jerkspot

a little late but eh. trains have no internet. positive police green canada circle allyway poison matching nah ch 0 has photo threads. keep it where it is i think.

im in the midst on moving back to toronto so tomorow on the train they shall be uploaded. i dont think i got the quota though.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23431560-421,00.html China wants army to oversee torch relay in Australia CHINA wants its army to oversee the Australian leg of the Olympic torch relay to ensure protests do not mar the event. The move, which has been rebuffed by the Australian Federal Police, comes as Beijing reels from an embarrassing relay launch in Athens when human rights activists hijacked the event. China has responded by radically cutting back relay legs in cities where it expects more trouble, including San Francisco and Paris. It is understood Beijing has deep concerns that protesters will turn the Canberra leg of the relay on April 24 into another public relations disaster. The Canberra leg will feature several Australian Olympic superstars including Ian Thorpe, Jodie Henry, Petria Thomas, Marjorie Jackson-Nelson and Ron Clarke. "We have explained to the Chinese Embassy that people have a democratic right in Australia to stage demonstrations and people are free to demonstrate when the torch does arrive but we would hope that demonstrations are peaceful and won't disrupt the relay in any way," AOC spokesman Mike Tancred said. Boycott threat Meanwhile, France overnight threatened to boycott the Games' opening ceremony. French President Nicolas Sarkozy said a boycott of the ceremony was possible over China's crackdown in Tibet, though leaders of other major powers vowed to attend. The White House said US President George W Bush still planned to be present for the August 8 opening of Olympics, and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's office said he would be there for the closing ceremony on August 24. Australia has ruled out boycotting the Olympics. But Mr Sarkozy spoke out amid growing political calls for stronger action against the deadly crackdown on anti-Chinese protests in Tibet. Mr Sarkozy said "all options are open" regarding a boycott and appealed to the "sense of responsibility" of China's leaders over the unrest. Growing pressure In Britain, the country's Foreign Office reproached China for its handling of Tibet and its use of torture, according to Associated Press. In its annual human right report, the Foreign Office said China had made little progress towards a peaceful settlement in Tibet and accused Beijing of human rights violations there and harassing people for their religious beliefs. And China also came under pressure at a United Nations' human rights forum to ease its clampdown on Tibet by lifting curbs on movement and information and not using force in the restive Himalayan region. The European Union, in a speech to the UN Human Rights Council, urged Beijing to refrain from force against a wave of Tibetan protests that began on March 10 - the 49th anniversary of a failed uprising against Chinese rule - and led to riots. China, a permanent member of the UN Security Council whose economic clout makes it a strategic ally for both rich and poor countries, rarely faces direct criticism at the United Nations. Also note that a month back the feberal tresurer stated that australia will not feel the pressure of the falling US ecomomy because china is so invested in australia. great sign. Do China really have the worlds balls that firmly in a vice grip that they think they can go into other countrys and beat their demonstrators? Will anything come of the protests around the world or will the olympics go ahead without incedent?

Why Ron Paul Scares the GOP http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1724358,00.html?cnn=yes

bump due to getting some today.

the thing that gets me is that 61% of the subprime borrowers had credit ratings high enough to receive normal loans but instead they recieved the subprime. now i dont know how this shit was sold the the borrower but either millions of americans dont know anything about personal finance/too stupid to realise what the fuk is happening or they where lied to.

Do not ever fuk with bush. another great/fuked peice by greg palast. The $200 billion bail-out for predator banks and Spitzer charges are intimately linked By Greg Palast Reporting for Air America Radio’s Clout Listen to Palast on Clout at http://www.GregPalast.com While New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was paying an ‘escort’ $4,300 in a hotel room in Washington, just down the road, George Bush’s new Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Ben Bernanke, was secretly handing over $200 billion in a tryst with mortgage bank industry speculators. Both acts were wanton, wicked and lewd. But there’s a BIG difference. The Governor was using his own checkbook. Bush’s man Bernanke was using ours. This week, Bernanke’s Fed, for the first time in its history, loaned a selected coterie of banks one-fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks’ mortgage-backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye-popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought two million families to the brink of foreclosure. Up until Wednesday, there was one single, lonely politician who stood in the way of this creepy little assignation at the bankers’ bordello: Eliot Spitzer. Who are they kidding? Spitzer’s lynching and the bankers’ enriching are intimately tied. How? Follow the money. The press has swallowed Wall Street’s line that millions of US families are about to lose their homes because they bought homes they couldn’t afford or took loans too big for their wallets. Ba-LON-ey. That’s blaming the victim. Here’s what happened. Since the Bush regime came to power, a new species of loan became the norm, the ‘sub-prime’ mortgage and it’s variants including loans with teeny “introductory” interest rates. From out of nowhere, a company called ‘Countrywide’ became America’s top mortgage lender, accounting for one in five home loans, a large chuck of these ‘sub-prime.’ Here’s how it worked: The Grinning Family, with US average household income, gets a $200,000 mortgage at 4% for two years. Their $955 a month payment is 25% of their income. No problem. Their banker promises them a new mortgage, again at the cheap rate, in two years. But in two years, the promise ain’t worth a can of spam and the Grinnings are told to scram - because their house is now worth less than the mortgage. Now, the mortgage hits 9% or $1,609 plus fees to recover the “discount” they had for two years. Suddenly, payments equal 42% to 50% of pre-tax income. Grinnings move into their Toyota. Now, what kind of American is ‘sub-prime.’ Guess. No peeking. Here’s a hint: 73% of HIGH INCOME Black and Hispanic borrowers were given sub-prime loans versus 17% of similar-income Whites. Dark-skinned borrowers aren’t stupid – they had no choice. They were ‘steered’ as it’s called in the mortgage sharking business. ‘Steering,’ sub-prime loans with usurious kickers, fake inducements to over-borrow, called ‘fraudulent conveyance’ or ‘predatory lending’ under US law, were almost completely forbidden in the olden days (Clinton Administration and earlier) by federal regulators and state laws as nothing more than fancy loan-sharking. But when the Bush regime took over, Countrywide and its banking brethren were told to party hardy – it was OK now to steer’m, fake’m, charge’m and take’m. But there was this annoying party-pooper. The Attorney General of New York, Eliot Spitzer, who sued these guys to a fare-thee-well. Or tried to. Instead of regulating the banks that had run amok, Bush’s regulators went on the warpath against Spitzer and states attempting to stop predatory practices. Making an unprecedented use of the legal power of “federal pre-emption,” Bush-bots ordered the states to NOT enforce their consumer protection laws. Indeed, the feds actually filed a lawsuit to block Spitzer’s investigation of ugly racial mortgage steering. Bush’s banking buddies were especially steamed that Spitzer hammered bank practices across the nation using New York State laws. Spitzer not only took on Countrywide, he took on their predatory enablers in the investment banking community. Behind Countrywide was the Mother Shark, its funder and now owner, Bank of America. Others joined the sharkfest: Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup’s Citibank made mortgage usury their major profit centers. They did this through a bit of financial legerdemain called “securitization.” What that means is that they took a bunch of junk mortgages, like the Grinnings, loans about to go down the toilet and re-packaged them into “tranches” of bonds which were stamped “AAA” - top grade - by bond rating agencies. These gold-painted turds were sold as sparkling safe investments to US school district pension funds and town governments in Finland (really). When the housing bubble burst and the paint flaked off, investors were left with the poop and the bankers were left with bonuses. Countrywide’s top man, Angelo Mozilo, will ‘earn’ a $77 million buy-out bonus this year on top of the $656 million - over half a billion dollars – he pulled in from 1998 through 2007. But there were rumblings that the party would soon be over. Angry regulators, burned investors and the weight of millions of homes about to be boarded up were causing the sharks to sink. Countrywide’s stock was down 50%, and Citigroup was off 38%, not pleasing to the Gulf sheiks who now control its biggest share blocks. Then, on Wednesday of this week, the unthinkable happened. Carlyle Capital went bankrupt. Who? That’s Carlyle as in Carlyle Group. James Baker, Senior Counsel. Notable partners, former and past: George Bush, the Bin Laden family and more dictators, potentates, pirates and presidents than you can count. The Fed had to act. Bernanke opened the vault and dumped $200 billion on the poor little suffering bankers. They got the public treasure – and got to keep the Grinning’s house. There was no ‘quid’ of a foreclosure moratorium for the ‘pro quo’ of public bail-out. Not one family was saved – but not one banker was left behind. Every mortgage sharking operation shot up in value. Mozilo’s Countrywide stock rose 17% in one day. The Citi sheiks saw their company’s stock rise $10 billion in an afternoon. And that very same day the bail-out was decided – what a coinkydink! – the man called, ‘The Sheriff of Wall Street’ was cuffed. Spitzer was silenced. Do I believe the banks called Justice and said, “Take him down today!” Naw, that’s not how the system works. But the big players knew that unless Spitzer was taken out, he would create enough ruckus to spoil the party. Headlines in the financial press – one was “Wall Street Declares War on Spitzer” - made clear to Bush’s enforcers at Justice who their number one target should be. And it wasn’t Bin Laden. It was the night of February 13 when Spitzer made the bone-headed choice to order take-out in his Washington Hotel room. He had just finished signing these words for the Washington Post about predatory loans: “Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which he federal government was turning a blind eye.” Bush, said Spitzer right in the headline, was the “Predator Lenders’ Partner in Crime.” The President, said Spitzer, was a fugitive from justice. And Spitzer was in Washington to launch a campaign to take on the Bush regime and the biggest financial powers on the planet. Spitzer wrote, “When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners the Bush administration will not be judged favorably.” But now, the Administration can rest assured that this love story – of Bush and his bankers - will not be told by history at all – now that the Sheriff of Wall Street has fallen on his own gun. A note on “Prosecutorial Indiscretion.” Back in the day when I was an investigator of racketeers for government, the federal prosecutor I was assisting was deciding whether to launch a case based on his negotiations for airtime with 60 Minutes. I’m not allowed to tell you the prosecutor’s name, but I want to mention he was recently seen shouting, “Florida is Rudi country! Florida is Rudi country!” Not all crimes lead to federal bust or even public exposure. It’s up to something called “prosecutorial discretion.” Funny thing, this ‘discretion.’ For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him. Naming and shaming and ruining Spitzer – rarely done in these cases - was made at the ‘discretion’ of Bush’s Justice Department. Or maybe we should say, 'indiscretion.'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics#Nazi_Germany so you are laughing at calming oil. why? i dont know if the shit works and i would probably never use it but why is it so crazy that this not for profit organisation sells alternative medicines. they are opposed to prescription drugs. that line is pretty misleading but that is the way it will go. passing this law is the first step. its actually funny what some of your guys wont 'buy' into. just reseach the topic a little more before critisizing.

no matter how many records you sell in the rap game you will still be getting ass raped by a white guy.

there are very few people that actually need antidepressants. most poeple just cannot deal with life so they get told to medicate. the fuked thing is that they have no idea what causes depression and otehr mental diseases but they sure as hell know how to 'cure' it.

man fuk those slimy wogs. they are always they most grease ridden aggressive fuks out. but im fairly certian that if this was done in 99' that shit would have been changed by now. btw australia should have won the world cup. damm diving wogs.

i bet they had all white girl and two black girls and 1 has an STD so they concluded that nearly 50% all american americans has an STD. but i still dont doubt that ALOT of girls are infected. but fuk thats like being afraid of being hit by a bus. who cares, if it happens it happens.

The supporters of The MOTHERS Act have been engaging for the past few years in an aggressive attempt to pass an incredibly broad federal law which will transform the U.S. market for “antidepressant” or “antipsychotic” drugs from a voluntary pool of patients who are encouraged by commercials to seek help from their doctors, to a government-sponsored screening program to select patients who are deemed to need “antidepressant” or “antipsychotic” drugs from among the female childbearing-age population. These promoters of the bill have had vast resources and ample time to obtain support and backing from the legislators they have influenced. The bill has passed the U.S. House, and needs approval from the Senate, final agreement from the House if any changes are made, and a signature from President Bush. This could happen in a matter of days or weeks. The timing of the impending vote on this bill in the U.S. Senate is highly ironic in light of the tremendous amount of negative news we have seen on antidepressants and antipsychotics over the past several months. It is especially shocking to see it being promoted at a time when our society is being terrified by frequent shootings and murder-suicides which have been preceded by the perpetrator’s use and sometimes improper discontinuation of antidepressant drugs, and in the wake of several notable celebrities’ deaths which were the result of prescription drug toxicity. The evidence against these drugs is frightening, and the reality is that, if The MOTHERS Act is passed, those who are the most innocent and vulnerable and in need of protection FROM these drugs will instead be put ON these drugs, and placed in serious danger from all of the negative drug effects - including spontaneous abortion, a tenfold increased risk of psychosis for postpartum women, birth defects, suicide, and homicide (YES, THIS IS A LISTED ANTIDEPRESSANT SIDE EFFECT). The bill creates funding for development of new drugs at taxpayers’ expense. Doctors will be under greater pressure to prescribe drugs to pregnant and postpartum women due to federal law which would ensure the promotion of earlier “detection” and “treatment.” Despite the fact that the law admits that the causes of depression or psychosis can vary between many life situations and social realities, and perhaps some unknown biological factors, and the manufacturers’ own research (kept hidden for years but recently revealed) shows that antidepressants have no more benefit than a sugar pill, the bill endorses drugs and hospitalization as essential and necessary treatment options. Many women who seek treatment or reach out for help under this proposed legislation would be under the watchful eyes of the government rather than simply under the care and guidance of their doctors or counselors. The potential for creating violence, death, and destroying families through the administration of drugs combined with possible involvement of police, CPS, and the courts, as well as the invasions of privacy and individual freedoms that this bill would ensure, must not be accepted. Since we first issued our press release opposing S. 1375, The MOTHERS Act on February 11, thousands of people have been made aware of this bill, which at one time flew way under the public radar. Many people have come forward for the first time with sad stories of personal harm caused by the drugs, while a few others have, unfortunately, gone on to continue their support for a bill that threatens to bring about a dire and dangerous situation, sacrificing life, family, children, motherhood, freedom, and our future. Some people pushing for the bill have taken notice of our efforts, and in response simply told the public and the media that The MOTHERS Act is mainly about “education.” That sounds so innocuous and harmless that it’s nearly impossible for most people to disagree with the bill if they have not read its contents. But even if that were the true purpose, or if the Senate were to rewrite the bill and remove most of the negative wording, leaving ONLY education as its goal, let us consider this idea for a moment - what is the impact of an education or awareness campaign promoting certain psychiatric labels? In a 1996 study cited by Dr. Grace Jackson in her book, Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs, researchers discovered that an awareness campaign in the UK called “Defeat Depression” resulted in a significant increase in prescriptions for antidepressants, a change in physician practices of increased willingness to prescribe, and a large increase in agreement from the public that antidepressant drugs are effective and should be given to patients. Furthermore, to summarize from a follow-up study in 2001, researchers concluded that since there were still so many people who favored alternative treatments such as yoga, meditation and natural remedies over antidepressants, “further efforts to improve public knowledge about pharmacotherapy of mental disorders [were] needed.” Would passing The MOTHERS Act in effect counter the ideas of those who have wised up to the drug companies, by creating a sense of legitimacy through governmental drug endorsements? By promoting earlier detection and treatment of postpartum depression or psychosis, or depression in pregnancy, it makes sense that we would see the numbers of prescriptions for antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs significantly increase in pregnant and postpartum women. This would be a boon to the drug industry, which has had to deal with the potential for decreasing sales since the FDA issued black box warnings on SSRIs for doubling the risk of suicide in 2004, and black box warnings on “antipsychotic” drugs for doubling suicides just a few weeks ago. Eli Lilly received a “Not Approvable” letter for their new injectable Zyprexa application several days ago. Also, a recent analysis of all studies submitted to the FDA prior to approval of many antidepressant drugs showed that the drugs overall were no more effective than placebo, but that most of the studies in which antidepressants did worse than placebo were never made public, or the results were misreported. With the truth stacked against the drugs and against this bill, we have no option other than to campaign vigorously against the passage of The MOTHERS Act. There are many steps you can take right now to help ensure its defeat and safeguard our women, unborn babies, and the innocent bystanders whose paths sometimes cross people who commit crimes during altered states while under the influence of prescription drugs. First, sign our petition against the MOTHERS Act http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-the-dangerous-and-invasive-mothers-act Next, contact the U.S. Senate and demand that they consider the truth and stop this bill dead in its tracks. For phone and fax numbers for the Senate please go to http://uniteforlife.org/senatecontactlist.htm http://www.drugawareness.org/home.html http://www.cchr.org why in the fuk anyone would still be taking anti-depressants or giving them to your child is beyond me. now allowing the government to decide who should be on them is way past fuked.

make that april 1st. work is making me lose my nut.

im not there now but home is the one of the most isolated citys on earth so ive got no issues. i think if i was american i would be outta there way too fast. if any country is going to get fuked its going to be the US. i doubt lube will be involved either. new zealand is a good option. does anyone have a bailout pack ready? what are your essentials? cash, weapons, first aid,

NEW LIST 1) The color green 2) A circle 3) Smoke 4) Politics/Election ect 5) A sunrise 6) Asia 7) Matching 8) Police 9) Church/Temple/Place of Worship 10) Allyway 11) Something positive 12) Your poison 13) A Room With a view Bonus Oh Canada, Aye Deadline March 8th Best 8 Maybe some of your slack cunts will show us what ya got this round.

i caught the end of last summer and it is unreal. i dunno about during winter though. i prefer snow over rain.

they are reporting that Ivan Rios was killed by his own men for the reward money. hahahahhaha

borrowed from gregpalast.com Do you believe this? This past weekend, Colombia invaded Ecuador, killed a guerrilla chief in the jungle, opened his laptop – and what did the Colombians find? A message to Hugo Chavez that he sent the FARC guerrillas $300 million – which they’re using to obtain uranium to make a dirty bomb! That’s what George Bush tells us. And he got that from his buddy, the strange right-wing President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe. So: After the fact, Colombia justifies its attempt to provoke a border war as a way to stop the threat of WMDs! Uh, where have we heard that before? The US press snorted up this line about Chavez’ $300 million to “terrorists” quicker than the young Bush inhaling Colombia’s powdered export. What the US press did not do is look at the evidence, the email in the magic laptop. (Presumably, the FARC leader’s last words were, “Listen, my password is ….”) I read them. (You can read them here) While you can read it all in español, here is, in translation, the one and only mention of the alleged $300 million from Chavez: “… With relation to the 300, which from now on we will call “dossier,” efforts are now going forward at the instructions of the boss to the cojo [slang term for ‘cripple’], which I will explain in a separate note. Let’s call the boss Ángel, and the cripple Ernesto.” Got that? Where is Hugo? Where’s 300 million? And 300 what? Indeed, in context, the note is all about the hostage exchange with the FARC that Chavez was working on at the time (December 23, 2007) at the request of the Colombian government. Indeed, the entire remainder of the email is all about the mechanism of the hostage exchange. Here’s the next line: “To receive the three freed ones, Chavez proposes three options: Plan A. Do it to via of a ‘humanitarian caravan’; one that will involve Venezuela, France, the Vatican[?], Switzerland, European Union, democrats [civil society], Argentina, Red Cross, etc.” As to the 300, I must note that the FARC’s previous prisoner exchange involved 300 prisoners. Is that what the ‘300’ refers to? ¿Quien sabe? Unlike Uribe, Bush and the US press, I won’t guess or make up a phastasmogoric story about Chavez mailing checks to the jungle. To bolster their case, the Colombians claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that the mysterious “Angel” is the code name for Chavez. But in the memo, Chavez goes by the code name … Chavez. Well, so what? This is what . . . . Colombia’s invasion into Ecuador is a rank violation of international law, condemned by every single Latin member of the Organization of American States. But George Bush just loved it. He called Uribe to back Colombia, against, “the continuing assault by narco-terrorists as well as the provocative maneuvers by the regime in Venezuela.” Well, our President may have gotten the facts ass-backward, but Bush knows what he’s doing: shoring up his last, faltering ally in South America, Uribe, a desperate man in deep political trouble. Uribe claims he is going to bring charges against Chavez before the International Criminal Court. If Uribe goes there in person, I suggest he take a toothbrush: it was just discovered that right-wing death squads held murder-planning sessions at Uribe’s ranch. Uribe’s associates have been called before the nation’s Supreme Court and may face prison. In other words, it’s a good time for a desperate Uribe to use that old politico’s wheeze, the threat of war, to drown out accusations of his own criminality. Furthermore, Uribe’s attack literally killed negotiations with FARC by killing FARC’s negotiator, Raul Reyes. Reyes was in talks with both Ecuador and Chavez about another prisoner exchange. Uribe authorized the negotiations. However, Uribe knew, should those talks have succeeded in obtaining the release of those kidnapped by the FARC, credit would have been heaped on Ecuador and Chavez, and discredit heaped on Uribe. Luckily for a hemisphere on the verge of flames, the President of Ecuador, Raphael Correa, is one of the most level-headed, thoughtful men I’ve ever encountered. Correa is now flying from Quito to Brazilia to Caracas to keep the region from blowing sky high. While moving troops to his border – no chief of state can permit foreign tanks on their sovereign soil – Correa also refuses sanctuary to the FARC . Indeed, Ecuador has routed out 47 FARC bases, a better track record than Colombia’s own, corrupt military. For his cool, peaceable handling of the crisis, I will forgive Correa for apologizing for his calling Bush, “a dimwitted President who has done great damage to his country and the world.” (Watch an excerpt of my interview with Correa here.) Amateur Hour in Blue We can trust Correa to keep the peace South of the Border. But can we trust our Presidents-to-be? The current man in the Oval Office, George Bush, simply can’t help himself: an outlaw invasion by a right-wing death-squad promoter is just fine with him. But guess who couldn’t wait to parrot the Bush line? Hillary Clinton, still explaining that her vote to invade Iraq was not a vote to invade Iraq, issued a statement nearly identical to Bush’s, blessing the invasion of Ecuador as Colombia’s “right to defend itself.” And she added, “Hugo Chávez must stop these provoking actions.” Huh? I assumed that Obama wouldn’t jump on this landmine – especially after he was blasted as a foreign policy amateur for suggesting he would invade across Pakistan’s border to hunt terrorists. It’s embarrassing that Barack repeated Hillary’s line nearly verbatim, announcing, “the Colombian government has every right to defend itself.” (I’m sure Hillary’s position wasn’t influenced by the loan of a campaign jet to her by Frank Giustra. Giustra has given over a hundred million dollars to Bill Clinton projects. Last year, Bill introduced Giustra to Colombia’s Uribe. On the spot, Giustra cut a lucrative deal with Uribe for Colombian oil.) Then there’s Mr. War Hero. John McCain weighed in with his own idiocies, announcing that, “Hugo Chavez is establish[ing] a dictatorship,” presumably because, unlike George Bush, Chavez counts all the votes in Venezuelan elections. But now our story gets tricky and icky. The wise media critic Jeff Cohen told me to watch for the press naming McCain as a foreign policy expert and labeling the Democrats as amateurs. Sure enough, the New York Times, on the news pages Wednesday, called McCain, “a national security pro.” McCain is the “pro” who said the war in Iraq would cost nearly nothing in lives or treasury dollars. But, on the Colombian invasion of Ecuador, McCain said, “I hope that tensions will be relaxed, President Chavez will remove those troops from the borders - as well as the Ecuadorians - and relations continue to improve between the two.” It’s not quite English, but it’s definitely not Bush. And weirdly, it’s definitely not Obama and Clinton cheerleading Colombia’s war on Ecuador. Democrats, are you listening? The only thing worse than the media attacking Obama and Clinton as amateurs is the Democratic candidates’ frightening desire to prove them right.

the new list will be up on saturday night. i fuken love vancouver thats where the last shots can from. i do prefer toronto though. i think i like the aggresivness of the toronto junkies more.

i like the part where they complained to the whitehouse and they sent back a letter thanking them for bringing to their attention the matter of water bounderys or some shit. i cant see why more peoples eyes are not opening when shit like this happens way to regular.

yeah post what you got dude. gotta get more people involved with this. if its cool im going to make a list for ya earmuffs.

haha wtf. i dont know what is funnier. the original post or cunts reactions. kkk supporting a democratic black obama. classic.

when she can pussy fart the alphabet.