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

Skip to comments.

[Mitt]Romney, [Fred]Thompson tie for straw poll victory
August 19, 2007 | Dan Shaw

Posted on 08/19/2007 4:22:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070819/ELECTION01/708190344

Due to copyright issues, link only....


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Indiana; US: Massachusetts; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: 2008; electionpresident; elections; fredheads; frednecks; fredthompson; gop; in2008; indianagop; indianaprimary; midwest; mittheads; mittromney; paulbearers; paulestinians; reaganesque; republicans; ronpaul; runfredrun; strawpoll; theweatherchannel; tippecanoecounty; whitehouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last
The Fred Thompson juggernaut keeps rolling.
1 posted on 08/19/2007 4:22:19 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

Link to story and results:

http://www.jconline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070819/ELECTION01/708190344


2 posted on 08/19/2007 4:22:58 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Both took 26.8 percent of the votes cast by about 180 local Republicans cast in the gymnasium of Wea Ridge Middle School.
Wow. We're talking about some bigtime news here. 180 people. That's something.

There very well might be a Fred juggernaut, and if so, I'm part of it, since I plan to vote for him when the primary comes to my state and I plan to donate to him when he announces. But I'd hold off on using the word juggernaut at this juncture. It just makes us all look a little silly. Unless you're being sarcastic, of course, in which case I say: a long journey begins with the first step.

3 posted on 08/19/2007 4:32:34 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
28.6% of 180 = juggernaut???
4 posted on 08/19/2007 4:35:31 AM PDT by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Well, the L. Ron Paul cheerleaders were out in force saying that Paul was the One Trve Frontrunner (TM) because he won a single poll of about 250 voters. And they were ganging up on anyone who dared to point out the flaws in their argument. Kind of like the tactics the Rudybots used to use here, before most of them were banned.


5 posted on 08/19/2007 4:46:20 AM PDT by JillValentine (Being a feminist is all about being a victim. Being an armed woman is all about not being a victim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JillValentine
Kind of like the tactics the Rudybots used to use here, before most of them were banned.
Rudybots were banned? I didn't know that. I have a problem with that. I am a supporter of Fred and yet I have a problem with banning people who happen to support one Republican over another. In fact, I am entirely sick of all the candidate bashing that goes on here, and I've stopped doing it myself. (I no longer bash Ron Paul.)

Why were they banned? Did they post pictures of themselves in drag?

6 posted on 08/19/2007 4:52:20 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Some of them formed their own little group where they ganged up on people who didn’t agree with them. They also tried smearing more conservative candidates to make theirs look better.

I agree that no one should be banned simply for supporting one Republican over another. Not all the Rudy supporters engaged in those tactics, and I do think the bannings went too far.


7 posted on 08/19/2007 4:57:01 AM PDT by JillValentine (Being a feminist is all about being a victim. Being an armed woman is all about not being a victim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Well! I’m a Fredhead but we have our work cut out for us. When he announces the big guns are gonna come after him. I believe he can cope with them but up to now he hasn’t had to.


8 posted on 08/19/2007 4:57:56 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JillValentine

I’m glad I don’t know much about it. I’m afraid of quitting this place. I don’t want to quit this place. I like it here a lot. But if it gets to the point where only certain candidate preferences are permitted — even if that candidate is one I prefer myself — then I will quit.

Free Republic should mean Free Speech for all Republicans and conservatives.

Even those who support Ron Paul. Even those who support Giuliani.


9 posted on 08/19/2007 4:59:36 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: elli1
Go ahead and be s/. I have it from and insider (someone close to the campaign) that Fred plans to announce his candidacy on the 10th anniversary of 9-11. This isn't another on of those "he's gonna announce, he's gonna announce" false alrams. This is the straight story!

Just you wait, you'll see then!

10 posted on 08/19/2007 5:01:13 AM PDT by skimbell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JillValentine

I hate to see anyone banned. Bashing other candidates is a futile effort it never accomplishes what one wants which is to garner support for ones own candidate. I hope they weren’t banned forever!


11 posted on 08/19/2007 5:03:27 AM PDT by ontap (Just another backstabbing conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
In fact, I am entirely sick of all the candidate bashing that goes on here, and I've stopped doing it myself. (I no longer bash Ron Paul.)

The problem with it is that you reach a point where there are so many grudges that FR becomes a circular firing squad and won't be able to unite.

Personally, I'm going to support any Republican except Rudy (guns, sodomy, abortion, personal life, autocratic power fread). But I'm even trying to soften up on him. Well, a little.

A lot of those banned were the Viking Kitty types. Many were also open-borders types. They really did harm our ability to recruit new members. Many of them were Fred supporters or supporters of other candidates. They also ran down the forum and its membership pretty blatantly. You should go back and look at some of their opus posts. Nasty and hateful.

We do still have some pretty strong Rudy supporters here. It wasn't a real purge of Juliebots by any means. I could name a bunch of the ones still here but you can find them pretty easily on Rudi threads.
12 posted on 08/19/2007 5:19:46 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: skimbell
...Fred plans to announce his candidacy on the 10th anniversary of 9-11...

In 2011? Wow, that's a looooooong campaign. LOL.
13 posted on 08/19/2007 5:21:18 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: samtheman; Jim Robinson
**** Why were they banned? ****

Were you gone for the month of April? That's when the purge mostly took place.

And if you really want to know why just go back in the archives for JimRob's posts and 'vanity' threads. He did most, or a good portion of the zotting himself.

Bottom line - FR is for conservatives and conservative causes. Not 'republicans' and/or 'pro abortion moderates' (rudy and his bots).

14 posted on 08/19/2007 5:22:55 AM PDT by Condor51 (Rudy makes John Kerry look like a Right Wing 'Gun Nut' Extremist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

There’s one thread, in particular, that you’re looking for. Some of the Rudybots got into words with The Boss on the thread—and he took a lot of “trash”, I guess you’d say, before he pulled the switch. It’s almost as easy to go over to the WA site to see who said Rudybots were as many used their FR names to sign up there. There are some there who were not banned, too. There are also some who post at both site, I believe, although I think they use a user name different from their FR name.


15 posted on 08/19/2007 5:43:34 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: elli1
28.6% of 180 = juggernaut???

Indeed. At FR, those numbers represent a JUGGERNAUT for the elderly and frail ex-lobbyist and amateur senator FRed Thompson.

But Romney got the same numbers, you say? "It's a meaningless poll of a couple-hundred rubes from Indiana."

That's the way FRedheads do math.

16 posted on 08/19/2007 5:50:06 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
Bottom line - FR is for conservatives and conservative causes.

It's far more arbitrary than that. It's currently for ex-abortion lobbyist, first amendment choking, FRed Thompson. Why? Because he has a conservative sounding voice. (i.e., he speaks "southron," a kind of redneck ebonics).

17 posted on 08/19/2007 5:54:52 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou

I’m a member at both FR and WA under the same screenname, and I’m not a Rudy supporter at all (although I will hold my nose and vote for him if he manages to win the nomination). I just like to listen to all sides (and often chime in with my own opinion).

What I find sad is the bickering between essentially like-minded folks, who have in common a compelling desire to keep Hillary and her ilk out of the White House. If the stupid infighting and name calling doesn’t stop, those posters can bear the blame when she wins.

It’s particularly disheartening to listen to the one-issue folks who aren’t going to be happy with any candidate that doesn’t agree with them 100 percent. That’s unrealistic, but they are often the most arrogant and hateful posters. That’s true on both FR and WA.

Perhaps when the primary season is ended we’ll see common sense and unity prevail.


18 posted on 08/19/2007 5:57:19 AM PDT by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

See post 18. It’s about you.


19 posted on 08/19/2007 5:58:52 AM PDT by Jedidah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JillValentine
"Some of them formed their own little group where they ganged up on people who didn’t agree with them."

They did? Which group, Rooty or the Hunter camp? I have learned to stay away from the over zealous pro one candidate or another threads. I'll make up my mind on my own, when the times comes.

I can't imagine that a freeper would get banned for supporting one candidate over the other, kinda goes against the democratic process IMHO.

20 posted on 08/19/2007 6:00:21 AM PDT by alice_in_bubbaland (I will respect illegal aliens civil rights, when they respect the sovereignty of the US!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles; Jim Robinson
It's far more arbitrary than that. It's currently for ex-abortion lobbyist, first amendment choking, FRed Thompson. Why? Because he has a conservative sounding voice. (i.e., he speaks "southron," a kind of redneck ebonics).

Don't you think that you should ping JR to a comment like that? I mean, he might want to know what his site has become and to thank you for helping him realize the situation. I could swear that I daily see multiple threads for Hunter, Romney, Paul, etc. What's your problem? Are you logged in?

21 posted on 08/19/2007 6:02:45 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JillValentine
I agree that no one should be banned simply for supporting one Republican over another. Not all the Rudy supporters engaged in those tactics, and I do think the bannings went too far.

I remember those days of a few months back as an all around a discouraging time for FreeRepublic. Some of the name-calling should still be available to anyone who wants to take the time and search... unless the comments were purged too. Anyway, if Rudy does NOT win the nomination, I hope those banned Freepers (some who were members of FR for years) can still find some common ground with whomever DOES win the GOP nomination. Otherwise, we've shot ourselves in the foot.

22 posted on 08/19/2007 6:04:33 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Ron Paul really won it. Ron Paul wins everything. It’s a conspiracy I tell ya!


23 posted on 08/19/2007 6:05:46 AM PDT by Artemis Webb (Ron Paul: the candidate of cowardice and appeasement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: samtheman
"In fact, I am entirely sick of all the candidate bashing that goes on here, and I've stopped doing it myself. (I no longer bash Ron Paul.)"

I promise I will double my efforts to make up for your attack of conscience. :o)

25 posted on 08/19/2007 6:09:09 AM PDT by Artemis Webb (Ron Paul: the candidate of cowardice and appeasement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
a compelling desire to keep Hillary and her ilk out of the White House.
This is most critical. I can't disagree with any of your post. I just hope that those who become so emotional about their own candidate and talk trash about the others can overcome that in the general election should their personal favorite not the The Candidate.

People, in general, need to avoid investing their emotions in a candidate, because that's when logic departs.

Also, I hope my comment didn't seem to imply that WA is for RudyBots only. There are some very fine supporters of other candidates there too. I occasionally read there. They are so anti-some candidates that I don't stay for long, though. I also have to confess that there are some there whose presence I do not miss here at FR--and it has to with posting style, not politics.

26 posted on 08/19/2007 6:15:55 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

It’s a conservative website not a republican website. Too many republican candidates at all levels are more leftist than their democrat opposition. That’s because we as republican voters have allowed it. “(R) means good” needs to be re-evaluated.

Jim Robinson created a forum where conservatives could meet and discuss the issues. He banned a certain group who actively cheerleaded for one of the most leftist republican candidates in history. Rudy.


27 posted on 08/19/2007 6:23:34 AM PDT by liberty or death
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
***** It's far more arbitrary than that. It's currently for ex-abortion lobbyist, first amendment choking, FRed Thompson. Why? Because he has a conservative sounding voice. (i.e., he speaks "southron," a kind of redneck ebonics). ******

Aw come on. That abortion lobbyist thing is baloney - 20 billing hours, and decades ago to boot - whoopee. And so is the CFR slam. Fred has admitted that backing McIsane-Feingold was a mistake.

In any case that has nothing to do with why the Rudybots got zotted. And it certainly wasn't 'arbitrary'.

28 posted on 08/19/2007 6:38:04 AM PDT by Condor51 (Rudy makes John Kerry look like a Right Wing 'Gun Nut' Extremist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

I think we might see a Mitt - Fred or Fred - Mitt ticket.


29 posted on 08/19/2007 6:40:05 AM PDT by webboy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: JillValentine; samtheman; 2ndDivisionVet; Captain Kirk; George W. Bush; philman_36
Well, the L. Ron Paul cheerleaders were out in force saying that Paul was the One Trve Frontrunner (TM) because he won a single poll of about 250 voters.

Actually, it was 2 Straw Polls, one in Alabama 266 Votes Total, Ron Paul got 216 (81%) Votes, the 2nd placer (Mitt) got 14, here is one of those threads:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1883170/posts

The other was in New Hampshire, Ron Paul w/208 (73%) Votes, the 2nd placer (Mitt) w/26.

Juggernaut?

And they were ganging up on anyone who dared to point out the flaws in their argument.

Wouldn't want a good lie to out perform the facts here, the only ganging up was performed by the usual harping Paul bashing Saran Wrapped moonbats. Thanks for giving the opportunity to correct the record. Blackbird.

30 posted on 08/19/2007 6:49:34 AM PDT by BlackbirdSST (I'm dug in, giving no more ground to the rino stampede. BB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Politicalmom; Sturm Ruger

Ping!


31 posted on 08/19/2007 6:55:11 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST
... the usual harping Paul bashing Saran Wrapped moonbats...
Press here! LOL
32 posted on 08/19/2007 7:04:35 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: samtheman; George W. Bush; Condor51; Clara Lou; Jim Robinson
I’m glad I don’t know much about it. I’m afraid of quitting this place. I don’t want to quit this place. I like it here a lot. But if it gets to the point where only certain candidate preferences are permitted — even if that candidate is one I prefer myself — then I will quit.

Free Republic should mean Free Speech for all Republicans and conservatives.

Even those who support Ron Paul. Even those who support Giuliani.

Some of the Rudybots got into words with The Boss on the thread—and he took a lot of “trash”, I guess you’d say, before he pulled the switch.

15 posted on 08/19/2007 8:43:34 AM EDT by Clara Lou

Bottom line - FR is for conservatives and conservative causes. Not 'republicans' and/or 'pro abortion moderates' (rudy and his bots).

14 posted on 08/19/2007 8:22:55 AM EDT by Condor51

That is the bottom line, almost. The bottom line is that Jim Robinson owns the site. And whether you or I agree 100% with his decisions or not - and I think that the success of the site, and the fact that you and I spend so much time on it, reflects the fact that he has manifested superb judgment overall - he ultimately makes the call.

If Jim says something or some candidate (Guliani, in this case) is not conservative - and puts his foot down on the issue - then, at least on this site, Guliani ain't conservative. And I happen to agree with that assessment, and as a resident of a county near New York City I think I was among the first on FR to point that fact out when people were waxing enthusiastic about him early on.

But it always has to boil down to someone making, or failing to make, a call. Fail to make a call - allow pornography on the site, for example - and you repulse your target audience. Make a series of wrong calls, and you lose the people who attract your target audience. Those are the constraints within which Jim operates on the site, but how he slices and dices it is in reality his decision.

But do not suppose that you can have free speech and still have that target audience. You want free speech, you got it - just do it on your own site, and attract the audience you want to target, as well as you can. But you and I know that it would be awfully cold out there. So until and unless something really blows up, we will salute Jim's decisions and continue to contribute (intellectually and I hope financially) to FR.

33 posted on 08/19/2007 7:08:36 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: philman_36
LOL! It sure is transparent how a Straw Poll holds significance by who wins or loses! Blackbird.
34 posted on 08/19/2007 7:09:08 AM PDT by BlackbirdSST (I'm dug in, giving no more ground to the rino stampede. BB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

26% of 180 people in a town in Indiana- wow, what a juggernaut.


35 posted on 08/19/2007 7:18:06 AM PDT by richmwill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST

Aw, man, you know straw polls don’t mean anything. That’s why they keep doing them.


36 posted on 08/19/2007 7:20:10 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST

oops.../sarcasm


37 posted on 08/19/2007 7:21:38 AM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: richmwill
Every straw poll, every national and state poll add up, and the numbers show that an UNDECLARED candidate is kicking butt on those that have been running and scheming since 2004 or before. What would that tell you if you weren’t blinded by your allegiance to a RINO?
38 posted on 08/19/2007 7:26:36 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST
Actually, it was 2 Straw Polls, one in Alabama 266 Votes Total, Ron Paul got 216 (81%) Votes, the 2nd placer (Mitt) got 14, here is one of those threads:

RP is winning all those NH straw polls consistently and overwhelmingly.

As with Buchanan in '96, NH is RP's single best shot at a primary win or a second place finish.
39 posted on 08/19/2007 8:26:26 AM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

If Fred wins the nomination, he needs to do some exhaustive
polling of moderate,suburban,WHITE,women. This is where the
election will be won or lost.He should make a list of VP candidates
ranked in order of their acceptability to that group of
women.


40 posted on 08/19/2007 8:40:04 AM PDT by GiveMeGoth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I had a straw poll at my house last night. My wife and I tied with each of us garnering 33% of the vote. My cat also got 33%. There were three total votes cast. Since our totals only come up to 99%, we’re thinking about filing a lawsuit claiming voter fraud. Where is that other 1%???


41 posted on 08/19/2007 8:50:04 AM PDT by Nathan _in_Arkansas (Shut the deuce up!!! I'll do the fighting!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nathan _in_Arkansas

Contact one of the FR Paulestinians, they’ll point you towards a civil rights lawyer/Reynolds aluminum foil dealer.


42 posted on 08/19/2007 9:00:56 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
And so is the CFR slam. Fred has admitted that backing McIsane-Feingold was a mistake.

Not only did he vote for it, but he bragged about co-authoring it. Anyone who thought he was doing the right thing in ignoring the constitution and voting to limit free speech is not a conservative. But he does play a conservative on TV.

43 posted on 08/19/2007 9:20:31 AM PDT by Nephi ( $100m ante is a symptom of the old media... the Ron Paul Revolution is the new media's choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion; George W. Bush; Condor51; Clara Lou; Jim Robinson
If Jim says something or some candidate (Guliani, in this case) is not conservative - and puts his foot down on the issue - then, at least on this site, Guliani ain't conservative.
Can't argue with that. It is his site. And notice, that I always only thought that my single recourse was to either go or stay. I never said anything about trying to change the rules here.

But anyway, you're points are well taken and eloquently stated.

As for Giuliani, although I do disagree with some of the conclusions regarding the difference between him and Hillary, I do accept the majority opinion here that he is no conservative. Why shouldn't I? I support Fred.

44 posted on 08/19/2007 10:21:27 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: skimbell
Go ahead and be s/. I have it from and insider (someone close to the campaign) that Fred plans to announce his candidacy on the 10th anniversary of 9-11.

You mean 2011?

45 posted on 08/19/2007 12:38:53 PM PDT by WFTR (Liberty isn't for cowards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
It’s particularly disheartening to listen to the one-issue folks who aren’t going to be happy with any candidate that doesn’t agree with them 100 percent.

I have very, very rarely seen one-issue folks and 100%ers on this website. A good number of 95% and 90%ers, sure. The only one-issue people I can remember offhand were 2nd Amendment supporters and WOT enthusiasts.

Usually those "one-issue", "100%" tags are just canards used to shout down any opposition to some favored candidate with liberal positions.

46 posted on 08/19/2007 1:13:16 PM PDT by JohnnyZ (Romney : "not really trying to define what is technically amnesty. I'll let the lawyers decide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyZ
Usually those "one-issue", "100%" tags are just canards used to shout down any opposition to some favored candidate with liberal positions.

Oh dear, you're not allowed to say anything so reasonable here. Don't force me to call the mods on you!

BTW, I am a one-hundred-percent 90%er personally.
47 posted on 08/19/2007 3:21:28 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Indeed. At FR, those numbers represent a JUGGERNAUT for the elderly and frail ex-lobbyist and amateur senator FRed Thompson.

Dude, you are relentless! Cracks me up. But I still like Fred. And Mitt. And Ron Paul.
48 posted on 08/19/2007 3:25:12 PM PDT by George W. Bush (Rudy: tough on terror, scared of Iowa, wets himself over YouTube)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
What's JC's problem?

Psychosis induced by fear of Fred.

49 posted on 08/20/2007 1:35:00 PM PDT by Petronski (Why would Romney lie about Ronald Reagan's record?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles

The man you malign as elderly and frail is doing as well as your weatherboy without even declaring his candidacy.

No wonder you’re soiling yourself with fear.

Your insults and his lies about Ronald Reagan make for a really fine campaign. You must be so proud.


50 posted on 08/20/2007 1:37:57 PM PDT by Petronski (Why would Romney lie about Ronald Reagan's record?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 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