Government Spending

Don't Trust Anybody Under 65

|

At Truth-Out, Dave Lindorff girds the Baby Boomers for their last battle, the defense of big Social Security paydays:

What we showed back then in our youth and our formative young-adult years was that when our interests were on the line, as they were with the draft, or when we saw a gross injustice, as was the case with Jim Crow, we knew how to fight politically. I'm not suggesting that the people born in the decade and a half after World War II are particularly radical, but I am suggesting that when this age cohort gets riled and the right issue or issues sets the spark, we've got the spirit and experience to take that struggle to the streets and the halls of Congress. And both our personal interests and our sense of justice are certainly on the line when it comes to the growing attack on Social Security and Medicare…

My prediction: As the number of Boomers nearing or entering retirement soars, and the number anticipating or signing up for Medicare soars over the next few years, we will see massive national campaigns grow around not just saving these programs but expanding and improving them.

For the record, the Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965. Given that the Baby Boom is generally considered to have begun with the end of World War II in September 1945, and given that in 1965 only the states of Georgia, Kentucky, Alaska and Hawaii allowed voting by citizens under the age of 21, it's fair to conclude that the Baby Boomers had nothing to do with the end of Jim Crow.

Life ain't easy for a girl named Suze.

That having been said, I think that in the unlikely event a president decides to take up the flag that President George W. Bush dropped in the heat of battle, Lindorff's prognosis will prove accurate. Leave aside the question of whether there is or ever really was a politically homogeneous Baby Boom generation. There are just too many people receiving benefits for any attempt to reduce Social Security payouts to become popular within the next decade. (Beyond that time, there's an outside chance at best, but if time does not stand still for Suze Rotolo, it will not stand still for anybody.) The only reforms possible are marginal penalties and denials of service inflicted on Americans currently working and not yet eligible for benefits. Raising the retirement age is the obvious lever, and having been born after the dispensation of the fullness of times (i.e., after 1960 and thus ineligible to receive until age 67) I don't see why we can't jack that baby way up.

If the Boomers were capable of the kind of collective thought Lindorff posits, they would realize that Social Security reform is not a threat but a chance for the boomers to get one last bite at the apple. A coherent boomer lobby would move right now to create a "full retirement" age of 70 for anybody born after whatever year everybody agrees was the beginning of Generation X (in my experience that year keeps shifting depending on the age of the statistician). They would also hike the partial-benefits age on current workers, which for some reason has not been increased since my dad's time and is still a sprightly 62. That should be at least 68. Finally, they would create a new post-1960 category for estimating delayed retirement credits—ratcheting the current yearly rate of increase from its current 8 percent back down to the original 5.5 percent created for people born in the 19th century. That would make future payout projections much rosier.

This is politically feasible. My team will never have the votes. It even has an intuitive appeal: God only promised you threescore and ten; after that you're the government's problem.

In fact, that AARP is not leading the charge for Social Security reform tells you that the boomers are not the engagé cohort Lindorff imagines. It tells you also that wishful thinking remains unsurprisingly popular. Once again, the economy is not Family Feud. It doesn't matter what the survey says. It matters what reality is.

Back in the 20th Century, Reason's own Mr. Mxyzptlk immortalized the moment that members of the don't-trust-anybody-over-30 generation began to team up with their parents against their children:

The costs of "national crises" are always paid by the relatively young. Those of us who were born at the tail end of the baby boom or later lived through the shift from the Me Generation to the We Generation, a stroke of luck that inspired maximum cynicism. The sudden reverence for the elderly, as with all things related to the boomers, seems overly self-interested and sanctimonious. Things were fishy enough when the same folks who exclaimed, "Don't trust anyone over 30" in the '60s only a few years later offered up Logan's Run, with its revisionist message that even actor Michael York should be allowed to live into a fourth decade.

Can anyone seriously doubt that—given the boomers' penchant for sucking up all the shrimp and steak in the buffet line of life—they are setting up the rest of us not merely to fork over ever more generous portions of our wages to fund their Social Security and Medicare (hey, why shouldn't face lifts and Viagra prescriptions be covered?) but to deny us any last crumb of joy that comes simply from being younger than them? We have, after all, spent a lifetime being castigated for following in the boomers' footsteps and being found wanting: They were idealistic, we were cynical; they did drugs to open the doors of perception, we did them just to get high; they dodged the draft out of high moral purpose, we simply forgot to register for selective service at the post office; they had the Manson Family, we had the Menendez Brothers; their congressional impeachment hearing was about a president fucking the country over, ours is about blowjobs; and on and on. And now, in a stunning, cunning gambit, they are laying the groundwork to rob us of our last remaining generational birthright: the simple, unfettered pleasure of some day dancing on their graves.

Advertisement

NEXT: Silver Markets Manipulated? Or, Hunt Brothers, Where Are You Now?

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. Generation X: 1964-1979. If you don’t agree with me, then talk to the hand!

    1. I was born in 1961. But I feel no affinity with the boomers, nor do I identify with the Gen Xers defined by the 1980s.

      So I invented a term for those of us on the cusp: Disco Teens. If you had disco at your prom, you’re a Disco Teen.

      1. There does seem to be an overlapping segment of the Boomers and X’ers that experience cultural milestones of both generations. My dad and uncle were born in ’58 and ’65 respectively, but neither seem like the Boomer type, nor do they seem like Generation X’ers. “Disco Teens,” you say….They are truly a “lost generation.”

        1. Broad stereotypes of everyone born during a particular decades long period are rubbish designed to allow for sloppy, nostalgic bullshit and bad journalism.

          1. Yup.

            the Baby Boomers had nothing to do with the end of Jim Crow.

            Or the beginning of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.

    2. Not me, man. I’m Generation Jones.

    3. Birthrates peaked in late 1959-early 1960 and trended down. Boom over.

      Anyone born after that, by any rational definition, is not a Boomer.

      1. Too bad you don’t get to make the definitions.

        1. The birth rate was above the 1945 level until 1964. By any rational definition, that’s when the boom ended.

  2. “If the Boomers were capable of the kind of collective thought Lindorff posits ….

    Well, dude, we aren’t cabable of collective thought, or any other kind. We just want our meds. Our meds and our money.

    1. Well, dude, we aren’t cabable of collective thought, or any other kind. We just want our meds. Our meds and our money.

      Well, you want my money and your viagra… paid for with my money.

  3. The Government Teet: fat and succulant and with an unending flow of milk and honey.

  4. Raising the retirement age is the obvious lever, and having been born after the dispensation of the fullness of times (i.e., after 1960 and thus ineligible to receive until age 67) I don’t see why we can’t jack that baby way up.

    Continuing the 2 months per year trend that went from 1954 to 1960 is the first obvious thing.

    So 1960 is 67 years.
    1966: 68 years
    1969: 68 and 6 months (my YOB)
    1972: 69 years
    1978: 70 years
    1984: 71 years
    1990: 72 years
    1996: 73 years
    2002: 74 years
    2008: 75 years

    etc, no need to post it for the unborn.
    I doubt that dramatic saves things, but its a start. It pushes off the late boomers a few months, at the very least.

    1. Its not even a problem for planning. Earliest affected would be those born in 1961, who are still 17 years away, so what is another 2 months?

      1. Earliest affected would be those born in 1961, who are still 17 years away, so what is another 2 months?

        You try living in Somalia for two months without roads!

        1. LOL At first I read “roids”.

      2. You, I’d settle with ramping up the eligibility age with reduction of input from my generation along with reduction in benefits. If the government were to tell everyone born after 1980 “yeah, we’re not going to pay you”, I’d be fine with that if they took my pay in amount and reduced it to 0 in the next decade.

        1. I would be fine if they set that date at 1968, meaning I never collected.

          1. Politically I think it would be difficult to get many people that have paid in for more than a decade to agree on the phase out, no benefits plan. But something is going to have to be done because this we’re in a hole and still digging furiously.

            1. I definately would have taken that deal and often said so in my early 30’s. Stop taking my money and keep what you collected. Done. Pushing 50, I’m not feeling that generous, although I’m certaintly ok with taking some reductions as part of a total phase out. Bitches owe me some of that money back though.

        2. No worries. It’s clear to me when I read articles like this, the author has no real concept of the extent of the problem. The money’s gone NOW. That’s right…the trust fund is a myth. If you don’t believe me, read the SS/Medicare Trustees Report. The reason that AARP is not lobbying for SS reform is because SS is not the problem – Medicare is. Think you’d miss your SS check? Trying to get a triple bypass and all the accompanying rehab for less than six figures. The Boomers may have voting power, but 100% of 0 is still 0.

  5. Off Topic: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/201…..pting.html REASON RESPOND PLZ!!!

    1. c’mon guys, help a brother out.

    2. Nor are state and local government pension funds broke. They’re underfunded, in large measure because ? like the investments held in 401(k) plans by American private-sector employees ? they sunk along with the entire stock market during the Great Recession of 2007-2009.

      Been there, done that. The standard talking point of every goddamn lefty commentator is that “the system isn’t broke, it just requires some fixing”.

  6. Here is a fun fact: If you are born on the first of the month, you are considered to be born the previous month for SS purposes.

    Those who have done much programming know what happened, some programmer made a fence post error and instead of correcting the bug, they encoded it.

    1. “That’s a feature, not a bug!”

    2. Well with this razor thin budget, how do you expect to pay programmers to go back and fix these things?

  7. >>Can anyone seriously doubt that — given the boomers’ penchant for sucking up all the shrimp and steak in the buffet line of life — they are setting up the rest of us not merely to fork over ever more generous portions of our wages to fund their Social Security and Medicare.

    Social Security and Medicare – that’s that shrimp and steak that we are standing in line for and we haven’t even, practically speaking, started “sucking it up”. You see, son, we bought a buffet ticket at the requisite price and dutifully stood in line, and though we’re happy to not overload our plates with the ol’ surf ‘n turf so there’ll be some for the second sitting, you can damn betcha we’re going to dine.

    1. No buffet ticket was bought.

      The guy selling the tickets was a fraud, none of the money went into the buffet fund.

      1. The money went to pay for the guy in front of him in line, just like the guy behind him paid for his meal. The problem is there aren’t enough folks behind that guy behind him to keep the trough stocked.

        Ponzi Buffet might be a better term.

        1. That would be a great ’80s cover band!

          Ponzi Buffet

      2. >>”No buffet ticket was bought.
        The guy selling the tickets was a fraud, none of the money went into the buffet fund.”

        Your first sentence is incorrect. Your second one is spot on.

        1. No, the first sentence is correct. You bought something called a buffet ticket, but it wasnt.

          No buffet tickets were sold.

          That sentence is absolutely correct.

          1. What sophistic nonsense.

          2. No one bought anything. We’re forced to give it up.

            1. Give what up? – “no one bought anything”.

              Fact is we did buy something and we will indeed have to give some of it up.

    2. You and your parents refused to reform social security back when it would have been so much easier. (I’m talking the laughter that greeted Barry Goldwater’s tepid reform proposals and every attempt since.)
      I don’t see why the AARP has not gotten behind reforms that would raise the retirement age for those age 45 and lower. I guess they don’t care at all for social justice and want inter-generational warfare.

      1. The AARP is afraid to make any controversial moves so soon after driving so many of its dues-payers away by supporting Obama’s death panels.

    3. But all that shrimp and sirloin isn’t killing you guys fast enough, so you’re using up your SS contributions quickly and then spending years on my dime. That’s the problem.

      Please toss some butter pats on the steak–get those arteries cloggin quicker.

      1. Saturated fat does not clog arteries.

    4. You see, son, we bought a buffet ticket at the requisite price and dutifully stood in line, and though we’re happy to not overload our plates with the ol’ surf ‘n turf so there’ll be some for the second sitting, you can damn betcha we’re going to dine.

      Sure, as long as you get kicked out of the buffet line when you’ve eaten the equivalent of what you put into it.

      From where I stand, most of you are one bran muffin over budget.

      1. Seems reasonable, doesn’t it – but for the fact that what we paid for was “all you ‘can’ eat”. You want to change the rules, do it to the guys who haven’t entered the stream. (metaphor OD alert!)

        1. I’d be comfortable pulling the carpet out from under you, wrapping you in it and rolling it out the door and then closing down the buffet entirely. All I need is a majority or complete economic collapse. I’m ok with either one.

          1. That’s cool. Good luck on the majority, BTW – there are 70 million Baby Boomers and, unlike their progeny, most of them vote.

            1. there are 70 million Baby Boomers and, unlike their progeny, most of them vote.

              We know, we’ve got the political system to prove it.

              1. Yep, one man, one vote. Seems like a pretty reasonable system, no?

          2. You may have both.

        2. the fact that what we paid for was “all you ‘can’ eat”.

          How’s that? You may have been sold “all you can eat”, but you paid for the folks in front of you (as pointed out above).

        3. Seems reasonable, doesn’t it – but for the fact that what we paid for was “all you ‘can’ eat”. You want to change the rules, do it to the guys who haven’t entered the stream

          It doesn’t matter a bit what you paid for.

          The money’s gone. It doesn’t exist.

          And if you think “I PAID INTO THIS, I’M ENTITLED TO IT, FUCK YOU IT’S MINE!!” the small case of Flemming vs. Nestor might open your eyes.

    5. You see, son, we bought a buffet ticket at the requisite price and dutifully stood in line, and though we’re happy to not overload our plates with the ol’ surf ‘n turf so there’ll be some for the second sitting, you can damn betcha we’re going to dine.

      You’re not going to be dining on anything other than your own sense of self-satisfaction.

      The money’s gone, and the Supreme Court has said you aren’t entitled to a dime of it anyway, no matter how much you’ve paid into the system.

      What are you going to do–force the system to cater to your needs? You’ve got two whole generations that have seen what the baby boomers have wrought over the last 40 years–a social dysfunction of broken homes, overscaled communities, massive debt both personal and institutional–and are now watching the same boomers raise their arms aghast at the failure of our leaders to fix the problems to which the boomers gave hideous birth. Do you really think that you’ll be met with any sort of sympathy as your hips start to break with increasing frequency?

      Ironically, the most navel-gazing generation in America’s history will never examine their legacy with any self-awareness, whining to the end about the lack of enthusiasm with which their demands are met.

      1. One of the most defining characteristic of the boomers is their assault on all fronts on the idea of personal responsibility. I am continually amazed at work at how hard it is to get a boomer to ever admit that they have made a mistake. Sometimes it really hampers efforts to fix problems.

  8. it’s fair to conclude that the Baby Boomers had nothing to do with the end of Jim Crow.

    Can’t be repeated often enough, since the Boomers love to trot out this myth to shore up their moral cred.

    Subtract that, what Lindorff is boasting about here is the ability of the Boomers to to to the mattresses to advance their self-interest. They aren’t called the Me Generation for nothing, you know.

    1. Come now. Everyone knows boomers were whining to their parents to change the Jim Crow laws. Right?

      1. “I’d like to help you son but you’re too young to vote”

      2. What no shout-out for ending the Vietnam War?

        1. That’s why we loves tricky Dick.

        2. Considering how long the war went on, I’d chalk up that as big bucket of failure. Given this, I guess it’s hardly a shock that Afghanistan and Iraq have been conducted under the aegis of baby boomer presidents.

  9. fire up Carousel on the people with the richest government pension payouts until budget equilibrium is reached.

  10. There are just too many people receiving benefits for any attempt to reduce Social Security payouts to become popular within the next decade.

    Prostate exams aren’t popular with the old farts who need them, but they happen anyway out of grim necessity. The stubborn fact that governments everywhere are running out of money will force the issue pretty soon.

    Having been raised by totalitarian boomers who smugly fancied themselves hip, easygoing parents, I take schadenfreude in the perversely beautiful storm that is gathering.

    1. In contrast, I’d say my boomer parents have already prepared for the coming SS amargeddon and paln to contribute the overbalance of there payout/take in to a fund for my siblings and I to use, realizing that we’ll never see our inputs ever return from the same system.

  11. We will smash the gerontocracy.

    1. It’ll break a hip before we ever get to it.

      1. 🙂 I suspect that a maximum voting age may be the only way to deal with it.

  12. IIRC, everyone of the Chicago Seven/Eight were born before Pearl Harbor–which pretty much reflects the generation of protest from the ’60s, whether Jim Crow or the military draft. So not only are the Boomers not monolithic, they’re not the “60s protesters” they often claim.

  13. What “big Social Security paydays” are we talking about? $18K?

    1. Multiply by a “shitload” of boomers.

      1. Several Shitloads, actually, at least if you’re talking Metric Shitloads. Nobody uses the Imperial Shitload any more, in any scholarly literature.

      2. Even one baby boomer is a shitload – or at least a load of shit.

  14. You’re going to lose some money either way; either the old folks suck us dry in taxes, or you cut them off and they move back in with you (and balk at the idea of paying rent; “I gave birth to you, you ingrate!”). Pick your poison.

    1. 1. Old folks move in.
      2. Purchase smothering pillow.
      3. ????
      4. Profit!

      1. All hail smoking!

    2. Soylent Green!!!!

      “It takes all kinds of critters to make Farmer Vincent’s Fritters!”

    3. You’re going to lose some money either way; either the old folks suck us dry in taxes, or you cut them off and they move back in with you (and balk at the idea of paying rent; “I gave birth to you, you ingrate!”).

      You mean traditional, multi-generational households? John Dewey’s ghost is having the faints.

  15. Man, Bob Dylan is/was one ugly sob…

  16. And I wanna kiss whoever wrote this:

    given the boomers’ penchant for sucking up all the shrimp and steak in the buffet line of life

    Put. Down. Those. Crab Legs. Grandpa!

    1. If memory serves me, it was Nick Gillespie.

  17. If the US is okay financially, Social Security will be fine, only requiring some modest tweaks. If the country is in serious financial trouble, Social Security will be more a symptom of the problem than a cause. Medicare is a much, much bigger problem.

    As for raising the retirement age, that makes Social Security even more regressive than it already is. The poor don’t live as long as the rich and collect fewer benefits. The wage cap on the tax hits the poor and middle class more than high earners. Raising the retirement age cuts a few years off the rich and most of the benefit to the poor. Means testing is much less nasty, although I don’t know if means testing will consume its savings (someone has to test the means, after all).

    1. Means tested, changing the pension style, etc I’m fine with if they sunset the damn thing within the next 30 years. Roll all the benefits for poor seniors into Medicare then cap Medicare payouts (hell, give the geezers lump sum amounts to spend on healthcare rather than the current “pay the doctors whatever they want” system). The amount of money saved alone in government jobs will make the new system sustainable even if medicare ends up costing more in outlays.

      1. Lost_In_Translation|3.7.11 @ 3:39PM|#
        …(hell, give the geezers lump sum amounts to spend on healthcare rather than the current “pay the doctors whatever they want” system).

        That should be the “pay the doctors whatever the bureaucrats feel like paying them, which is usually sustantially less then they would be able to bill for the same service in the private sector, while attempting to keep the Medicare reimbursement below the actual expense for the doctor to provide said service” system.

  18. Last week a professor was asked me what generation I’m in, and I had no idea.

    Born in the 80’s, first time I paid attention to politics was the 2000 election, had the internet since jr high…

    Whats that make me?

    1. Generation Y. You have to have had the Internet most of your life to be considered a “Millennial.” (Why they aren’t “Z” is curious.)

      1. The “Generation Whatever” shit was made up by the boomer scum because they were just so proud of their “generation”. While there is a certain validity to cohorts, the “Generation Whatever” shit is pure vanity posturing.

        1. You’re just mad that you’re stuck in Generation Dickbag.

        2. Whatever, dude.

      2. Why they aren’t “Z” is curious.

        I’ve often wondered that myself. The conclusion I came to is that since “Z” is pronounced “zed” in the rest of the English speaking world it would just confuse things more than they already are… or it would simply encourage the “Millennials” to think of themselves as having cool hi-tech/computer game personae.

        1. but “Millennials” was coined by them because they didn’t like it when Generation X dubbed them Generation Y.

      3. Why they aren’t “Z” is curious

        Because “X” was never intended to be the first in a generational march to Z. Such a march would have been stupidly shortsighted (what comes after Z?). In its original iteration, “X” didn’t mean “What comes before Y.”

        1. In Finnish and Swedish, ?, ?, and ? come after Z (in that order). The ? in Finnish is only used in names of Swedish origin, however.

    2. Fuck, you’re younger than my children.

      1. It’s like watching Jesse Eisenberg explain what Ghostbusters is to Abigail Breslin in Zombieland.

        1. I have Zombieland queued up on the DVR, but I haven’t watched it yet.

        2. I realized I was old at age 32 when I had to explain to my millennial sister-in-law that no, KITT is not all all like Herbie.

        3. I started feeling old when I started to hear the music from my high school years on the classic rock station.

          1. ^^^THIS^^^

      2. This is one of the few places on the internet where Im not “old guy”.

        I feel rather youthful at times around here.

        1. Yeah, I expect to be the young one around here, although I don’t expect people to be so surprised that there is someone born more recently than the 70s here.

        2. There one series of commercials where the “old guys” in the office are explaining to the newbies how hard life was before they got some integrated document system.

          One of the ads shows the really old guy “the one who speaks of floppies”. I saw him and thought how fucking young he looked.

          The first 4-function electronic calculators where introduced by TI when I was in high school.

        3. I feel rather youthful at times around here.

          Hanging around for a while, I figure that JsubD is about my age, as is TWC. Warren (DOOM) is older but haven’t seen him for a while.

          The rest of you kids can just get off my lawn!

          … Hobbit

      3. What’s really scary is that there will be people going to bars this year that were born in the 90s.

        1. My daughter turns 21 in about 12 hours! In Canada she could (legally) go to bars 3 yrs ago.

          1. What’s her number?

  19. “Given that the Baby Boom is generally considered to have begun with the end of World War II in September 1945, and given that in 1965 only the states of Georgia, Kentucky, Alaska and Hawaii allowed voting by citizens under the age of 21, it’s fair to conclude that the Baby Boomers had nothing to do with the end of Jim Crow.”

    1. Jim Crow didn’t end at, or because of, the ballot box; in fact, wherever one saw popular votes on the subject, such as with fair housing or school integration, it was usually to uphold Jim Crow.

    2. If you are going to illustrate the term “baby boomer” with Dylan and the Dylan-chick, it should be pointed out that neither was, under the technical sense you use the term, a baby boomer.

    1. You beat me to it. The joker who wrote that statement spawned a first-rate straw man. I don’t recall ever hearing Boomers claiming they ended Jim Crow. Some of them – those who participated in the South in the civil rights movement actions there – tend to be fairly proud of the fact that they helped put an end to institutionalized racial discrimination but even they don’t claim to have ended Jim Crow. What a bullshit notion. And, BTW, the civil rights movement didn’t end with either the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

      1. I don’t recall ever hearing Boomers claiming they ended Jim Crow.

        RTFA, you senile old fart.

        1. I already had, you obtuse impetuous pup.

          My statement stands.

    2. STEVE SMITH VOTE AGAINST JIM CROW! STEVE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY RAPIST!

      1. That’s funny every time!

  20. “Truth-Out” requires earth-shattering hubris to operate thus — especially considering that website exists primarily for lefty spleen-venting of the sort that begins and ends with “Someone out there has money, take it!”

  21. I was born in 83 and I’ll gladly give up everything I put in if you people will quit taking money from me. I want out of Medicare and SS. You can bug my employer for their contribution to keep your pitiful little system going. Enjoy those inflation eaten checks!

    PS

    Your generation is the worst generation ever, except for your parents.

  22. This thread is me all over again.

  23. I’d like to hear more about how those well-organized Boomers fought hard and ended the gross injustice called the War On Drugs.

  24. As good a place as any to trot out my proposed solution to the Medicare and Social Security problem:

    All federal transfer payments (Medicare, SocSec, Medicaid, unemployment comp, you name it) are funded solely out of the Transfer Tax.

    The Transfer Tax is set annually at a rate sufficient to fund that year’s transfer payments. If the rate is set too low, the rate for the next year is set high enough to pay the shortfall.

    The Transfer Tax replaces current SocSec and Medicare payroll taxes. There is no “hidden” employer portion anymore for employers after they raise pay enough to cover the additional tax owed by their employees. That means the employee sees the entire amount of the Transfer Tax on their paystub, and puts them on equal footing with the self-employed (who would also pay the Transfer Tax).

    So: all these entitlements are fully funded, going forward. Budget problem solved.

    The cost of these entitlements is fully transparent to taxpayers. The stage is set for a real discussion about what we can afford for entitlements.

  25. It is the people UNDER 30 we can’t trust, they all voted for Obama.

    FUN FACTS ABOUT QADAFFI.
    http://libertarians4freedom.bl…..about.html

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.