Rand Paul

Nick Gillespie Discusses a Libertarian Future for the GOP on MSNBC's Hardball, Tonight at 7pm ET

|

Chris Matthews
MSNBC

Tonight, so that you don't have to, Reason's Nick Gillespie appears on Hardball with Chris Matthews to discuss the future of the Republican Party. Specifically, can Senator Rand Paul and like-minded colleagues make the GOP more attractive to younger voters with a libertarian-ish message of tolerance and freedom? And can they do so without alienating the grumpy, more authoritarian old guard? Tune in to find out Nick's take on a political balancing act that has implications well beyond one political party.

Advertisement

NEXT: Snowden Clarifies: Not Seeking Amnesity in Exchange for Information

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. Bring a saliva shield, Nick. Mr Tingly pants will spraying all over the studio.

    1. Nick, watch this for some pre-game inspiration:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGUfsfJTX88

      1. I couldn’t go 2 minutes without laughing – what a fucking crazy asshole.

  2. It’s a trap, it’s a trap!

  3. That won’t take long.

  4. I’m pretty sure, if you try, Nick, you can make Matthews cry. I’m actually 100% serious here. You should go for it. I donated to you, I fucking demand it!

    1. ^^This. You can even cancel my t-shirt if you do this.

      1. I will donate AGAIN if you do this.

        IMPROMPTU FUNDRAISER!!!

        1. I’m in.

              1. Double the money if Nick pulls out a tissue and says, “I thought you would need this.”

          1. Where do I sign?

        2. Wait, this isn’t at all like that angry Twitter mob thing, right? Cause I’m against that or something.

          1. I am anti-intervention in the twitter wars. I think it is a good thing for the various faction to wipe themselves out first. Then we can just walk in and take over.

            1. You’re talking about twitter. Why would we want it? It’s the dumping grounds for sad passive-aggressive sentiments, hysterical remonstrations from the illiterati, and banal expressions of pleasure over someone’s dinner.

              Let them keep it. It’s their hell.

  5. Oh, dear.

  6. DVR SET!

  7. It’s a trick. Get an axe.

    1. First you wanna kill me, now you wanna kiss me. Blow.

  8. “Tonight, on Hardball, Chris Matthews goes deep into the heart of an obscure, but growing sect. One that doesn’t believe the government has all the answers. One that believes that government is as much a problem as a solution. Join our host as he goes into the Heart of Darkness.”

    1. They would never phrase it that way. Acknowledging that there are people who think that government can’t solve all problems may induce similar thoughts in MSNBC viewers. More likely they’ll just call Nick an antigovernment radical. Possibly a terrorist, if things go south on the interview.

      1. Mr. Gillespie, why do you want brown babies to die?

    2. Join our host as he goes into the Heart of Darkness.”

      DC….shit…I’m still only in DC.

      1. You’re an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks, to collect a bill

        1. He’s out there operating without any decent regulatory oversight, totally beyond the pale of any ideologically-acceptable human conduct.

  9. You can say whatever you want to Matthews, but he’ll still come out of the interview believing you’re just a racist who steals money from the poor.

    1. He should still make him cry. Stop sabotaging this!

  10. Ask him if he wrote a chapter in his new book about how JFK like to rape 17yr old interns.

    1. Mathews did write a book describing LBJs penchant for hanging out in the shower and saunas as a means of networking when he arrived in DC. Scrubbing with other men several times a day. If that isn’t weird.

      1. Then again, like Lady McBeth, he had a lot of blood stains to scrub out. Even before Vietnam.

  11. I swear to God Nick, do not Godwin this fucker. Do some pushups or something beforehand. Wear the Jacket and do what It says. You are being served up a meatball here and it needs to be hit out of the park.

    1. Fonzie should spank his nut sack repeatedly with an electrical cord just prior to the interview. The correct frame of mind can mean everything.

    2. Yeah, no Godwinning, but if you mention Mathews’ former boss enabling Pol Pot, that would be a winner.

  12. On a related note, I presume there will be a live blog and drinking game. First, a shot if the words “Tea Party” and “darling” are used in the same sentence.

  13. I like seeing Nick Gillespie, but does Chris Matthews have to be there?

  14. Drinking game rules:

    Drink if Matthews brings up SOMALIA!!11!!!1!

    1. Nothing like a failed socialist revolution to prove libertarianism wrong, right?

    2. Drink if Matthews brings up Ron Paul’s newsletters

    3. Drink if Matthews talks about “reasonable” gun control. Bonus if he says “Sandy Hook”.

      1. Speaking of Sandy Hook and Palin Derangement Syndrome:

        Dan Savage fails to read a book because he has the maturity level of a four year old child.

        Good Grief and Great Tits Sitting Down to Read Sarah Palin’s Christmas Book While I Bake Christmas Cookies for My Family

        What was inspiring that anti-gun chatter in Washington in December of 2012? Oh, right: Twenty children and six teachers were shot dead in their classrooms by a deranged asshole with a “powerful gun.” And before the grieving mothers and fathers of Newtown, Connecticut, could put their dead children in the ground, Sarah Palin ran out gun shopping. Buying Todd a gun in the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary was “fun,” Palin writes?and, again, an act of “civil disobedience.” Because gun nuts are a persecuted minority.

        This paragraph about gun shopping in December of 2012?one first grader at Sandy Hook was shot 11 times?ends with Palin bragging about her tits. I’m not kidding.

        Okay, I have to put the book down. I’m five pages into Good Tidings and Great Joy and… Jesus Fucking Christ… I have got to put down this toxic little shitstain of a book. I’m going to go wash my eyes out with hydrogen peroxide. Be right back.

        1. The whole piece is epically funny. It is entirely focused on his emotional reaction to the book. He doesn’t even make it past the introduction! And he is proud of his failure, with the pride that reminds me of a 2 year old who has fingerpainted on the walls with the contents of his diaper presenting his handiwork.

        2. But does Palin offer any reasoned arguments of her own, or is the book one big anecdote? Dan Savage is a political dunce, but I don’t think ol’ Sarah is much better.

          1. Its kind of like watching your two drunk uncles argue about something that neither knows a goddamn thing about. In this case, acting like a normal human being and not a lizard person.

          2. I don’t know. It’s hard to tell what the book is about since Dan Savage couldn’t bring himself to review the book.

            He literally wrote an essay about how he couldn’t read a book because the children at Sandy Hook died.

            For all I know, it could be an awesome book or an awful book. All I know about it comes from Dan Savage’s article about how he utterly failed to read it because the children at Sandy Hook died.

            I should use that as an excuse for not doing my job too.

            1. I thought your excuse for not doing your job was your utter incompetence.

              1. That was before Sandy Hook.

          3. Yeah, but Savage is a special kind of pitiful. The type who needs Sarah Palin to reaffirm their own half baked belief system because she is so low class in their estimation to look down on her alleviates their own arguments. Think about that, they contort social status and the soundness of political argument. That is how stupid the Savages of the world are.

            I never think about Sarah Palin unless she is mentioned by someone else or is in the news. No animosity on my part, but her detractors raise her status way beyond her actual effect on the world.

            1. alleviates — elevates. Damn default to autocorrect — I had it right the first time Firefox developer assholes. Isn’t asm.js just the greatest? Yes, now get off your lazy asses and fix the spell checker!

            2. She’s their Emmanuel Goldstein.

        3. I think the only people that are buying her book are liberals that want to hate-read it. A bunch of people were having a little circle jerk about how fun it would be to order it and read it on my facebook the other day. Does anyone else give a shit about Palin?

      2. “Living Wage” and “Income Inequality” need to be in there.

  15. Where is Festivus post?

    1. Two posts down

      1. OH yeaH so it iS!

  16. Go Gunners!

  17. Apart from his many other personal failings, one of my huge fucking issues with Matthews is that he broadcasts to the planet that he views things from a Marxist perspective and argues that you can raise taxes as much as you want and people will just work harder to make up the difference (I don’t have a link but I watched him say it on his show), and then gets pulls the victim/McCarthyism schtick and gets evasive when called on it.

    This “how dare you call me a Marxist/Communist for advocating the total destruction of capitalism and the abolition of private property, you ratfucking Teabagger” shit really seemed to kick into high gear with Obama’s 2008 lightworking days.

    I can’t decide what’s more annoying, that, or the totally bogus “civility” concern trolling post-Giffords segueing effortlessly into rants about how “Republicans are terrorists and suicide bombers holding guns to the heads of the American people” just after “elections have consequences, deal with it”, or the omnipresent social justice warrior “check your privilege” Oppression Olympics.

    Bah humbug.

    1. I haven’t watched anything on MSNBC since before the 2008 election, do you see how much happier I am? The only pundits I really watch regularly are Maria Bartiromo and Larry Kudlow (a very nice fellow, esp. for an establishment type of Republican).

      1. Some nogoodnik likes to put it on at my two favorite bars/restaurants and I was exposed to it constantly when my brother was rooming with me for a while before grad school. I’m greatly amused by the rapidly plummeting viewership as it swung hard left, though.

        1. Its considered bad practice to have punditry shows in the bars around here. Even the hipster joint with the great beer selection and gaming terminals in the basement avoids them and on purposely so by the management. Think I’ll stop by Thursday. The owner is the guy I bought a Heady Topper off of about a month ago.

    2. Obama’s 2008 lightworking days

      That part of your comment reminded me that, as much as I’ve hated the entirety of Obama’s presidency, that first year of his first term was the most nauseating and obnoxious time in the news cycle I’ve ever seen. Chris Matthews was one of many in the media with tingly body parts at that time.

      One thing I recall fairly clearly: Oprah had announced then that she was going to give up her talk show, and some ditz on NPR thought Michelle Obama would be the only person capable of replacing Oprah. She was just gushing about Frowning Wookiee’s intelligence, charm, glamour…on and on. The giddyfest of that first year…yeesh.

      Similarly, I really dread ex-president Obama weighing in on the issues of the day. He’ll have some stupid glasses and some kind of stupid pseudointellectual beard and he’ll be on TV all the goddamn time. Ugh.

  18. OT: Stop making our lives better and easier through efficiency and progress!

    “Though protesters do take issue with the buses directly because they use the city’s bus stops without paying for the privilege, they’re mostly seen as a prominent symbol of growing inequality in the Bay.”

    You couldn’t make this up if you tried.

    1. Ugh. Lots of people indirectly or directly stating that throwing bricks at people is “effective” or trying to pretend it’s nonviolent (I’m assuming that the same technology that brought soft and harmless concrete sidewalks to George Zimmerman’s neighborhood also brought bricks of the same make to Oakland) and this nonsense:

      I find your view on things depressing. Did you read the article? Probably not. Here’s the main reason for the protests, “Today’s protests centered on low-income tenants evicted from their homes as a result of the area’s housing situation, a situation some blame on the high-income individuals employed by tech companies ? who have been bidding up housing prices in the area.”

      It’s not that they want what they have, they just don’t want to get evicted from their dwelling because tech companies are artificially inflating prices to drive them out to expand their reach in the area. These are elderly, disabled and financially stricken individuals who now find themselves homeless. It’s called Gentrification, look it up.

      I know a few self-loathing Bay Area techies who bang this same drum. It doesn’t stop them from blowing cash on new iPhones (in fact every one I know is a huge Apple zealot), laptops and hundreds of bucks on Steam instead of, say, donating to an organization other than Organizing For America. Or spending 14 hours a day on Facebook ranting about Teathuglikkkans.

      1. artificially inflating prices

        How exactly are they artificially inflating prices? Through fraud or graft? No? Just by buying and fixing up dilapidated properties?

        It’s called supply and demand. Look it up, fuckwit.

        1. He means that the prices and availability weren’t set at gunpoint by the nomenklatura at the People’s Glorious Red Banner Housing Committee.

        2. Some people just don’t understand that what something is worth is what someone else is willing to give you for it.

      2. Wow! Where have I heard this shit before?

        What had been promised to the Jew seemed to be fulfilled: “The Lord your God will bless you, as he has promised. You will lend to many peoples, and borrow from none. You will rule over many peoples, but no one will rule over you.”to to

        The Jew seemed to have achieved his promised paradise, where he did not have to labor, where he did not have to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow. This last phrase shows clearly what the Jew thinks of labor. The millions of our German people’s comrades who were forced into involuntary vacations by the failures of the past system certainly would not have seen their unemployment as a blessing, but rather as a curse. The Jew, however, sees labor as a curse imposed on him, so long as he does not succeed in gaining the power that makes it possible for him to make others work for him so that he can live in paradise, or indolence.

        What has the National Socialist state done? Its measures have defended against the greed and arrogance of a tiny minority of the total population, and worked to protect the German people that has been entrusted to its care from Jewish greed and arrogance.

      3. who now find themselves homeless

        How the fuck does one equate “Can no longer afford to live in a gentrified area” with “homeless”? I’m sorry, but you don’t have a perpetual right to the rent from your first lease. Too fucking bad. Move.

      4. ” tech companies are artificially inflating prices”

        Rent control is what artificially inflates rents in SF and NY. Progs are so clueless it’s very depressing that they’re winning (won)

    2. You couldn’t make this up if you tried.

      I wish you would, though. I wish you’d tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies.

  19. Watch and learn…. Sununu owns fucking Matthews

    1. Did he receive oral pleasure from Matthews like Mr. Obama did….or was that a special occasion?

    2. To be fair, Sununu the Elder could own pretty much anyone. Why he went into politics as opposed to quantum physics is anyone’s guess.

      1. Yes, it was fantastic. I saw it live, after the debates.

    3. Governor, repeating the word “ridiculous” doesn’t make it so.No, Christopher, but it describes a ridiculous situation well enough.

      1. Gorramit.

        Governor, repeating the word “ridiculous” doesn’t make it so.

        No, Christopher, but it describes a ridiculous situation well enough.

  20. Rand Paul has returned to air more grievances

    It includes this Tweet:

    I have a small grievance — with people who think my hair is not real.

    ? Senator Rand Paul (@SenRandPaul) December 23, 2013

    [removed][removed]

    The fact that he is being actually funny probably explains the vitriolic reaction he’s gotten from commenters on Politico, CNN, and Huffington Post.

    1. Wait, they’re reacting negatively to light self-deprecating humor? Oh wait, of course they are. Silly me.

      1. It’s fascinating. All of the negative comments follow 1 of 3 patterns:

        1. Rand Paul is a plagiarist

        2. Rand Paul is a quack doctor who created his own ophthalmology board to avoid (re) certification

        3. Rand Paul is hypocrite: he hates government, and yet he’s a Senator!

        Really, those are the three things they say. Not a word, except from the Rand defenders, about how he’s apparently good friends with Cory Booker and they want to reform mandatory minimums and marijuana policy together.

        1. The more they’re terrified of him, the happier I am. Anything that pushes these scum over the edge is a win.

          1. This is what kills me about the GOP. Rand Paul is a guy who at the very least embodies the principles of what they supposedly suppose to believe in but yet always try to sell him down the river to keep their grubby paws on the taxpayer’s money and look like they are “moderates”.

            If the GOP decides to run Christie the left will paint him as an extremist, even though he is a big government sort of guy. I mean fuck it, no matter ho the GOP runs the left will call them a radical so why not run an actual radical person?

            1. The TEAMS don’t believe in anything. Don’t get so lost in the mindless stupidity of the Democrats to think that the GOP isn’t nearly as dumb. Paul may actually follow through on all the smaller government schtick, and the GOP can’t have none of that. Better someone like Christie who talks the talk but skips all that walking part.

              1. The teams believe in something alright. The accumulation of power and how to get themselves more of that sweet ass taxpayer’s money.

            2. “…no matter ho the GOP runs the left will call them a radical so why not run an actual radical person?”

              Because they might actually win.

              1. Sadness. The GOP could have won in 2012 but they were too chickenshit to ind a nominee that would actually curtail the growth of government.

            3. the GOP stopped espousing any principles long ago. All that matters is keeping the establishment class in office, and they’ll use the nominally conservative media to do that. People like Paul or Cruz or Amash are outliers, possibly worse than Dems since they remind Repubs of their own hypocrisy.

              1. This is a party that considered a 1930s style Social Democrat* who never really changed his tune like Reagan too radically pro free market for them. When he got the nomination they tried to get him to push Gerald Ford on him as some kind of co-president who would really be running the administration. They hate any degree of change. Any.

                * pretty much, like Hayek, political redistributionist who don’t have a knee jerk hatred of capitalism.

                1. they tried to get him to push Gerald Ford on him

        2. I hope they keep pounding on the certification thing… because it will blow up in their faces:

          I took the American Board of Ophthalmology (the largest governing body in ophthalmology) boards in 1995, passed them on my first attempt (as well as three times during residency), and was therefore board-certified under this organization for a decade.

          In 1997, I, along with 200 other young ophthalmologists formed the National Board of Ophthalmology to protest the American Board of Ophthalmology’s decision to grandfather in the older ophthalmologists and not require them to recertify.

          So basically, they think the state recognized board is not rigorous enough…

          1. They do not care. They think that since he created it that its not really abiding to any standards.

        3. Tell me more about this opthalmology board scandal.

        4. 2. Rand Paul is a quack doctor who created his own ophthalmology board to avoid (re) certification

          To me, if that is true, it just makes him a little bit more awesome because it is exactly the sort of thing I would like to pull off.

          1. During the summer months when Congress is in recess Rand Paul will set up free clinic and perform pro bono eye surgeries on low-income patients.

            Rand Paul has literally healed the blind by removing cataracts from the eyes of poor people.

            1. No worries about me. If he were to get the nomination, unless he did something major to fuck it up, it would be the first time since 2000 that I voted for a Republican presidential candidate.

              1. It would be 20+ years to vote for a president in the general election, if Paul got the nod.

      2. It’s because he is creating his own narrative as oppose to letting the Establish GOP and Democrats do it for him. Both sides of the establishment view him as a dangerous candidate so they want to make sure that no one see him as being actually normal.The best way to get people to like you is making fun of yourself. They know this and thus the reason they are bothered.

    2. with people who think my hair is not real.

      would have been better if he said “with people who think my hair is real”

      Still a good show.

  21. Oh crap, my father-in-law watches MSNBC (seriously, I know somebody who watches MSNBC – yesterday there was a long list of “all the great things Obama has done in what the evil ones call his best year”) and we are here for Christmas.

    I might end up seeing, or at least hearing, this.

    1. No wonder MSNBC have such low ratings.

    2. Hand him his grand-daughter, then change the channel. My family shows up tonight. Thankfully, they are staying in a hotel because we all want to like each other at the end of the day Wednesday. Nothing more controversial than whether to watch the Rocky or Dirty Harry marathon will be fought over TV-wise.

      1. My girlfriend’s family are all flaming progressives but they never ever want to get into a debate with me. Which is fine with me by the way. Her younger sister once told me that money doesn’t matter. I would have stayed quiet if it wasn’t for the fact that they are upper class. I looked at her and said of course it doesn’t matter, because you never had to worry about it. It got quiet at the table but it showed them that I am not going to eat shit.

        1. good. Good for you. These people count on those who differ from them being quiet.

      2. Happen to be watching Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry. I was a big fan of Peter Fonda as kid growing up in the 70s.

        1. This movie needs a remake.

  22. Didnt I read a story lately that Matthews was paid around 200k last year by unions?

    He is a fucking clown and a straight up paid shill.

    1. I believe it was Shultz.

      1. You can tell them apart?

        1. I find Chrissy more effeminate. That’s how you tell them apart. Both of them are more effeminate than Maddow.

        2. Rhetorically, not much, but Shultz is so physically repulsive I have the urge to projectile vomit on sight of him in a story.

  23. I know people here don’t like Michelle Bachmann, but she was funny as hell when she asked Matthews on Election Night 2010 if he still had his tingle.

    1. That is funny, even if Milfchelle is warmongering statist.

    2. The fact that Matthews gets so pissy and evasive when it gets brought up is hilarious. Quote him and he’ll tell you to “go to hell” or you’re a “Republican jackass”.

      1. All the better that Chrissy brought it on himself….an on-air mash note to the President.

        Swoooon!

  24. I dunno if I am watching this or not. If I were able to pick someone to go on the Teevee and smack Chrissy Poo around, it wouldn’t be the jacket. I’m really undecided on who it would be. But I’m afraid that Nick will just be too easy on Matthews and then invite him for cocktails after the show.

    Anyway, if Matthews is not rolling around on the floor foaming at the mouth and trying to chew off his own tingly leg by the end of the segment, then I won’t be happy.

    1. Nick has comported himself pretty admirably on Real Time, like when he threatened to stab that fat mayor guy with his pen. If he’s feeling his oats this could be watchable.

      1. Fat Ass Mayor – I’m mayor of the poorest town in America

        Nick – You’re obviously proud of your accomplishments

    2. Anyway, if Matthews is not rolling around on the floor foaming at the mouth and trying to chew off his own tingly leg by the end of the segment, then I won’t be happy.

      Great imagery, there.

      1. What would be even better would be to see Maddow get pissed at him over who loves dear leader most and then both of them rolling around chewing each others leg off, live on air…

    3. But I’m afraid that Nick will just be too easy on Matthews and then invite him for cocktails after the show.

      Anyway, if Matthews is not rolling around on the floor foaming at the mouth and trying to chew off his own tingly leg by the end of the segment, then I won’t be happy.

      Yep. 🙁

    4. Until he actually does something boneheaded (like the gun article taking John Stewart’s hissies seriously) give Nick the love. He is our guy in the fight, after all.

      1. I have got a new love, and his name is Kmele!

      2. You only roast those you love.

      3. No, sorry, fuck that shit. No more cocktails. I’m still irked about that gun article, too. Wondered about the train of thought which led to that offal on my screen in a libertarian publication.

        1. I’m on my third Anchor Big Leaf Maple.

          http://www.anchorbrewing.com/b….._maple_red

          Something about having a buzz makes me feel generous . . . with other people’s good intentions.

          Pretty good hoppy amber, but I don’t taste any maple.

          1. I wonder if that’s the same sweet-added-flavor balance issue with berry beers and either being sickly sweet or no taste.

          2. As I get better at brewing I notice that many of the fruity and spicy flavors that I assumed were additions are actually the result of thoughtful combinations of malt and yeast species that arrive at those taste in the esters produced. I’ve grown to dislike most actual fruit additions if not part of actual fermentation. Dog Fish Head has one brewed with pear juice that is actually good, but the typical product like what Shock Top does with ale and fruit blends, blech!!!

            1. Fermented sugar is awful on its own, btw. I’ve tried doing that once just to see what it is like.

        2. That rant was epic!

          1. Yeah, for some reason I never became aware of Breitbart until fairly late. I don’t agree with him on everything but when he was right he was right, and I’m sad he’s gone, especially so young.

            1. Breitbart was what I see a lot of people claiming Hitchens to have been (which I never saw), someone very smart and witty who groked the mentality of those on the other side and mocked them mercilessly while also shutting down their bullshit with facts.

              1. Hitchens had the gall to take Islamists at their word and point out that Islam is not a race and criticism of it thusly not racism, which enraged the people who are eternally vigilant in the “war on women” in the US but engage in multicultural nihilism and handwavery when the same moral standard is applied to other humans who are critical of the US.

  25. I liked when Gillespie asked Maher/Stewart (I can’t tell them apart) to name one Republican he could say something good about in order to show that they he isn’t a partisan. He couldn’t do it, and still insisted he isn’t a partisan Democrat, just that all Republicans are nuts.

    So I hope Gillespie asks Tingly if he can name one bad/negative thing about Obama. And when Matthews says something about messaging, Gillespie rips him apart.

    1. It was Rachel Maddow but I can see how you could confuse them all.

      1. It was Maher, and then later the same question to Maddow.

        Maher, went all in on the sports bar with “Every Republican is insane”. Maddow went him one better with “How dare you assume I’m a fluffer for Team Blue”.

  26. Dear lord I can’t believe I am subjecting myself to this drivel. You better be good tonight Nick.

    Sad Mathews isn’t going to be on. I’m sure he was terrified. Generally these shows do not allow people more intelligent than the host to go on the program. A big reason why Mathew’s show is the Special Olympics of journalism.

  27. It’s not clear to me, is Chris Matthews evil or just a total dimwit? And, frankly, if you want an actually, truly brilliant person on these shows who will actually, materially challenge the conceits of these jackasses, you need to get Tom Woods on these shows. I have been trying to get Tom Woods on Bill Maher for years.

  28. Ladies & Gents, put your hands together for MC Chris Mathews- The Vanilla Leg-Thrilla!

  29. Well now that makes perfect sense.

    http://www.AnonIs.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.