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

Skip to comments.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - DVD (Release Date: October 21, 2008)
Christian Cinema ^

Posted on 08/10/2008 3:54:03 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat

Big Science has expelled smart new ideas from the classroom. What they forgot is that every generation has its rebel!

Attacked by pro-evolution scientists and others, this film, Expelled exposed the prejudice leveled against scientists who reject Darwinian thinking, and took almost $8 million at the box office at around 700 theaters earlier this year, making it the 12th most successful documentary of all time.

(Excerpt) Read more at christiancinema.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevo; design; evolution; expelled; id; moviereview; stein
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last
Verified on this site and at amazon.com: Ben Stein's fine film is going to be released on 21 October.

I will be getting a copy. Maybe even Blu-Ray. :)

1 posted on 08/10/2008 3:54:19 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

Our whole family is getting a copy of this — can’t wait.


2 posted on 08/10/2008 3:57:02 PM PDT by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

I love Ben Stein. Thanks for the update. going to go resreve it on Netflix right now. :)

“Nathan Frankowski’s film explores how scientists who believe in God are oppressed and how the acceptance of evolution may have played a role in the formation of organizations such as the Nazi regime and Planned Parenthood.”

It’s pretty simple, really; when there is no god, you get to be God! Jerks.


3 posted on 08/10/2008 3:57:39 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

In before the “Rage Against The Ben” crowd shows up.


4 posted on 08/10/2008 4:01:07 PM PDT by Hacksaw (Deport illegals the same way they came here - one at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
It’s pretty simple, really; when there is no god, you get to be God! Jerks.

What exactly is the Intelligent Design theory anyway?

5 posted on 08/10/2008 4:04:36 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cindy

Apparently the latest fad in Big Science is to claim fossils aren’t necessary to “prove” evolution; all the evidence needed is now available by studying genes. :)

Convenient, ain’t it?


6 posted on 08/10/2008 4:05:20 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (Just say NObama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

I haven’t bought many new releases lately because most of them are just garbage. Instead I’ve been working on my John Wayne collection. However, I will be picking this one up.


7 posted on 08/10/2008 4:06:01 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer ("I'm trying to save the planet!" - Nancy Pelosi ..........ROTFLMAO! What a dumbass!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

An excellent movie!


8 posted on 08/10/2008 4:06:44 PM PDT by Guenevere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
Plenty of resources out there. One of the best:

Discovery Institute

9 posted on 08/10/2008 4:07:38 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (Just say NObama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Saw it.Excellent film.Ben Stein is quite a guy.
10 posted on 08/10/2008 4:08:53 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Obama:"Ich bein ein beginner")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

Fabulous movie which provides the common man with a glimpse as to what the world is really dealing with in the case of evolutionites.


11 posted on 08/10/2008 4:11:14 PM PDT by wendy1946
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

I will rent this. I like Ben Stein.


12 posted on 08/10/2008 4:28:49 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("And the rum is for all your good vices.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

Been in my Netflix queue (as saved) for a long time just waiting for release date.


13 posted on 08/10/2008 4:30:31 PM PDT by Domandred (McCain's 'R' is a typo that has never been corrected)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

Yep. But it is no different than studying fossilized skeletons and claiming that similarity proves evolution. Now they just look at genes of LIVING animals and say that the similarity proves evolution.


14 posted on 08/10/2008 4:38:29 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Plenty of resources out there. One of the best:

Why don't you simplify it for me into something that is intelligible?

15 posted on 08/10/2008 4:43:15 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

2 Peter 2:5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water.


16 posted on 08/10/2008 4:46:14 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

Perhaps I can help.
Intelligent design looks for signs of intelligent design of living beings. Signs that life is actually created.
For example: DNA is an complex information system. The complexity of design is an indicator of intent.

How you cannot find any factual help here on FR: Evolutionists will smear any concept of intentional design with the Discovery Institute and Creationism. No independent thought will be allowed to impugn their religion.


17 posted on 08/10/2008 4:54:46 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
For example: DNA is an complex information system. The complexity of design is an indicator of intent.

Probably in the way that a snowflake does the same thing.

Humans have long ascribed to gods the things which they do not understand.

Complexity does not indicate anything other than complexity.

The rarity of a complete solar eclipse is not proof of a god, although it long was thought to be so.

Intelligent Design rests on the premise that "this stuff is too complicated, so it must have been designed."

It's not even a logical argument.

18 posted on 08/10/2008 5:03:28 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic; Recovering_Democrat
Perhaps I can help. Intelligent design looks for signs of intelligent design of living beings. Signs that life is actually created.

So Intelligent Design really means looking for evidence that there is a God?

For example: DNA is an complex information system. The complexity of design is an indicator of intent.

So a complex system like snow flakes is an indicator of design?

How you cannot find any factual help here on FR: Evolutionists will smear any concept of intentional design with the Discovery Institute and Creationism. No independent thought will be allowed to impugn their religion.

So Recovering_Democrat is an Evolutionist?

19 posted on 08/10/2008 5:10:36 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
What exactly is the Intelligent Design theory anyway?

From Little Green Footballs:

Last November, radio host Michael Medved was made a Senior Fellow at the anti-evolution "think tank" known as the Discovery Institute, and he has some rather interesting things to say about "intelligent design":

Q: Speaking of your desire for this kind of particularity, you are a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute that studies and believes in Intelligent Design. How do you, as an Orthodox Jew, reconcile with this kind of generality - with the view of their being a hierarchy with a chief "designer" - while believing in and praying to a very specific God?

The important thing about Intelligent Design is that it is not a theory - which is something I think they need to make more clear. Nor is Intelligent Design an explanation. Intelligent Design is a challenge. It's a challenge to evolution. It does not replace evolution with something else.

Q: The question is not whether it replaces evolution, but whether it replaces God.

No, you see, Intelligent Design doesn't tell you what is true; it tells you what is not true. It tells you that it cannot be that this whole process was random.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30897_Medved_on_Intelligent_Design-_Its_Not_a_Theory

posted at LGF Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:46:00 am PST

20 posted on 08/10/2008 5:11:21 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
The important thing about Intelligent Design is that it is not a theory - which is something I think they need to make more clear. Nor is Intelligent Design an explanation.

So Intelligent Design is nothing? Interesting.

21 posted on 08/10/2008 5:23:03 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
It seems to be a default position - evolution can't be true, therefore ID is the only other possibility. At least that's how I read Medved's statement.
22 posted on 08/10/2008 5:30:50 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
It seems to be a default position - evolution can't be true, therefore ID is the only other possibility. At least that's how I read Medved's statement.

It seems to me that Medved see ID as some kind of weird scientific process. Kind of like he doesn't know how to falsify a scientific theory.

23 posted on 08/10/2008 5:41:30 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
“So Intelligent Design really means looking for evidence that there is a God?” No, it is looking for evidence of intent. Evos make that last leap in an effort to taint any evidence of design

“So a complex system like snow flakes is an indicator of design?” Possibly, but intelligent design is mainly looking at living organisms. You could expand the look for design in all of science. Why not? scientists have for centuries.

“So Recovering_Democrat is an Evolutionist?” Don't have a clue and that isn't the point. The point is to say that there is little tolerance on FR of the discussion of intelligent design. The Evos attack with strawmen attaching creationism and the Discovery Institute to everything. Evolution is very much a religion here.

24 posted on 08/10/2008 5:47:09 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

look, it has been said before,NOTHING,ABSOLUTELY NOTHING can be used to opposed the evolutionism...

ANYTHING AT ALL THAT OPPOSES IT...will automatically be dismissed as religion or ‘outside of the realm of science’

NOT BECAUSE IT IS, but because those who worship at the altar of darwinism...can have it no other way.

anyone with half a brain recognizes design all around him or her, in everyday life.....

that idiot dawkins even said (paraphrasing) evolutionism is the process that gives the appearance of design.....

of course if it gives the appearance of design, oh it couldnt possibly be designed right? i mean, the most obvious conclusion if seeing something that looks designed is that there is intelligence behind it...but, we cant have that, can we??? cause we all know where that leads...

thats why complex information bearing things like cells have to be dismissed as ‘looking like designed, but not really’....

snowflakes are not complex information bearing creations...

living cells are....and the resulting semantic gymnastic somersaults evos have to go thru to side step and tap dance around that is hilarious to watch...

including your two-step...


25 posted on 08/10/2008 5:55:17 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
“Intelligent Design rests on the premise that “this stuff is too complicated, so it must have been designed.”

It's not even a logical argument.”

Well, logic itself is a product of the mind. The mind is intelligence. Nowhere did I state intelligent design equaled GOD. That is your prejudice sneaking in. In fact, your post shows you to be so biased no logical argument would sway you. That is why I call Evolution a religion. An intolerant one at that.

26 posted on 08/10/2008 6:00:25 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
Intelligent Design does mean God, because whose intelligence would it otherwise be?

You can pretend that it means any God, not just the one mentioned in Genesis, but are you fooling yourself more than anyone else?

I mean, have a discussion of which God intelligently designed the universe but don't insult our intelligence in the process.

If you're so disingenuous to accuse me of bias in that regard, then I can't really help you except to deny your silly allegations.

Creation or Intelligent Design might be why the earth is here. Present the evidence. Present it logically. Your evidence cannot consist entirely of criticism of evidence. Not logically. Present something.

27 posted on 08/10/2008 6:16:56 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

Sarge 1:1 There is no god.


28 posted on 08/10/2008 6:19:46 PM PDT by Old Sarge (CTHULHU '08 - I won't settle for a lesser evil any longer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
No, it is looking for evidence of intent.

What is evidence of intent?

You could expand the look for design in all of science. Why not? scientists have for centuries.

So the Theory of Information Entropy is evidence of design or intent? I am having a hard time understanding how anyone can get evidence of intent.

The point is to say that there is little tolerance on FR of the discussion of intelligent design.

Can you clearly define exactly what is intelligent design? I have found that a good definition simplifies the problem immensely.

29 posted on 08/10/2008 6:22:46 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Saw this in a theatre.. The interesting part of the movie for me was how scientists who question the theory of evolution were silenced. The same problem occurs with the current Global Warming debate.

No matter what the theory is, if you and main-stream science are on opposite sides then the main-stream science will crush you like a bug. This is a problem, it stifles scientific debate and discovery. Science is supposed to be about the search for truth. No-one (and I mean no-one on this earth) knows for sure how life developed, no-one knows and understands all the various mechanisms that affect our climate.

But there are a scary-large number of people who will go to any lengths to prevent people from knowing that they (the scientists) are simply guessing about a great many things.

What we know, or think we know, is dwarfed by what we do not know.

30 posted on 08/10/2008 6:26:40 PM PDT by BRITinUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

The point is that the Lefty ‘publik skrewels’ and universities (which our American tax dollars pay for, no matter WHAT our religious beliefs) only teach Evolution and won’t even consider that we, and all life, is Divinely Made.

But, you knew that. You’re just yankin’ my chain. :)

It’s called “Faith.” You either have it, or you don’t. It’s pretty simple, really. When you don’t don’t believe in something, you’ll fall for anything. :)


31 posted on 08/10/2008 6:29:24 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

Interesting, that sounds like a good idea...I’ve got some of my Clint Eastwood collection caught up.


32 posted on 08/10/2008 6:33:14 PM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing-----Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: raygunfan
look, it has been said before,NOTHING,ABSOLUTELY NOTHING can be used to opposed the evolutionism...

It seems to me that if the offspring of the parents were clones (genetically identical) that would disprove evolution wouldn't it?

NOT BECAUSE IT IS, but because those who worship at the altar of darwinism...can have it no other way.

Do they sacrifice virgins too? Maybe I should join : ) Except I have a hard time deciding between sacrificing harlots or virgins. What do you think?

of course if it gives the appearance of design, oh it couldnt possibly be designed right? i mean, the most obvious conclusion if seeing something that looks designed is that there is intelligence behind it...but, we cant have that, can we??? cause we all know where that leads...

Then who or what is the designer? Who or what designed the designer? Isn't that circular reasoning on your part?

snowflakes are not complex information bearing creations...

I beg to differ. There is literally tons of information in a snowflake. We are just now scratching at the surface of the information a snowflake can provide.

living cells are....and the resulting semantic gymnastic somersaults evos have to go thru to side step and tap dance around that is hilarious to watch...

What isn't a complex system? Can you name anything that isn't?

33 posted on 08/10/2008 6:36:41 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Diana in Wisconsin
But, you knew that. You’re just yankin’ my chain. :)

Yes, I am one of those victims of the 'publik skrewels' but at least I didn't go to that East Coast Liberal Art's skrewel MIT! I went to the other one : )

It’s called “Faith.” You either have it, or you don’t. It’s pretty simple, really. When you don’t don’t believe in something, you’ll fall for anything. :)

Ahh faith, I guess that is the answer to my question isn't it? Thank you for being honest : )

34 posted on 08/10/2008 6:42:01 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
When you don’t don’t believe in something, you’ll fall for anything.

I believe I'll drink to that.

All science so far...

35 posted on 08/10/2008 6:44:59 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

please do explain the complex information in a snowflake....and please feel free to use dawkins definition, or something similar, when he describes the information content of cell as a complete volume of the encyclopedia brittanica...

let’s hear all about that type of complex information that in the snowflake please..


36 posted on 08/10/2008 7:26:17 PM PDT by raygunfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

You may not believe in God, but He believes in you.


37 posted on 08/10/2008 7:29:28 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

he has a perverse sense of humor.


38 posted on 08/10/2008 7:30:23 PM PDT by Old Sarge (CTHULHU '08 - I won't settle for a lesser evil any longer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

Sorry your ox got gored.
Let’s try this. Scientists are trying to create life in a laboratory. If they do, that is intelligent design. If they do, then can they admit it? It won’t be evolution, at least not yet.
Your prejudice and hostility reeks. I never said anything about God directly but why not? Why must that answer be excluded? I talked about the search for design which scares you enough to make you hostile. Why is that? “silly accusations” “insult our intelligence” “pretend” “disingenuous” Grab your torches and pitchforks! We have a heretic in the lab!

Present the evidence heretic. We demand it!

Well, heck, I would simply like to be able to look. You and the others in the inquisition won’t allow that. That is what I originally was posting to this thread. The antagonism of inquiry here on FR is by the priests of evolution.


39 posted on 08/10/2008 8:03:20 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

I will bw ordering this DVD too!


40 posted on 08/10/2008 8:03:54 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

I tire of your pretending to not understand. If you need help find someone there to explain it.


41 posted on 08/10/2008 8:04:30 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
Let’s try this. Scientists are trying to create life in a laboratory. If they do, that is intelligent design.

If I carve a stone arch, does that imply that there are no stone arches carved by erosion?

Humans do modify living things by design, and the results are distinguishable because genetically, they do not fit the nested hierarchy of common descent. Since this is how humans behave when they design, what motive would the invisible, unnameable Designer have for making all living things appear to be the result of evolution?

42 posted on 08/10/2008 8:49:51 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Are you RadioAstronomer? I am honored : )


43 posted on 08/10/2008 8:50:13 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

I consider myself honored to be an internet friend of RadioAstronomer. Since he was banned, I carry his memory on my home page.


44 posted on 08/10/2008 8:51:46 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: js1138
“If I carve a stone arch, does that imply that there are no stone arches carved by erosion?”

No, but by the same token can you admit that a stone arch was carved on purpose? That is what is being denied. The possibility that it was carved with intent. Only the natural erosion one is allowed to be acknowledged.

45 posted on 08/10/2008 9:25:15 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic
No, but by the same token can you admit that a stone arch was carved on purpose?

The one carved by erosion?

I don't follow you line of reasoning. The fact that a stone arch can be designed does not imply that all instances are designed.

The problem for the intellignt design movement is that living things designed by human genetic engineers have features that distinguish them from living things that fit the forensic determination of common descent. In a court case, the natural or artificial lineage could be determined.

46 posted on 08/10/2008 10:17:03 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Look, when you are digging for archaeological artifacts, you are looking for things that have features similar to things known to have been created by humans. We have a long list of such things, and we have provenances for many kinds of objects. Pottery, arrowheads, spear points, etc.

It’s a little tough looking for objects that are supposedly the work of an unknown designer having unknown motives and capabilities, working at unknown times and places.

What we do have are examples of living things designed and modified by humans, and we can distinguish them from things that could have resulted from common descent. We make this distinction using the same methods and reasoning we use to determine or exclude paternity.


47 posted on 08/10/2008 10:28:58 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: js1138
“No, but by the same token can you admit that a stone arch was carved on purpose?
The one carved by erosion?

I don't follow you line of reasoning. The fact that a stone arch can be designed does not imply that all instances are designed.”

No but sticking only with the stone arch analogy, an arch carved by a man is possible. All arches do not have to be by erosion. If you came across an arched doorway made up of individual blocks, you could infer the arch was made by intelligent design. Even though there are plenty of arches carved by erosion. This one isn't. The problem with the evolutionist fanatics is they wouldn't allow anyone to suggest the arch doorway is anything other than caused by erosion. To suggest it was built is unforgivable.

Now, as far a the human genetic engineers creating life from scratch, IF they achieve it they will have achieve intelligent design.
The problem with your last analogy is that a million years from now could the determination be made which was made in the laboratory and what already exists in the outside world right now be made?

Since evos are terrified of the concept of a supreme being lets do a sci fi example. Say a space race decided to spread life through the universe. They create DNA and seed it on comets throughout the star systems they travel through. The simple viruses or whatever hit all the planets and flourish for a while on Mars and Earth. Over time our planet is the better host and the DNA replicates and diversifies into the myriad of life we have now.
Evolution happens and intelligent design happens.

SO what is wrong with looking for signs of the design?
Intelligent Design does not replace evolution as a theory.
It simply looks at another aspect. Attempting to find signs of the origin just like looking for evidence of the big bang for the evidence of the start of the universe.

48 posted on 08/10/2008 10:42:05 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: BRITinUSA

I think this is accurate; the wonderful solution evolutionists have to the debate is to tell thoughtful ID proponents to STFU. Really. How nice.

Kind of like, oh, I don’t know...Islamofacists in the Middle East, like...Nazi Pelosi and the drilling debate, like...Al Gore and the “established science” crowd on Global Warming....any number of “we know better, so you sit over there...” totalitarians.


49 posted on 08/11/2008 1:11:49 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (Just say NObama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
Simplify it? Yes.

Read. Listen. With an open mind.

50 posted on 08/11/2008 1:12:51 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (Just say NObama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


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

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

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

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