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

Skip to comments.

McCain slams Obama, “activist judges” in judicial speech
Fox News ^ | May 6, 2008 | Mosheh Oinounou

Posted on 05/06/2008 11:18:58 AM PDT by Red Steel

Winston-Salem, NC — Sen. John McCain slammed his Democratic rivals’ judicial philosophy and railed against “activist judges” who show “little regard” for the Constitution and even “less interest” for the interests of the American people, during a speech today at Wake Forest University.

“Some federal judges operate by fiat, shrugging off generations of legal wisdom and precedent while expecting their own opinions to go unquestioned. Only their favorite precedents are to be considered “settled law,” and everything else is fair game,” McCain said, addressing more than 2,000 University students, staff and faculty at the college’s Wait Chapel, before turning his attention to the Democrats. “”Senators Obama and Clinton have very different ideas from my own. They are both lawyers themselves, and don’t seem to mind at all when fundamental questions of social policy are preemptively decided by judges instead of by the people and their elected representatives. Nor have they raised objections to the unfair treatment of judicial nominees.”

McCain focused much of his fire at the Democratic frontrunner and continued to paint Sen. Barack Obama as elitist and out of touch–rebuking the Illinois Senator for using “vague words” to justify judicial activism and maintaining standards that “proved too lofty” to vote to confirm the “brilliant, fair-minded” Chief Justice John Roberts.

“He went right along with the partisan crowd, and was among the 22 senators to vote against this highly qualified nominee,” McCain said, as he completed a two-day swing through the Tar Heel state partially meant to steal some attention from the Democrats competing in today’s primary. “Somehow, by Senator Obama’s standard, even Judge Roberts didn’t measure up. And neither did Justice Samuel Alito. Apparently, nobody quite fits the bill except for an elite group of activist judges, lawyers, and law professors who think they know wisdom when they

(Excerpt) Read more at embeds.blogs.foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: activistjudges; elections; mccain; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

1 posted on 05/06/2008 11:18:58 AM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Like Ginsberg, a judge you voted for John??????

This guy sure knows how to spin.

I think I’ll start calling him the Screw Driver.


2 posted on 05/06/2008 11:24:27 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

This is a big issue for McCain to win back some conservatives, although there will still be many who do not trust him on this issue. But if you know the makeup of the court and the ages and health of the judges, you would realize how critical it is for the Democrats to win the White House in 2008.


3 posted on 05/06/2008 11:25:02 AM PDT by Always Right (Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Listen up Republicans.  The Republican National Committee and Senator John McCain are looking for folks who are willing to let bygons be bygons.

Over the last twenty years, Senator McCain has taken on a lot of baggage.  Today he needs many of you to help him carry it.

If you're willing to help John carry some of the same baggage that Senator Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton have accumlated, please contact the McCain campaign and or the RNC at once.  It's going to take a lot of folks to carry this around between now and Tuesday November 4th.

If you're a Democrat in good standing and find some of this baggage to be appealing, you may find yourself compelled to help out, and we would welcome you.  We're asking anyone who doesn't mind carrying this baggage to contact us right away.

We have found a larger number of Conservatives unwilling to overlook what this baggage represents, than we thought we would, so we're reaching out to anyone that is willing to help out.

Please use the following numbers to offer help.  900-555-NUTS or 900-555-LFTY.

4 posted on 05/06/2008 11:25:42 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Republican Senators are under the mistaken assumption that a president has the Constitutional right to name judges that he sees fit.

Dhimmirats are under no such constraints.


5 posted on 05/06/2008 11:27:25 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

How about illegal immigration, Johnnie?

Gonna tell the good folks you sided with B. Hussein Obama, not to mention, Teddy “The Swimmer” Kennedy in your attempt to push an amnesty for wetbacks through the Senate?

Are you?


6 posted on 05/06/2008 11:27:55 AM PDT by Redbob (WWJBD - "What Would Jack Bauer Do?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

I would rather take my chances with McCain picking judges than the Dems.

McCain is a Rino but we aren’t given any other choice.


7 posted on 05/06/2008 11:28:16 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Like Ginsberg, a judge you voted for John??????

Republicans (and conservatives for that matter) tend to just accept that the White House gets to appoint judges and never really puts up a fight. She passed 96-3.

8 posted on 05/06/2008 11:28:48 AM PDT by Always Right (Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Let’s hear him provide names of people he would consider nominating to the bench. Otherwise, I will consider this spin.


9 posted on 05/06/2008 11:29:37 AM PDT by taxesareforever (We'll never forget Matt Maupin and his service to our country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

When talking to a leftist about activist judges,

they’ll try to classify any overturning of previous rulings as “activism”, pushing Constitutional constructionist judges into this category,

but they will avoid at all costs (or say “you do it too”) the fact that lib judges go into a case with a social goal in mind, and find justification wherever they have to go to find it.

If I had my way, any judge that put any reference to anything outside of the written Constitution into any ruling would be automatically impeached.


10 posted on 05/06/2008 11:30:48 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
:-)

Good ole Juan McPain...still trying to pretend he's one of "us".

Useful
11 posted on 05/06/2008 11:31:28 AM PDT by hiredhand (Check my "about" page. I'm the Prophet of Doom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
I would rather take my chances with McCain picking judges than the Dems.

It is almost a given that Ginsburg (health and family issues) and Stevens (88 years old) will be replaced next. Even if McCain only could get moderates to replace them, it would still shift the court to the right.

12 posted on 05/06/2008 11:32:13 AM PDT by Always Right (Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

McLame voted for Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg? (God was there ever a more apt comedic nickname!)

In fairness (and I don’t like McLame as our nominee at all) we often here made the argument that the president should get who he chooses- and clintoon chose Buzzi.

Unless the nominee is a real fruit bat (like Ms Buzzi)


13 posted on 05/06/2008 11:33:50 AM PDT by Mr. K (Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

So I have been wrong to trash Ted Kennedy for his Senate voting record? LMAO, just because there are only three Conservatives in the Senate, that is no justification for voting for the likes of McCain.

Wrong is wrong, whether it’s Ted Kennedy or Juan McCain.


14 posted on 05/06/2008 11:36:52 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Yep, you’re right, Republican, not Conservative.


15 posted on 05/06/2008 11:38:18 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

And he voted for Roberts, Alito, and Clarence Thomas. That’s more than I can say about Obama and Hillary Clinton.
With Ginsberg 75 years old and Stevens 88, I want them replaced by someone who isn’t like them.


16 posted on 05/06/2008 11:38:33 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in - Michael Corleone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hiredhand

Bingo! He’s out of the closet...

How true!


17 posted on 05/06/2008 11:39:58 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I am just telling you the facts on Judicial appointments. The GOP does not politicize them like the Dems. The GOP fights with its hands behind their backs, as they often do.


18 posted on 05/06/2008 11:40:16 AM PDT by Always Right (Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

The President should get who he chooses, unless...

Ginsberg? No way in hell!

It’s a sad commentary on not only the Senate, but Juan McCain. Both are disgusting.


19 posted on 05/06/2008 11:41:16 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

I wonder if McCain is being educated, or if he is just saying the stuff I want to hear??

He’s hanging with Fred Thompson today during campaigning ~ that sure can’t hurt.


20 posted on 05/06/2008 11:43:52 AM PDT by incredulous joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Darren McCarty

What the hell is history for then bud? It boggles the mind to watch folks flail around as if they didn’t have any history to look at.

Oh, he voted for Ginsberg? Well, I’m going to support him because I don’t want more judges like Ginsberg!!!

These triple backward flips of logic are sure lost on me.


21 posted on 05/06/2008 11:46:24 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

And yet:

1. He told a group of supporters that he would NOT appoint judges like Alito because “that guy wears his conservatism on his sleeve.”

2. He knows that judges in the Rehnquist-Roberts-Alito mold would be more likely to overturn his signature achievement, McCain-Feingold, given the chance.

3. He loves to accommodate Democrats and he knows that the Dimmycraps will NEVER allow judges like that to get coonfirmed; and

4. He was the leader of the so-called “Gang of Fourteen” which deraield the prospect of forcing through cofirmation of several of President Bush’s nominations — especially the ones most in the mold of the judges he now says he likes.

Let’s be honest: we’ve gotten these promises from every Republican Presiential nominee, then we’ve gotten justices like Earl Warren, William Brennan, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, David Souter, and so very many others.

McCain also says he’ll secure the borders, but at the same time he says he’d sign a bill like the amnesty bill that bore his name.

Juan McVain simply isn’t telling you the truth. There is no “straight talk” there — he talks out of both sides of his mouth, like any other politician infected with a bad case of Potomac fever.


22 posted on 05/06/2008 11:47:31 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Sen. John McCain slammed his Democratic rivals’ judicial philosophy and railed against “activist judges” who show “little regard” for the Constitution and even “less interest” for the interests of the American people,

What a pos!
This (blank) has NO ROOM to talk. He wants his freaking AMNESTY back.

"McCain said, and the lesson I learned from it is we’ve got to have comprehensive immigration reform.”
You didn't LEARN anything you (blank)ing idiot! You and your buddy Kennedy's 'comprehensive immigration reform' was the whole dam problem.

Lotta luck getting elected with your moderate crossover Dem's and illegals, senator Sh*t For Brains.

23 posted on 05/06/2008 11:48:55 AM PDT by Condor51 (I have guns in my nightstand because a Cop won't fit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

You know, this actually gets downright comical. No matter what John has done, there’s an excuse for it.

Why is it that we excuse John but don’t excuse Ted Kennedy? Why don’t we excuse Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, Reed... hell, every Democrat? If it doesn’t matter what people do, we’re wasting our time here.

It’s truly shocking to come here to a conservative forum and watch the unmitigated gaul expressed by folks who are going to support John McCain no matter what he has ever done.


24 posted on 05/06/2008 11:51:47 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

So why did he vote for Ginsburg?

John McCain, doing the Pandering that Conservatives won’t do!


25 posted on 05/06/2008 11:53:21 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (GOP: If you reward bad behavior all you get is more bad behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I didn’t click the link - is this really from a SATIRE “news” site?


26 posted on 05/06/2008 11:55:21 AM PDT by Manfred the Wonder Dawg (Test ALL things, hold to that which is True.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP; Always Right; Darren McCarty

See post #22 for the REASONS you won’t get what you want.


27 posted on 05/06/2008 11:57:18 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (GOP: If you reward bad behavior all you get is more bad behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Always Right; Dianna

>>It is almost a given that Ginsburg (health and family issues) and Stevens (88 years old) will be replaced next. Even if McCain only could get moderates to replace them, it would still shift the court to the right.<<

Thank you!


28 posted on 05/06/2008 11:57:31 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Darren McCarty

Thank you too!!!!


29 posted on 05/06/2008 11:59:22 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; All
Although I despise activist judges as much as McCain does, McCain either doesn't understand or is ignoring the main problem with our courts.

The biggest problem with the courts is actually the people. The people are the problem because ignorance of the Constitution and how the government is supposed to work is epidemic. Widespread constitutional ignorance is evidenced by the following links.

http://tinyurl.com/npt6t
http://tinyurl.com/hehr8
The consequence of widespread constitutional ignorance is that the people are impotent to stop activist judges from walking all over our constitutional freedoms.

The way that we got into this mess with respect to activist judges versus constitutional ignorance, in my opinion, is as follows.

Judicial activism took a turn for the worst in the days of FDR's dirty politics. This is because FDR got the USSC to give the green light to his constitutionally unauthorized New Deal programs; the Court scandalously politically repealed 10th A. protected state powers in order to give FDR what he wanted. And by politically nuking 10th A. protected state powers, FDR foolishly created a political situation where there's now "nothing" in the Constitution that stops corrupt justices from allowing the feds to interefere with state affairs. And decades of activist justices ignoring 10th A. protected state powers has ultimately weakened traditional family values.

As a side note, this post (<-click), while addressing tax issues, provides more details as to how the 10th A. stood in the way of FDR establishing his New Deal programs.

And this post (<-click) gives examples of how corrupt justices then began using FDR's "license" to ignore 10th A. protected state powers to eventually stifle traditional family values. The USSC's scandalous legalization of abortion and today's suppression of ID discussion in public school classrooms are examples of this corruption.

Again, because of widespread ignorance of the Constitution and its history, it seems that the best that response that people have given to Constitution-ignoring activist judges is to sit on their hands with their mouths wide open.

The bottom line is that, instead of blaming everything on activist judges, the people need to reconnect with the Founder's intentions for the division of federal and government state powers. The people then need to get in the faces of the feds, demanding that the feds start respecting the Constitution that they have sworn to defend, particularly where wrongly ignored 10th A. protected state powers are concerned. This not only includes allowing religion-related discussions in public schools while respecting people's 14th A. protections, but also putting a stop to all constitutionally unauthorized federal spending while appropriately lowering federal taxes.

30 posted on 05/06/2008 12:11:33 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
Let’s be honest: we’ve gotten these promises from every Republican Presiential nominee, then we’ve gotten justices like Earl Warren, William Brennan, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, David Souter, and so very many others.

And now we have basically an evenly divided court with most of the decisions going 5-4 our way. We may get hoodwinked on some, but lately we have been doing better.

31 posted on 05/06/2008 12:12:50 PM PDT by Always Right (Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
McCain is a Rino but we aren’t given any other choice.

Actually, we are. Dr. Alan Keyes will be on the ballot probably in every state. Barr or whomever the libertarians pick will likely be on most of them also. Pastor Baldwin will be on several. There are conservatives of all stripes for whom you could vote. You don't vhe to vote for Juan the RINO.

32 posted on 05/06/2008 12:14:21 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
McCain is a Rino but we aren’t given any other choice.

Actually, we are. Dr. Alan Keyes will be on the ballot probably in every state. Barr or whomever the libertarians pick will likely be on most of them also. Pastor Baldwin will be on several. There are conservatives of all stripes for whom you could vote. You don't vhe to vote for Juan the RINO.

33 posted on 05/06/2008 12:14:49 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
McCain is a Rino but we aren’t given any other choice.

Actually, we are. Dr. Alan Keyes will be on the ballot probably in every state. Barr or whomever the libertarians pick will likely be on most of them also. Pastor Baldwin will be on several. There are conservatives of all stripes for whom you could vote. You don't have to vote for Juan the RINO.

34 posted on 05/06/2008 12:14:51 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

I’d believe this message coming from Fred Thompson. But McCain? Gimme a break.


35 posted on 05/06/2008 12:15:12 PM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
"Sen. John McCain slammed his Democratic rivals’ judicial philosophy and railed against 'activist judges' who show 'little regard' for the Constitution and even 'less interest' for the interests of the American people..."

Yes, JOHN, they are called 'LIBERALS'. Hint, Hint.

36 posted on 05/06/2008 12:17:33 PM PDT by cake_crumb (Obama's bus needs a lift kit just to clear all the bodies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darren McCarty
With Ginsberg 75 years old and Stevens 88, I want them replaced by someone who isn’t like them.

So do I. You're not going to get that from Juan McVain.

37 posted on 05/06/2008 12:18:07 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Why is it that we excuse John but don’t excuse Ted Kennedy? Why don’t we excuse Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, Reed

You know why. Because Johnny Boy has an R after his name, which means anything he does is right, whereas the others have Ds after their names, which means anything they do is wrong.

38 posted on 05/06/2008 12:20:41 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Even if McCain only could get moderates to replace them, it would still shift the court to the right.

Moderates like Souter and Stevens? That's the kind of judge we get from Establishment RINOs, time afteer time after time.

39 posted on 05/06/2008 12:22:06 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Exactly! It’s sure nice to see that someone gets it. There are times when I almost feel like the only guy on the planet that does.


40 posted on 05/06/2008 12:26:48 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Who opposes John McCain's leftist agenda? The RNC, Rep Congress members, the Democrats? Good luck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TBP

What most Koolaid drinking Republicans don’t even have a clue is, the majority the Democrats will gain in this coming election, (Based on Gas Prices, Health Care and the Environment, not to mention the stupidity of the General Public.) will completely eliminate any hope for a Presidential veto.

But heck, don’t even worry there will be a veto from McCain in regards to any major Democrat agenda.


41 posted on 05/06/2008 12:29:20 PM PDT by PSYCHO-FREEP (Juan McCain....The lesser of Three Liberals.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: TBP

>>Moderates like Souter and Stevens? <<

So it’s better to let Hillary or Obama pick. Right??


43 posted on 05/06/2008 12:42:46 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: PSYCHO-FREEP

>>What most Koolaid drinking Republicans don’t even have a clue is...<<<

I’m a registered Independent. Always have been. But given the choice of either Dem or McCain, I vote McCain.

I did the Perot deal. I won’t do it again.

Your tagline says it all.


44 posted on 05/06/2008 12:44:52 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Gee, I thought the same thing with Ross Perot. It worked really well.


45 posted on 05/06/2008 12:46:16 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

He also voted for Alito and Roberts.


46 posted on 05/06/2008 12:46:31 PM PDT by cake_crumb (Obama's bus needs a lift kit just to clear all the bodies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

No, it makes little difference which of the three of them picks the justices. We’ll wind up getting about the same thing.

It would be better to let someone like Keyes pick them, someone who actually understands both the Constitution and the conservative philosophy. Neitehr McVain nor Hitlery nor Barry Osama understands either or has any respect for either.


47 posted on 05/06/2008 12:46:46 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TBP

You honestly think Keyes is going to win?
Really?

Well that splitting of votes sure did work in the past. Got us 8 years of Clinton. WooHoo.


48 posted on 05/06/2008 12:48:50 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am very mad at Disney. Give me my James Marsden song!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

This thread is about judicial activism and Supreme Court nominees, not your pet voting issue!


49 posted on 05/06/2008 12:49:42 PM PDT by cake_crumb (Obama's bus needs a lift kit just to clear all the bodies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

Ross Perot wasn’t a conservative. Keyes is.

And there was no challenger to the Dimmycraps from the left that year. There are two this year with soem name ID: Crazy Cynthia (”Do you know who I am?”) McKinney and Ralph (Harold Stassen) Nader.


50 posted on 05/06/2008 12:49:49 PM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | 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