Community | January 06, 2012 | 86 comments

Ron Paul Racist Newsletter Author Revealed

source: http://https://rpnewsletter.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/1993-the-ron-paul-strategy-guide/

Image
maasanova
https://rpnewsletter.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/1993-the-ron-paul-strategy-guide/

Racist newsletters dubunked...again.

Sure they were published under Ron Paul, but as you can see, the authorship is attributed to James B. Powell, allegedly.

At the time of the publication of the newsletters, Ron Paul was actually practicing medicine, as well as giving away free medical care to minorities (Google: "The Compassion of Dr. Ron Paul).
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Politics,   US Politics,   5 more
  2. tags:
    Racism,  Ron Paul,  Propaganda,  Mainstream Media,  10 more
  3.     
    |

86 comments // Ron Paul Racist Newsletter Author Revealed

  • Milieu
  • maasanova
    • +1
      maasanova  

    • Reposting this again because some people still don't get it:

      THE TALK OF RACISM HAS BECOME THE LOWEST FORM OF POLITICAL DISCOURSE!

      "But there is a bigger issue than just Ron Paul here.

      What you may not know is that in this presidential election cycle, every single candidate for president, including President Obama, has been called a racist.

      Herman Cain was called a racist because he said blacks had been brainwashed into voting for the democratic party.

      Mitt Romney was called a racist by Bill Maher because he is a Mormon, and called racist by MSNBC for continually calling the President by his first and last names instead saying President Obama.

      Newt Gingrich was called a racist just a few months ago for calling Palestinians an invented people.

      Michelle Bachmann was called a racist a few months ago after saying African American children and black families were better off during slavery presumably because they had both parents living with them. She says she was clearly taken out of context.

      Rick Perry was called a racist for a name spray painted on a rock at a hunting camp rented by his family.

      Also saying he was taken out of context, one of the latest claims against Rick Santorum, is saying he is a racist for a supposed statement he made that blacks shouldn't receive welfare. He says he didn't say that.

      President Obama himself has been called a racist by many people, including Glenn Beck, who triggered a fire-storm after saying he believes President Obama doesn't like white people.

      President Obama also called a racist for attending the Reverend Wright's church for 20 years.

      Here's what you need to know.

      The talk of racism has become the lowest form of political discourse.

      Even as I just went down that list, some of you at home thought to yourselves how the candidates you don't like, probably are racist.

      And when you heard the name of a candidate you support, you thought "No", that's ridiculous.

      See how it works?"

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
  • GENERALNATTY
    • +1
      GENERALNATTY  

    • He's on record defending those letters in 1996 so who wrote them is irrelevant and if he didn't believe in that stuff back then, that makes it even worse. Because he is trying to be president if that can go under his nose undetected under his name for that amount of time when he was 20 years younger, now he is 20 years older what else is he gonna miss?

      Your trying to tell me a certified medical doctor would miss something like that? anyway you slice it, its bad. Honestly who the hell publishes a paper and never reads it, you'd have to be blind to think that a person who is privately funding his own newsletter does not read or contribute writing to the paper thats like steve jobs (R.I.P) saying "well i never really used a iphone"

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MBl4JqcLtHg

      Oh and by the way when the dallas morning news interviewed him about the racist passages in one of his newsletters in 1996 he admitted that he wrote it in response to a study saying "those are not my figures" so he not only did disavow the statements but he admitted writing them at least in that newsletter so clearly not only did he read the letters he wrote in some of them as well.

      All politicians lie, All of em, you want to believe he isnt a racist today, feel free to do so, people do change, but he wrote at least some of the content and did not disavow it before. You cant really fight the facts.

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
  • corderodedios
    • 0
      corderodedios  

    • Interesting post. When the media crucified Paul for "saying" in a past debate, in answer to Wolf Blitzer's question if he would "just let someone die" who didn't have health insurance, that he would do that, I listened to the entire exchange. In fact, in answer to the question, a yahoo in the audience (probably a Santorum supporter) yelled out the supposed response. Actually, Paul did say that when he practiced medicine, they "never turned anyone away."

      Paul's got some really bad ideas about economics and the public purpose, but he is the only person running for President who has called bullshit, consistently, on America's wars, and on the NDAA. These are the two overweening problems right now. The economy will collapse in any event. Our fear about the economy, destroyed as it has been by a coalition of Republicans since Reagan and now Mr. Obama, is what the one percenters are using to enable their atrocious warmongering. Forget the economy. Nothing will impede the collapse, unless of course a state of war allows total martial law. We've got to start allowing nations to settle their own national and regional problems.

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
  • corderodedios
  • artemis6
    • +3
      artemis6  

    • A pen name ? Really they are in such a position as to NEED to throw SOMEONE under the bus . They had better get said guy to come forward , because , a name does not mean anything except that they can pick a name .

    • 5 months ago
  • bailey78
  • bailey78
    • -2
      bailey78  

    • Look folks they are all crooks and Liers. Thats their job now days to lie to us at every chance to get what they want. An you folks that are argueing back and forth insteed of fighting those in office is just what they want you to do. So as I see it you folks are all a bunch of fucking retards. just one more reason I don't post much any more.

    • 5 months ago
  • artemis6
    • 0
      artemis6  
    • bailey78:

      That is sad bailey . I do understand though . The way the newbie think is very superficial and they do not seen to cary a conversations with any depth . They do not ask questions as much as tell answers . Intellectual suicide . Have you found somewhere else i should check out ?

    • 5 months ago
  • bailey78
  • trueforyou
  • artemis6
  • trueforyou
    • 0
      trueforyou  
    • artemis6:

      And thank you too, artemissed the subtlety of my comment, for proving my point as well. Mine was not directed at anyone in particular, but merely an observation. Your comment said "newbie", hence the quotation in my post. So in fact, you offend yourself.

      I have been a contributing member of this forum, off and on, for the better part of six years now, and have watched current transform many times over. And although I may not add the most content, or earn the most badges or have the most "friends",.. I like to believe that I encourage dialogue and support a positive atmosphere. And I always attempt to put forward a well thought out response, which is more than I can say for everyone who posts here, young and old.

      I have followed your comments on many threads and generally agree with most of what i've read. It would be a shame to realize you're just another superficial hypocrite.

      peace

    • 5 months ago
  • trueforyou
    • -1
      trueforyou  
    • trueforyou:

      mine was a comment directed at the conversation you were having with Bailey, who I also tend to agree with. He used the term ignorant which is why I phrased my, honestly, throw away comment, using it, instead of shallow or superficial as you say. My point, which I'm certain you have experienced, is that there are many long standing members who fit your description of "newbie think".

    • 5 months ago
  • hombre76
  • NippersVoice
  • EmperorThan
  • Abbynrml
  • hombre76
  • Abbynrml
    • 0
      Abbynrml  
    • hombre76:

      Maybe if dumba**es like yourself would read the articles insted of just attacking everyone you would of understood my comments. Given your other remarks you appear to be one of those knuckle-dragging far right wingnuts who most likely agree with Paul's racist/bigoted views. Do you know that Che Guevera was a terrorist who after the Cuban revolution went to Africa to teach rebels their terrorist template you wouldn't be using him as an icon. I'm sure you tea bagger buddies wouldn't approve of him......

    • 5 months ago
  • hombre76
  • bailey78
  • Joeydee44
  • EmperorThan
    • +2
      EmperorThan  
    • hombre76:

      I think there are very few of them with plenty of time (and accounts) on their hand. I love how passionate they are against him.

      These are the same people who say he's unelectable. Ok fine, so why are you so worried then? He wants to legalize drugs and end wars, Americans would never stand for either of those things. So why are you soooooooooooooooooooooooo afraid of him anti-Paulites?

      I was pretty passionate about hating W Bush for 6 years, plastered the back of my car with anti W Bush anti Iraq War bumper stickers, but that was different, he already held the office. You're this way to a guy who is just running and by ALL media reports is 'unelectable' as they yearn to remind the drooling viewers every time they mention him.

    • 5 months ago
  • hombre76
  • hombre76
  • joeredford
    • +1
      joeredford [removed]  
    • Image

    • Paul seeks to shrink the federal government to minimal size not because it intrudes into individual rights but because it stands in the way of allowing the states and localities to enact laws as they see fit -even laws that govern people's behavior in the bedroom.
      He does not stand for individual freedom but wants to implement "Godslaw" on earth, since he is allied with Christian Recontructionists.
      He's just another sneaky bastard politicialn who tells his supporters what they want to hear so he can lie his way into power to enact his own whacko Christian agenda.

      http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/153607/major_ron_paul_supporter_favors_death_pe...

    • 5 months ago
  • leosoup
  • leosoup
    • 0
      leosoup  

    • The amount of LIES and DENIAL that accompany Ron Paul's supporters is disgusting. I don't care if he was birthing black babies for free, his racist newsletters were published by Ron Paul and Associates, which was owned by him and his family. The newsletters ARE COMPLETE with racist filth, regardless of what his mindless followers say. He made nearly A MILLION DOLLARS SELLING THEM. SO you make a million dollars selling racist propaganda, but since you're a doctor that wants to legalize drugs, you're not guilty of that? Nice try. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8P0-WBVEnk

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
  • Buddha2112
    • 0
      Buddha2112  

    • Again debunkes... But ultimately the newsletter isn't racist... And makes no reference to color except by mentioning the LA riots... Which was mostly a race riot with extreme racist violence carried out and supported by blacks, whites, even hispanics... Watch the videos and see for yourself what happened. People uses the King beating as an excuse to riot... The communities did not protest peacefully or even protest anything on the whole... They beat eachother and stole from stores. Not exactly effective... There is ample video evidence of this. Pointing out the truth isnt racist.

    • 5 months ago
  • EmperorThan
    • +2
      EmperorThan  

    • While Paul ultimately holds responsibility for anything printed in his name; slipping up and not proof reading a newsletter that goes by his desk is inevitable for someone who's in political office ACTUALLY serving the people of his district (unlike most in office).

      The problem I had with the whole 'Ron Paul is a racist' jargon to begin with was it didn't add up, why would he be racist ONCE 20 years ago and never again? Anyone who knows a racist (and in Oklahoma I know many) they don't say one racist thing. People who are racist are consistent and say that shit on a daily basis they don't say it once and then stay un-racist for 20 odd years.

      The fact that no other racist newsletters went out in his name means that others likely were written by this guy Powell AND STOPPED before printing.

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
  • EmperorThan
  • chew_chew
    • +2
      chew_chew  

    • I have mixed feelings on this one.

      First, I do believe that the higher up the ladder one climbs, the more difficult it becomes to keep up with *everything* being done in one's name. I'm saying I believe Mr Paul could be telling the truth about not knowing. Additionally, Mr Paul has made public statements against the language we are talking about.

      So, speaking only for myself, I can cut Mr Paul some slack on this. That is, I do not believe he is a racist. I will take him at his word on this.

      Having said all that, being President of the U.S. involves making sure *somebody* is keeping a close eye on details and reporting back in a structured way, so that appropriate action(s) can be taken - if needed - in a timely manner. By his own admission, Mr Paul had no idea this kind of thing (the newsletter's racist content) was going on. To me, speaking only for myself, that sounds like someone who is not able to organize and/or delegate responsibility to others, and implement some kind of tracking procedure(s) to make sure the message being sent out in his name is in-fact the message he wants to spread. That waves a big red flag in my eyes regarding Mr Paul's candidacy.

      I do not see him as qualified to be President. Not because he is a racist (I do *not* see him as a racist), but because he - in his own words - had no idea what was going on in his name. And it's not like it was some non-person Super PAC running negative ads against him which stirred this hornet's nest, it was something done in his name and from which he profited, and was responsible for.

      Since, in his own words, Mr Paul was not able to keep up with a Newsletter published under his name and from which he profited and was responsible for, how in the world could he be trusted to keep up with all the information which requires a President's attention?

      Mr Paul speaks quite often on accepting responsibility for one's actions. Now, he is asking us to *not* hold him responsible for his.

    • 5 months ago
  • EmperorThan
    • +1
      EmperorThan  
    • chew_chew:

      I agree with what you said but I'll also say Presidents have many more advisers than congressmen and let less stuff like this slip through the cracks. A LOT more advisers. And even then Presidents slip on stuff like this from time to time. It's why Obama is blamed for things like Solyndra getting hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars when they knew the company was going to go bankrupt anyway. I don't think Obama knew much of anything about the details of the deal but in the end it was his photo-op and speech saying how great they were because he trusted his advisers to do the busy work for him. And they failed him.

      Shit happens and the wrong people usually get blamed.

    • 5 months ago
  • chew_chew
  • infiniteblackbox
    • +1
      infiniteblackbox  

    • All of this bickering about Paul is irrelevant.
      Does anybody here really think the GOP can field a candidate that can beat Obama?
      And no I no longer support Obama.
      He has turned out to be just another Big Business Pro Lobbyist Shill.
      He is actually more conservative than Paul.
      In the pocket of Wall Street
      Obamacare=Ins. Industry Big $$$
      Extended the Bush Tax Cuts
      Big Bank Bailouts

      the list goes on and on

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
  • hombre76
  • bourneverde
  • joeredford
  • letsliveinpeace
  • Joeydee44
  • hombre76
  • joeredford
  • Joeydee44
  • WakeUpPeople
    • +3
      WakeUpPeople  

    • Great. We can finally put this issue to bed.

      Ron Paul is *not* a racist... but he allows racists to use his name, gives them a job, offers them a platform, reaps the profits, defends the language, and claims to be oblivious for the decade in which it took place.

      Case closed. Vote for Oblivious in 2012!!!

      (Opposing the Civil Rights Act is completely coincidental... Something about freedom.)

    • 5 months ago
  • hombre76
    • -3
      hombre76  
    • WakeUpPeople:

      ya your canidate only extended the patriot act, exempted from prosicution phone companies involved in illeagle wire tapping, and now passed the NDAA bill which strips americans of their right to trial and alows for their indefinate detention at the hands of the millitary no less. Ya you got your self a real fucking winner there my friend.

    • 5 months ago
  • leosoup
    • 0
      leosoup  
    • WakeUpPeople:

      Ron Paul's policies are more bigoted than his newsletters! He supported DOMA, doesn't think legally gay couples should be allowed to adopt (sounds like the NANNY STATE!), wants to repeal Civil Rights legislation so states can re-impose jim crow laws if they like, is PRO-LIFE (how the hell is this guy a civil libertarian) OH YEAH AND HE DID NOT EVEN SHOW UP TO VOTE AGAINST THE NDAA. WAKE UP RON PAUL IS A LIAR AND A RACIST AND A MIRAGE YOU PAULBOTS ARE THE SCUM OF THE EARTH!

    • 5 months ago
  • leosoup
  • WakeUpPeople
  • Dagum
  • leosoup
  • hombre76
  • WakeUpPeople
  • hombre76
    • -1
      hombre76  
    • WakeUpPeople:

      me too so I guess your not an obama worshiping hipocrit. thats good. now why are you so concerned that Paul someone the establishment obviosly does not like top to bottom left or right would be a bad thing? I think of it as a gigantic monkey wrench to throw into the plutocratic machine. It cant hurt.

    • 5 months ago
  • JustZ
    • +1
      JustZ  

    • SIGH..........and the beat goes on... and on.... and on.... and on!
      Most sentient beings here realize Ron Paul is a libertarian racist and NOTHING you say here will change any of that.

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
    • +1
      unimatrix0  
    • Image

    • This is lame Paul propaganda - check the source. The fact is Paul approved the messages of racism, homophobia and antisemitism that appeared in various newsletters published under his name.

      Paul and his supporters want us to believe he never looked at or approved the content that was being ghost written in his name. This is absurd, and if true, indicates Paul is completely incompetent.

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • unimatrix0:

      http://rt.com/usa/news/cnn-ron-paul-thorsen-207/

      Ok so according to people like you Ron Paul is a racist..so what?

      Charging someone with racism is the equivilant of telling that person to shut up, or in your case trying to end a debate when it is clear that you have no solid argument, or in the media's case, using it as a smokescreen to detract from the real issues.

      It's meaningless in the end, but you can post all the funny but meaningless pictures all you want.

    • 5 months ago
  • unimatrix0
    • 0
      unimatrix0  
    • maasanova:

      For some of us racism is a real, meaningful, important issue. It is an issue worthy of debate and scrutiny, since it goes to issues of character, integrity, and human decency.

      However, it seems obvious Paul supporters have no problem supporting a racist, which is a sad and troubling commentary.

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
    • -1
      maasanova  
    • unimatrix0:

      Human decencey and integrity is offering to deliver a black man's pregnant wife's baby when no other doctor will, and then not sending him a bill for delivering a stillborn baby.

      A case of actions speaking louder than words...literally.

    • 5 months ago
  • CarlosBobthe3rd
    • 0
      CarlosBobthe3rd  
    • unimatrix0:

      Do you find it troubling that the Obama supporters support a murderer or is that not one of your priorities? Do you find it troubling that Joe Biden can get away with making racist comments about people from India? Do you support Biden? Are you a racist?

    • 5 months ago
  • Paratus
    • -1
      Paratus  
    • maasanova:

      I'm with you. Racism is the "boy who cried wolf" of this era. It gets thrown around to discredit and requires no proof, merely the utterance of the word. Overused and overblown.

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
  • EmperorThan
  • EmperorThan
  • hombre76
    • -1
      hombre76  
    • unimatrix0:

      ya your canidate only extended the patriot act, exempted from prosicution phone companies involved in illeagle wire tapping, and now passed the NDAA bill which strips americans of their right to trial and alows for their indefinate detention at the hands of the millitary no less. Ya you got your self a real fucking winner there my friend.

    • 5 months ago
  • leosoup
  • leosoup
    • +1
      leosoup  
    • maasanova:

      Exactly, like how Ron Paul wants to repeal Civil Rights legislation. Like how he supported DOMA. Like how he doesn't think legally gay wed couples should have the right to adopt. His bigoted POLICIES speak for themselves. Being a PRO-LIFE doctor means he should just go be a doctor, and let the Presidential duties to REAL AMERICANS who stand for REAL FREEDOM AND LIBERTY and not this everybody for themselves, legalize drugs bullshit. Paultards wake up this man is 100% UNELECTABLE

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
  • joeredford
  • Dagum
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • Image

    • http://www.cato.org/people/jim-powell

      Is this CATO senior fellow the profile of Jim B. Powell the alleged author of the Ron Paul newsletter?

      "Jim Powell, senior fellow, is an expert in the history of liberty. He has lectured in England, Germany, Japan, Argentina and Brazil as well as at Harvard, Stanford and other universities across the United States. He has written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Esquire, Audacity/American Heritage and other publications.

      He is the author of several books, including The Triumph of Liberty, A 2,000 Year History Told Through The Lives Of Freedom's Greatest Champions (Free Press, 2000), with a foreword by Paul Johnson. This book chronicles heroic struggles against tyranny, slavery, war and mass murder. Powell’s book FDR's Folly, How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression (2003) reported a wide range of findings – ignored by political historians and biographers -- about the unexpected consequences of New Deal policies. Thomas Sowell wrote: “Only now has a book been written in language that non-economists can understand which argues persuasively that the policies of the Roosevelt administration actually prolonged the depression and made it worse.”

      Powell’s book Wilson’s War, How Woodrow Wilson’s Great Blunder Led To Hitler, Lenin, Stalin And World War II (2005) documented the unintended consequences of U.S. entry in World War I. He explained how by backing the British and French, Wilson broke the three-year stalemate, put the British and French in a position to force the vindictive Versailles Treaty on Germany, triggering a bitter nationalist reaction that generated political support for Hitler.

      His book Bully Boy, The Truth About Theodore Roosevelt’s Legacy (2006) tells how TR’s policies backfired badly. Powell explains how TR expanded the arbitrary power of the president; how he promoted the policy of starting wars when the United States was neither attacked nor directly threatened; how his “pure food” law led to loony crusades against corn syrup, blended whiskey and Coca-Cola (“soda fountain dope”); how his “trust-busting” targeted low-cost competitors like Standard Oil whose market share and prices were declining in intensely-competitive markets; how he prevented companies from setting free market prices, making it harder to raise capital and thereby beginning the decline of America’s largest industry; how his “conservation” policies squandered resources and degraded the environment; and how he played a key role ushering in the federal income tax.

      His most recent book is Greatest Emancipations: How the West Abolished Slavery (2008)."

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
    • +2
      maasanova  
    • Image

    • http://www.fox19.com/story/16458700/reality-check-the-name-of-a-mystery-writer-o...

      (FOX19) - I told you Wednesday night that in 2007 the New Republic magazine published copies of the Ron Paul Report, Ron Paul Strategy Guide, etc.

      In those newsletters were some passages that could be deemed racist and certainly inappropriate.

      I also pointed out that the author of those articles, James Kirchick, mentions that none of the racist newsletters have a byline, except for one.

      The only problem, back in 2007, he did not disclose the name of that writer or which edition he or she wrote, until today.

      For the first time, I am going to share with you the name of that writer in connection with the article he authored.

      It is a 1993 edition of the Ron Paul Strategy Guide. The article is titled "How to Protect Against Urban Violence." The author is James B. Powell.

      The full eight pages of his article match so closely to some of those other so-called "racist newsletters" it is stunning.

      Powell writes about the 1992 riots in L.A., as well as the "holocaust coming to America's urban areas." He calls California Congresswoman Maxine Waters a militant leader. The article goes on to talk about how to be self-reliant when well armed gangs move in and threaten your home.

      Like the other newsletters, it is not racist, per se, but certainly could be deemed questionable or insensitive.

      But there is a bigger issue than just Ron Paul here.

      What you may not know is that in this presidential election cycle, every single candidate for president, including President Obama, has been called a racist.

      Herman Cain was called a racist because he said blacks had been brainwashed into voting for the democratic party.

      Mitt Romney was called a racist by Bill Maher because he is a Mormon, and called racist by MSNBC for continually calling the President by his first and last names instead saying President Obama.

      Newt Gingrich was called a racist just a few months ago for calling Palestinians an invented people.

      Michelle Bachmann was called a racist a few months ago after saying African American children and black families were better off during slavery presumably because they had both parents living with them. She says she was clearly taken out of context.

      Rick Perry was called a racist for a name spray painted on a rock at a hunting camp rented by his family.

      Also saying he was taken out of context, one of the latest claims against Rick Santorum, is saying he is a racist for a supposed statement he made that blacks shouldn't receive welfare. He says he didn't say that.

      President Obama himself has been called a racist by many people, including Glenn Beck, who triggered a fire-storm after saying he believes President Obama doesn't like white people.

      President Obama also called a racist for attending the Reverend Wright's church for 20 years.

      Here's what you need to know.

      The talk of racism has become the lowest form of political discourse.

      Even as I just went down that list, some of you at home thought to yourselves how the candidates you don't like, probably are racist.

      And when you heard the name of a candidate you support, you thought "No", that's ridiculous.

      See how it works?

    • 5 months ago
  • wolfess
    • +3
      wolfess  

    • If someone over the age of 21 gives alcohol to minors they are the ones that are charged with a crime ... I really don't give a damn who wrote those 'newsletters' as ronnie p was glad to take credit (and money) for them in the past -- that makes him just as culpable as this Powell moron.

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  
    • wolfess:

      LOL first of all racism isn't a crime, at least it isn't a crime in America although it is a crime in other alleged western democracies like Canada, Austria, Germany etc under "hate speech" legislation.

      Second, the newsletters are certainly offensive to some, contains some questionable generalizations, but it's mostly hyperbole and incendiary language.

      And like I mentioned in a post yesterday that if this was such the controversy that the media people who don't want to talk about the war and the economy are playing this up to be, where was Congress on the issue of the newsletters?

      Why didn't they take Ron Paul to task over these newsletters?

    • 5 months ago
  • maasanova
    • -1
      maasanova  
    • wolfess:

      Also, I'm often called an anti-semite and a racist by some people here but somehow the Current mods have not gotten around to kicking me off the forum. So by your logic, Current, meaning Al Gore and the top guys are guilty of racism because they publish and distribute my writings (and make money from page views), is that about right?

    • 5 months ago
  • ThatCrazyLibertarian
  • maasanova
  • Kilnsapper
more from Community:
from the community

top videos