Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

TAKE ACTION TODAY -- President Bush Signs Partial Birth Abortion -- NE Judge Puts a Stay on Bill
5 Nov 2003 | PhiKapMom

Posted on 11/05/2003 12:06:41 PM PST by PhiKapMom

The President signed the Partial Birth Abortion bill today and within an hour, a Nebraska Federal Judge according to Fox News had put a stay on the Partial Birth Abortion bill taking effect. ACLU is also shopping for a Manhatten Federal Judge to do the same.

Since these liberal judges have taken this action, it is up to Freepers to take action. Please start writing letters and calling talk radio NOW. You can find the info for your area by visiting Bush-Cheney '04 at:

Bush-Cheney '04 Activism Site

Please post on this thread the action you have taken and notify all your email lists to also take action. Time for all of us not to take it anymore from these Federal judges.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Culture/Society; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: abortion; birth; federaljudge; partial; pbaban2003; stay; terrischiavo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last
Enough is enough from these Federal Judges. Write/Call TODAY!
1 posted on 11/05/2003 12:06:41 PM PST by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing; onyx; JohnHuang2; Dog Gone; Dog; isthisnickcool; OKSooner; VOA; mhking; Reagan Man; ...
To read President Bush's comments before signing the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, please visit the daily Victory thread at:

363 Days to Victory '04 -- President Bush's Remarks on Signing of Partial Birth Abortion Ban


2 posted on 11/05/2003 12:11:34 PM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Don't forget to Visit/donate at http://www.georgewbush.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom; deport
Any info handy on this jack-ass? Such as, which democrat president appointed him, his fax number, e-mail address, etc?

Yo, deport! You're thee best.......
3 posted on 11/05/2003 12:11:41 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I love how the judge was saying he'd block it even before Bush signed the bill. Nice judicial ethics there.
4 posted on 11/05/2003 12:17:47 PM PST by jmcclain19
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
We are a representitive republic. We vote for representitives to speak for us. They have spoken for us.

If the courts choose to over ride the will of the people, then the representitives are not representing us by leaving these judges in place. If our representitives were to truely do their job, they'd impeach these judges for abuse of power

There's no taxation without representation. If the government doesn't represent us, we no longer need to pay taxes. If the courts decide our laws, we have no representation. That means no taxes.

5 posted on 11/05/2003 12:22:39 PM PST by concerned about politics ( As a rightous man declarith a thing, so shall it be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmcclain19

As in the Terri case, the pro-death crowd shopped around for a pro-death judge - Murder Inc. They found this one. This one is willing to dictate from the bench (facist litigation) to go around the representitive republic and the will of the people.

6 posted on 11/05/2003 12:26:10 PM PST by concerned about politics ( As a rightous man declarith a thing, so shall it be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Planned Parenthood just sent a email to their minions...urging them to email Bush and BLAST HIM for signing the (as they put it) "so-called" Partial Birth Abortion Ban.......

Click HERE to THANK HIM for stopping this barbaric form of infanticide.

7 posted on 11/05/2003 12:39:10 PM PST by Gopher Broke (Abortion: Big people killing little people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
I agree totally that this law should be in effect BUT AND ONLY BUT....

If it is true in instances in which the mother's life is in danger then that should be included in the bill.

AND ONLY THAT nothing more. If a stay has to be put on this bill to allow that exemption then I am ok with that. I love my wife and if it were her life and that of a child I am sorry I wpuld have to opt for the life of my wife.
8 posted on 11/05/2003 12:40:49 PM PST by AbsoluteJustice (Kiss me I'm an INFIDEL!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Impeach this
9 posted on 11/05/2003 12:46:01 PM PST by keithtoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
AND ONLY THAT nothing more. If a stay has to be put on this bill to allow that exemption then I am ok with that. I love my wife and if it were her life and that of a child I am sorry I wpuld have to opt for the life of my wife.

There is never any medical or health reason to briefly pause childbirth long enough to kill the baby before he or she is fully birthed. In fact, birthing the feet first (as is done with the D&X procedure) is more dangerous to the mother than birthing head first. If you can deliver the child's legs and torso, there's no reason to not deliver the head - unless of course you intend the sneak into the legal window that allows you to murder the baby inches before full birth.

10 posted on 11/05/2003 12:46:50 PM PST by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: keithtoo
The judge's name is Richard Kopf.

Richard = Dick
Kopf = German for head.

So, this judge will hereafter be known as Judge Dick Head.

11 posted on 11/05/2003 12:47:51 PM PST by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
AND ONLY THAT nothing more. If a stay has to be put on this bill to allow that exemption then I am ok with that. I love my wife and if it were her life and that of a child I am sorry I wpuld have to opt for the life of my wife.

It's in there. The last time they signed this bill, it wasn't there. That's how the pro-death killers got it thrown out.
They didn't want to make that err again.

12 posted on 11/05/2003 12:48:56 PM PST by concerned about politics ( As a rightous man declarith a thing, so shall it be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
There are instances, few of course, but there are instances in which women have been told by medical doctors that having birth CAN be deadly. I am no doctor and these instances are long before the partial birth abortion debate even began. None of what you list below are in those circumstances and anyone with half a brain knows this. I am sure there are rare diseases or conditions in which a soon to be mother's life may be in danger if she were to give birth. I AM NOT FOR ABORTION but if my wife were told by a medical doctor NOT A BUTCHER DOCTOR that her life may end if she were to give birth, I am sorry but my wife lives and child goes. I have a child so I know how I would feel FYI.
13 posted on 11/05/2003 12:53:18 PM PST by AbsoluteJustice (Kiss me I'm an INFIDEL!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
But in the D&X procedure (partial birth abortion) the mother gives partial birth and the baby's head is held in the birth canal just long enough to suck the brains out and crush the skull. Give a slight pull, or let natural contractions complete the work - as in don't mess with the childbirth already in progress - and the child would be born alive. They only perform the procedure to fit within some grisly legal window allowing the murder of the child at a VERY late stage of pregnancy.

Another method to kill the child at this stage is to perform a partial C Section - enough to allow access to the child - and to clamp the umbilical and let the child suffocate within the mother's womb before it is removed. Again, no excuse but technically legal. No, the C Section method is not performed in an abortuary, but has been reported to have been done in some hospitals (I've read a lot of pro-life books containing testimony from ex-abortionists and nurses.)

14 posted on 11/05/2003 1:01:42 PM PST by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
Is there another method that this can be done IF AND ONLY IF the mother's life is determined to be in danger NOT when the child is coming out? Because these conditions had to have been diagnosed prior to the mother giving birth.
15 posted on 11/05/2003 1:09:31 PM PST by AbsoluteJustice (Kiss me I'm an INFIDEL!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
Is there another method that this can be done IF AND ONLY IF the mother's life is determined to be in danger NOT when the child is coming out? Because these conditions had to have been diagnosed prior to the mother giving birth.

Yes, either complete the childbirth since you've already endangered the mother as much or more through the partial birth. Or deliver via emergency C Section. There's no medical reason to KILL the child in the process.

16 posted on 11/05/2003 1:18:26 PM PST by Spiff (Have you committed one random act of thoughtcrime today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't a woman who knows that getting pregnant would result in her death do something about it BEFORE she gets pregnant....my doctor told me that after my fourth child ...so....guess what...we had that issued settled before I left his office that day, or at least my husband did....the cases of women having this procedure performed due to health concerns is infinitisimal....by the way, health concerns can be severe depression or anxiety, so for that a little baby deserves this horrific procedure? I don't think so.
17 posted on 11/05/2003 1:27:04 PM PST by coloradomomba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
The judge is suffering from delusions of grandeur.He has NO AUTHORITY to stay anything.Congress passes laws and the da*n judges have no right to usurp them.The president should order the executive branch to carry out the enforcement and spit on the courts!
18 posted on 11/05/2003 1:45:17 PM PST by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx
"Such as, which democrat president appointed him"

He was appointed by GHWB, not a Democrat.
19 posted on 11/05/2003 1:47:26 PM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

20 posted on 11/05/2003 2:00:54 PM PST by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Judicial appointments were not his strong suit, now were they? David Souter comes to mind and now this horrid man.
21 posted on 11/05/2003 2:20:09 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: onyx
RICHARDG. KOPFCHIEFJUDGE
Office: 586 Denney Federal Building, 100 CentennialMall North, Lincoln, NE 68508-3803,
phone (402) 437-5252

Appointed as U.S. District Judge: May 26, 1992; be-came chief judge for the District of Nebraska, 1999Biography: Born Dec. 1, 1946, in Toledo, Ohio. Gradu-ate of Kearney State College, 1969; University of NebraskaCollege of Law (with distinction and Order of the Coif),1972. Married Verdella Blank Kopf (deceased Dec. 26, 1986).Three children: Marne C. Byrd, Lisa Kopf and Keller Kopf.Married Joan Stofferson, April 30, 1992. Former: appointedfull-time U.S. magistrate, 1987; served as counsel for the stateof Nebraska in regard to the impeachment of the Nebraskaattorney general, 1984; private law practice, Cook, Kopf andDoyle, Lexington, 1974-86; law clerk to Donald R. Ross, U.S.Circuit Judge, 1972-74. Honors and awards: elected Fellowof the Nebraska Bar Foundation, 1989.


Bush Signs Abortion Ban; Judge Stays Law in Nebraska



President Bush on Wednesday afternoon signed the first federal law to restrict an abortion procedure since the U.S. Supreme Court's 30-year-old Roe v. Wade decision.

But less than an hour later, a U.S. District judge blocked the legislation from taking effect in Nebraska, where one of three appeals against the new law had been filed, the Associated Press reports.

The bill outlawing what opponents call "partial birth" abortion had been challenged even before it became law.

In acting on the Nebraska appeal, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Kopf stopped short of barring the law's implementation nationwide. But he issued the Nebraska edict because the law did not make an exception for the health of the mother. Hearings were also held Wednesday on similar challenges in San Francisco and New York City.

The "partial-birth" procedure, generally done in the second or third trimester, involves partial delivery of the fetus before it is killed. Anti-abortion groups had sought to have the procedure outlawed since 1995. But two separate attempts were both vetoed by then-President Bill Clinton, who said both did not provide exceptions to protect the mother's health.

Supporters of the legislation say it applies only to a relatively rare procedure done late in pregnancy, the AP reports. Pro-choice groups counter that the measure's language is overly broad and could wind up making several other safe and common procedures illegal.

I saw Judge Nigapillio (SP) on Fox News immediately after the signing discussing the legislation. He mentioned that the PBA had been struck down in Nebraska some years back by the same SCOTUS we have today but that he thought this writing would stand up.... He mentioned that there were at least three appeals coming. So this stay occuring in Nebraska where the Law had once been struck down and one of the appeals filed there isn't surprising....
22 posted on 11/05/2003 2:33:20 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: onyx
"Judicial appointments were not his strong suit, now were they? David Souter comes to mind and now this horrid man.
"

Apparently not. I just wanted to clear things up. Not every bad judge was appointed by a Democrat.
23 posted on 11/05/2003 2:34:03 PM PST by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
There are no cases in which the delivery can hurt the mother WHEN ALL BUT THE TOP OF THE BABY'S HEAD IS ALREADY OUT!!! Do a little research before spouting off.
24 posted on 11/05/2003 2:36:33 PM PST by johnb838 (What about MY right to free speech?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: INSENSITIVE GUY
The judge is suffering from delusions of grandeur.He has NO AUTHORITY to stay anything.Congress passes laws and the da*n judges have no right to usurp them.

Well actually, Congress could have included language in the bill to preclude federal appeal, but of course it didn't.

25 posted on 11/05/2003 3:15:41 PM PST by findingtruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: deport; JennieOsborne; /\XABN584; 10mm; 3D-JOY; 5Madman; <1/1,000,000th%; 11B3; 1Peter2:16; ...
passing it on...
26 posted on 11/05/2003 3:43:51 PM PST by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
Ask your wife what she would want you to do.
27 posted on 11/05/2003 4:22:46 PM PST by SwinneySwitch (Freedom isn't Free - Support the Troops & Vets!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
Why do you keep pinging me? I have no idea who you are.
28 posted on 11/05/2003 4:29:39 PM PST by CrazyBillyJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: deport
Deport, even though I know you're the best researcher and finder of fact, I am nonetheless, always amazed and awed by your many posts. I appreciate you more than I am able to relate.
29 posted on 11/05/2003 5:06:35 PM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Thanks...... it's all in the 'google'.....
30 posted on 11/05/2003 5:16:49 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I am against abortion, unless necessary for the physical life of the mother.

That said, I'd like to put out some logic that I think we should deal with. Since I read Roe v Wade some years ago, I may be misremembering some things. I don't want to go reread it because, frankly, when I read it before I had to watch Walt Disney's Fantasia twice to wash the corruption out of my mind.

The basic way the SC ruled the anti-abortion laws in the states unconstitutional was the 9th amendment (rights retained by the people) "purviewed" through the 14th amendment (citizen of the US only, not a state and recognized only if "born or naturalized).

Any other considerations notwithstanding, The "born or naturalized" clause in the 14th, to the extent Roe relied on it, would have to mean actually, physically born, and out of the mother's womb.

I would think any court would have to follow what the SC rules for the reasons the SC used.

A law banning a partial birth birth procedure, and with the wording I last saw when I read the bill (it was when it was first posted here), it could be reasonably argued that it is an anti-abortion law. An anti-abortion law wouldn't, by the reasoning above, be constitutional based on Roe's interpretation of the constitution, which is alive and active.

My understanding is that a court can take "judicial notice" of precedents and other facts that bear on a case. It may be that even a conservative judge would have to use those considerations, that it be likely the SC would rule it unconstitutional under their previous notions of the post 14th amendment era constitution.

I'd like it to be otherwise, but this is how I read the situation.

31 posted on 11/05/2003 5:33:26 PM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
The courts need to take judicial notice of facts, not legal fictions. Judges ,some of whom are human, have made many mistakes over the centuries.
32 posted on 11/05/2003 5:42:51 PM PST by hoosierham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
There has always been an ethical medical rationale to save the LIFE of a mother over that of a fetus . Even the Catholic church agrees with that. However, the Partial birth procedure would never be used in a life threatening situation. The uterus has to undergo several days of 'ripening' medications, before the natural premature labor begins.

No doctor would choose this to for a woman threatened with death.
It is generally chosen so that the mother avoids a Caesarian section scar.

33 posted on 11/05/2003 6:15:37 PM PST by maica (Leadership matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
So, this judge will hereafter be known as Judge Dick Head.

&&&&

And one of the protesting congresswomen today is named Louise Slaughter. I don't think I would want to be the soundbite person against this law, if that was my name.
34 posted on 11/05/2003 6:17:52 PM PST by maica (Leadership matters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics; All
Thanks for the clarification.I've got a couple of questions. On the off chance that the U.S.Supreme Court decides against this bill,can the President issue an Executive Order? And if he does,can the courts overturn it? Thanks.
35 posted on 11/05/2003 6:21:39 PM PST by Lady In Blue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham
The courts need to take judicial notice of facts, not legal fictions. Judges ,some of whom are human, have made many mistakes over the centuries.

Yes, but the reasons the SC ruled how they did in Roe v Wade would be a judicially noticed fact, wouldn't it? I don't think the court would have to mention it's judicial notices in its rulings; they could rule on any reasonable point, as I understand, but do it noting that the law was unlikly to survive the SC, and that being the real consideration.

Maybe somebody out here has more expert knowledge of the situation.

36 posted on 11/05/2003 7:23:45 PM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Will do bump!
37 posted on 11/05/2003 8:08:45 PM PST by harpo11 (Rush, He Ain't Heavy, He's Our Brother... Best Wishes, Godspeed. Rush!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if I'm repeating something. I don't know if you and your wife have had children already, I'm sorta assuming not.

There is NO WAY a baby can be that far along in the delivery and suddenly the wife's life is in danger. Perhaps complications arise...but don't you ALL remember something called C-section???? That WAS how things were (and still are) handled if there seems to be a breech birth (or other complications).

Trust me on this. They are part of the culture of death, those ghouls who advocate this. They're demonic in my opinion. And they WILL answer to God someday.
38 posted on 11/05/2003 8:21:09 PM PST by Brad’s Gramma (I have a good recipe for Spotted Owl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Brad's Gramma
This whole bill is just sound and fury signifying nothing. Late term abortions can still be peformed by simply killing the child while he or she is still in the womb, rather than waiting until he or she is halfway out.
39 posted on 11/05/2003 10:25:38 PM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Then he (President Bush) should have done nothing?

Sat on his hands?

I'd LOVE it if abortion was flat out outlawed RIGHT THIS INSTANT....but it's NOT gonna happen! Take what's been given to us, and WORK WITH IT!!! Come on! We can do this...!!!
40 posted on 11/05/2003 10:27:40 PM PST by Brad’s Gramma (I have a good recipe for Spotted Owl!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I guess this judge needs some prayers today!

Shall we pray that lightning knocks him off his horse or

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>??
41 posted on 11/05/2003 10:36:29 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
BTTT!!!!!!
42 posted on 11/06/2003 3:06:55 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: jmcclain19; Khepera
"Nice judicial ethics there."

Isn't that an oxymoron? Judges don't have a soul or ethics (in general, there are some left)...
43 posted on 11/06/2003 4:51:49 AM PST by wwjdn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Brad's Gramma
Yes I have a child 14 month baby girl.
44 posted on 11/06/2003 5:05:54 AM PST by AbsoluteJustice (Kiss me I'm an INFIDEL!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: All
I speak as a native Nebraskan

This judge is a shame and embarrassment to our state, and I plan on letting him know that.
45 posted on 11/06/2003 6:03:14 AM PST by NebraskaTrailrider (("Anyone who thinks a horse is dumb, is dumb." Roy Rogers))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: AbsoluteJustice
Former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, along with hundreds of physicians and the Physicians' Ad Hoc Coalition for Truth (PHACT) said that this "procedure" is never necessary to save the life of the mother.

Dr. Nancy Romer, FACOG, Chairman of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Miami Valley Hospital in Ohio said, "People deserve to know that the partial-birth abortion is never medically indicated either to save the health of a woman or preserve her future fertility."

Dr. Martin Haskell, an abortionist who specializes in these late-term abortions, has admitted to performing over 1,000 of these abortions. He stated in a recorded interview with the American Medical News (the official newspaper of the AMA) that: "In my particular case, probably 20% (of these procedures) are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective." That means in 80% (that's over 800 babies) there was no health risk for the mother and the baby had no handicaps.

It has been documented that thousands of these abortions are performed each year. A New Jersey newspaper reporter with the Bergen County Record discovered and reported that 1,500 babies are killed each year by partial-birth abortion at one New Jersey "Hospital" alone. - source

46 posted on 11/06/2003 6:13:10 AM PST by shhrubbery!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I will pray that judge has a change of heart.
47 posted on 11/06/2003 7:03:11 AM PST by Pippin (GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
KEWL!
48 posted on 11/06/2003 7:03:34 AM PST by Pippin (GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Pippin
May GOd show this judge the same mercy he has bestowed upon the innocence children his ruling affects!
49 posted on 11/06/2003 8:12:24 AM PST by princess leah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Pippin
:O)

That Meekabump gif was made for me by Autoresponder ...


50 posted on 11/06/2003 8:49:50 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson