Reason Morning Links: Stay Alert, Citizens!

|

NEXT: Whose Was Bigger?: An Eyewitness Guesstimation of One Nation's Crowd Size vs. Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor Rally

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. If you travel to Europe, something might happen to you, somewhere, maybe.

    Richard Clarke had that in a memo to Bush years ago.

    1. Zing.

      I chuckled.

  2. Rahm Emanuel faces a different sort of residency issue.

    The Chicago political machine draws the line at carpetbagging?

    1. You can take Chicago out of the boy, but you can’t take the boy out of Chicago.

  3. Blackwater quietly gets a sizable government contract.

    That’s change you can believe in. But Democrats know Republicans won’t attack them for this.

    1. As a side note, has anybody read Jeremy Scahill’s screed against Blackwater? I’ve got it on the night stand, but it’s difficult reading because he’s such a tendentious ass. I’m trying to figure out if it’s worth finishing.

    1. This seems to be going straight to Fatal Attraction territory. Or at least the dude who burns his house down rather than letting his wife keep it in the divorce.

    2. But Joe tells me he is a Democrat. He is just following the will of the people.

        1. True, Chavez has been putting on a lot of weight lately.

          1. Am I the only one who thinks Chavez looks a lot like the Cubs’ Zambrano? Separated at birth?

            1. Separated at birth?

              Yes, it’s political… but they do look frighteningly alike.

              1. Similar temperaments too…Look at any “US is Satan” harangue by Chavez and compare to Zambrano’s clubhouse breakdown…

      1. Did joe ever say Chave was a democrat? Iirc his position was the Venezula’s democratic institutions were still alive.

        1. Which is another way of saying he was a Democrat. Joe’s position was that Chavez was lawfully elected. And that yeah, he is kind of a bad guy. But, the people down there liked him and he kept winning elections. Whenever Chavez would close down a radio station or appropriate private property Joe would say “he is going to keep doing this until he loses and election someday”. Nothing Chavez did ever bothered Joe that much. And since Chavez is a leftist and an enemy of the US, Joe could never bring himself to admit that maybe he was really a threat to the nation of Venezuela.

          1. “Which is another way of saying he was a Democrat.”

            That’s bizarre. Venezula is not Chavez.

            Joe’s position was that while Chavez was bad as long as Venezula’s institutions were alive the problem would likely take care of itself. Remember at the time we had a war-mongering administration and those like you on the right seemed to be setting Chavez up as the next boogeyman. Joe explicitly said his stance was based on these “drum beats of war” he perceived.

            1. As long as he keeps winning elections, he is “officially” a democrat. Now, once he “loses” an election…I think we’ll see how much mugabe he’s got in him.

            2. “That’s bizarre. Venezula is not Chavez.”

              If a person follows the Democratic structures and leaves those structures in place, I don’t see how that person is not a Democrat. And that is what Joe claimed despite apple evidence to the contrary.

              Chavez has committed numerous acts of war against Columbia by harboring and funding the FARC. Joe denied that for years until the evidence was undeniable and then he proceeded to defend it. Chavez is closely allied with Hezbollah and Iran. It is well known that Iranian intelligence works closely with him.

              I wasn’t away anyone wanted to go to war against him. But he is clearly an enemy of the United States. I know in your world the U.S. is the only force for evil in the world. But some of us chose to live in reality where there are people out there not associated with America or worse yet the Republican party who mean the world harm.

              Chavez is where people like you and Joe show your asses. You will do anything to defend and obfuscate and minimize his crimes. And whenever the crimes are undeniable, they are always the fault of the US or small in comparison to the US. If he were anything but a socialist, you would never defend the guy or talk about how the country is still democratic. In yours and Joe’s world, anyone who is a leftist can never be that bad and is always worth defending. And certainly always preferable to the United States.

              1. “You will do anything to defend and obfuscate and minimize his crimes.”

                Fuck you John. I give money every month to Human Rights Watch which has been at the forefront of documenting and condemning Chavez’s crimes. I’ve always said the man is a thug. I just don’t want to prep a new war like you and your war-mongering buddies in the GOP. At this point Venezula has proven it can still rebuke Chavez.

                “And that is what Joe claimed despite apple evidence to the contrary.”

                He socialized the orchards?

                “I wasn’t away anyone wanted to go to war against him.”

                John and his ilk are such fevered war-mongerers that his loose grasp on grammar falls apart when beating his war drums…

                1. “John and his ilk are such fevered war-mongerers that his loose grasp on grammar falls apart when beating his war drums..”

                  Yeah I and the GOP want war. I guess that is why we are not at war now and are going to war against NW Pakistan since the Democrats are in power.

                  Seriously MNG, your ability to claim that the Democrats are the peace party ended a long time age in a shower of Obama ordered drone strikes in Pakistan.

                  And can’t give a single piece of evidence that I have ever advocated war against the guy. I just admit the obvious that he is an enemy of the US. Admitting the obvious seems to be a problem for you. But go ahead and lecture about grammar. It is not like you have anything else to say or can ever make an honest argument about anything.

                2. “John and his ilk are such fevered war-mongerers that his loose grasp on grammar falls apart when beating his war drums..”

                  Yeah I and the GOP want war. I guess that is why we are not at war now and are going to war against NW Pakistan since the Democrats are in power.

                  Seriously MNG, your ability to claim that the Democrats are the peace party ended a long time age in a shower of Obama ordered drone strikes in Pakistan.

                  And can’t give a single piece of evidence that I have ever advocated war against the guy. I just admit the obvious that he is an enemy of the US. Admitting the obvious seems to be a problem for you. But go ahead and lecture about grammar. It is not like you have anything else to say or can ever make an honest argument about anything.

              2. Actually, as I recall, Joe’s FULL position was that widespread nationalizations were the will of the people, that they were no different than eminent domain or utility variances to title in the US, and that since Chavez had the support of most Venezuelans, nobody had any right to complain.

                1. I’d invoke the law of nature and go all Branch Davidian on Chavez if he tried taking my land. Those who ignore the rule of law deserve to suffer the full consequences of their violations.

              3. I know in your world the U.S. is the only force for evil in the world.

                John – That is uncalled for. While I am sure that I agree with you more often than I agree with MNG, MNG’s positions are not as you just described.

                MNG does not equal Joe

            3. ” Remember at the time we had a war-mongering administration”

              Bullshit.

              1. While we did in fact at that time have a war-mongering administration, I thought that the fears of some that we would pursue military action against Chavez were IMMENSELY overblown.

                In fact, the entire debate around Chavez here in the US has a comical quality about it to me, because he has always seemed to be US priority #9876 but acts like he thinks he’s priority #3. Nobody in or out of government in either party gives a damn what Chavez does or says. There are no bombs in his cigars and Venezuela is perfectly safe.

                1. After the administration backed Zelaya in Honduras, Chavez knew he has nothing to worry about.

                2. Unless he really does something stupid like facilitate the entry of terrorists into the US via the southern, a possible if unlikely event, he is safe. But it is a tragedy for Venezuela though.

                3. There are no bombs in his cigars and Venezuela is perfectly safe.

                  No, but you have to admit that it would be just funny as hell if he were to fall victim to the old loaded cigar gag.

              2. Remember at the time we had a war-mongering administration…

                My memory can be short, but I do remember last week.

                1. This past tense thingy is not what some think it is.

                  At this point Venezula has proven it can still rebuke Chavez.

                  Proven how? Chavez is still in power, and is proceeding to confiscate more private property for the state. And, if he loses an election, anyone here actually think Chavez will give up power? Or that he can actually “lose” an election when he controls who counts the votes?

    3. I read in the article that inflation is 30%. How can this be? Doesn’t Chavez have price controls?

      1. Evil hoarders and speculators acting at the behest of Yankee running dog imperialists.

        1. +1

      2. Inconceivable!

      3. Re: Waffles,

        I read in the article that inflation is 30%. How can this be? Doesn’t Chavez have price controls?

        Inflation is the rapid/constant increase of the money supply, not simply “rising prices.”

        Even with price controls, you can have inflation. The true cost of things will show up either in monetary terms or NON monetary terms (that is, when distortions are present, like for instance: price controls.)

        A higher scarcity of goods will be the first indication of a price distortion; black markets will be another; rationing (by the government, as a way to shroud reality from people) is another.

    4. Lovely man.

      My visit with Hugo

      You know, we need to give the man some time. His people are frustrated, they’re anxious, they’re scared about the future. And they have a right to be impatient about the pace of change. I’m impatient about our own. It took time to free the slaves, you know. Building a socialist utopia is no easier.

      1. Who introduced you, Barry, – your friend Ayers?

  4. Medical interns get shorter work hours.

    Noah Wyle’s tired whining on ER is going to make no sense to the new generation of TNT “Drama in the Daytime” viewers.

  5. Blackwater quietly gets a sizable government contract.

    Blackwater changed its name in Feb. 2009, to Xe. In related news, the Washington Senators are now known as the Texas Rangers.

    1. Blackwater changed its name in Feb. 2009, to Xe.

      I know. But since it didn’t get the contract under that name either, I think it’s fair to use its more familiar tag here.

      1. How about: Private army formerly known as Blackwater quietly gets government contract.

        1. Yeah, maybe something like that would be better. Will tinker.

    2. I like this reference. It reminds me of the Washington Senators Topps bubble gum team card I had as a yute.

      Why the fuck did I have a Senators team card? The Senators sucked.

      good times….

    3. Calvin Griffith moved the Senators to Minnesota, not Texas.

      1. From the Wiki, which, like a major league baseball umpire, isn’t always right but is never wrong, this:

        Washington Senators (1901?1960) became the Minnesota Twins

        Washington Senators (1961?1971) became the Texas Rangers

        1. Are you sure Pope Jimbo wasn’t making a commentary about the replacement Senators not being the true Senators?

          1. Im sure he was.

            1. I wonder who the Nationals will become?

              Tick…tick…tick…

    1. Jesus there are some stupid motherfuckers in this country.

    2. John Wallis, 50 years old, blames imports for the 2001 death of his 12-employee business that made small electronic prototypes for the telecommunications industry and the subsequent loss of his Chicago-area home….Mr. Wallis now works in programming and design for an international manufacturer in Rhode Island, but doubts he’ll ever be able to repay debts from his old business. “Financially we’ve never recovered,” he said.

      So, this whining dick bet wrong and now it’s the fault of free-trade?

      Maybe if he hadn’t sucked so much as a businessman, he wouldn’t still have almost 10-year old debts.

      1. I thought that just starting a business means I should be guaranteed profitability and success. As if there are innovative tech companies in the telecom industry outside of the US!

  6. NRO had a pretty good rundown of the Paul debate. It seemed like a thorough beat down for Paul. The highlight

    ” Wallace then asked Paul why he didn’t mention Conway in his appearances. “We may wait for him to catch up in the polls and then we’ll refer to him more,” Paul joked. Then, he piled on: “He supports Obamacare, he supported repealing the tax cuts, on cap-and-trade he’s been on both sides of the issue. Cap-and-trade would be a disaster for our economy. If we pass cap-and-trade it will be a disaster for our economy and for Kentucky jobs.”

    Continuing Paul’s litany, Wallace asked whether Conway would support “loads” of President Obama’s agenda such as the stimulus and TARP. Conway objected: “These are all hypotheticals. I wouldn’t have voted for the bailouts. There wasn’t enough accountability.” Afterward, he attempted a defense of Obamacare: “I have a friend with a kidney transplant, who says how tough it is to get treatment with preexisting conditions.” He concluded we couldn’t go back to a “pre?World War II system,” which he said his opponent preferred.

    Wallace then challenged Paul to explain why he didn’t support the stimulus, which created or saved 17,000 jobs in Kentucky. Paul explained that the stimulus was so inefficient as to spend $413,000 on each job it created or saved. Then he pounded into his opponent: “Jack acts like the money’s for free. The money is not for free.”

    http://www.nationalreview.com/…..ian-bolduc

    1. Remember, Rand Paul’s the crazy one. Civil Rights Act! Drugs! Drugs! Civil Rights Act! Civil Rights Act!

      Conway defended his work on meth labs ? his office had found more labs, thus the statistical increase ? before firing back that this was “another example where Rand Paul doesn’t get Kentucky. I have mothers crying on my shoulders because their daughters overdosed on oxycotton.”

      Sure you do, champ.

      1. My favorite line “the money is not for free.” But Paul is the crazy one for having the bizarre belief that money has to come from somewhere.

        1. I’m tired of all your conservative/libertarian nonsense…we all know that money is shat from of ass of the great rainbow unicorn!

  7. Warning: If you travel to Europe, something might happen to you, somewhere, maybe.

    I guess a warning that “it’s only four weeks until election!” would have been a little obvious.

    1. I guess this means we have to wait until 2012 to catch OBL.

    2. Well, the UK and Sweden are giving warnings too.

      1. They’re having elections, too?

      2. I believe they actually included some of the intel and were more specific. Instead of the blanket BE AFRAID!!.

    1. “I am of two minds about democracy,” he writes, “and so is everyone else. We all agree that it is the sovereign remedy for corruption, war and poverty in the Third World. We would certainly tolerate no other system in our own country. Yet most people are disenchanted with the way it works. One reason is that our rulers now manage so much of our lives that they cannot help but do it badly. They have overreached. Blunder follows blunder.”

      Far worse, traditional democratic theory has been flipped upside down: “Our rulers now make us accountable to them.”

      “The point is that governments have no business telling us how to live. They are tiresome enough in the exercise of authority. They are intolerable when they mount the pulpit. Nor should we be in any doubt that nationalizing the moral life of the people is the first step toward totalitarianism.”

      I’d vote for this dude for God-Emperor.

    2. I like the strangely polite Canadian insane commenters.

      RussellBarth
      8:47 AM on October 4, 2010
      Harper declared war against 60’s culture – whatever that means.

      he will make masturbation illegal if he gets a majority

      which he will

      the worst kept secret in Ottawa is the story of how Lurleen is spending her nights with her RCMP bodyguard instead of sleeping at 24 sussex.

      the guard is a woman, by the way

      that might explain why Harper is SO full of hate. He is dork-less. a petty bully.

      1. Why is the Left always the one playing the homo card?

        1. Yeah, the left and the homo card. I mean, remember how the Democrats got so many states to vote on banning gay marriage and unions in 2004 because they hoped it would help turn out all those homo-hating leftists? Always playing that homo card…

          Actually, this kind of thing (the commenter quoted) comes from what is a goofy belief popular among leftists: that dislike of homophobia is rooted in secret homosexuality. It’s as if every Klansman feared they were really black.

          1. “If you got hate in your heart… let it out.”

          2. You gotta admit that he “If you hate homos, you secretly are one.” meme is a powerful and disarming one. And has often turned out to be true.

            1. Doesn’t it, if broadly true, mean that straights should just stay out of what is a basically a fight between closeted and outed homosexuals?

          3. You mean the DOMA passed by Clinton?

            1. Every single one of the 14 Senate nay votes on DOMA were Democratic Senators. It was a shameful vote, and a lot of Dems did the wrong thing, but as a party they did better than the GOP. If I were gay I would know which party to work within…

              1. The party that promises you the world and then gives you a black eye helps you after falling down the stairs.

              2. How about the party with a former vice-president who was in favor of gay marriage while he was in office?

                Oh, that’s the GOP and the VP was Dick Cheney? Nevermind, doesn’t go along withthe narrative I had planned.

              3. “If I were gay I would know which party to work within…”

                The LP? I would rather have a party that promises to leave me alone, than one that strings me along through the election and then takes a dump on me.

          4. The only people I know who are ever outed as homosexuals on the assumption such a fact should end their careers, are political figures from the right. And it is those on the left who are always doing the outing. For being so supportive of homosexuals, the Left sure does seem to get angry when one of their enemies turns out to be one.

            1. You don’t think it has anything to do with the hypocrisy John?

            2. I think alot of that has to do with the hypocrisy those on the right adopt when they fight so wholeheartedly against certain homosexual objectives only to discover they’re living the life they denounce secretively. Most people aren;t thrilled by that amount of cognitive dissonance.

            3. Actually, the only way that assumption would be present is if the subject is a political figure on the right.

              There is no reason to assume that being outed would end your career if you’re on the left. If you’re on the right, under current conditions the entire fact that you have a career is based at least in part on your deception.

              I’m pretty supportive of homosexuals, to the extent that is consistent with the libertarian disclaimer, but I have no problem with people being outed and shrug my shoulders when people complain about outings. Information wants to be free.

              1. There is a gigantic difference between being homosexual, and supporting expanded entitlements for the same. There is nothing hypocritical about opposing expanded government entitlement of a group while being a part of it.

                I oppose Social Security on all levels. I am eligible to eventually receive benefits. Am I a hypocrite because I could receive government benefits but am opposed? Just because you are gay doesn’t mean you have to support the expansion of the welfare State, does it? More genetic disposition?

                Have any of these outed Republicans favored making homosexuality illegal? If a Leftard claims something is about “gay rights” and you are gay you are a hypocrite unless you agree?

                1. Two people acquiring a marraige license is not an entitlement, nor is a person allowing it be known that he/she is homosexual while serving in the military. The only reason I can fathom why this is still opposed is there are still too many people that think gays are icky untouchables.

                  1. Two people acquiring a marraige license is not an entitlement

                    So Social Security spousal death benefits are not an entitlement? Because people “paid in” I suppose?

                    The only reason I can fathom why this is still opposed is there are still too many people that think gays are icky untouchables.

                    Fortunately, the rest of us are not bound by your lack of imagination or knowledge.

                    The only reason I can think of that you would disagree with me is because you want to kill my children. Sure, you didn’t say that, but that is all I can fathom that you are really thinking. Stupid, huh?

            4. The only people I know who are ever outed as homosexuals on the assumption such a fact should end their careers, are political figures from the right.

              Dunno, I recall a recent Democratic NJ governor who resigned after being outed as gay.

              Some Democrats at lower levels of office can run as more or less openly gay candidates and win. That is not doable as a Republican, or as a viable Presidential candidate.

          5. Check where Gay Marriage polls among black democrats and get back to me. Don’t let it deflate your “big tent” hypothesis though.

            1. FTW!

  8. Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management, [said] the advisory was … to urge “common-sense precautions,” including … moving away quickly if something is “beginning to happen.”

    Hence, no doubt, the growing interest in expatriatism.

  9. The future is finally here. Flying cars and personal jetpacks. All we need are hoverboards and Mr. Fusions.

    1. Jetpack? More like jettanker.

  10. How the hell do these two sentences regarding Sobran even reconcile?

    #1:

    As a conservative Roman Catholic, he made a particular target of the Supreme Court’s decisions legalizing abortion and protecting pornography as free speech

    #2:

    His two marriages ended in divorce.

    1. He pursued an annulement of the divorces?

      I have no idea how Catholicism works IRT marriage and divorce, but I know a woman friend of mine got a vacation paid for by her ex-husband because he needed her permission for an annulment so he could marry his new wife and she wouldn’t give it unless he paid for her vacation.

      1. Once a bitch, always a bitch.

      2. Short version: you can get your marriage annulled if the marriage isn’t valid in the eyes of the church. You can usually get one on your first marriage, but it’s much harder for the second. Most Catholics don’t bother because it’s a huge pain in the ass.

        Long version: Go get a book of canon law and read up. I don’t claim to understand.

        1. Anecdote.

          My father needed an annulment from the Catholic Church to marry his new (third) wife. She wanted to be married in Church. Eight years after my parents divorce, having been married to my mother for 34 years, the Church granted the annulment. Don’t know what this proves other than “Divorce” Is not that hard for Catholics.

      3. I have no idea how Catholicism works IRT marriage and divorce, but I know a woman friend of mine got a vacation paid for by her ex-husband because he needed her permission for an annulment so he could marry his new wife and she wouldn’t give it unless he paid for her vacation.

        It works the same as Jewish kosher pork.

    2. Re: Puff-pass,

      How the hell do these two sentences regarding Sobran even reconcile?

      Being against abortion does not preclude one from seeking or wanting a divorce. I don’t understand your point or argument.

    3. Re: Puff-pass,

      His two marriages ended in divorce.

      It also does not say he was the one that seeked the divorces; his two former wives may have sued for divorce, in which case there’s nothing he could have done except fight for the house, car and dog.

  11. The strategy shift carries significant risks, particularly if it is perceived as an end-run around the Pakistan government’s long-standing objections to American military operations within its domain.

    Nuke, nuke, nuke, nuke of oil, oil, oil, oil …

    1. the Pakistan government’s long-standing objections to American military operations within its domain.

      The fact that Pakistan thinks the Afghan border area is part of its domain shows just how delusional they are.

      Pakistan is not sovereign over the Afghan border zone. It cannot control events there. It has no standing to object to hot pursuit or other military operations intended to defend Afghanistan from aggression from this zone.

  12. Anyone else watching the Ryder Cup? It’s going to come down to the final match. Which Europe will win. 🙂

  13. Anyone else watching the Ryder Cup? It’s going to come down to the final match. Which Europe will win. 🙂

    1. Europe just won. Rats.

      1. Nah, Hunter halved his match while looking like someone out of caddy shack.

        McDowell has to win his match for Europe to win 14? to 13?.

        1. Fowler not Mahan.

          1. BOOM! McDowell knocks it in to make it 2 up with 2 to play.

            1. McDowell wins 2 and 1, meaning that Europe wins 14? to 13?.

              By winning this golf contest by the narrowest possible margin we have demonstrated that we are better than you in every way. I shall now resume hating all the other European nations.

      1. You forgot the “Oh,”.

    1. Government is the largest growth industry in the country.

    1. I see now that the NYT article already links to that essay. Didn’t read the obituary before posting. Good for the NYT.

  14. “Joseph Sobran dies.”

    Again?

    1. No, his zombie self died this time, MNG.

      Here’s one of his last articles, very spot-on:

      “Are You A Marxist?”

      Summary: If you are, you’re just as lousy a human being as a Nazi.

      100 Million Deaths cannot be wrong on that!

      http://www.sobran.com/columns/2008/080304.shtml

      1. OM
        It was a joke, Sobran’s death was reported last week on H&R. And at the time I remarked at what a fan of Sobran I was.

        1. The news surfaced in the comment threads but I don’t think we reported it on the blog itself.

          1. It’s all good Jesse.

            1. That’s it. Bow to the man!

        2. Re: MNG,

          It was a joke[…]

          So was my comment to you, my friend 😉

          What’s no joke is that communists are no moral beings themselves. That is deadly serious.

  15. What should Americans in Europe do? “Be aware of their surroundings” and “adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when traveling,” the department advised.

    That’s prtetty much part of the sage advice we were given whether the port was uber civilizerd (Sydney) or striving to raech the level of third world hellhole (Mombassa).

    It’s also good advice for walking in any large city in America.

    1. My mom told me the same thing, albeit in less official-sounding language, when I went off to Europe to spend the summer of my 17th year trotting around Paris. I guess Europe was safer then from terrorist attacks and white-slave abductions than it is today, though, because I came home in one piece with no Scary Near-Abduction/Bombing stories to tell. Or, maybe it was that I kept my wits about me and didn’t do anything stupid. Amazing what a little observation can do for your safety.

  16. Ahem – where are the johnny longtorso supplemental links?

    1. Maybe he’s on strike as a result of being chastised the other day.

  17. Wherever you are in the world, mishap always happen, it may be you or other person. We just have to be careful, cautious and responsible with our actions too.

    We help Americans find jobs and prosperity in Asia. Visit http://www.pathtoasia.com for details.

    1. The careful, responsible thing clearly being to find employment in Asia through a spam post at H&R.

    2. Anon-bot could shit you out for breakfast.

      1. Where did anon-bot go?

        1. To find employment in Asia. Duh. Do try and keep up, old chap.

  18. Well that was quick: According to a CNN statement issued today (and as reported by Politico and elsewhere):

    Rick Sanchez is no longer with the company. We thank Rick for his years of service and we wish him well.

    Though at the time of this post, the former host still has a webpage via CNN.com.

    (Also, has the line “Some of my best friends are [insert minority group]” ever worked?)

    1. The Godfather II?

  19. I’ve read about this guy’s horror before – this story is a prime example of why I believe the death penalty should remain available as a legal option, albeit to be used sparingly, only in cases such as these. There is no doubt – not even “reasonable” doubt – that these guys did the horrific things they are accused of.

    Some things just need killing. And that includes these two subhuman pieces of filth.

    1. I could put a bullet into those two without even so much thought as I’d give to stepping on a cockroach.
      It wasn’t enough to rape the mother and daughters. It wasn’t even enough to murder them. Oh no, they had to burn them alive as well. Far as I’m concerned, those two guys ought be thrown into an open hearth furnace and the door slammed shut.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.