You know, all three of us spend a lot of time covering politicians and I don’t know about you guys, but in my view, they’re all emotional freaks of one sort or another. They’re guaranteed to invade your personal space, touch you. I sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time. I was like, ehh, get me out of here....What!? Perhaps the Republican Senator just periodically patted him on the thigh and technically the fingers extended into the inner part. The fact that Brooks put up with it, to me, indicates that was all it was. Why would he just think I was like, ehh, get me out of here. What stopped him from leaving? Or are we seriously to think some Senator had Brooks in an intimate grip all night and Brooks did nothing but think about how he didn't like it?
I’m not telling you, I’m not telling you. But so, a lot of them spend so much time needing people’s love and yet they are shooting upwards their whole life, they’re not that great in normal human relationships. And so, they’re like freaks, they don’t know how to, they’re lonely. They reach out....
July 10, 2009
What Republican Senator had his hand on David Brooks's inner thigh through an entire dinner?
Brooks is talking on MSNBC — video at the link — and says:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
102 comments:
Eww. Just, eww. Actually the worst part would seem to be that Brooks tolerated it all through the meal. And didn't the pol need both hands to eat? Eww. I mean, does not compute.
Unless his thighs are more appealing that his face, I can't see it happening. Surely there's something better available to even a Republican senator. I know, that was ugly. Forgive me.
Brooks sold his credibility for a newspaper column a long time ago. To believe that this happened and he is just now mentioning it, despite having had literally hundreds of opportunities to do so previously, is beyond incredible: it is an obvious lie.
Don't get me wrong. If he had said this happened at a dinner he was at last night, and this was the first opportunity he had to speak out about it, then I'd be inclined to believe him.
But what kind of credibility is any reasonable person supposed to assign to this bogus garbage? Was it some sort of repressed childhood memory that he and his therapist just uncovered or something?
Puulleeaassee...
I bet Titus would like to put his hand on David Brooks's inner.
get your hand off my leg , i'll give you an hour to stop.that's believable.
I guess that's what senators call a wide hand stance.
The first pat would be a message tome to hit the men's room to disengage.
I'd hope Titus has higher standards (though I admit some of his comments make me wonder).
What Jim Said @6:12. Exactly
Ha ha ha ha. Waitaminit. Are you trying to tell me this doesn't happen to everybody?
No I wouldn't want to put my hand on David Brooks thigh. I do have taste.
I am trying to picture if there is any hot republican senator that I would find appealing doing something like this. Nope, can think of one.
A democrat you expect because they are Godless and fruits but not a republican.
Very disappointing.
My money is on Lindsey Graham.
Why would David Brooks allow the senator to have his hand on in his inner thigh through an entire dinner?
Would a women allow a man to do this?
I sure wouldn't unless I was 100% sure I was going to pork him in about 10 minutes.
Actually, I would skip the dinner altogether. Talking generally ruins things.
Now that I think about it Garage is correct, it was Huckleberry Hound.
you mean there are politicians who are not what they seem? shocking!
i once had an 80 year old woman do that to me at a dinner party. i didn't storm out b/c i am a southerner. didn't want to make a scene.
Again, EWWWWW
Now if Althouse put her hand on my inner thigh during dindin that would be an entirely different story.
Yowza!
I wouldn't mind if Olympia Snowe did it to me in a kind motherly like way.
She is so nice.
Susan Collins, sure why not? Cute as a little button.
Mary Landrieu ok, kind of cute.
I would be willing to be their chicken for the right amount of dough. 100k will not cut it though. I aint trash. That Ensign whore went for cheap.
Mary is a Democrat-I think you only left out -
Kay Baily...
It coulda been Strom...
Maybe he thought Brooks was his nurse.
How the hell did he eat lunch with his hand on Brook's leg? Was David feeding him? Brooks is gay, so was this some other gay Republican senator who was hitting on him? And if he is not prepared to disclose his name, why mention it specifically?
I agree many politicians are freaks and emotional wrecks, but that is universal for both parties. It is even worse in the entertainment and news industry.
Didn't Brooks recently write that Obama had returned dignity to the presidency?
What to say?
I am as speechless as he was during that dinner. Allll during dinner??
Brooks is gay?
Really...
Let no one say that McCain didn't do his darndest to get the press on his side during the campaign.
I just learned that Brooks is only 47, I always thought he was somewhere north of 55.
Another shark, cleared effortlessly.
"I sat next to a Republican senator once at dinner and he had his hand on my inner thigh the whole time. I was like, ehh, get me out of here...."
And when the Senator stuck his finger in David's ear and gave him a big wet sloppy French kiss, Brooks was like, I will never sit next to him again!, and stomped out. Well, a little later, after things were breaking up, and the good wine was gone, but he definitely stomped.
Maybe The New York Times has The Washington Post beat in those-
"special dinners"...
Isn't there an etiquette about such things? Either move the hand up if you like 'em, or move it down if you don't?
Brooks should have put the hand on his crotch and seen how the guy rolled. LOL!
Some dude puts his hand on my inner thigh, there will be a scene.
If I was a woman, and some dude puts his hand on my inner thigh without me wanting it here, there will be a scene.
This is just a strange thing for Brooks to say and it doesn't give me the warm fuzzies for *his* perspective or wisdom.
fred -
"And if he is not prepared to disclose his name, why mention it specifically? "
Exactly. If it had actually happened, then he would have named the guy. Why bring it up at all unless you just want people to look sideways at ALL Republican senators wondering "Is this the guy Brooks was talking about?"
It's cheap, and it's nasty. Not that I would expect anything more from a guy who makes his living pretending to be something he clearly isn't: a conservative with integrity. He clearly fails on both parts of that description.
Notice that he only made this accusation on MSNBC where he knew he would get a pass on it without being seriously pressed for a name and where he knew that making tawdry, unsubstantiated accusations against Republicans was more likely to get a return visit than saying anything nice about one.
I did not realize Brooks was gay. That kind of changes the complexion of things. I don't know why Brooks gets into the question of politics and personalities, it was obviously a come-on. I would not be putting my hand on a woman's thigh at dinner unless, not merely hoping, I was expecting to have sex with her. I would rather just not think about doing it to a man.
But that's just me, I don't write for the NYT.
BTW, 0 is also rather touchy-feely, but so was Bush. I don't find it agreeable. Especially when it seems to be some sort of subliminal power move, and double especially when it is rejected in a way that makes you look like a bitch, e.g., 0 with Medvedev.
Brooks has a wife and three kids so I think Fred4Pres is getting him mixed up with someone else.
It's weird how Brooks makes the accusation that Senators are emotionally inept yet what kind of a guy cannot extricate himself from the vulcan like grip of say- Strom Thurmond...
You could say a person that is socially inept...
" so I think Fred4Pres is getting him mixed up with someone else."
I don't think he is.
If a guy tolerates another man putting his hand on his inner thigh for an extended period of time, he's gay.
Brooks is on the down low.
He may be married, but he likes guys too. Or possibly even exclusively.
There is nothing wrong, IMO, with him being gay. There is something wrong with him being gay and married to a woman, but make no mistake-- if the facts are as he has said, he is gay.
Brooks is not gay, he is straight and he is one of yours. We don't want him.
I lost total respect for Brooks when he accepted the prime real estate of the NY Times editorial page and has now been indoctrinated into the East Coast, elite liberal establishment.
Bobos in Paradise was a fabulous romp though.
I know he is 47, right, I was guessing 57. That is why you know he isn't gay. No gay 47 year old would look like that. At least not one that lives in NYC.
Frank Rich isn't gay either. I know you can't differentiate liberals from fags. Or as I like to say liberals are fags.
I know Mary Landrieu is a democrat. She aint bad for a democrat. Kay Bailey, ok, I guess.
Barbara Murkowski not for 10 million dollars.
All my fabulous summer plans have changed because I am nursing a wounded dog back to health. That's the kind of compassionate conservative I am.
Richard Lugar and his finger was on the trigger....
I really thought David Brooks was gay. Is he not? I swear I saw an article where he said he was gay.
I was not calling him gay to be insulting, but in stating a fact.
"We don't want him."
If you want him or not, you cannot simply claim he isn't.
I am straight, and I would prefer if someone such as Fred Phelps was not. But he is. Sucks, but such is life.
If Brooks will tolerate a guy's hand on his inner thigh for an entire meal, then he's obviously just wishing it was another guy. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.
But so, a lot of them spend so much time needing people’s love and yet they are shooting upwards their whole life, they’re not that great in normal human relationships. And so, they’re like freaks, they don’t know how to, they’re lonely. They reach out....
What says "I need love" more than letting someone touch your inner thigh all dinner long?
Sorry. Letting someone touch you for a prolonged period of time is implicit acceptance of their overture. If you don't know that, you aren't very good at normal human relationships.
I swear I did not call Brooks gay because he wears pink shirts and lavender ties.
Because even straight men can pull that off and not be metrosexual.
Go Figure.
He is married. I was wrong...well maybe because what straight guy let's another guy touch his inner thigh? I mean other than a sports trainer or doctor?
I'll bet there is a Republican Senator out there who remembers it as a dinner party where David Brooks kept brushing his thigh against his hand.
Let's also add-either this Republican Senator is going around doing this to all the little reporters or David Brooks is especially attractive.
Which is it?
{Feel free to answer none of the above...}
Too bizarre for words.
Even a clearly accidental under the table touch warrants an immediate but clear shift away.
If someone had his hand on Brooks's thigh through a meal it was because Brooks *wanted* it there.
DUH!
I realize that men don't have to put up with this as much as women do but geez-louise... it's not rocket science!
Frank Rich isn't gay either
Gay, no.
Woman, yes.
Good Oped columnists are like hot comedians who knock it out the park every night for ten years. Then they become part of the establishment and lose that edge.
It can happen to bloggers, musicians, and sportscasters too. It happened to Howard Stern IMO.
Brooks sucks anymore.
So now we see why Brooks is considered a safe enough "conservative" to be the default representative on tv pundit shows. He's a wuss.
I'd really like to start seeing real men on tv, not pansies that are afraid to hurt someone's feelings or cause a scene. Real men don't worry about such things. If another man puts his hand on your thigh, you punch him in the nose. It's really all quite simple.
I think our culture has really lost something.
Obama is a lot like Brooks.
They both constantly insist "we must find a common ground". But the middle ground always seems to be be aligned with their viewpoint.
Jesus tap-dancing CHRIST!!!
Who KNEW that our very own TITUS was not only a United States Senator, but that he was fucking David Brooks in the ass!
Well done, Titus! Now about that health care monstrosity....
Titus, rather than try to shock, try to impress us...
You can do it.
Larry Craig, doncha think? Could it be he has a wide stance at lunch?
I say Saxby Chamblis.
First his name is Saxby Chamblis, and secondly, grown men that squinty are up to something.
Christ on a crutch, is this batshit insane fucking moron still at it? Drink another box of wine and pass out already...
madawaskan --
"Brooks has a wife and three kids so I think Fred4Pres is getting him mixed up with someone else."
Being married with kids got nothin' to do with being straight or gay. Knew a gal whose last husband and she had two kids and were married almost ten before he 'came out'.
"But so, a lot of them spend so much time needing people’s love and yet they are shooting upwards their whole life, they’re not that great in normal human relationships. And so, they’re like freaks, they don’t know how to, they’re lonely. They reach out...."
Brooks might just as well be talking about himself here. Did it happen? Probably. Why is he putting this on the table now? Oh who knows? Maybe all this talk about the very dead Michael Jackson's freakishness got to him? I suspect he's evaluating his own life. Look at it as the person who writes into a forum with some story about a "friend" who did thus and such, and they need some help, so what do you advise? Yeah, right..."friend"...um hm.
This guy is in some sort of pain and looking to be smacked around by the masses to get his emotional center back.
Or? Heck, maybe he was quietly given notice by the NYT's and is looking to jumpstart his career elsewhere.
In any case, Brooks appears to me to be in some serious life crisis.
I think Brooks isn't gay, and that he let the senator keep his hand on his thigh because, by his code, it would have ungentlemanly to make a scene.
I really think this. Easterners of a certain class, or pretensions to one, would act this way.
Fred4Pres - there is another journalist with a very similar name, I think it is David Brock, who is gay. He had been identified as a conservative and then "turned", sorta like Andy Sullivan except he didn't go quite as batshit crazy. I used to confuse the two myself (Brooks and Brock). Still pretty bizarre that Brooks would let another guy feel him up for hours, on his *inner* thigh no less.
Watching this simpering twit recently on his regular Friday night stint with Jim Lehrer and an increasingly dotty old freak named Mark Shields, I said to a friend that Brooks had to be the most singularly compromised and compromising center-left twit in the world of journalism. His twitching body language fairly shrieks for some sort of petting, as though he were a smiling baahing goat in a zoo for kiddies to touch animals.
It's way past midnight and I ask forgiveness from the gods of decorum, but Brooks is singularly & perhaps uniquely unattractive, so he has to say weird bizarre crap to attract attention, maybe?
Obviously - this story is more important than health care or cap-n-trade... I will BET the press will dig into this just like they did Palin ... They won't rest until we know WHO the senator is and then destroy him. Whew! Just when I was starting to worry about the gapping vacuum left by Michael Jackson's funeral!
And what did the Democratic senator grab?
David Brooks is a feckless crap-weasel. If he didn't like the guy feeling him up, he should've been a man about it and slugged him.
Life imitates Onion.
What's more disturbing to me if this happened is not that it happened. The most disturbing thing to me is someone thought David Brooks as some kind of hottie boy-toy.
Then again, I'm not the one to decide if a man rates that title or not. Perhaps if Mr. Brooks sang Y.M.C.A. his inbox would be overfilled with phone numbers and flowers.
Jesus Christ is very talented. He tap dances on crutches!
I know this is going to sound like a crazy fantasy but every word of this story is true...
I was in Washington D.C. fulfilling my duties as a lowly intern. Despite my meager status, I was allowed to attend lavish parties and events. During one such gala, an attractive middle aged Democratic Senator happened to catch my eye. Being nervous and notoriously shy around the fairer sex, I didn’t know how to approach her. But she was far too stunning to not pursue. She had mousey blonde hair that danced on her shoulders whenever she would turn her head and short, sexy legs that I would have given anything to spend an evening in between, and she was wearing sneakers.
Summoning up all my courage and finishing off my Manhattan, I approached her from across the crowded ballroom. She was seated at a table. I awkwardly introduced myself and asked her what her name was and if I could join her.
Obviously, impressed by my straightforwardness, she smiled and replied “Patty*” in a Kathleen Turner like voice. She told me she had been admiring me across the room, which made me very embarrassed as I am usually a very humble gentleman and not boastful.
We began to make small talk. She asked me questions about my life, interests and hobbies, and the like. I could tell that she was very interested. I felt it was time to make my move. Trying to be both charming and suggestive, I paid her the ultimate compliment a man can give a woman, by stroking her inner thigh, and I could tell by the way she reacted that she was turned on and totally into it. I could tell her mind might have been saying no but her body was definitely saying yes.
Returning to my apartment that night, I was in bliss. I set the stage for a night of white-hot romance - candlelight, champagne chilling on ice, soft music, erotic oils, edible clothing - the works. The scene was set for seduction.
The time for lovemaking was upon us and I have to tell you, it was mind-blowing. I have never met a more capable and complimentary partner for the pursuit of carnal fulfillment. It was almost as if we inhabited the same mind, body and soul. My Democratic Senator lover knew exactly what to do at exactly right moment. All I can tell you is I would trust her with any stimulus package after that.
When it was over, I was exhausted. I don’t know how long we were making love - hours, perhaps days. And although our tryst in D.C. may be over, I have a feeling we will reunite and try to recapture the magic of that evening once again. Why wouldn’t I? Just look at my lover.
Now I have been made aware that my lover has a junior Democratic Senator she is friendly with, let's call her "Maria*". I don’t know exactly how to pronounce it, but I believe the French call it ménage à trois. I can nearly picture it now.
*nom de plume
I bet when Chris Mathews read this he had a few ideas about a certain democratic politician that he'd like to have put his hands on his inner thigh through an entire dinner. So that politician could feel the thrill running up Chris's leg.
Just like he when he saw a certain politician ogling a hot nubile females butt recently he felt hot pangs of jealousy coursing through his heart, wishing it was his butt that this same politician were looking at.
If a guy lets another guy grope his inner thigh for a whole meal there's some gay there, married or not.
That said, and with me not giving a rat's tush if he or anyone else is gay, I seriously doubt this happened. I'm going with the drinking at lunch and wanting to look cool on TV theory myself.
re: Jim Lehrer's Newshour, I thought Brook Shields was one person...
Time for term limits. My preference is 10 minutes.
You know, you wouldn't have to make a scene. You could pick the hand up, move it away from you and drop it, and quietly say, "don't do that." No scene. If he puts the hand back after that, THEN you should make a scene.
Sitting there, putting up with it and wishing he would stop, is stupid as heck. I don't believe his story. Either it didn't happen, or it did and he is now retroactively deciding that he didn't like it.
What stopped him from leaving? Or are we seriously to think some Senator had Brooks in an intimate grip all night and Brooks did nothing but think about how he didn't like it?
Think about how dangerous it could be to oppose a Senator's sexual advances.
Where is Althouse.
Did she sneak off to get married in Vegas?
It would be a completely different story had it been a Democrat who put a hand on a conservative in good graces with the Right, who hadn't uttered a good word about Obama.
You know, you wouldn't have to make a scene. You could pick the hand up, move it away from you and drop it, and quietly say, "don't do that."
Um, yes you would. It's a requirement.
We're on the same page. Methinks he liked it (or is exaggerating): For David Brooks: A Question About That Male Republican Senator and Your Inner Thigh
I can’t believe it happened to me. I attended a party hosted by a Republican Senator last weekend. As a journalist, my work introduces me to interesting characters occasionally and I met this Senator for an article I was writing. He appreciated my interviewing style apparently, because he invited me to his place for a party.
I brought a bottle of moderately priced Champagne (well, sparkling white zinfandel anyway), thinking that would be what a Senator and his friends would enjoy. To my surprise, I was greeted at the door by the Senator and a number of his equally sexy colleges drinking Jim Bean from the bottle. They took the bottle of White Zin from me and I never saw it again. As they led me to the hot tub, bourbon struck me as an odd choice of beverages for a group of nearly naked Senators, I would have expected them drinking old fashions or perhaps highballs. That wasn’t the only thing that stuck me as odd as the night continued. They stripped me of my clothes, leaving only my modest underwear on.
As I got in to the hot tub alone, a cute Senator forced me to guzzle foul bourbon (Wild Turkey is the only decent choice of Kentucky’s finest). He then asked me about oysters and clams and asked if I had a preference. I told him I could go either way. The other Senators began to circle the hot tub. I expected them to undress. Instead, they began donning full-body Disney mascot costumes. Mickey, Goofy, Donald, Pluto, one of the dwarves. They were all there. I searched for the booze again but the Senator was replaced by a furry visage of Buzz Lightyear. Naturally, I felt awkward at that point.
To make a long story short, the tub eventually went inside, played Scrabble and I went home alone.
There are many sick twisted individuals in the Republican Party and in the Senate.
Oh, he is married? Well then, that settles that. Gay folks never marry people from their opposite gender. Never. And they never have children with their wives or husbands. Never.
Trey
Sitting there, putting up with it and wishing he would stop, is stupid as heck. I don't believe his story. Either it didn't happen, or it did and he is now retroactively deciding that he didn't like it.
Exactly. If he sat through it for an hour, he liked it.
Read his columns. Brooks spends so much time these days jerking off and trying to jerk everyone else off, he probably just didn't notice that it was his own hand.
The instant Brooks began to criticize Bush, Cheney and the current crop of Republican losers...he was no longer considered one of your "own." (And PLEASE...don't give me the bullshit line that he NEVER was...because that's exactly what it is BULLSHIT.)
I've said it before and will say it again: Unless one agrees with the local "pack's" beliefs they're considered out of touch, a liberal, a leftists, or recently the new wingnut mantra is "socialist."
And the whining and bitching continues.
Jeremy, I guess that explains why Brooks only got a hand on his inner thigh and dinner. If he played ball with Republican, he could have closed that deal?
Ann gets some coverage for this post.It's quality snark:
Brooks probably had it coming, as I'm sure he was deliberately flaunting his tits. .
But he does get serious:
David, if you're telling the truth, you're protecting a monster -- speak up, asshole. Because sure as hell there is someone else who needs to be spoken for, and who has a hell of a lot more to lose than you do by going public. I mean, the more I think about this -- ha ha, a Senator gropes you in a public place, but no names, they're all like that -- I mean, Christ, this gets less funny and far more revolting. .
Yup.
I conclude from this that if the senator had been a Democrat, Brooks would have been okay with it.
David, if you're telling the truth, you're protecting a monster
A monster?
If it had been a female doing this, would she be described as a monster?
An adult hitting on an adult is not a monster. A gay man making an advance is not a monster. What a shocking allegation.
MayBee, maybe it was just a come-on (that Brooks did not rebuff?) I think the guy's point was that this powerful person feels he is free to grope other people because of his power.
So there may be other people in more vulnerable positions than Brooks, (and who may enjoy the groping less?), who can't protest.
Or maybe Brooks felt the Senator was too powerful even for Brooks to object?
And, partisan probably has little to do with it. Wouldn't a groper avoid crossing the aisle to grope where the gropee may be more likely to blow the whistle?
OK. That's all I can handle on this subject! It's a rich vein for double meanings, though.
Skyler said...
You know, you wouldn't have to make a scene. You could pick the hand up, move it away from you and drop it, and quietly say, "don't do that."
Um, yes you would. It's a requirement.
Well, Skyler, if you wanted to make a scene I wouldn't stop you. Make one, don't make one, but either way, don't just sit there and put up with it.
MayBee, maybe it was just a come-on (that Brooks did not rebuff?) I think the guy's point was that this powerful person feels he is free to grope other people because of his power.
Tell me....was Bill Clinton a monster?
Hitting on another adult does not make you a monster. And a Senator who makes unwelcomed advances might need a hint such advances are unwelcomed...ahemm, everything okay at home with you and the missus David? Assuming of course the story is true.
Or are you mixing psychotropic medications and alcohol?
Talk about a story tailor-made for Titus. He must be in hog-heaven, no pun intended.
We knew Brooks was a media whore and now he's established his price.
Laura has it right, you remove the offending hand discreetly while giving the person a "No, never going to happen" look. If they do it again you bend their little finger back sharply and they will remove the hand post haste. All under the table and radar. It's quite effective.
Another is when a guy puts his hand on your ass or makes inappropriate body contact in an enclosed space such as the office elevator. You simply step back on his toes with a high heel. They move, the cool ones do it without anyone noticing, the amateurs yelp.
Making a scene almost always turns the tables on the woman later, especially in a business setting.
So why did Brooks identify the Senator's party? Why was that relevant? Especially since he doesn't name the person and clearly people will wonder who it was. But the "witch hunt" will involve only Republican Senators not all Senators. Partisan effect.
Either Brooks planned the comment and understood the kind of effect or he is such a toady that he craves acceptance among the media elites he hangs with. Probably the latter but still does not ultimately reflect well on him.
John:
Think about how dangerous it could be to oppose a Senator's sexual advances.
It depends.
If the Senator is a Democrat, it could be dangerous for Brooks.
If the Senator is a Republican, Brooks could just complain to fellow members of the Fourth Estate, and the Senator would be run out of the Senate.
When I lived near Chicago's Boy's Town, I was hit on by men quite a number of times, including more than one thigh grab (even when I was with my girlfriend, who is now my wife.) It really wasn't difficult to politely refuse the attention. I have also had the usual experience of having women decline my attention. Again, it was easy for the female to give me the message without embarrassing me publicly or causing a scene. In fact it is so easy to decline such attentions that Brooks' lack of reaction is the most interesting fact of this little story.
Did Brooks not react because he is gay? Pretty doubtful. Always choose the most obvious reason. Brooks is a journalist and is so used to sucking up the powerful Washingtonians that he just let it slide to develop the source.
"Brooks is not gay, he is straight and he is one of yours. We don't want him."
Can we split the difference and say that he is bi-curious? Politically and sexually.
I think it was Lindsey Graham, who is also bi-curious. And has a girl's name.
I can't believe it. Some of you are allowing yourself to be Titus-ized and spewing sexual innuendos like it's nothing! I'm outraged you know, out-raged!!!
jim,
all of your comments are hilariously wrong. e.g.:
Jim said...
Brooks sold his credibility for a newspaper column a long time ago. To believe that this happened and he is just now mentioning it, despite having had literally hundreds of opportunities to do so previously, is beyond incredible: it is an obvious lie.
why on earth would he ever want to admit to this? i'd think he would go 10,000 opportunities before blabbing. use your head.
what the heck !!!
unbelievable
I think about it Garage is correct
BGY
طرب توب
اغاني جديده
اغاني 2012
اغاني
سوق الجمعه
حراج
مستعمل
Must have been one HELL of a crease in Brooks pants.
فريق ايجي فوركس
منتدي ايجي فوركس
توصيات العملات
ايجي فوركس
تحليلات فوركس
فوركس
الفوركس
توصيات فوركس
Post a Comment