm 32, I have never smoked anything, I work for the federal government, and I want a properly sized nd scoped federal government.

So you think the war on drugs is a proper and effective use of resources, the government is always benevolent, and that power is always better centralized?


Now I can add to the list: people who don't understand words and ideas.
 
2013-11-07 10:43:17 AM

t3knomanser: Fiat currency is just paper!


It's much worse than that, fiat currency is debt. It is a promise that someone will pay you back. There isn't even, in the scheme of things, an appreciable amount of paper backing that debt up. Welcome to modern money systems. Is it a bad thing? I can say that we seem appreciably better off since we went onto the system, so I will give it a pass.
 
2013-11-07 10:43:45 AM

sprawl15: dwrash: I used to identify with the Libertarian Party... but I'm now more along the lines of the Modern Whig party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Whig

the meaningful distinctions are:


Whigs are interested in making the system work, no matter who holds the dominate view at the time and stopping gridlock.
 
2013-11-07 10:44:03 AM
Wait, who doesn't want to do some coke, bang some hookers, and empty a belt fed weapon into some fluffy woodland creatures? Dull people, that's who.
 
2013-11-07 10:45:02 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: BMFPitt: Are you saying that you think the federal government should have unlimited power over everything, or just that you didn't understand what you were reading?

Limited within the scope of what is necessary at the time, up to and yes included unlimited should the republic need it

We fought that war already and settled this argument some time ago


People like you should terrify anyone who dislikes autocracy.
 
2013-11-07 10:45:26 AM

dwrash: I used to identify with the Libertarian Party... but I'm now more along the lines of the Modern Whig party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Whig


I was with you until this one...

 "Government should refrain from legislating morality."

What does this mean exactly?  No gay marriage?  No abortion or legal abortion?
 
2013-11-07 10:46:40 AM

JusticeandIndependence: I was with you until this one...

 "Government should refrain from legislating morality."

What does this mean exactly?  No gay marriage?  No abortion or legal abortion?


Such wording is almost always used to indicate a pro-choice, liberal position on those questions.
 
2013-11-07 10:48:40 AM
A libertarian is a liberal who learned economics.
 
2013-11-07 10:48:55 AM

UNC_Samurai: kxs401: All the Libertarians I know are either 20-something dudes who love weed and have very little idea what the federal government actually does or brilliant sociopaths who believe they would flourish in a country without a strong central government and therefore, screw you.

Anecdata!

I can't disagree.  I went through a dumb college libertarian phase.  Then I graduated and the real world slapped some sense into me.  Between wising up and watching the political spectrum around me being distorted, I'm now pretty damn liberal.


Late to the show, but this was pretty much my path as well.  As in, co-founding member of the largest Objectivist club in my city kind of libertarian.  And that was with another well-known ex-farker.  He's still got a hard on for it, too, and that has pretty much destroyed his life.
 
2013-11-07 10:49:08 AM

BMFPitt: IdBeCrazyIf: BMFPitt: Are you saying that you think the federal government should have unlimited power over everything, or just that you didn't understand what you were reading?

Limited within the scope of what is necessary at the time, up to and yes included unlimited should the republic need it

We fought that war already and settled this argument some time ago

People like you should terrify anyone who dislikes autocracy.


It's not as much an endorsement of autocracy as restating the problem, affirming the problem exists, and ending it at that.

Of course the government should have some power, but how do we decide what how much? That's the entire point of having representative government in the first place.
 
2013-11-07 10:50:32 AM

slayer199: The GOP establishment is afraid of growing libertarianism inside their party...so they're taking a break from attacking gays, women and Democrats to attack libertarianism.  Color me shocked.  Actually, it's good news for libertarians that they consider libertarianism a threat to the status quo.

It's a pretty simple philosophy:   Socially liberal, fiscally conservative (non-crony capitalism), and a more non-interventionist foreign policy.  The author doesn't understand it...and judging by the lefty responses in this thread...neither do most farkers.



It really does depend on which libertarian you ask.
devil is in the details I think....

what do you think of the EPA?

Go back to the gold standard? yes or no.
 
2013-11-07 10:50:58 AM

ikanreed: The only positive thing you can say about libertarianism is that it's internally consistent.  It's failings become obvious in any attempt to address a real-world issue.


QFT
 
2013-11-07 10:51:17 AM

super_grass: EWreckedSean: Wanting smaller, less intrusive government and supporting personal liberty. What a bunch of greedy cave dwellers.

The brand has been hijacked by people on the far right. Is Glenn Beck really a libertarian, or the socially conservative wing of the Tea Party?


It's a big tent term. Left libertarians, aka libertarian socialism, anarcho-communists will tell you that any right libertarian, aka anarco-capitalists, minarchists, are all fake libertarians.
 
2013-11-07 10:51:59 AM

karnal: A libertarian is a liberal who learned economics.


That is the problem with libertarians.  Everything boils down to dollars and cents.  They go out and buy a product and they give no thought into how that product was created or who created it.  The thinking is I have the money to by X product and I have now purchased X product and then BAM, the thinking stops.  Their need or want has been met and that is all that matters.
 
2013-11-07 10:52:05 AM
A Republican will pee on your leg and tell you it's raining.

A Democrat will pee on your leg and tell you you're racist/sexist/plutocratic for objecting to having your leg peed on.

A Libertarian will tell you to move your farking leg out of the way before he pees.
 
2013-11-07 10:52:51 AM

karnal: A libertarian is a liberal who learned economics at a 3rd grade level in an Alabama public school.



FTFY
 
2013-11-07 10:53:00 AM

xalres: I put libertarianism up there with communism in the pantheon of BS political philosophies. Both fail for the same underlying reason, greed. Communism fails to take into account human greed and assumes everyone will be okay with sharing all the resources whereas libertarianism celebrates human greed and sociopathy and yet somehow assumes everything will turn out fine if we let these qualities run amok on a national scale.  We had a small taste of how a libertarian-style unregulated market would act with the sub-prime mortgage debacle and it almost broke the world economy. I shudder to think what would happen if we actually tried full implementation.

It's an interesting thought exercise but it quickly falls apart as a philosophy when subjected to even the slightest scrutiny.


There was nothing libertarian about the sub-prime mortgage debacle. Banking in the US is so intertwined with government it is disgusting.
 
2013-11-07 10:53:04 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/13/libertarianism-for-dummies/

Too long. Don't read.


Thanks, but your name at the top of the post is enough for me.
 
2013-11-07 10:53:56 AM

timujin: UNC_Samurai: kxs401: All the Libertarians I know are either 20-something dudes who love weed and have very little idea what the federal government actually does or brilliant sociopaths who believe they would flourish in a country without a strong central government and therefore, screw you.

Anecdata!

I can't disagree.  I went through a dumb college libertarian phase.  Then I graduated and the real world slapped some sense into me.  Between wising up and watching the political spectrum around me being distorted, I'm now pretty damn liberal.

Late to the show, but this was pretty much my path as well.  As in, co-founding member of the largest Objectivist club in my city kind of libertarian.  And that was with another well-known ex-farker.  He's still got a hard on for it, too, and that has pretty much destroyed his life.


I think a lot of people went a route like this. Young people in the west haven't heard any real critical words about capitalism in decades, so you end up with lots who decide that some form of ultra-capitalism must be ultra-good. I was a bit of a libertarian type when I was younger, then I grew up and got a job. Sixteen years later and I've ended up all the way at the far left end.
 
2013-11-07 10:56:14 AM

Gulper Eel: A Republican will pee on your leg and tell you it's raining.

A Democrat will pee on your leg and tell you you're racist/sexist/plutocratic for objecting to having your leg peed on.

A Libertarian will tell you to move your farking leg out of the way before he pees.


Notice all anecdotes about people who were libertarian until they grew up?  Now look at your post.  Look at it.
 
2013-11-07 10:56:20 AM

odinsposse: skullkrusher: Diogenes: Honestly, what does being a Libertarian mean beyond legalizing drugs, banging hookers and sitting by while the rest of the world blows itself up?

Well, there's also the self-centeredness and sociopathy.

That's Randians

Randians are narcissists, not sociopaths. They believe society is just jealous of how extra special they are and so tries to keep them down. Libertarians are closer to sociopaths because they usually recognize that societal structures help some people but want to get rid of them because they don't personally benefit.


This is a false characterization. There is nothing to libertarianism which says it is immoral to help a stranger in need. In general terms, they just reject government being involved in that believing that the decision to help others should be left to the individual. Randians attach a moral wrong to assisting the "leeches".

Randians are the ones required by their philosophy to be self-centered. Not right(or left) libertarians
 
2013-11-07 10:56:39 AM

kxs401: BMFPitt: kxs401: All the Libertarians I know are either 20-something dudes who love weed and have very little idea what the federal government actually does or brilliant sociopaths who believe they would flourish in a country without a strong central government and therefore, screw you.

Anecdata!

I'm 32, I have never smoked anything, I work for the federal government, and I want a properly sized nd scoped federal government.

So you think the war on drugs is a proper and effective use of resources, the government is always benevolent, and that power is always better centralized?

Now I can add to the list: people who don't understand words and ideas.


No, I get it. You are only referring to the craziest extreme, and you would like to keep it that way.

Do you believe that anyone who isn't a whackjob fundie isn't a member of a given religion?
 
2013-11-07 10:57:28 AM
unexplained bacon: slayer199: The GOP establishment is afraid of growing libertarianism inside their party...so they're taking a break from attacking gays, women and Democrats to attack libertarianism.  Color me shocked.  Actually, it's good news for libertarians that they consider libertarianism a threat to the status quo.

It's a pretty simple philosophy:   Socially liberal, fiscally conservative (non-crony capitalism), and a more non-interventionist foreign policy.  The author doesn't understand it...and judging by the lefty responses in this thread...neither do most farkers.


It really does depend on which libertarian you ask.
devil is in the details I think....

what do you think of the EPA?

Terrible idea as it exists currently. There is value perhaps in it being an advisory institution, but an un-elected government branch should have zero authority to regulate.

Go back to the gold standard? yes or no.

No, but it is hard to say that fiat money has been a success. Maybe best to go back to some form of commodities backed currency.
 
2013-11-07 10:58:25 AM

A Dark Evil Omen: Young people in the west haven't heard any real critical words about capitalism in decades


Are you kidding me? Any university with a worthwhile economics or social sciences department will do that. And I honestly doubt that kids outside of the west save for China gets a radically different treatment of capitalism.
 
2013-11-07 10:59:28 AM

Gulper Eel: A Republican will pee on your leg and tell you it's raining.

A Democrat will pee on your leg and tell you you're racist/sexist/plutocratic for objecting to having your leg peed on.

A Libertarian will tell you to move your farking leg out of the way before he pees.


A Green will pee on you, and then plant an acorn on the wet spot on the ground.
 
2013-11-07 10:59:30 AM
Lemme alone!

You guys suck!

I'm taking my ball and bat and I'm going home!

/ What Libertarians sound like to the rest of us.
 
2013-11-07 10:59:54 AM

EWreckedSean: what do you think of the EPA?

Terrible idea as it exists currently. There is value perhaps in it being an advisory institution, but an un-elected government branch should have zero authority to regulate.


This is why we can't have nice things.
 
2013-11-07 10:59:59 AM
www.bitlogic.com
 
2013-11-07 11:00:01 AM

Churchill2004: JusticeandIndependence: I was with you until this one...

 "Government should refrain from legislating morality."

What does this mean exactly?  No gay marriage?  No abortion or legal abortion?

Such wording is almost always used to indicate a pro-choice, liberal position on those questions.


Yup.. it's up to the individual.

Personally, I'd like to see marriage done away with (unregulated by government) and provide a contractual method to provide for the care of children and others along with estate matters.

The current laws were designed to protect women and to encourage the birth rate post world wars and is no longer needed.
 
2013-11-07 11:00:12 AM

EWreckedSean: xalres: I put libertarianism up there with communism in the pantheon of BS political philosophies. Both fail for the same underlying reason, greed. Communism fails to take into account human greed and assumes everyone will be okay with sharing all the resources whereas libertarianism celebrates human greed and sociopathy and yet somehow assumes everything will turn out fine if we let these qualities run amok on a national scale.  We had a small taste of how a libertarian-style unregulated market would act with the sub-prime mortgage debacle and it almost broke the world economy. I shudder to think what would happen if we actually tried full implementation.

It's an interesting thought exercise but it quickly falls apart as a philosophy when subjected to even the slightest scrutiny.

There was nothing libertarian about the sub-prime mortgage debacle. Banking in the US is so intertwined with government it is disgusting.


Yes they are intertwined but that situation led to a period of completely lax regulation. They saw an opportunity in foreign investors clamoring for mortgage backed securities but there weren't enough new mortgages being created to meet the demand. So they went about meeting that demand in the most short sighted and destructive way possible. Whatever the reasons for the government dropping the ball the situation was still one of free reign for the most part. It was as close to a "free market" as I've seen.
 
2013-11-07 11:00:43 AM

A Dark Evil Omen: Libertarians are just plutocrat-wannabes who like weed. Authoritarian shiatheels with a stolen name.


I do love anarcho-socialists-cum-uber-statists who call others authoritarian
 
2013-11-07 11:01:32 AM
In the years since, that attitude has only grown. And what it means to be a Libertarian has blurred even more than before. So much so that a "Libertarian" candidate for governor in Virginia - many of whose views would disgust "real" Libertarians - pulled 7 percent in a race decided by much less pretty much solely on the strength of his party ID.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/134537/robert- sa rvis/#.Unu4q_nJY64

What views of his would disgust "real" libertarians?

I'm not even sure what the author is biatching about here?

(stolen from a thread yesterday: Yes, the pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-pot legalization, anti-death penalty Libertarian candidate. The sound of Cuccinelli voters stampeding to him was deafening. "
 
2013-11-07 11:02:28 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Dancin_In_Anson: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/13/libertarianism-for-dummies/

Too long. Don't read.

Here's your problem, "Max Borders"

8. Myth: Libertarians agree on everything.
Here's a mini top ten list of things about which libertarians are fairly divided:
1.) Immigration
2.) Austrian or Chicago economics
3.) Abortion
4.) Origin of rights
5.) The status of children and teenagers
6.) War and pacifism
7.) Strategy of reform
8.) Tactics of reform
9.) Whether to compromise
10.) Intellectual property rights


They even disagree on what libertarianism is, I don't think they've exactly coalesced around the Max Bordersian definition.


They can't even agree if Hayek's wishy-washiness on this was appropriate.
 
2013-11-07 11:02:32 AM

EWreckedSean: It's a pretty simple philosophy: Socially liberal, fiscally conservative (non-crony capitalism), and a more non-interventionist foreign policy. The author doesn't understand it...and judging by the lefty responses in this thread...neither do most farkers.


In theory, the Tea Party is socially neutral and smaller government. In practice it is quite different. Most libertarians I know (I know, anecdotes) aren't so much socially liberal as they are leave me the fark alone. While I applaud that attitude in general, it means that in practice they think the civil rights act is wrong. They think you should absolutely be able to discriminate as much as you want.
 
2013-11-07 11:02:32 AM

justaguy516: I remember a friend who was a rabid libertarian. And then he had an autistic son born to him.


A true Libertarian would never have submitted to government-mandated vaccinations for his child.
 
2013-11-07 11:02:41 AM
Libertarians are fat guys with beards who envision themselves as heroic freedom fighters in possession of secret information about how the economy "really works" struggling against a faceless evil (the government). They're basically conspiracy LARPers.
 
2013-11-07 11:03:13 AM

EWreckedSean: unexplained bacon: slayer199: The GOP establishment is afraid of growing libertarianism inside their party...so they're taking a break from attacking gays, women and Democrats to attack libertarianism.  Color me shocked.  Actually, it's good news for libertarians that they consider libertarianism a threat to the status quo.

It's a pretty simple philosophy:   Socially liberal, fiscally conservative (non-crony capitalism), and a more non-interventionist foreign policy.  The author doesn't understand it...and judging by the lefty responses in this thread...neither do most farkers.


It really does depend on which libertarian you ask.
devil is in the details I think....

what do you think of the EPA?

Terrible idea as it exists currently. There is value perhaps in it being an advisory institution, but an un-elected government branch should have zero authority to regulate.

Go back to the gold standard? yes or no.

No, but it is hard to say that fiat money has been a success. Maybe best to go back to some form of commodities backed currency.


So, EPA minus any enforcement capability then? There goes all the gains we've made cleaning up our air, water and soil. Just say you want them gone next time.

...and basically you want to go back to the gold standard, except instead of gold you'd like to pick some other commodity, perhaps OJ or pork bellies? Try to get specific on that one, run this logic out for us.

Sorry I think you're ideas are as naive as they are terrible. That's why I stopped being a libertarian many years ago I guess.
 
2013-11-07 11:04:11 AM

KyngNothing: In the years since, that attitude has only grown. And what it means to be a Libertarian has blurred even more than before. So much so that a "Libertarian" candidate for governor in Virginia - many of whose views would disgust "real" Libertarians - pulled 7 percent in a race decided by much less pretty much solely on the strength of his party ID.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/political-courage-test/134537/robert- sa rvis/#.Unu4q_nJY64

What views of his would disgust "real" libertarians?

I'm not even sure what the author is biatching about here?

(stolen from a thread yesterday: Yes, the pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-pot legalization, anti-death penalty Libertarian candidate. The sound of Cuccinelli voters stampeding to him was deafening. "


That is PURE, uncut buttrage at the election spoiler. Which is ironic, given that the conservatives were SO sure that the Libertarian party will help sway voters away from the left just a few short years ago.
 
2013-11-07 11:04:19 AM

skullkrusher: A Dark Evil Omen: Libertarians are just plutocrat-wannabes who like weed. Authoritarian shiatheels with a stolen name.

I do love anarcho-socialists-cum-uber-statists who call others authoritarian


He is an anarchist.  I would say he is the last person that will trample your rights.  Me on the other hand,  I love the state.  I don't love the state as it exists now.  I mean the state is a tool used by the ruling class to oppress other classes.  Who is the ruling class? Capitalists.  Now,  I love the state in as much as I want the working class (the majority of the people) to control the state to oppress the ruling class (the capitalists).  It's only fair :)
 
2013-11-07 11:06:56 AM
For my libertarianism, I'm considered a liberal.  I think GOD should stay out of politics, I think the government should lightly regulate emergent order in the markets and society to prevent harm.  I believe that we have way more police, laws and lawyers than we need to protect people and property and some laws, police and lawyers are employed simply to enforce a power dynamic onto people who don't want it.

In other words, I'm a libertarian in that I believe that there IS a role for government.  Libertarians do believe this.  Where most libertarians fall down on their own beliefs is that they think that government in the real world can be this tiny thing tied only to local problems.  That is unrealistic bullshiat. The size of government is related to the size of the population and the issues it faces.  If some states hadn't systematically ignored their responsibility to educate it's citizens, there would be no department of education.  If some states hadn't been corrupted by corporations into ignoring the obvious effects of pollution there would be no EPA.  The FEDERAL government did fark up healthcare in the war years through employer sponsored healthcare being the only thing firms can compete on because of wage and price controls, but that was during a national crisis and Democrats have been trying to fix that shiat for 70 years now.  Drug policy has been insane for decades and should be radically changed. Universal access to affordable health care is the only real way to handle the problems drugs cause so that we can wind down the failed drug war (which is really about controlling brown people anyway).

So I am a libertarian.  Because of that, I vote for and support the Democrats.  They go too far at times, but they are working to make the government the correct size to handle the issues of the day and not some hypothetical size dictated by unsupportable models created to reach specific conclusions, and not based upon moralistic punishment of the lower class.

And fark the libertarian brony guy.  Dude, you have too much time on your hands if this stuff means that much to you.  Get a different hobby.
 
2013-11-07 11:07:28 AM

super_grass: BMFPitt: IdBeCrazyIf: BMFPitt: Are you saying that you think the federal government should have unlimited power over everything, or just that you didn't understand what you were reading?

Limited within the scope of what is necessary at the time, up to and yes included unlimited should the republic need it

We fought that war already and settled this argument some time ago

People like you should terrify anyone who dislikes autocracy.

It's not as much an endorsement of autocracy as restating the problem, affirming the problem exists, and ending it at that.

Of course the government should have some power, but how do we decide what how much? That's the entire point of having representative government in the first place.


The difference being that you seem content to let the government decide how much power it needs with a simple majority, and I think that any expansion in power must be carefully considered and thoroughly justified.

Is there nothing that the government does right now that you think it has no business doing?
 
2013-11-07 11:09:02 AM

toomuchwhargarbl: Fedoraheads for freedumbs!

[i.imgur.com image 430x538]


Please dear God tell me that is fake. I'm not certain I can live with the alternative.
 
2013-11-07 11:09:12 AM

kxs401: All the Libertarians I know are either 20-something dudes who love weed and have very little idea what the federal government actually does or brilliant sociopaths who believe they would flourish in a country without a strong central government and therefore, screw you.

Anecdata!


All the Libertarians I know are Republicans too embarrassed after Bush's tenure to call themselves Republicans.
 
2013-11-07 11:09:20 AM
Libertarians are inexhaustible little golden retriever puppies.
 
Displayed 50 of 499 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report