Carpetbagging weasel faced smarmy little bitch, Ted Cruz

[Guest Lobo]

Shouldn't he be in an Ice Shanty somewhere watching somebody fuck his wife's mouth? 

[sidis 9,832]

3 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

 

weird...i would have thought they wanted to paint false flag antifa operatives in as poor a light as possible.  huh.

[Gil Bang 25,984]

 

[atomheartbevo 89,766]

Texas Republicans are addicted to making Texas look bad.

[WhatTheBuck 28,794]

8 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Says the guy who called it a terrorist attack then curled up in the fetal position and apologized to Tucker Carlson for saying so. 

[Bullneck 19,191]

 

[tchookem 3,905]

 

Can we say Republicans did this to our kids?

[Patricio Swayze 17,058]

I sincerely hope Ted Cruz catches the worst form of cancer and AIDS at the same time. He is one of the biggest pieces of shit to ever hold office. If I am being honest, I also wish the same fate for anyone who has voted for him. He is the fucking human equivalent of a pile of dog shit.

[Jive Turkey 12,633]

 

[dingleberryswitzer 2,724]

On 2/11/2022 at 7:36 PM, Bullneck said:

 

Lol that’s so obviously staged.  Also hope that teacher got approval from all parents to put their kids image im Twitter.  

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

The tweet above, that podcast/show is funded by the Jobs, Freedom, and Security PAC headed by Cabell Hobbs and its purpose is solely to fund Cruz. The PAC is running around $1.7 million and had close to a hundred donors giving over $4000 a pop. Including gubernatorial candidate Huffines.

 

For some backstory, Hobbs helmed (he was the FEC designated treasurer for the PAC) the John Bolton Super PAC before it was suspended due to making "illegal, excessive, and unreported in-kind contributions to the North Carolina Republican Party and/or the Thom Tillis Committee by financing coordinated communications through the use of a common vendor, Cambridge Analytica."

Helms denied all that, saying he was just the 'numbers' guy.

Uh-huh.

So,  a show sponsored by a supporting PAC that lets Ted spout nonsense is par for the course.

 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5,114]

I'd consider myself a pretty frequent Howard Stern listener and have been since he first came to Austin in the 90's.  I'm not recalling a time when he was even an infrequent user of the n-word.  I can attest that he does use "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits". And pussy too. 

So I looked it up, turns out the time he was using the n-word, he was playing the part of Ted Danson in a bit about what a buffoon Ted Danson was to show up in black face 30 years ago.  And it looks like Biden said it while reading the words of a Republican who he was grilling about his racial profiling also at least 30 years ago.  Was Joe Rogan even at the cockroach eating stage of his career 30 years ago?  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,881]

3 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I'd consider myself a pretty frequent Howard Stern listener and have been since he first came to Austin in the 90's.  I'm not recalling a time when he was even an infrequent user of the n-word.  I can attest that he does use "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits". And pussy too. 

So I looked it up, turns out the time he was using the n-word, he was playing the part of Ted Danson in a bit about what a buffoon Ted Danson was to show up in black face 30 years ago.  And it looks like Biden said it while reading the words of a Republican who he was grilling about his racial profiling also at least 30 years ago.  Was Joe Rogan even at the cockroach eating stage of his career 30 years ago?  

only when no one was looking, along with boogers.

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

4 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I'd consider myself a pretty frequent Howard Stern listener and have been since he first came to Austin in the 90's.  I'm not recalling a time when he was even an infrequent user of the n-word.  I can attest that he does use "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits". And pussy too. 

So I looked it up, turns out the time he was using the n-word, he was playing the part of Ted Danson in a bit about what a buffoon Ted Danson was to show up in black face 30 years ago.  And it looks like Biden said it while reading the words of a Republican who he was grilling about his racial profiling also at least 30 years ago.  Was Joe Rogan even at the cockroach eating stage of his career 30 years ago?  

Thirty years ago Rogan had just moved to NYC and was doing full time stand up comedy according to the Googles.

[crash_davis 23,114]

how can this fucking smegma coated dick holster be so wrong on so many issues. fuck him and anyone who votes for him. 

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/cruz-gop-senators-oppose-fly-list-convicted-unruly/story?id=82907388

Quote

Cruz, other GOP senators oppose no-fly list for convicted unruly passengers

They say it would be wrong to treat those against mask-wearing like terrorists.

ByMichelle Stoddart,Mina Kaji, andAmanda Maile

February 15, 2022, 3:09 PM

• 7 min read

 

 

 

4:37

Flight attendants speak on increase in assaults on planes

More than ever, flight attendants have been dealing with unruly passengers fighting agai...Read More

Win Mcnamee/Getty Images

A group of Republican senators sent a letter to the Justice Department on Tuesday to express "strong opposition" to creating a federal no-fly list for unruly passengers, claiming "the majority of recent infractions on airplanes has been in relation to the mask mandate."

Sens. Mike Lee of Utah, Marco Rubio and Rick Scott of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas were among those who signed a letter opposing Delta Airlines' CEO Ed Bastian's, request earlier this month that the DOJ create a "no-fly" list for passengers convicted of federal offenses relating to on-board disruptions.

 

 

 

Win Mcnamee/Getty Images

Sen. Ted Cruz speaks during a press conference on Capitol Hill, Feb. 9, 2022.

2021 saw a major spike in unruly passengers, with more than 5,981 reported cases, according to the FAA. The agency notes, of those cases, 4290 were mask-related.

"Creating a federal 'no-fly' list for unruly passengers who are skeptical of this mandate would seemingly equate them to terrorists who seek to actively take the lives of Americans and perpetrate attacks on the homeland," the GOP senators' letter said. "The [Transportation Security Administration] was created in the wake of 9/11 to protect Americans from future horrific attacks, not to regulate human behavior onboard flights."

The senators argued airlines could create their own no-fly lists and refuse services to unruly passengers, but that it would be an overreach for the federal government to do so.

MORE: After increase in assaults, flight attendants are saying enough is enough

Many airlines have already done this, but they do not prevent an offender from boarding another carrier. Delta has previously asked other U.S. airlines to share their internal no-fly lists so that people who endangered their crew can't do so on another airline.

 

 

 

Bloomberg via Getty Images

Ed Bastian, chief executive officer of Delta Air Lines Inc., speaks during a keynote at CES...Read More

"The creation of this list by DOJ would result in a severe restriction on the ability of citizens to fully exercise their constitutional right to engage in interstate transportation," the GOP letter said. "It also raises serious concerns about future unrelated uses and potential expansions of the list based on political pressures."

In Bastian's request to the DOJ, he indicated that he believes banning unruly passengers from all commercial flights will send a strong signal to the flying public that not following crew member instructions comes with severe consequences.

MORE: Delta CEO: Put convicted unruly passengers on national 'no-fly' list

"This action will help prevent future incidents and serve as a strong symbol of the consequences of not complying with crew member instructions on commercial aircraft," he wrote.

Unruly passenger incidents onboard Delta planes have increased nearly 100% since 2019, according to Bastian. The airline has placed almost 2,000 people on Delta's internal no-fly list for refusing to wear a mask and has submitted around 1,000 banned names to the TSA to pursue civil penalties.

Other people in the industry have called for support of a no-fly list for unruly passengers. Sara Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA, responded in a statement to the GOP senators.

 

 

 

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workers screen passengers at O'Hare Inter...Read More

"We've been punched, kicked, spit on, and sexually assaulted. This puts everyone at risk and disrupts the safety of flight, which is never acceptable and every single one of the senators who signed this letter knows full well what is at stake if we leave a gap in aviation safety and security," Nelson said. "It is irresponsible and political brinkmanship that will put our economic security at risk right along with our lives."

Nelson pushed back against the lawmakers' argument about mask mandates, noting many charges stem from incidents unrelated to mask-wearing.

"Our union continues to call for the creation of a centralized list of passengers who may not fly for a period of time after being fined or convicted of a serious incident. This is not about "masks," and the worst attacks have nothing to do with masks," Nelson said. "You're either for protecting crew and passengers from these attacks or you're against. We need clear and consistent rules with strict consequences for those who cannot respect our collective efforts to keep everyone safe - in the air and on the ground."

 

Joe DePete, the president of the Air Line Pilots Association, called for the Department of Homeland Security to create a "no-fly list" for unruly passengers.

"There should be zero tolerance for airline passengers who threaten the safety of others," DePete said in a tweet Tuesday.

Delta responded to the Republicans senators in a statement, saying unruly passengers risk the safety of airline staff and other passengers.

"Delta welcomes the interest from Congress as U.S. airlines continue to grapple with an uptick in unruly passengers, putting the safety of airline employees and the flying public at risk," a spokesperson for Delta told ABC News on Tuesday. "At Delta, nothing is more important than ensuring a safe and secure travel experience for our customers and our people."

 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,586]

The rest of the country must accommodate adults throwing toddler tantrums.

-Ted Cruz

[Gil Bang 25,984]

 

 

[Gil Bang 25,984]

Y'all gotta check out this thread.  Lots of dumb shit from Hawley and Cotton. 

[tx 3 putt 77,258]

11 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

Y'all gotta check out this thread.  Lots of dumb shit from Hawley and Cotton. 

both are complete idiots 

[Gil Bang 25,984]

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,794]

22 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

 

Freeing innocent people from prison causes crime. That’s a novel take.

[Gap03 3,308]

5 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

 

She seemed prepared for Cruz's bullshit ...

[Gil Bang 25,984]

For fuck's sake, if there's anything that should be a fucking BEDROCK for conservatives, it's keeping the innocent from being imprisoned. 

 

Sorta makes me wonder if there's anything about these particular innocent folks that the GOP doesn't like. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21,208]

2 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

For fuck's sake, if there's anything that should be a fucking BEDROCK for conservatives, it's keeping the innocent from being imprisoned. 

 

Sorta makes me wonder if there's anything about these particular innocent folks that the GOP doesn't like. 

Perhaps but when has that EVER been the case?

You can’t build up a private for profit prison system with only the guilty.

[Captainant 27,706]

18 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

For fuck's sake, if there's anything that should be a fucking BEDROCK for conservatives, it's keeping the innocent from being imprisoned. 

 

Sorta makes me wonder if there's anything about these particular innocent folks that the GOP doesn't like. 

must not donate to enough hatian orphanages or something, right @Johnny Sack?

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,881]

38 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Perhaps but when has that EVER been the case?

You can’t build up a private for profit prison system with only the guilty.

if you make everything illegal you can!

[elfenix 34,331]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Freeing innocent people from prison causes crime. That’s a novel take.

but masks are tyranny

[DDD Dad 14,346]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Freeing innocent people from prison causes crime. That’s a novel take.

I'm sure they were guilty of something.

[Mrs Whiggins 13,050]

Didn't Senator Cruz foment an insurrection by promoting the lie that the election was stolen and then later flee across the border into Mexico? Seems kinda like someone who needs to be shown a bar graph to depict how insurrection rates skyrocketed during the month of January by a particular group of persons.

Edited February 16, 2022 by Mrs Whiggins

[atomheartbevo 89,766]

7 hours ago, Gap03 said:

She seemed prepared for Cruz's bullshit ...

Honestly, it's not that hard to be ready for Cruz or Rand Paul anymore.  Just pick the dumbest arguments they could throw at you and prepare for them.

[pyrohornIII 4,817]

On 2/14/2022 at 8:22 AM, Mrs Whiggins said:

The tweet above, that podcast/show is funded by the Jobs, Freedom, and Security PAC headed by Cabell Hobbs and its purpose is solely to fund Cruz. The PAC is running around $1.7 million and had close to a hundred donors giving over $4000 a pop. Including gubernatorial candidate Huffines.

 

For some backstory, Hobbs helmed (he was the FEC designated treasurer for the PAC) the John Bolton Super PAC before it was suspended due to making "illegal, excessive, and unreported in-kind contributions to the North Carolina Republican Party and/or the Thom Tillis Committee by financing coordinated communications through the use of a common vendor, Cambridge Analytica."

Helms denied all that, saying he was just the 'numbers' guy.

Uh-huh.

So,  a show sponsored by a supporting PAC that lets Ted spout nonsense is par for the course.

 

They seem to be paying a price though in the corporate world.  I think it's part of the GOP turning away from Trump and those hoping to hijack his followers.

Corporate donations to Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and other Jan. 6 election objectors have plummeted, and individual donors are Congress’s biggest fundraising force

Quote

Business leaders are clearly not buying the continuing narrative from many political leaders that efforts to overturn American democracy after the last election were “legitimate political discourse.” Newly released Federal Election Commission filings this month, now encompassing the entirety of 2021, show that all 93 of the incumbent members of Congress who failed in their constitutional duties to confirm the certified ballots of the Electoral College have suffered a major plunge in business support.

 

We’ve seen a resurgence of whining from cynical media about companies that let expire last year’s pledges to halt donations to these “objectors” in Congress. But the chorus of corporate critics has missed the forest for the trees. According to the new FEC filings, total corporate giving to those objectors fell a staggering 60% from calendar year 2019, the equivalent stage of the last election cycle. Putting this in context: All corporate political spending on Congress is down 28%; corporate support for GOP non-objecting members of Congress slipped that same 28%; and corporate giving to Democratic members of Congress fell just 19%. Thus, while businesses have lost some interest in supporting congressional campaigns in general, by this measure they are three times more wary of assisting objectors. 

Courtesy of Yale's Chief Executive Leadership Institute

Leaders of the insurgency have been hit particularly hard, with Josh Hawley down 79%, Ted Cruz down 95%, Matt Gaetz down 97%, and Mo Brooks also down 97%. Even the influential House GOP leaders Kevin McCarthy and Steve Scalise saw their corporate donations decline, by 60% and 70% respectively.

These facts will be upsetting not only to GOP objectors, but also to the business reporters and voting rights groups so eager to wrongly condemn business as the spigot to sedition. A self-styled watchdog called Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington issued a recent inflammatory report titled, The Corporate Insurrection: How Companies Have Broken Promises and Funded Seditionists. Similarly, The Hill recently ran the banner headline “GOP Election Objectors Rake In Corporate Cash,” atop a story in which the publication cited a breathless report from Accountable.US, a liberal lobbying group, reporting that corporations donated $6.8 million spread across 147 objectors. These shrewd accountants at Accountable.US must not realize that this is not even 1% of total congressional campaign donations.

 

Hundreds of companies including IBM, Levi Strauss, and Discovery never made the pledge to halt donations, because they never give political donations to begin with. Meanwhile, most of the companies that made such temporary pledges have maintained that moratorium—with the list of 78 companies tracked by Yale’s Chief Executive Leadership Institute including such iconic brands as AIG, Allstate, Alphabet, American Express, Amazon, AT&T, Verizon, Marriott, Disney, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Hartford, Travelers, Liberty Mutual, Home Depot, Dell, McDonald’s, Microsoft, Micron, Intel, eBay, BlackRock, State Street, Mastercard, Visa, Bank of America, Citi, JP Morgan, Target, and Walmart.

Recently, Los Angeles Times business columnist Michael Hiltzik mistakenly asserted, “It should be obvious that corporations shouldn’t be permitted to make any campaign contributions, because their dollars will always overwhelm contributions from individuals.”

 

This sounds sensible on its face, but the FEC data reveals the exact opposite is true. Based on our research, not only has the corporate funding of objectors plunged, but total corporate giving has fallen from 20.6% of all congressional donations in 2019 to just 13% in 2021. While total congressional campaign coffers have grown from $989 million during 2019 to $1.2 billion in 2021, only $147 million came from corporations. Yes, rather than corporations overwhelming individual contributions, it is individual contributions that have soared to 87% of total congressional campaign funding. 

In fact, we found corporate funding now accounts for a record low percentage of total congressional campaign fundraising. While individual donations as a percentage of total political fundraising have already been on the rise for at least a few decades—from 25% in 1977 to 55% in 1991 to 79.4% in 2019—the trend has markedly accelerated over the past few years, with the resulting climate transforming individual donors into the single most potent force in political fundraising. 

The misdirected fire of voting rights groups and media pundits is even more alarming given that substantial funding of the objectors comes not from business at all, but from individuals. Despite losing virtually 100% of their business support, Hawley, Cruz, Gaetz, and their peers have drawn similar or increased support from individuals. The rise of individual donors is not confined to only congressional races. According to OpenSecrets, of the $14 billion spent by all candidates and groups in the 2020 election cycle, only 5% came from corporate PACs. Individual donations made up a vast majority of funding, reinforcing the fact that reformers' focus ought to be on individual contributions rather than corporate money. 

 

The proliferating ranks of voting rights groups have piled on to the wrong mission. Business leaders have been on the frontiers of immigration rights, sustainability, gun safety, civil rights, and voting rights issues as the loudest and most trusted voices in society. By vilifying business, critics have locked, loaded, and fired upon the wrong targets entirely. The 1930s bank robber Willie Sutton explained he targeted banks “because that's where the money is.” However, the campaign money is not where the pundits and voting rights groups assumed it is. 

The problem may be that the goal of many of these attention-starved groups is to create dramatic, if incorrect, headlines to get more attention as they struggle for recognition and funding. Our recent research has revealed that there are now a dysfunctional overlapping mound of 188 look-alike competing voting rights groups, most created in just the past year, with funding well in excess of $300 million. 

Instead of the convenient, incendiary attacks on business, voting rights activists and pundits should take on the less exhibitionist tasks of courting clergy, trade unions, professional associations, pension funds, and campus voices to the cause of fortifying democracy. That more prosaic work of building broad, inclusive coalitions is what produced social change from the 1960s through the 1980s. Reaching individuals through these pillars of civil society taps the actual source of 87% of campaign dollars—individual contributors, not corporations. 

All that money Cruz and Brooks lost went to Manchin and Sinema.  

[Underdog 28,759]

19 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

 

RW YT Channel:  Watch Ted Cruz destroy Nina Morrison’s career… 

[atomheartbevo 89,766]

8 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

They seem to be paying a price though in the corporate world.  I think it's part of the GOP turning away from Trump and those hoping to hijack his followers.

They will chase the money, even if it means eventually turning away from Trump.  I know Trump wanted to control the GOP purse strings both directly and through funneling donor money through his PACs to then funnel that money through his properties, etc., but I wonder if some of it was to keep Republican politicians under this thumb.  

[High Plains Drifter 11,050]

21 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Freeing innocent people from prison causes crime. That’s a novel take.

 

I hope her response to such an attack would make this point.

 

"I'm sorry senator, but I don't think letting innocent people out of prison has anything to do with 'skyrocketing' crime rates. Are you suggesting that people who are innocent should not be set free?"

 

[High Plains Drifter 11,050]

10 hours ago, pyrohornIII said:

They seem to be paying a price though in the corporate world.  I think it's part of the GOP turning away from Trump and those hoping to hijack his followers.

Corporate donations to Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and other Jan. 6 election objectors have plummeted, and individual donors are Congress’s biggest fundraising force

All that money Cruz and Brooks lost went to Manchin and Sinema.  

 

 

 

 

 

But how much did their individual donations increase? And did that make up the difference.

 

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,881]

54 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

But how much did their individual donations increase? And did that make up the difference.

I wouldn't think so. Don't most politicians that accept PAC money get most of their contributions from that? Seems like there are two camps: grassroots (read: individual donor) vs big money/PACs. Seems like most choose one route or another, but I'm sure there is overlap

[pyrohornIII 4,817]

Individuals can't make up the difference in all those guys' warchests.  The herd is getting smaller and thinner, and more grifters are getting into it, via PACs to compete for fewer dollars.  And you have Trump on top of that heap of grifters.  It's why so many of them try to stay in his good graces, hoping he'll fund them. 

Edited February 17, 2022 by pyrohornIII

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,881]

15 minutes ago, pyrohornIII said:

Individuals can't make up the difference in all those guys' warchests.  The herd is getting smaller and thinner, and more grifters are getting into it, via PACs to compete for fewer dollars.  And you have Trump on top of that heap of grifters.  It's why so many of them try to stay in his good graces, hoping he'll fund them. 

thank you for finally identifying reason for TFG's followers' fealty. It had not occurred to me that he was holding the gruel pot and they were simply hoping he would slop a ladle-full in their spot. I always had my eye on blackmail/dirt as why people were loyal to him (and is certainly still a possibility) but I had not thought about the fact that down-ballot candidates would have to come groveling to him. I bet he loves that shit. What an asshole.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Longhorn_Fan68

[royiv 9,333]

1 hour ago, pyrohornIII said:

Individuals can't make up the difference in all those guys' warchests.  The herd is getting smaller and thinner, and more grifters are getting into it, via PACs to compete for fewer dollars.  And you have Trump on top of that heap of grifters.  It's why so many of them try to stay in his good graces, hoping he'll fund them. 

I keep hearing/seeing that the herd is getting smaller, but I'm not seeing it. In my mind if that was true, we would be seeing a group of more moderate Republicans coming up in the ranks and that doesn't seem to be happening. The familiar faces are still Trumpy and the new faces are even Trumpier. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,881]

2 minutes ago, royiv said:

I keep hearing/seeing that the herd is getting smaller, but I'm not seeing it. In my mind if that was true, we would be seeing a group of more moderate Republicans coming up in the ranks and that doesn't seem to be happening. The familiar faces are still Trumpy and the new faces are even Trumpier. 

right, because of exactly what you quoted, especially the part I keyed into in the post previous to yours

Also, because of that, I doubt you'll see moderate republicans breaking through now or in the future, really. There is no place for them in today's party. They'll all go 3rd party, hopefully.

[SydneyCarton 48,143]

26 minutes ago, royiv said:

I keep hearing/seeing that the herd is getting smaller, but I'm not seeing it. In my mind if that was true, we would be seeing a group of more moderate Republicans coming up in the ranks and that doesn't seem to be happening. The familiar faces are still Trumpy and the new faces are even Trumpier. 

 

17 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

right, because of exactly what you quoted, especially the part I keyed into in the post previous to yours

Also, because of that, I doubt you'll see moderate republicans breaking through now or in the future, really. There is no place for them in today's party. They'll all go 3rd party, hopefully.

Right. All the reasonable people are looking at politics and throwing up their hands and wanting nothing to do with that shitshow of a life. Because they're reasonable people with goals and ambitions, not former failed models and actors/actresses. I know plenty of people who would be great elected leaders who are conservative by nature, and deeply religious, and overall good people. But they want nothing to do with entering politics because they're smart enough not to make themselves targets and want to take care of their families. 

[atomheartbevo 89,766]

4 hours ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

thank you for finally identifying reason for TFG's followers' fealty. It had not occurred to me that he was holding the gruel pot and they were simply hoping he would slop a ladle-full in their spot. I always had my eye on blackmail/dirt as why people were loyal to him (and is certainly still a possibility) but I had not thought about the fact that down-ballot candidates would have to come groveling to him. I bet he loves that shit. What an asshole.

This is why a while back Trump was trying to get somebody in the family (Don Jr?  Kush?) installed in the GOP leadership around the finances.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,466]

After the country of Mexico threw shade at Ted yesterday,  today it's Art Acevedos turn.

 

 

[RDCanecutter 26,458]

On 2/17/2022 at 10:42 AM, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

 

 

 

But how much did their individual donations increase? And did that make up the difference.

 

 

Local vibe about Mo Brooks is that he has gone from shoo-in for Senate, to having kind of a loser stink to him.

[pyrohornIII 4,817]

pos rep for shoo-in.  

 

[Blotto 23,560]

Oliver with the Dr Suess jab (should start at 0:43)

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,881]

[Gil Bang 25,984]

[4th&Five 41,572]

[DigglerontheHoof 21,208]

If Teddy isn't the definition of a cuckold, no one is.