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

Skip to comments.

Dems Diss Jimmy Carter--Even his party won't give a platform to his bigotry.
FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | September 11, 2008 | Alan M. Dershowitz

Posted on 09/11/2008 5:23:11 AM PDT by SJackson

It is long been traditional for living ex-presidents to be invited to address their party’s quadrennial convention during presidential election years. The fact that Jimmy Carter was not invited to give the traditional address was no accident. Nor is it true, as Jimmy Carter has falsely claimed, that it was he who made the decision not to speak to the convention. The Democratic Party, and its leaders, made a deliberate decision not to invite Jimmy Carter precisely because they so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel and its Jewish supporters that he displayed both in his mendacious book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid and in his subsequent television appearances. They decided that they, as a party, did not want to be associated with Jimmy Carter’s despicable views. This took courage, more courage than the Republican Party showed in 1992 when they invited the notorious anti-Semite and anti-Zionist, Pat Buchanan, to deliver a prime time speech at their convention.

Perhaps the Democrats learned a lesson from the Republican’s mistake. Buchanan’s speech, which declared cultural war against non-Christian fundamentalists, may well have contributed to their electoral defeat. Had Jimmy Carter been allowed to speak, and had he chosen to repeat his bigoted views, the impact on voters might have been considerable.

I must admit that I am not an unbiased observer. I played a role in seeking to persuade the Democrats to disinvite Carter. I made it clear that I could not support a party that honored a bigot like Carter. Many others—on Jews and non-Jews—took the same position.

Nor has Carter been denied his free speech rights, as some anti-Israel zealots have claimed. Carter says that he wrote his screed in order to stimulate a debate. But he has adamantly refused to debate the contents of his book, with me or anyone else. I have written extensively and critically about Carter’s book.

In my soon to be published book, The Case Against Israel’s Enemies—Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand In the Way of Peace, I take apart his arguments point by point. His only response was, “I don’t read Dershowitz.” Well maybe he should read Dershowitz and the other critics who have demolished his arguments, disproved his facts and questioned his motives. His answer to his critics bordered on anti-Semitism. He claimed that “book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations.” He must know this to be a lie, unless he believes that all Jews are somehow “representatives” of Jewish organizations. The most critical reviews were written by Michael Kinsley, Ethan Bronner, Jeffrey Goldberg, and me. None of us are representatives of Jewish organizations—unless he believes that all Jews belong to some uniform and organized conspiracy. On NBC’s Meet the Press, Carter claimed that the “Jewish lobby” was part of the problem, never defining what he meant but leaving a clear implication of dual loyalty against “Jewish” Americans.

It is Jimmy Carter who has tried to skew the marketplace of ideas by refusing to debate. So let Jimmy Carter speak, wherever he chooses to—on college campuses, on television, at political events. But let others who disagree with him be invited to speak at the same time. That is debate, not the kind of one-sided propaganda that Carter insists on. So I renew my challenge to President Carter: Join the marketplace of ideas. Debate me—anywhere, anytime. On your turf or mine. How about a debate at the Carter center in Emory University? I will come at my own expense. Do you accept or will you continue to refuse to read your critics or to debate them?


TOPICS: Editorial; Israel; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008dncconvention; antisemite; carterlegacy; cultureofcorruption; democratscandals; worstexpresident

1 posted on 09/11/2008 5:23:11 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Alan Dershowitz is a liberal but he's not a moonbat. He did good in making sure Jimmy Carter was neither seen nor heard from by the Democrats.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

2 posted on 09/11/2008 5:45:38 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

What Dershowitz is, what separates him from liberals in general, is that he is intellectually honest, at least when it comes to Israel and terrorism. The dearth of intellectual honesty on the left is staggering, and Joe Sixpack is starting to see the disconnect very clearly on display.


3 posted on 09/11/2008 5:54:20 AM PDT by CoolPapaBoze (Nothing that requires the effort or labor of another can be a right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

4 posted on 09/11/2008 5:54:30 AM PDT by SJackson (as a black man, you know, Barack can get shot going to the gas station, Michelle O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
“Alan Dershowitz is a liberal but he's not a moonbat. He did good in making sure Jimmy Carter was neither seen nor heard from by the Democrats.”

Well, guess he did good in behalf of the Dem's. However, as a conservative, I can't get enough of Carter. I thoroughly enjoy watching him make a fool out of himself. His elitist,socialist, anti-American, idiotic words are a tonic for the Conservative soul...

5 posted on 09/11/2008 6:01:18 AM PDT by snoringbear (Government is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Right on target.


6 posted on 09/11/2008 6:03:45 AM PDT by Sal (Pyrrhic Pooty just took Russia down to a 3rd class, 3rd world POS country that is dying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sal

Who’s Jimmy Carter?


7 posted on 09/11/2008 6:08:51 AM PDT by Vasilli22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Vasilli22
Who’s Jimmy Carter?

Billy's brother.

8 posted on 09/11/2008 6:10:46 AM PDT by dfwgator ( Go OSU, beat USC!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Mr D: Time to make sure you are registered as a Republican before November?


9 posted on 09/11/2008 6:15:18 AM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
I think the Dersh is fooling us on this one. Yes, he was earnest in trying to keep Carter away from speaking at the convention. But I don't think that an Obama nominating convention would disinvite Carter on its own. Obama, IIRC, has never said anything negative about Carter or his book or his positions on the Middle East and Israel.

My guess is that there was some other reason for Carter's not speaking, maybe something related to general mental deterioration. Dershowitz could well be taking false credit for Carter's absense as a Dem campaign tactic with Jewish voters.

10 posted on 09/11/2008 6:15:27 AM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

“the notorious anti-semite...Pat Buchanan.”

Really, Doucheawitz?

How so, is it because he believes an American citizen has the right to due process before being shipped overseas to his death?

That’s a lot of moral indignation for a mercenary who will defend any murderous psychopath as long as they have money.


11 posted on 09/11/2008 6:55:24 AM PDT by Natchez Hawk (We stand with you, Port Lavaca/ Corpus Christi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; All

“The Democratic Party, and its leaders, made a deliberate decision not to invite Jimmy Carter precisely because they so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel and its Jewish supporters”

I don’t for a minute believe this to be true, at all.

The Dims simply didn’t want to publicly display Jimmy, whom they love, because they want to protect the fiction that they really do support Israel.


12 posted on 09/11/2008 7:23:46 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Natchez Hawk

Yeah, just because he’s punching Carter, doesn’t make Dershowitz a good guy. In fact, I think Carter is a better person than Dershowitz, but your mileage may vary. :o)


13 posted on 09/11/2008 7:55:34 AM PDT by Maximum Leader (run from a knife, close on a gun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Maximum Leader

Carter may be naive, foolish, wimpy, irritating, blustery...well you get the point.

But, I do think he is a moral man.

Alan, I have my doubts...


14 posted on 09/11/2008 8:01:40 AM PDT by Natchez Hawk (We stand with you, Port Lavaca/ Corpus Christi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CoolPapaBoze; goldstategop
What Dershowitz is, what separates him from liberals in general, is that he is intellectually honest, at least when it comes to Israel and terrorism.

True. But I doubt that he's being intellectually honest when he tells us that the Democrats didn't have Carter speak at their convention because of Carter's views on the Middle East. My guess is that there is some other reason why that happened, and Dershowitz is trying to create a false impression that he and other pro-Israel Dems successfully obtained Carter's withdrawal from an active role at the convention. Dershowitz's story makes the Democrats look better to pro-Israel voters than reality would suggest - in other words, a nice spin from his point of view.

15 posted on 09/11/2008 8:03:48 AM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

It’s curious why the left never turn their noses down at Carter for his religious beliefs but are going full steam ahead to disparage Palin for hers.


16 posted on 09/11/2008 8:05:54 AM PDT by peggybac (Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
"The Democratic Party, and its leaders, made a deliberate decision not to invite Jimmy Carter precisely because they so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel and its Jewish supporters”

I don’t for a minute believe this to be true, at all.

The Dims simply didn’t want to publicly display Jimmy, whom they love, because they want to protect the fiction that they really do support Israel.

You hit the nail on the head. Exactly the quote I had copyied to make the same point, but for once I read ahead to see if anyone else already had.

17 posted on 09/11/2008 8:08:41 AM PDT by libs_kma (NOBAMA. Keep the change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

It would seem that Jimmy Carter is official the Democrat version of Pat Buchanan.


18 posted on 09/11/2008 8:13:44 AM PDT by jpl ("First come smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire." - Roland of Gilead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CoolPapaBoze

let’s be real frank

what separates Dershowitz is that he is an ardent defender of Israel

other than that he is still a Red Diaper Baby and uses the race, sexist, anti-semite cards with abandon seldom seen

he deserves credit only for Israel, other than that is an asshat

which means to me to be frank again, that he has his priorities messed up.

Preserve Israel ...great.

Destroy America with vile leftism...bad.

He gets no kudos from me.


19 posted on 09/11/2008 8:14:45 AM PDT by wardaddy (Obama/Pol Pot 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Outside of comunist Cambridge, Buchanan's "Culture War" speech was quite popular.
Dershowitz is a liberal and never to be trusted.
20 posted on 09/11/2008 10:19:52 AM PDT by rmlew (NYARLATHOTEP / BIDEN'08 . If you don't believe me check out the first's wikipedia page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy
Dershowitz a "Red Diaper Baby"?

He may be on the left, but I've never heard anything about his being raised in a "Red" family. So he wouldn't meet the qualifications for that.

21 posted on 09/11/2008 11:11:24 AM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj; firebrand; dennisw; juliej; OldFriend; Alouette; Slings and Arrows; pabianice; montag813; ...

Ping!!!

Please see my posts #s 10 and 15.


22 posted on 09/11/2008 11:36:41 AM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Alan Dershowitz is a liberal but he's not a moonbat. He did good in making sure Jimmy Carter was neither seen nor heard from by the Democrats.

I don't know if he did good. To the extent he kept Carter away he helped Democrats.

He is a liberal and a Democrat. Since when did Liberals and Democrats decry bigots? How does he feel about Obama? How about Hillary? Here are dyed in the wool bigots. The Democrat Party has more bigots per capita than the Ku Klux Klan.

23 posted on 09/11/2008 12:22:35 PM PDT by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
I must admit that I am not an unbiased observer. I played a role in seeking to persuade the Democrats to disinvite Carter. I made it clear that I could not support a party that honored a bigot like Carter. Many others—on Jews and non-Jews—took the same position.

Good thing Carter didn't speak. That automatically makes everything all right. Now Dersh can campaign and vote for Obama and continue fighting "anti-Semitic fascists" like McCain and Palin.

Why does Horowitz continue to give this ultra-liberal Dem party whore a forum?

24 posted on 09/11/2008 1:08:20 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Zakhor 'et 'asher-`asah lekha `Amaleq baderekh betze'tkhem miMitzrayim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
Why does Horowitz continue to give this ultra-liberal Dem party whore a forum?

I noticed that myself, and I don't have a ready explanation for it.

25 posted on 09/11/2008 1:15:20 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

It’s about time members of his own party started taking a stand against this moron. Carter went off the deep end a long time ago when he stopped acting like an ex-President and started acting like a fool. He’s an embarassment to both democrats and republicans alike.


26 posted on 09/11/2008 1:20:36 PM PDT by reagan_fanatic ("And how can this be? For I am the Kwisatz Haderach! " - Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy; justiceseeker93
let’s be real frank

what separates Dershowitz is that he is an ardent defender of Israel

other than that he is still a Red Diaper Baby and uses the race, sexist, anti-semite cards with abandon seldom seen

he deserves credit only for Israel, other than that is an asshat

which means to me to be frank again, that he has his priorities messed up.

Preserve Israel ...great.

Destroy America with vile leftism...bad.

He gets no kudos from me.

I agree with eveything you just said! I've never given Dershowitz any credit for his "pro-Israel" position any more than I've given Buchanan credit for his conservative position. "Conservatism" that's anti-Semitic is unacceptable, and "pro-Israeliism" that's mixed with Gramscianism is equally unacceptable! I've never liked Dershowitz, I've never "congratulated" him for "breaking rank" on this issue, and I've never understood why any conservative would have anything to do with him (he's never had anything to do with us and to this day pretends that liberalism is philo-Semitic and conservatism anti-Semitic). I wish Horowitz would stop running his stuff altogether. It isn't comforting and it isn't encouraging--it's simply disgusting!

Some wonderful and sincere pro-Israel conservatives (G-d bless them!) will say that "at least he's conservative on Israel." But that's just the point: he's not conservative on Israel at all. He's one of those standard ueber-liberal "pro-Israel" Jews who consider the pro-Israel position to be "the true radical position." To him the Israelis are the Cubans, the Vietcong, the Sandinistas of the Middle East while the Communist Arab dictatorships are Somoza, Pinochet, and (the former) South Africa. I'm afraid most pro-Israel conservatives (with their never-enough-to-be-commended Biblical view of Israel and Jews) are simply ignorant of the existence of such a worldview, but it was totally dominant in Jewish liberalism and far-leftism for a long, long time (there was at one time a whole magazine, Dissent, dedicated to this worldview), and Dershowitz wants to keep it alive. I disagree. I'd bury it with a stake through its heart. The identification of the Jewish mission in the world with the abomination of an ideology espoused by Dershowitz and his ilk is nothing short of a chillul HaShem.

Alan Dershowitz is garbage. The only reason he's pro-Israel is he thinks Israel is garbage too and that the "Jewish mission" is to dump garbage on the world.

I can't stand this man.

27 posted on 09/11/2008 1:24:51 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Zakhor 'et 'asher-`asah lekha `Amaleq baderekh betze'tkhem miMitzrayim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93; wardaddy
Dershowitz a "Red Diaper Baby"?

He may be on the left, but I've never heard anything about his being raised in a "Red" family. So he wouldn't meet the qualifications for that.

Oops! Sorry I let that one pass, Justice!

Dershowitz is from an Orthodox family. From what I understand, he's the only one who left Orthodoxy.

I trust he's an embarrassment to the rest of them.

28 posted on 09/11/2008 1:27:48 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Zakhor 'et 'asher-`asah lekha `Amaleq baderekh betze'tkhem miMitzrayim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93
Why does Horowitz continue to give this ultra-liberal Dem party whore a forum?

I noticed that myself, and I don't have a ready explanation for it.

My theory is that it's because Horowitz isn't really conservative.

Now wait a minute--I don't mean that the way Birchites and "palaeos" mean it when they say someone "isn't really conservative" (by which they mean someone is pro-Israel). The "palaeos" literally believe anyone, no matter how reactionary in his worldview, who supports Israel is a "neocon" because they literally believe that Israel is the "vatican" of the "new world order." In other words, they're anti-Semites. The real thing.

When I say that Horowitz isn't really a conservative, I mean that Horowitz isn't really a conservative. He's a former red diaper baby who because of his fundamental decency and rejection of hypocrisy rejected identification with the Far Left and thus calls himself a conservative, but he's really more of a pro-Israel secular libertarian. He's stated before that he's pro-"gay rights," though he doesn't believe in quotas or any of the "politically correct" stuff about "gays." He just wants them to have equal rights exactly as he wants white chr*stian males to have equal rights. He's consistent and fundamentally decent, but also fundamentally secular. I sincerely hope he will come around to HaShem and the Torah, his eternal heritage. Can you imagine what an addition he would be?

Now--not to be misunderstood I must add that Horowitz's carrying Dershowitz is not one bit worse than Human Events still carrying Pat Buchanan. Considering several of his positions are the exact opposites of everyone else there, that simply makes no sense at all. Either it's a case of "fair mindedness" taken to extremes (like David does with Dersh) or there may still be an anti-Semitic cabal left over there from the Bad Old Days when the conservative movement (unknown to Biblical Fundamentalists like myself) were solidly and almost totally anti-Israel (because they agreed with the Dershowitz's that Israel was the Vietcong of the Middle East).

Let Dersh and Buck go elsewhere to spew their trash than decent conservative publications and web sites.

29 posted on 09/11/2008 1:51:16 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Zakhor 'et 'asher-`asah lekha `Amaleq baderekh betze'tkhem miMitzrayim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
I'm not a Dersh fan, but I have read a book of his which is somewhat autobiographical and gives a good insight into his thinking on a lot of things, especially his Jewish identity. I don't think of him quite as negatively as you do.

The guy with a similar family background who is much more disgusting than Dersh is Noam Chomsky.

30 posted on 09/11/2008 2:12:02 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93
I'm not a Dersh fan, but I have read a book of his which is somewhat autobiographical and gives a good insight into his thinking on a lot of things, especially his Jewish identity.

Does the guy even know that once upon a time Jews were Theocrats who stoned co-religionists who turned to other "gxds" and killed Canaanites at G-d's command, or does he think the Jews popped out of nowhere two thousand years ago to serve as leftwing "dissidents" to "theocratic" chr*stianity?

I don't think of him quite as negatively as you do.

As disgusting as Chomsky is, he at least knows about the TaNa"KH. True, he hates it, but he identifies it with Judaism and Israel and attacks them all. He doesn't go around promoting atheism and homosexuality in the name of Judaism because "this is the millenial Jewish heritage" or whatever.

31 posted on 09/11/2008 2:21:42 PM PDT by Zionist Conspirator (Zakhor 'et 'asher-`asah lekha `Amaleq baderekh betze'tkhem miMitzrayim.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

Thanks for the ping!


32 posted on 09/11/2008 10:21:13 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93; AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ..

thanks justiceseeker93!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2079846/posts?page=10#10
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2079846/posts?page=15#15
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2079846/posts?page=21#21
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2079846/posts?page=25#25
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2079846/posts?page=30#30

[snip] The Democratic Party, and its leaders, made a deliberate decision not to invite Jimmy Carter precisely because they so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel and its Jewish supporters that he displayed both in his mendacious book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid and in his subsequent television appearances. They decided that they, as a party, did not want to be associated with Jimmy Carter’s despicable views. This took courage... [end]

Dersh is full of it — the Demwits do not fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel. Dersh happens to be a strong supporter of Israel, as is Senator Lieberman, but the overwhelming preponderant dominant view among Demwits is, they support the “Palestinians” and think Israel is an imperialist occupier and police state. Dersh is, as always, acting as the partisan hack that he is.


33 posted on 09/11/2008 10:33:44 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/_______Profile hasn't been updated since Friday, May 30, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CoolPapaBoze
What Dirtshitz said:
The Democratic Party, and its leaders, made a deliberate decision not to invite Jimmy Carter precisely because they so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel and its Jewish supporters that he displayed both in his mendacious book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid and in his subsequent television appearances.

What you said:
What Dershowitz is, what separates him from liberals in general, is that he is intellectually honest, at least when it comes to Israel and terrorism

What I say:
One of you is wrong.

34 posted on 09/11/2008 10:39:24 PM PDT by blake6900 (YOUR AD HERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Alan is only partly right. They do not want to be associated with Jimmy Carter and his idiotic beliefs at this point in time. They need to make the party look moderate, and Obama “middle of the road” and the last thing they need is Carter to remind the public how dangerous their party really is.

Next year they’d be happy to let Carter keep the far left on the farm with his yammering.


35 posted on 09/12/2008 12:11:57 AM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CoolPapaBoze

“What Dershowitz is, what separates him from liberals in general, is that he is intellectually honest, at least when it comes to Israel and terrorism. The dearth of intellectual honesty on the left is staggering, and Joe Sixpack is starting to see the disconnect very clearly on display.”

Joe Sixpack saw it years ago. Wm. F. Buckley and company caught on a little later. Probably the only ones who don’t see it now, aside from “the left” itself are tenured college professors at major universities, and journalists.

You can fool some of the people some of the time, and most of the people most of the time, but only if you don’t fool yourself.


36 posted on 09/12/2008 1:56:31 AM PDT by Eleutheria5 (www.publishedauthors.net/benmaxwell/index.html. Donate to members.tripod.com/tva_israel/HOME.HTM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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