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

Skip to comments.

The Debt-Peonage Society
The New York Times ^ | March 8, 2005 | PAUL KRUGMAN

Posted on 03/08/2005 2:54:18 PM PST by Torie

The Debt-Peonage Society

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: March 8, 2005

Today the Senate is expected to vote to limit debate on a bill that toughens the existing bankruptcy law, probably ensuring the bill's passage. A solid bloc of Republican senators, assisted by some Democrats, has already voted down a series of amendments that would either have closed loopholes for the rich or provided protection for some poor and middle-class families.

The bankruptcy bill was written by and for credit card companies, and the industry's political muscle is the reason it seems unstoppable. But the bill also fits into the broader context of what Jacob Hacker, a political scientist at Yale, calls "risk privatization": a steady erosion of the protection the government provides against personal misfortune, even as ordinary families face ever-growing economic insecurity.

The bill would make it much harder for families in distress to write off their debts and make a fresh start. Instead, many debtors would find themselves on an endless treadmill of payments.

The credit card companies say this is needed because people have been abusing the bankruptcy law, borrowing irresponsibly and walking away from debts. The facts say otherwise.

A vast majority of personal bankruptcies in the United States are the result of severe misfortune. One recent study found that more than half of bankruptcies are the result of medical emergencies. The rest are overwhelmingly the result either of job loss or of divorce.

To the extent that there is significant abuse of the system, it's concentrated among the wealthy - including corporate executives found guilty of misleading investors - who can exploit loopholes in the law to protect their wealth, no matter how ill-gotten.

One increasingly popular loophole is the creation of an "asset protection trust," which is worth doing only for the wealthy. Senator Charles Schumer introduced an amendment that would have limited the exemption on such trusts, but apparently it's O.K. to game the system if you're rich: 54 Republicans and 2 Democrats voted against the Schumer amendment.

Other amendments were aimed at protecting families and individuals who have clearly been forced into bankruptcy by events, or who would face extreme hardship in repaying debts. Ted Kennedy introduced an exemption for cases of medical bankruptcy. Russ Feingold introduced an amendment protecting the homes of the elderly. Dick Durbin asked for protection for armed services members and veterans. All were rejected.

None of this should come as a surprise: it's all part of the pattern.

As Mr. Hacker and others have documented, over the past three decades the lives of ordinary Americans have become steadily less secure, and their chances of plunging from the middle class into acute poverty ever larger. Job stability has declined; spells of unemployment, when they happen, last longer; fewer workers receive health insurance from their employers; fewer workers have guaranteed pensions.

Some of these changes are the result of a changing economy. But the underlying economic trends have been reinforced by an ideologically driven effort to strip away the protections the government used to provide. For example, long-term unemployment has become much more common, but unemployment benefits expire sooner. Health insurance coverage is declining, but new initiatives like health savings accounts (introduced in the 2003 Medicare bill), rather than discouraging that trend, further undermine the incentives of employers to provide coverage.

Above all, of course, at a time when ever-fewer workers can count on pensions from their employers, the current administration wants to phase out Social Security.

The bankruptcy bill fits right into this picture. When everything else goes wrong, Americans can still get a measure of relief by filing for bankruptcy - and rising insecurity means that they are forced to do this more often than in the past. But Congress is now poised to make bankruptcy law harsher, too.

Warren Buffett recently made headlines by saying America is more likely to turn into a "sharecroppers' society" than an "ownership society." But I think the right term is a "debt peonage" society - after the system, prevalent in the post-Civil War South, in which debtors were forced to work for their creditors. The bankruptcy bill won't get us back to those bad old days all by itself, but it's a significant step in that direction.

And any senator who votes for the bill should be ashamed.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: bankruptcy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-288 next last
I usually disagree with Krugman, and sometimes find him disingenuous and tendentious, but I agree with each and every word he wrote in this Op Ed piece.

Credit Card companies know the risks when they extend credit, and induce the spendtrift who don't read the fine print to get sucked into the quicksand. BK and a fresh start is not only something I think if fundamentally moral and right, but it also is the only real curb there is on credit card companies just going hog wild, and leading some folks into lifelong peonage as Krugman would put it.

I am a Republican, and if I were in the Senate, I would have been the sole Pubbie to vote no on cloture with respect to this turkey.

1 posted on 03/08/2005 2:54:24 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: Torie
Ditto.

I even wrote Krugman to tell him so.

I hope the Republicans are pleased with themselves--they are going to pay a huge political price for this down the line.

3 posted on 03/08/2005 2:57:24 PM PST by cicero's_son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

I don't think I agree with Krugman on anything much less his take on revolving credit worthiness....you play you pay.


4 posted on 03/08/2005 2:58:09 PM PST by iopscusa (El Vaquero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Do you think this will have an effect on housing prices? Maybe people will cut back on the amount they are willing to borrow?


5 posted on 03/08/2005 2:59:18 PM PST by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Individuals are responsible for their own actions. NO ONE is forced to use a credit card. I know, because my own brother got into this kind of trouble, and I bailed him out. This is just more of the same from Krugman.


6 posted on 03/08/2005 3:05:20 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cicero's_son

Same here as far as this bankruptcy bill goes. He could have done a much better job, however, of addressing the particular problems with this bill. Instead, he had to go to the broad brush approach of Republicans evil, Democrats good. Republicans are going to get hammered repeatedly over this.


7 posted on 03/08/2005 3:07:37 PM PST by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: undercover brother

When you find yourself on the same side as four partisan DemocRATs like
Ted Kennedy, Russ Feingold, Dick Durbin and Charles Schumer you are not
thinking like a Republican.


8 posted on 03/08/2005 3:09:08 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Warren Buffet is again over the top and a little hypocritical, after all he has made billions shorting the dollar while he gloom and dooms the american economy down.

Still severe bankruptcy reform is a very bad idea for Republicans to be promoting; I thought Enron etc taught them something about how all strata of society try to avoid paying their bills when they can.

Also its easy to be in favor of bankruptcy reform if you are a Senator from states like Texas, Florida, and some others now where it is impossible to collect debts anyway.


9 posted on 03/08/2005 3:13:14 PM PST by stan_sipple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

Not discussed is the fact that TORT issues are largely what made medical care so costly. Sorry you agree with "everything" here.


10 posted on 03/08/2005 3:17:19 PM PST by The Spirit Of Allegiance (ATTN. MARXIST RED MSM: I RESENT your "RED STATE" switcheroo using our ELECTORAL MAP as PROPAGANDA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
...over the past three decades the lives of ordinary Americans have become steadily less secure, and their chances of plunging from the middle class into acute poverty ever larger.

Second rate drivel from a third rate hack.

11 posted on 03/08/2005 3:21:04 PM PST by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Credit Card companies know the risks when they extend credit..."

As do adults when they sign the contracts .

...and induce the spendthrift who don't read the fine print to get sucked into the quicksand.

They don't cause the spendthrift to get into debt - the spendthrift alone decides that.

12 posted on 03/08/2005 3:21:08 PM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RKV

This bill is a hugely bad idea -- in my opinion -- because it's going to play havoc with the banking system. Again, just my thoughts -- but I see two waves hitting the banks. The first is the massive number of people who'll rush to file Chap 11 under the old rules. Some of these people would have been on the fence and continued to pay off the bills, but since this is the last chance to walk away, many of them will take the opportunity.

Secondly, once people start failing in a significant way -- and it's gonna happen. They're gonna start losing their homes. Banks are not only going to end up with a lot of homes to sell (something they don't like to do) but if the numbers reach a certain level (as yet to be determined) it's going to drive prices down, so the banks end up upside down on all those mortgages.

This bill seems to be a real exercise in being real careful what you wish for...


13 posted on 03/08/2005 3:21:14 PM PST by durasell (Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stan_sipple
One oddity of the bill is that if you are below the median income of a state you can still do chapter 7 (discharge all debts except non dischargeable debts arising from fraud, puntive damages ala OJ, certain taxes owed etc), and if you are above, you can't. That should engender lots of litigation right there. And woe the person who was above the median income at the time of the BK (or whatever the test is), but typically is below it.

The whole bill is a Rube Goldberg thingie and an embarrassment. The only merit it has is limiting the abuse of the effectively unlimited homestread exemption that Texas and Florida offer up, which is indefensible.

14 posted on 03/08/2005 3:22:01 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Credit Card companies know the risks when they extend credit, and induce the spendtrift who don't read the fine print to get sucked into the quicksand.

If you rent the money, you gotta return it.

They don't read the fine print?
Stupidity has always been a capital crime.

I know it's hard. When I was younger I dug myself in so deeply it took years to dig out, but I owed the money.

So9

15 posted on 03/08/2005 3:22:56 PM PST by Servant of the 9 (Trust Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ikka
No. Mortages are secured debt and typically non recourse to the individual in any event. The lender can look solely to the property for repayment. There are exceptions, but they are of little practical significance for homeowners.
16 posted on 03/08/2005 3:24:34 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
"Credit Card companies know the risks when they extend credit..."

As do adults when they sign the contracts ."

The "adults" don't have millions to spread around politicians to change the law to increase profits multi-millions.
17 posted on 03/08/2005 3:25:44 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Shermy

No, all the "adults" have is the ability to vote and fire the pols.


18 posted on 03/08/2005 3:27:14 PM PST by durasell (Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: durasell

I think you are wrong. Under chapter 11, you lose your home now so if they rush to file under chapter 11 they wont keep their house anyway. Chapter 13 or the type of bankruptcy that the Republicans are attempting to make most file under you can keep your house, but you continue to make some payments on your other credit.


19 posted on 03/08/2005 3:28:39 PM PST by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Torie
One oddity of the bill is that if you are below the median income of a state you can still do chapter 7 (discharge all debts except non dischargeable debts arising from fraud, puntive damages ala OJ, certain taxes owed etc), and if you are above, you can't.

Really? That's so patently awful. The consequences are enormous, including credit card companies lobbying to have the govt. concocted statistical "median" to be lowered.

"The whole bill is a Rube Goldberg thingie and an embarrassment."

Yep. But the credit card companies paid big bucks to get this through.

20 posted on 03/08/2005 3:29:16 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
The bait and switches credit companies play with consumers, like with little clauses that if they are late in paying anything to anybody, then the APR on their credit card goes up from 7% to 27% even if they are not late in paying the credit card company, and simply legion and amazing. American Express plays the game of sending your bill quite close to when the grace period ends to pay it without incuring an interest charge. Sometimes the period is so short, I have to send the check in the mail rather than pay via Quicken, which has a four business day delay. And it goes on and on.

The credit card industry makes its money off slimer tactics, and preying on the less sophisticated and disciplined. They need to be punished, and then punished some more.

21 posted on 03/08/2005 3:29:22 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the 9

A bank giving unsecured loans is much like someone playing the stock market.

Prepare to see even more 'sweet deals' for youngsters who don't know better and other crap that's gonna really come back to haunt Republicans.

The credit companies are probably drooling like mad wolves at the prospect of offering desperate people way more credit than they otherwise ever would consider.

This is a nightmare political bill. I wish it at least had a 5 year sunset clause in it.


22 posted on 03/08/2005 3:30:25 PM PST by G32
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dave S

They'll lose their homes because they won't be able to make mortgage payments, etc., not because the home was sold off to satisfy the debt.


23 posted on 03/08/2005 3:30:35 PM PST by durasell (Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Torie

I don't know the details of this, but it is probably a very bad idea. I'd remind all my brother and sister freepers that Bankruptcy protection is in the Constitution. I don't know what we are going to do with people who can neither pay nor discharge their debts. But I do know the protection to file bankruptcy was put in the Constitution by our founders because they had seen the useless hell of debtor's prisons in the old country.

Maybe W will break out the veto pen, but I think he is allergic to it.


24 posted on 03/08/2005 3:31:14 PM PST by jocon307 (Vote George Washington for the #1 spot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
It's a tough bill. You know, it almost makes me think that it might have been the creditors (and not the debtors) who won last November.

And isn't it fitting that it should be our national political leaders who sense that the time has come for Americans to understand that we just can't go on spending more than we're bringing in? ;-)

25 posted on 03/08/2005 3:33:17 PM PST by Scenic Sounds (Sí, estamos libres sonreír otra vez - ahora y siempre.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
What law did the credit card companies break that they can be punished for, pray tell? Adults have to be responsible for their actions and the government already has given the irresponsible a break with bankruptcy. Why not require people who can vote, sit on a jury and own a gun to meet their contractual obligations? If that is too much to ask then let's just end the Republic right here and now.
26 posted on 03/08/2005 3:37:15 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Torie

wHY CAN'T CREDIT CARD COMPANIES BE HAPPY WITH 30 CENTS ON THE DOLLAR, JUST LIKE BUYERS OF aRGENTINE bONDS?


27 posted on 03/08/2005 3:37:15 PM PST by SURI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
The "adults" don't have millions to spread around politicians to change the law to increase profits multi-millions.

They don't need millions to avoid credit card debt.. No one forced them to use a credit card at all.

28 posted on 03/08/2005 3:38:36 PM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
They don't need millions to avoid credit card debt.. No one forced them to use a credit card at all.

So there should be no bankruptcy at all, is that your point?

29 posted on 03/08/2005 3:40:53 PM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RKV

Just for for yucks, does anyone know how the law impacts those who can't pay their home equity loans?


30 posted on 03/08/2005 3:45:29 PM PST by durasell (Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Torie
The bait and switches credit companies play with consumers, like with little clauses that if they are late in paying anything to anybody, then the APR on their credit card goes up from 7% to 27% even if they are not late in paying the credit card company, and simply legion and amazing. American Express plays the game of sending your bill quite close to when the grace period ends to pay it without incuring an interest charge. Sometimes the period is so short, I have to send the check in the mail rather than pay via Quicken, which has a four business day delay. And it goes on and on.

So get a different card, or no card. You haven't shown me any fraud yet.

The credit card industry makes its money off slimer tactics, and preying on the less sophisticated and disciplined. They need to be punished, and then punished some more.

If people don't know how to read contracts, then they can hire a lawyer or not sign a contract. If they can't figure out that they need help, then perhaps they need a legal guardian appointed.

I don't want the government as my legal guardian.

31 posted on 03/08/2005 3:48:16 PM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: undercover brother

Understood, Bro, but Krugman is almost NEVER right. I have been watching this guy for a LONG time, and the song always remains the same. My 2 cents.


33 posted on 03/08/2005 3:53:47 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Torie

I personally think that there is a huge debt problem in this country, but that it is only 50% the fault of the credit card companies. Are their tactics manipulative and underhanded, designed to prey upon the young, stupid and poor? Yes, yes they are. But no one is forced to take on credit card debt. I think the industry needs to be regulated in a fair and just way, but also that the American consumer needs a better education about personal finances and personal responsibility. Why do our schools spend a year teaching algebra to students who will never figure out how to balance a checkbook?


34 posted on 03/08/2005 3:55:12 PM PST by LiveBait
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
So there should be no bankruptcy at all, is that your point?

I favor bankruptcy law to divide the assets of the debtor and manage his future earnings amongst his creditors, but not to remove his debt at the expense of his creditors.

The bankrupt might keep his car, as part of a plan to maximize his earnings, in order to limit damage to creditors.

35 posted on 03/08/2005 3:59:57 PM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: secretagent

"I don't want the government as my legal guardian." Ditto. Thanks for saying that.


36 posted on 03/08/2005 4:02:49 PM PST by RKV ( He who has the guns, makes the rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: LiveBait

I cannot imagine how anyone could disagree with a word you said. The only phrase that comes to mind is, "of course."


37 posted on 03/08/2005 4:04:56 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Torie

I don't believe you can legally force people into CH 13 because of the prohibition against indentured servitude.


38 posted on 03/08/2005 4:07:18 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiveBait

If the masses don't understand contracts they sign, then we need to reconsider the franchise to vote.


39 posted on 03/08/2005 4:09:31 PM PST by secretagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Blurblogger

Collection agencies which buy up bad credit are frustrated by the fact that their judgments become worthless after the debtor files bankruptcy.

The largest group of Ch 13 filings is from DOCTORS. (per a recent bankruptcy conference)

There is also the new phenomenon of people loosing their jobs and IMMEDIATLY filing bankruptcy. People don't wait to loose everything.


40 posted on 03/08/2005 4:13:22 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
I don't think so. The idea is that you just keep paying any money you make above a certain subsistence level to your creditors until you die. It is sort of like an extra little social security tax kind of thing. But of course, you don't have to earn any surplus money. You can just make subsistence level, and spend the rest of the time on the beach. There is no mandate to work, so it isn't indentured servitude.

I hope that helps.

I have this phobia about paying any credit card company one late charge or one penny of interest while present on this mortal coil. So far I remain a virgin, and pure. The credit card companies may make most of their money screwing people, but they won't screw me.

41 posted on 03/08/2005 4:13:30 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: secretagent

That is called indentured servitude. What if the debtor refuses to work as a slave? Will you amend the constitution to bring back debtor prisons?


42 posted on 03/08/2005 4:14:57 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Torie

The law currently provides that a Ch 13 must be complete in no more than 60 months.

You also have to dedicate 90 percent of your income after exemptions, to pay the bankruptcy plan.

THE SOLE purpose of this bill is to force more people into Ch 13's in the HOPES of getting a few pennies more for the unsecured creditors. (remember the secured creditors are SECURED).

The irony is that lawyers will make MORE money from a Ch 13 than a Ch 7.


43 posted on 03/08/2005 4:17:54 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Torie
I have this phobia about paying any credit card company one late charge or one penny of interest while present on this mortal coil. So far I remain a virgin, and pure. The credit card companies may make most of their money screwing people, but they won't screw me.

This may be a little bit on the Hyperbole side, but anyone who pays a dime for credit card interest is an idiot living beyond their means (clearly I am with you). The only debt anyone should have is a mortgage and maybe a car payment (and that should be paid off early).

I especally like it when the credit card companies call and offer to up my credit limit (what? They think it isn't enough to buy a yacht or something?). I tell them, "no thanks" and they freak out.

That, my friends, is how you get a FICO of 820.

44 posted on 03/08/2005 4:18:55 PM PST by freedumb2003 (1st you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women (HJ Simpson))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Well it is good to know there is a five year limit. What happens after that? Are the debts THEN discharged?


45 posted on 03/08/2005 4:19:06 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Torie

IF, very important IF, you have your Ch 13 plan approved, you essentially buy back the non exempt assets of your ch 13 extate. If you live in a state with no homestead exemption it means you WILL loose your home.

The final discharge means all debts are satisfied. It usually means the unsecured creditors are screwed with a few cents total.

If you can not finish in five years, you may not qualify for a ch 13. (ie back child support arears, mortgage arears)


46 posted on 03/08/2005 4:25:30 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Torie
I often feel out of touch with much of America. I don't drink, smoke, watch network telelvision or go to movies but I think sometimes my biggest difference is I don't owe anybody anything. I have credit cards and I use them because that's about the only way to shop online or get automotive work done but I pay them in full every month. If I can't afford to pay them in full, I don't use them

It is remarkably liberating to do without many things including debt.

47 posted on 03/08/2005 4:29:05 PM PST by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopeckne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie

how interesting.... especially considering it was Republicans who helped to repeal or over-ride old anti-loan sharking bills to help states get into the legal loansharking business via credit card companies. the history of the whole thing is quite interesting, especially considering my own ex-con, ex-gevornor, ex-represenative - William Janklow(R) got the ball rolling right here in SD w/ citabank. why? because SD was the only state (or one of only a very few) who had no loan shark laws.


48 posted on 03/08/2005 4:31:29 PM PST by sdpatriot (remember waco and ruby ridge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Well, if you were in the Senate, you could count on my vote for "anyone but Torie". Personal responsibility, financial and otherwise, has to be flogged back in people, if need be (and there IS a huge need for it).
Centuries ago there were debtors' prisons, and before that the institution of debt slavery, even extending to debtor's family. Not that there were no bad debtors at that time - there were, but the notion of responsibility, buttressed by real penalties for failure - was much deeper rooted, to the point of being unquestionable.
49 posted on 03/08/2005 4:34:05 PM PST by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

i'm even more out of touch... never used or had a credit card in my life. it makes it hard to do certain things at time like travel.... but i refuse to play the game. i consider them legalized loan sharks. (i do smoke though hahaha!)


50 posted on 03/08/2005 4:34:56 PM PST by sdpatriot (remember waco and ruby ridge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-288 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