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

Skip to comments.

Pro-gun, anti-abortion and fiscally conservative: meet the neo-Dems
Guardian ^ | 11/10/06 | Ed Pilkington

Posted on 11/10/2006 1:08:07 AM PST by paudio

The conservative Democrats, or new Democrats as they are sometimes called, were disproportionately represented in the most highly contested races against Republicans, and are likely to form a substantial bloc within the new members.

Heath Shuler, a former American football celebrity who now holds a House of Representatives' seat for North Carolina, is representative of the group. He has an evangelical Christian background and is on the right of the argument on many social issues such as abortion.

Democratic party leaders deny that they had an official strategy to plant right-wing candidates in vulnerable Republican seats as a way of winning over voters. But Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the campaign to win back the House of Representatives, has said that when they searched for candidates with the best hopes of winning, they ended up with several with a moderate approach. "As a group, they are moderate in temperament and reformers in spirit," he said.

That is not the experience of Mr Shuler, who told local newspapers that he had been reluctant to stand for election but was strong-armed into it by Mr Emanuel. "Rahm was tougher than any of the college coaches who were calling me when I was in high school. None of [the coaches] could hold a candle to Rahm Emanuel as a recruiter," he said.

The number of conservative Democrats among the 28 who wrestled house seats from Republican incumbents has yet to emerge, but with 27 of the 40 candidates in the most contested seats falling into this category, the figure could be substantial. They will join an already sizeable caucus within the Democrats in Congress who are on the right of the party and will be encouraged to line up formally with the two existing sub-groups: the New Democrats and the Blue Dog Coalition.

(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: beholdentopelosi; bluedogdemocrats; elections
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-90 next last
We'll see how this new batch of Blue Dog Coalition works. Keep in mind, this is from Guardian. Practically almost every US politicans are on their right.
1 posted on 11/10/2006 1:08:09 AM PST by paudio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: paudio
On the other hand, it's not bad for conservatives. The Democrats will vote together on procedural votes, but not on anything else, and the Republicans still have a solid core. If we can split the Democrat loonies from the solid Dem conservatives, then we will win more than we lose in this lame-duck Congress.
2 posted on 11/10/2006 1:13:36 AM PST by GAB-1955 (being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the Kingdom of Heaven....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955
The scenario you mentioned was common in the late 1990s and early 2000s, I think. But later they didn't have many Blue Dog Democrats anymore, and having Condit as one of their leaders didn't help.
3 posted on 11/10/2006 1:46:09 AM PST by paudio (Universal Human Rights and Multiculturalism: Liberals want to have cake and eat it too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: paudio
Ole Heath and the other 26 that ran on conservative values that won are in for a huge rude awakening, if they think that they will have any kind of voice within the Democrat party.

These fools have sold their souls for a vote and power!
4 posted on 11/10/2006 1:47:33 AM PST by Coldwater Creek (The TERRORIST are the ones who won the midterm elections!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955

Any pro-life limited-government legislator is fine by me.

I consider my self GOP exclusively due to the pro-life plank in the platform.

If that were ever removed, I would consider myself an independent.

I am Catholic, Pro-life, Conservative and Republican, in that order.




Hat tip to Mike Pence, whose trademark slogan on his radio show was:

"I am Christian, Conservative and Republican, in that order".


5 posted on 11/10/2006 1:48:14 AM PST by Notwithstanding (Post-9/11 Volunteer Active Duty OEF Vet Lawyer (who is too dumb to understand Kerry's apology))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: paudio

The "new" democrats basically use fraud to get elected. They run and win as GOP lite, but when they get to DC they are beholden to pelosi and emmanuael and will vote their radical leftist line.


6 posted on 11/10/2006 1:50:10 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding
Any pro-life limited-government legislator is fine by me.

If you actually beleive these "new" dems are the italicized above, may I suggest that you visit your local used car lot. You seem to enjoy the experience of being suckered.

7 posted on 11/10/2006 1:52:05 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: paudio
Wouldn't Heath Shuler and other "so-called Blue Dogs" beholden to George Soros?

If so, they'll have no choice but to listen to Nancy Pelosi or else their campaign funds for 2008 would be cut.

8 posted on 11/10/2006 1:53:20 AM PST by MinorityRepublican (Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane

Many of them are from Republican districts. I don't think they will move to the left right away, at least not in the first two year. If they do, they will say goodbye to their offices in 2008.


9 posted on 11/10/2006 1:55:01 AM PST by paudio (Universal Human Rights and Multiculturalism: Liberals want to have cake and eat it too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
or else their campaign funds for 2008 would be cut.

Then they probably can switch party...

10 posted on 11/10/2006 1:55:48 AM PST by paudio (Universal Human Rights and Multiculturalism: Liberals want to have cake and eat it too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dane

I have little hope that these new guys will vote in accord with the values they claime dot hold. But it is possible.

Hell, we can't even count on many Republicans to vote in accord with the values outlined in the GOP platform!


11 posted on 11/10/2006 1:59:33 AM PST by Notwithstanding (Post-9/11 Volunteer Active Duty OEF Vet Lawyer (who is too dumb to understand Kerry's apology))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dane

I have little hope that these new guys will vote in accord with the values they claimed to hold. But it is possible.

Hell, we can't even count on many Republicans to vote in accord with the values outlined in the GOP platform!


12 posted on 11/10/2006 1:59:49 AM PST by Notwithstanding (Post-9/11 Volunteer Active Duty OEF Vet Lawyer (who is too dumb to understand Kerry's apology))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: paudio
Many of them are from Republican districts. I don't think they will move to the left right away, at least not in the first two year. If they do, they will say goodbye to their offices in 2008

Some will have to move left, no matter what, to push through the radical left agenda of pelosi and the radical leftist chairmen of the house committees.

pelosi and emannueal are probably right now figuring out a voting matrix for these new "dems", so that some can be "protected", but still to get to the magic number of 218, some of these new democrats will have to vote for the radical agenda pelosi wishes to ram down the throat of the country.

It's all smoke and mirrors, but what else to expect from the democrats.

13 posted on 11/10/2006 2:01:09 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: paudio
However, they're back. We have to exploit this fracture. We can point to the power play maneuvering of the left and say "The Democrats don't care about your values."
14 posted on 11/10/2006 2:09:25 AM PST by GAB-1955 (being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the Kingdom of Heaven....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mariabush

...and not much power.


15 posted on 11/10/2006 2:18:16 AM PST by wastoute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955
On the other hand, it's not bad for conservatives. The Democrats will vote together on procedural votes, but not on anything else, and the Republicans still have a solid core. If we can split the Democrat loonies from the solid Dem conservatives, then we will win more than we lose in this lame-duck Congress.

First of all, the "solid Dem conservatives" are virtually nonexistent. Go to the American Conservative Union's congressional ratings. You have to go to "Louisiana" (on the House Side) to find a Democrat who cracks a "lifetime" fifty percent. Living in the KC area, I'm familiar with two alleged "moderate to conservative" Democrats (Ike Skelton in Missouri, and Dennis Moore in Kansas) who don't hit a fifty percent rating. How is that possible? Because of the very "procedural votes" (and the committee votes) that you mention. The "moderate and conservative" Dems can move a bill to the floor without "officially" voting for it when the bill comes before the entire House for the proverbial "up or down" vote. Only rarely are the "CINO" and "MINO" Dems asked to vote in favor of liberal legislation, and even then only as many votes as may be needed are asked for. Frankly, when you look at the ACU ratings you realize that a "moderate" or "conservative" Democrat is a closeted Liberal.

16 posted on 11/10/2006 2:30:27 AM PST by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Won't matter because their conservative voters won't stand for a non conservative candidate. The Republicans will be sure to put up a much better opponent next time around. They were tied to an incumbent who had some ethics issues people weren't too fond of. Besides the dems will have no choice but to put money back into this candidate if they wish to hold the seat. If he votes differently than he ran as a candidate he is screwed. Keep an eye on this guy and the other neo-dems.

On a side note I do like Shuler and what he stands for. He really does have the wrong letter next to his name but that is it.
17 posted on 11/10/2006 2:38:19 AM PST by rtsimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rtsimon
On a side note I do like Shuler and what he stands for. He really does have the wrong letter next to his name but that is it.

Will you still like Shuler when he votes the pelosi line.

18 posted on 11/10/2006 2:40:58 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
If so, they'll have no choice but to listen to Nancy Pelosi or else their campaign funds for 2008 would be cut.

That depends upon how many there are. If there are enough of them, then Pelosi will have to listen to them or she will no longer be speaker.

19 posted on 11/10/2006 2:44:40 AM PST by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos
That depends upon how many there are. If there are enough of them, then Pelosi will have to listen to them or she will no longer be speaker.

There are enough of them(new dems) and they will vote for Pelosi.

20 posted on 11/10/2006 2:46:56 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican; Congressman Billybob
Wouldn't Heath Shuler and other "so-called Blue Dogs" beholden to George Soros?

We have a FReeper who is planning to take that seat back in 08.

21 posted on 11/10/2006 2:57:01 AM PST by don-o (Proudly posting without reading the thread since 1998. (stolen from one cool dude))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pawdoggie
You know, I don't care about the American Conservative Union; what I care about is leveraging what I can from a position of vulnerability. We don't know how Shuler will vote; he hasn't been in Congress before. I am more concerned with personal values than party affiliation at this stage.

Remember that all American political parties are really coalitions of smaller parties. Despising moderates got us into this mess. Let's not repeat the same mistake.
22 posted on 11/10/2006 3:01:59 AM PST by GAB-1955 (being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the Kingdom of Heaven....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dane

Of course not. My point is if he holds true to his campaign than he will be an asset to the Republicans.


23 posted on 11/10/2006 3:02:59 AM PST by rtsimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: paudio

O'Bama, talked conservative once, voted otherwise.

Reading and understanding what they are supporting?

Those things that get slipped in at the last moment....

My fiscal orientation says taxes are going up, dramatically.

My first teaching lesson; Hidden Tax.

I'm going to point out the obvious increases to alot of folks,

who thought voting 'against the war', was on the ballot.

I can get by on paying 75% of my wages for taxes, because I have always had to be frugal,

and will teach other wage earners how high taxes diminish income and opportunities.

This is one concrete angle I am interested in working at, and,

am blessed with you all to help keep me informed with facts.


24 posted on 11/10/2006 3:07:07 AM PST by Son House
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mariabush
"These fools have sold their souls for a vote and power!"

Maybe, maybe not. Being optimistic here. There is power in numbers. All who are not far left need to find each other and soon. Somebody needs to start taking a running count of their votes on issues and keep their electorate informed. Two years is not that long.

25 posted on 11/10/2006 3:07:10 AM PST by maxter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: don-o; Dane
These new recruits to the Dem House are naive if they think they are going to be able to vote their conscience on issues. They flatly do not understand how ruthless their own party leaders are. There isn't one of them that their leaders won't throw overboard if their vote, even one critical vote, is going to be needed to pass something outrageous.
26 posted on 11/10/2006 3:11:03 AM PST by Enterprise (Let's not enforce laws that are already on the books, let's just write new laws we won't enforce.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rtsimon

He actually was being pushed to run as a Republican by the GOP in 2004 in Tenessee. Shuler decided against it, then moved back to his home town in Western North Carolina, and then got pressured by the dems to run.

Shuler is a social conservative, but not an economic one. He is opposed to free trade deals for example, but they aren't really popular out here anyways.


27 posted on 11/10/2006 3:11:37 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955
I am more concerned with personal values than party affiliation at this stage.

By all means, let the GOP try to make "common cause" with the Democrat CINOs and MINOs, but don't hold your breath expecting positive results. YOU may not care about party affiliation, but the Democrats do! There's a major difference between the moderates in the electorate (who should not, as you say, be taken for granted), and the Democrat "moderates", but we'll see.

28 posted on 11/10/2006 3:17:16 AM PST by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Not necessarily.

It was Clinton and the House Democratic Leadership that forced to take liberal votes in 93 that got them 'wiped out' in competitive districts.

I do not see them doing that again,nor the House leadership forcing them to do so, not if they want to stay in power.

The first year they will be the most compliant, but after that, I think they will have to think of winning reelection and they cannot go home with liberal voting records.

29 posted on 11/10/2006 3:23:10 AM PST by fortheDeclaration (Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
Shuler is a social conservative, but not an economic one

Then why did he join the party of abortion and gay marriage, if he is a social conservative.

30 posted on 11/10/2006 3:24:04 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration
It was Clinton and the House Democratic Leadership that forced to take liberal votes in 93 that got them 'wiped out' in competitive districts.

I do not see them doing that again,nor the House leadership forcing them to do so, not if they want to stay in power.

Charlie rangel is already making rumblings of ramming through the radical left agenda.

31 posted on 11/10/2006 3:26:08 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Charlie rangel is already making rumblings of ramming through the radical left

I have no doubt there is going to be 'radical' rhetoric thrown around.

But that is placate their base.

If the Democratic leadership doesn't show it can lead sensibly it will be right back in the minority.

This election was not a pro-liberal mandate, and if they interpret it that way, all the better for us in 08.

32 posted on 11/10/2006 3:29:46 AM PST by fortheDeclaration (Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Oh, Heath Shuler! I kept reading Heath Ledger and wondering, how...? Welcome to Broke Nation, stump-broke by the left.


33 posted on 11/10/2006 3:31:09 AM PST by dhuffman@awod.com (The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

Nancy & co. will ram through their radical left agenda and Heath Shuler will vote for it.


34 posted on 11/10/2006 3:31:24 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: paudio

Unfortunately, I suspect that many were as conservative as they need to be to win the election, but will all fall in line behind San Fran Nan.


35 posted on 11/10/2006 3:32:21 AM PST by NavVet (O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

AMEN!


36 posted on 11/10/2006 3:34:32 AM PST by Coldwater Creek (The TERRORIST are the ones who won the midterm elections!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Nancy & co. will ram through their radical left agenda and Heath Shuler will vote for it.

Then Shuler will be a one term Congressman.

Moreover, the House Democrats know that they have to deal with a cloture proof Senate and a President who can veto as well.

They are not going to sacrifice their majority for empty gestures.

The Constitution is still in place and it is very difficult to move our Gov't in one direction or the other quickly.

I would hope that these new Congressman are forced to vote for liberal legislation and then go home and claim they are 'conservatives' on those issues.

They only ran against something when they ran, now they will have a record to defend.

37 posted on 11/10/2006 3:43:28 AM PST by fortheDeclaration (Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: paudio

Pro-gun, anti tax, pro-choice, pro-evolution, pro-stemcells, pro-privatizing SS, anti-religeous nutcases.


Any questions?


38 posted on 11/10/2006 3:50:44 AM PST by MonroeDNA (Libertarians are more conservative than pubbies. Strictest interpretation of the constitution,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paudio

Their first key vote will be for their majority leader..Hoyer or Murtha..


39 posted on 11/10/2006 4:06:15 AM PST by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paudio

DINO trumps RINO

conservative wins again

Zell Miller (D) vs John McCain (R), no contest Zell wins.


40 posted on 11/10/2006 4:07:46 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Then why did he join the party of abortion and gay marriage, if he is a social conservative.

Economic issues. We are screwed in this country with the two party system. Because you believe in life, doesn't mean you believe in free trade with China. In fact, it might mean you are opposed to dealing with the thugs. Because you like to hunt doesn't mean that you like trickle down tax cuts, and might want broader middle class tax cuts instead. But, the theory in this country is that you must support one party or the other Dane, as you know. Most of us actually hold different views than the party platforms. We decide our party on which has more of what we agree with overall. I have chosen Republican. There are pro-abortion Republicans, and pro-life democrats. There are gun nanny Republicans, and pro 2nd amendment democrats. There are southern democrats who are conservative, northern republicans who are liberals.

41 posted on 11/10/2006 4:25:00 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
Well actually within the last 20 years the difference between the parties has become more stark.

The vast majority of democrats(socially liberal, anti-gun, pro-tax hikes), while the vast majority of Republicans are socially conservative, pro-gun, pro-tax cuts.

And that is why the so-called new conservative dems is such a sham. When the time comes they will vote for the people who brought and paid their way to the party, nancy pelosi.

42 posted on 11/10/2006 4:32:05 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
We have to remember that our two-party system involves coalitions of smaller groups. In a parliamentary system, the Democrats would split into three parties and the Republicans into two.
43 posted on 11/10/2006 4:35:26 AM PST by GAB-1955 (being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the Kingdom of Heaven....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Dane

Just like Lincoln Chafee was actually a conservative, because the parties are miles apart.

It is getting rarer true Dane. But, I actually find it a bad thing about the parties getting less blurred ideologically. Like I said, being against abortion has nothing to do with tax policy, foreign policy, your view on trade issues. Being pro gun has nothing to do with your views on lobbying reform. Anybody who genuinely thinks that 50% of people all agree with everything the GOP does, and another 50% believe in everythign the dims do is deluding themselves.


44 posted on 11/10/2006 4:35:30 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955

Agreed. Good example is that dims have pro minority factions, pro illegals. However, the union faction doesn't like the illegals taking jobs and depressing wages. They are all democrats.

In the GOP, you have the social conservative wing, and the libertarian wing on social issues. You have the isolationist and interventionist wing on foreign policy. You have the flat taxers, the supply siders, the rockefellers on tax policy.

On guns, you have the strict constructionists, and then you have the big city Guiliani types. There isn't one position on anything in either party.


45 posted on 11/10/2006 4:38:01 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955
We have to remember that our two-party system involves coalitions of smaller groups. In a parliamentary system, the Democrats would split into three parties and the Republicans into two.

I'm guessing that the GOP would split up inot social conservatives and economic conservatives/libertarians.

What would be the three dem wings. I know one would be social liberals.

46 posted on 11/10/2006 4:39:29 AM PST by Dane ("Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" Ronald Reagan, 1987)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GAB-1955

Also in the GOP, you have the anti illegal faction, and then you have the corporate faction who hires the illegals.

It's not hippies who are hiring illegals after all. It's big agriculture, big construction.

In the democrat party, you have the Pelosi liberals on foreign policy, and you have the Lieberman wing. Lieberman is hugely liberal, just is hawkish on foreign policy. What party should he join?


47 posted on 11/10/2006 4:40:17 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dane
A Labor party, a Black party, and moderate leftists. I forgot the splinter Green party as well.

This is why calling moderates "RINOs" doesn't help in the long run. They are Republicans, but have a different ideology.
48 posted on 11/10/2006 4:42:01 AM PST by GAB-1955 (being dragged, kicking and screaming, into the Kingdom of Heaven....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Dane
but when they get to DC they are beholden to pelosi and emmanuael and will vote their radical leftist line.

Bingo!

49 posted on 11/10/2006 4:42:40 AM PST by tiredoflaundry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dane

There are two factions of the social conservatives in the GOP too. You have the Pat Buchanan, isolationist, pro tarriff wing. You also have the pro business, pro tax cut, pro trade group.

There are alot of former FDR style democrats who are very socially conservative, but like the nanny state. They want big government. Just big government also setting social policy as well as economic.

You have the pure libertarians who are open borders, you have closed border mostly libertarians.


50 posted on 11/10/2006 4:42:48 AM PST by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-90 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