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

Skip to comments.

Beating the TSA: How a determined passenger spent hours arguing his rights before...
UK Daily Mail ^ | November 23, 2010 | James White

Posted on 11/23/2010 11:03:40 AM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

Maybe it was the video of the three-year old getting molested, maybe it was the sexual assault victim having to cry her way through getting groped, maybe it was the father watching teenage TSA officers joke about his attractive daughter.

'Whatever it was, this issue didn’t sit right with me. We shouldn’t be required to do this simply to get into our own country.'

As a result, Mr Kernan informed staff he did not want to go through the infamous Backscatter imaging machine.

He was told he would have to undergo an invasive pat-down search, but again politely told staff that he would consider any contact with his genital areas as assault.

After being told that the two options were TSA policy, he replied: ' I disagree with the policy, and I think that it is unconstitutional.

'As a US citizen, I have the right to move freely within my country as long as I can demonstrate proof of citizenship and have demonstrated no reasonable cause to be detained.'

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


TOPICS: War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 4thamendment; fourthamendment; mattkernan; napolitano; patdwon; scanner; tsa; tsapervs; tsascanners
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Amendment IV, U.S. Constitution

1 posted on 11/23/2010 11:03:50 AM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

This is a fundamental human right given to us by God and given legal force by the Bill of Rights. TSA has gone too far.


2 posted on 11/23/2010 11:06:20 AM PST by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

You are so right.

Flying is not a right, but grabbing my crotch or my kid’s IS? WRONG.


3 posted on 11/23/2010 11:07:58 AM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Obama and Janet Napolitano do not have the right to molest our wives, our family, or our children...

4 posted on 11/23/2010 11:11:03 AM PST by American Constitutionalist (The fool has said in his heart, " there is no GOD " ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

5 posted on 11/23/2010 11:11:16 AM PST by CharlesMartelsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Matt Kernan is my hero of the day. But the thing is this, he was right, he hung tough. But he was an arrival. The article says "he returned to North Kentucky International Airport in Cincinnati from Paris on Sunday."

In other words WHAT THE HECK WAS SCANNING HIM ALL ABOUT ANYWAY? He was getting off a flight arrived from Paris. He didn't get on another flight according to the article. He doesn't fly again until next Wednesday.

I hope he succeeds then. G-d help us all!

6 posted on 11/23/2010 11:15:28 AM PST by bvw (No TSA goon will touch MY stuff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

For liberals, our lives, our property, and our sacred honor are gifts of the state, and the state can take them back whenever it sees fit.


7 posted on 11/23/2010 11:16:20 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Writing on his website noblasters.com, he said: 'I certainly don’t enjoy being treated like a terrorist in my own country, but I’m also not a die-hard constitutional rights advocate.

'However, for some reason, I was irked.'


If you don't advocate Constitutional Rights, do not be irked when you are treated like a terrorist in your own country then sir. Rights, like muscles, work best when exercised.
8 posted on 11/23/2010 11:18:36 AM PST by mrmeyer ("When brute force is on the march, compromise is the red carpet." Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

The right to travel is a Constitutionally protected right, and there is a SCOTUS decision squarely holding that. There is no right to violate the 4th Amendment or our right to travel.


9 posted on 11/23/2010 11:22:37 AM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Flying is not a right,

So they say. It's considered a privilege, like driving. But I don't think this is so.

It's a privilege to drive because you are operating a ton or more of potentially lethal metal. But you don't drive the plane.

When you purchase a ticket, you purchase the right to sit in a chair and be delivered to your destination. It's a contract made with the airline-- you pay the money, the check don't bounce, you present yourself at the gate before takeoff, and they get you and your luggage there in one piece.

If it's a contract, it's like property. You have the right to claim your property. Let me know if you think this is far-fetched.

10 posted on 11/23/2010 11:22:37 AM PST by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

It’s a shame that we have to read about people standing up for their rights in this country — in a UK paper.

Are our own news organizations too scared of the Obama Administration to speak the truth? Clearly, on item after item, they demonstrate that they do not have the courage to stand up to the defacto censorship of this administration.

Just as the health care industry was cowed by the threat of punishment, as the Obamacare bill apparently allows the executive branch to write any rules they want and apply them to any businesses they want.

In the same manner, the executive uses the power of the government to silence bank critics, to steal the voice of bondholders at the car companies.

And they even used the military leadership to denounce and silence a pastor who thought burning a Koran was a good method of protest.

Throughout this country, people are scared of the powers that bee. People know what they want to say, sometimes good things, sometimes incorrect things, but they are afraid to speak, lest the powers come down on them, punish them, banish them from the community.

Just like the muslims silencing the world against pointing out the problems with Mohommed, to the point where cable channels will refuse to run fictional TV shows lest their offices be blown up, the powers are afraid of rational discourse, of real discussion of the issues, afraid the populace might be stirred up against their preferred beliefs.

So in this case, knowing they couldn’t win, they let the guy go, but in a way that first made them feel in control, and second hid his victory from other passengers, lest they too understand what it means to stand up for freedom. So far as those passengers knew, the guy rationally arguing his position was hauled away for punishment, strip search, incarceration or to be sent back out of the country.

So, will the people rise up against the censorship, the raw use of power? Will the TSA be shut down as millions refuse to use the machines and overwhelm the gropers? Or will in the end the vast hordes of clueless passengers lash out not against the abuse of government, but against those who stand against it, because that stand holds them up from getting on their planes? The government has already planted THAT seed, having already publicly blamed these “malcontents” for slow lines this week.

My guess is the sheep will, instead of applauding those freedom fighters who stand up for truth, and who are willing to fight the power, will be the first to turn them in, lest they be inconvenienced.


11 posted on 11/23/2010 11:31:51 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
I would agree with you, but it is a conditional right, i.e. you purchased the ticket agreeing to certain stipulations, which probably include following TSA procedures.

The problem with all of this is that air travel is a time-sensitive item. If you are not at your gate on time, you miss your flight. The TSA knows this, and is willing to make you miss your flight to strong-arm you into doing what they want.

12 posted on 11/23/2010 11:37:24 AM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Photobucket
13 posted on 11/23/2010 11:46:12 AM PST by baddog 219
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrmeyer
but I’m also not a die-hard constitutional rights advocate.

Well, that irked me. Maybe if more Americans had been die-heard Constitutional rights advocates the country wouldn't have become the minimum security camp it is today.

14 posted on 11/23/2010 11:53:24 AM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: achilles2000
The right to travel is a Constitutionally protected right, and there is a SCOTUS decision squarely holding that. There is no right to violate the 4th Amendment or our right to travel.

The right to travel has its roots in the common law. Do you know what specific SC case this was addressed in?

15 posted on 11/23/2010 11:59:08 AM PST by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
what is the purpose of a pat down and scan after a return flight? Practice? Desensitization?
16 posted on 11/23/2010 12:10:05 PM PST by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51

Can someone please help me out? Why are we scanning people that are leaving customs AFTER a flight? That blows me away, and since I don’t have a passport and am stupid like Mayor Bloomberg says, I’m asking the intelligent FREEPERS that might know. Wow!


17 posted on 11/23/2010 12:11:58 PM PST by Paddy Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge
While it's true his statment on Constitutional rights was wishy-washy, he actually did this and stood up for his rights against intense intimidation.

How many of us on the board have the courage, determination and cleverness to actually do this next time we fly?

18 posted on 11/23/2010 12:21:22 PM PST by sjmjax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bvw

I read that to. Something is missing.

“We walk over to the staff entrance and he scans his badge to let me through. We walk down the long hallway that led back to the baggage claim area.”


19 posted on 11/23/2010 12:27:56 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bvw

BVW,

When returning from flying international you have to go back through security after going through customs and picking up your bags... it does sound silly though if he just went through customs but I don’t know the layout of the Cincinnati airport to know if he had to go back through the main security or a special security that some airports have (Houston airport has a special security that gets you into the terminal).


20 posted on 11/23/2010 12:33:32 PM PST by dleach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

You do have a right to conduct business with a private interprise of which the airlines are.The gubmint is getting in the way like they do with everything in our lives.They have NO right to do this.


21 posted on 11/23/2010 12:42:06 PM PST by HANG THE EXPENSE (Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

It was a 60’s or early 70’s case (the name escapes me) in which the SCOTUS struck down a NY requirement that you must be a resident of NY for at least 6 months before you were eligible for welfare. The rationale? Such a requirement burdened the constitutional right of the “poor” to travel.


22 posted on 11/23/2010 12:43:40 PM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
From the guy's blog:

"You see, it is official TSA policy that people (both citizens and non-citizens alike) from international flights are screened as they enter the airport, despite the fact that they have already flown."

Why are they doing this if you have ARRIVED and have ALREADY flown on the plane? Unless you are trying to make a connecting flight, what can they do if you refuse everything and just want to leave the airport?

23 posted on 11/23/2010 1:09:44 PM PST by mikey_hates_everything
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: achilles2000

Well, don’t count on them being consistent with that rationale. They’ll use the opposite rationale if necessary in the next case in order to further the power of the government.


24 posted on 11/23/2010 1:12:14 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mikey_hates_everything
Why are they doing this if you have ARRIVED and have ALREADY flown on the plane? Unless you are trying to make a connecting flight, what can they do if you refuse everything and just want to leave the airport?

The guy is mistaken on it being TSA policy. The problem is with the NKI layout. Arriving passengers are forced into the secure area along with the connecting passengers. A separate exit would have eliminated this.

25 posted on 11/23/2010 1:57:00 PM PST by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.
26 posted on 11/23/2010 2:05:19 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (V for Vendetta.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

>>Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.<<

You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article.

What is your problem>


27 posted on 11/23/2010 2:27:59 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

>>Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.<<

You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article.

What is your problem?


28 posted on 11/23/2010 2:28:07 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

>>Did you read the article? They guy is right on point. It is a RIGHT to move about this country in any manner you desire as long as you are a citizen and in good standing. The sky as claimed by the Federal government is a public right of way. You have a right and the ability to use a public right of way. There is legal precedence for this and this is the was the TSA should be beaten.<<

You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article.

What is your problem?


29 posted on 11/23/2010 2:28:09 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

“Did you read the article?”

Did you read my response to the article? I quoted the fourth amendment. You REALLY jumped the gun on this one. Please read before posting.


30 posted on 11/23/2010 2:31:13 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

Then you forgot your sarcasm tag.

I do try to make my point in one post not four but hey each to his own.


31 posted on 11/23/2010 2:39:35 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (V for Vendetta.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

Sarcasm tag after WHAT? An excerpt from the article itself, the exact text of the fourth amendment, or this:

“Flying is not a right, but grabbing my crotch or my kid’s IS? WRONG.”

???

Maybe you need to read more closely before posting.


32 posted on 11/23/2010 4:05:18 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; mad_as_he$$
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article. What is your problem?

You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?

33 posted on 11/23/2010 4:12:42 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; mad_as_he$$
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article. What is your problem?

You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?

34 posted on 11/23/2010 4:13:04 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; mad_as_he$$
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article. What is your problem?

You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?

35 posted on 11/23/2010 4:13:49 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; mad_as_he$$
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article. What is your problem?

You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?

36 posted on 11/23/2010 4:14:20 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; mad_as_he$$
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article. What is your problem?

You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?

37 posted on 11/23/2010 4:14:44 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; mad_as_he$$
You are OBVIOUSLY responding to the wrong person. I KNOW the guy is right on point, which is exactly why I posted the article. What is your problem?

You are OBVIOUSLY responding too often. I KNOW you can post only once, which is exactly what the point is. What is your problem?

38 posted on 11/23/2010 4:15:27 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Maybe you should learn some manners noob.
39 posted on 11/23/2010 4:17:05 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (V for Vendetta.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Hey Laz. Best wishes for the holidays!!!
40 posted on 11/23/2010 4:18:45 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (V for Vendetta.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
Flying is not a right

Actually, it is.

See 49 U.S.C. § 40103 : US Code - Section 40103: Sovereignty and use of airspace, section (a)(2): "A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace."

41 posted on 11/23/2010 4:23:22 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge
Well, that irked me.

It irked me too. I AM a diehard Constitutional rights advocate.

42 posted on 11/23/2010 4:24:43 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

You too! Get some tail!


43 posted on 11/23/2010 4:28:07 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

I mean, uhhh, turkey.


44 posted on 11/23/2010 4:29:00 PM PST by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I agree.

Thats why my entire quote was, “Flying is not a right, but grabbing my crotch or my kid’s IS? WRONG.”

I think this argument should have been nuked immediately by every conservative voice out there.


45 posted on 11/23/2010 4:47:55 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

Maybe you should learn some manners noob.


Been a Freeper under another screenname since 1998. Attended a Crawford Texas rally and met Jim a few years ago.

You can go away now, if you like.


46 posted on 11/23/2010 4:52:00 PM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (TSA: "All Your Groin Are Belong To Us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: kosciusko51
I would agree with you, but it is a conditional right, i.e. you purchased the ticket agreeing to certain stipulations, which probably include following TSA procedures.

Lots of folks keep saying that and it demonstrates that you do not understand how much the rules of the tyranny have changed in the last week to 10 days. Most of those tickets were probably bought 30-60 days ago or longer.

47 posted on 11/23/2010 5:01:00 PM PST by EBH ( Whether you eat your bread or see it vanish into a looter's stomach, is an absolute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I plan on it!!! Back at you (and I know you will)!!


48 posted on 11/23/2010 6:56:55 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (V for Vendetta.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: achilles2000
RE: our right to travel... see U.S. vs Guest. It's pretty unequivocal.

 The District Court was in error in dismissing the indictment as to this paragraph. The constitutional right to travel from one State to another, and necessarily to use the highways and other instrumentalities of interstate commerce in doing so, occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union. It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized.

Empasis mine. There are several other excellent references and quotes. I'll be bringing a copy of this and some of the referenced caselaw with me next time I fly. :-)

In Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 , invalidating a California law which impeded the free interstate passage of the indigent, the Court based its reaffirmation of the federal right of interstate travel upon the Commerce Clause. This ground of decision was consistent with precedents firmly establishing that the federal commerce [383 U.S. 745, 759]   power surely encompasses the movement in interstate commerce of persons as well as commodities. Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania, 114 U.S. 196, 203 ; Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. Kentucky, 154 U.S. 204, 218 -219; Hoke v. United States, 227 U.S. 308, 320 ; United States v. Hill, 248 U.S. 420, 423 . It is also well settled in our decisions that the federal commerce power authorizes Congress to legislate for the protection of individuals from violations of civil rights that impinge on their free movement in interstate commerce. Mitchell v. United States, 313 U.S. 80 ; Henderson v. United States, 339 U.S. 816 ; Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454 ; Atlanta Motel v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 , Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 .

 Although there have been recurring differences in emphasis within the Court as to the source of the constitutional right of interstate travel, there is no need here to canvass those differences further. 16 All have agreed that the right exists. Its explicit recognition as one of the federal rights protected by what is now 18 U.S.C. 241 goes back at least as far as 1904. United States v. Moore, 129 F. 630, 633. We reaffirm it now. 17Although there have been recurring differences in emphasis within the Court as to the source of the constitutional right of interstate travel, there is no need here to canvass those differences further. 16 All have agreed that the right exists. Its explicit recognition as one of the federal rights protected by what is now 18 U.S.C. 241 goes back at least as far as 1904. United States v. Moore, 129 F. 630, 633. We reaffirm it now. 17   [383 U.S. 745, 760]     [383 U.S. 745, 760]  


49 posted on 11/23/2010 9:17:53 PM PST by zeugma (Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: zeugma

Thanks for digging up the case citations - I was too lazy to do it ;-)

I also think that there may be personal liability under section 1983 for civil rights violations. The Bivens case is also relevant.


50 posted on 11/23/2010 9:23:33 PM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 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