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

Skip to comments.

Oops: Obama judicial appointee says we have right to keep arms, but not to bear them
The Daily Caller ^ | 2/13/12 | AWR Hawkins, Ph.D

Posted on 02/13/2012 1:19:23 PM PST by Nachum

When Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association (NRA), spoke at CPAC on February 10th, he predicted that if Barack Obama wins a second term it will usher in an all-out attack on the Second Amendment. In so many words, he said the same people who brought us Fast and Furious, “a criminal enterprise” for which there has yet to be prosecutions, will use four more years to gut constitutional protections on the right to keep and bear arms. And anyone who wonders what this assault on the Second Amendment might look like need look no further than Illinois, where a judge that President Obama appointed has just ruled that we have the right to keep arms, but not to bear them.

That’s not a typo. Rather, it’s an unbelievable decision recently delivered by U.S. Judge Sue Myerscough, in a challenge which the Second Amendment Foundation filed against Illinois’s ongoing prohibition against carrying concealed weapons in that state. Said Myerscough, in rendering her decision: “[Although the] plaintiffs argue that the Second Amendment protects a general right to carry guns that include a right to carry operable guns in public … [the] Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”

This is troubling for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that Myerscough has completely disregarded the fact that our natural, God-given rights are not subject to court approval for viability. Rather, our Founding Fathers used the Bill of Rights to build a hedge of protection around those rights with which we were endowed by our Creator. And one of those rights was the right to self-defense, and therefore the right not only to keep but also to bear the arms necessary to defend ourselves. On this point, the language

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


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Illinois
KEYWORDS: 2012; 2012election; 2ndamendment; ajudgenamedsue; appointee; arms; banglist; bloodoftyrants; cwii; democrats; donttreadonmy; elections; judicial; judicialtyranny; liberalfascism; liberals; lping; molonlabe; myerscough; nobama2012; obama; policestate; progressives; rapeofliberty; secondamendment; shallnotbeinfringed; tyranny; waronliberty; youwillnotdisarmus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

1 posted on 02/13/2012 1:19:27 PM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum
[the] Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home

And of course, if the Supreme Court has not recognized a right, we don't have it, right?

2 posted on 02/13/2012 1:22:39 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


3 posted on 02/13/2012 1:22:59 PM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

She doesn’t know what she’s talking about.


4 posted on 02/13/2012 1:25:58 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Beware the Sweater Vest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

It’s going to be so much fun watching the Left implode with cries of “RACISM” when Breitbart releases those videos of Steve Dunham quoting Marx and Alinski to an eager radical audience composed of the likes of Ayers and Dohrn a couple of weeks before the election.


5 posted on 02/13/2012 1:36:25 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the fascists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The second Amendment guarentees this right.
It does NOT require affirming by ANY court!

Can you imagine the fools trying to confiscate weapons anytime in the next 20 years?

1. Please turn them in.
2. Amnesty
3. Confiscate all FFL records
4. More threats and pressure
5. 2nd Civil War


6 posted on 02/13/2012 1:37:11 PM PST by G Larry (We are NOT obliged to carry the snake in our pocket and then dismiss the bites as natural behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Um, what about hunters? Sports shooters? That’s outside of your home! Idiot leftists trying to splice language to fit their “feeeeeeelings”.


7 posted on 02/13/2012 1:41:05 PM PST by vpintheak (Occupy your Brain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Somebody buy this dipsh*t a dictionary.

8 posted on 02/13/2012 1:45:47 PM PST by GVnana (Newt 2012 - He Speaks for Us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GVnana
The quote from the Constitution is irrelevant to a postmodern deconstructionist. The only thing that matters to her is, indeed, what she feels about what should be.

Deconstructionism
A term tied very closely to postmodernism, deconstructionism is a challenge to the attempt to establish any ultimate or secure meaning in a text. Basing itself in language analysis, it seeks to "deconstruct" the ideological biases (gender, racial, economic, political, cultural) and traditional assumptions that infect all histories, as well as philosophical and religious "truths." Deconstructionism is based on the premise that much of human history, in trying to understand, and then define, reality has led to various forms of domination - of nature, of people of color, of the poor, of homosexuals, etc. Like postmodernism, deconstructionism finds concrete experience more valid than abstract ideas and, therefore, refutes any attempts to produce a history, or a truth. In other words, the multiplicities and contingencies of human experience necessarily bring knowledge down to the local and specific level, and challenge the tendency to centralize power through the claims of an ultimate truth which must be accepted or obeyed by all.

9 posted on 02/13/2012 1:50:06 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MrB

The words of the Constitution are what the 9 Supreme Court Justices - including the total fruitloops like Souter and Ginsberg - say they are on any particular day.

It’s not so much a Constitution as an Etch-A-Sketch.


10 posted on 02/13/2012 2:08:07 PM PST by DNA.2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DNA.2012
The words of the Constitution are what the 9 Supreme Court Justices - including the total fruitloops like Souter and Ginsberg - say they are on any particular day.

No effective way to reign in the Judiciary, the fatal flaw of our Constitution.

11 posted on 02/13/2012 2:16:28 PM PST by houeto (Mitt Romney - A Whiter Shade of FAIL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html

“Americans of the Revolutionary generation distinguished between the individual’s right to keep arms and the need for a militia in which to bear them. Yet it is equally clear that more often than not they considered these rights inseparable.”

I can tell you what means, lady. It means “Tread on me at your own risk.”
This is typical lefty obfuscation, like those who try to say that Article 2’s use of the words “citizen” and “natural born citizen” was just a redundancy.
They can blow me

))

))

a kiss on Valentines Day.


12 posted on 02/13/2012 2:18:41 PM PST by tumblindice (It is what it is. If you don't like it, move back to Kenya or wherever you came from.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: houeto
No effective way to rein in the Judiciary, the fatal flaw of our Constitution.

It provides for impeachment and removal but Congress is too gutless to use that mechanism anywhere near as often or as broadly as it now needs to be used.

13 posted on 02/13/2012 2:32:27 PM PST by Paine in the Neck (Where's he getting these ideas? He's not smart enough to be that stupid all by himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

time to fight fire with fire........... ok, if I cannot bear then outside my home, then it does not matter what type and kind of firearms I keep inside my home... machine guns, mortars, grenades, cannon, howitzers... it does not matter....let’s see what the libs say to that one


14 posted on 02/13/2012 2:35:34 PM PST by joe fonebone (Project Gunwalker, this will make watergate look like the warm up band......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Come and take it, Barky.


15 posted on 02/13/2012 2:39:48 PM PST by Salvavida (The restoration of the U.S.A. starts with filling the pews at every Bible-believing church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Wow. Is that what Breitbart has? And was he using yet another alias back then?


16 posted on 02/13/2012 2:40:45 PM PST by jersey117 (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Sue Turnyourheadandcough is clueless and full of crap.


17 posted on 02/13/2012 2:41:07 PM PST by july4thfreedomfoundation (I'm NOT smitten' with Mittens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The building is not on fire. Please remain in your seats.


18 posted on 02/13/2012 2:41:46 PM PST by Lady Lucky ( Exposure to the Son may prevent burning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck
Congress can also decide whether they have jurisdiction or not. The federal courts are a creation of Congress. The only federal court that has an independent constitutional existence is the USSC. (The Constitution specifically spells this out!) One of the first acts of the first US Congress was to create the inferior Federal Court system (Inferior in the sense it is inferior to the USSC.) If the Congress can make it, they can unmake it. Newt is the only candidate that has a clear understanding of this. We have 3 coequal branches of government. Which are supposed to balance out the power. USSC is NOT the only institution that can decide constitutionality. If 2 of these institution say A, then its A. We have gone too long allowing the courts to dictate to the other branches. The reason this has occurred is primarily do to political cowardice. Newt has pointed this out and proposed a solution. If one is truly interested in reigning in these out of control courts that are destroying our culture then Newt should be your candidate, all others are either running from the issue or burying their head in the sand.
19 posted on 02/13/2012 2:44:33 PM PST by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

baraq is running for reelection while at the same time ramping up his assault on the Constitution.
Ususually a sitting president does everything to endear himself with the American people.
This cocky sob is stirring the pot.

Like they think this thing is in the bag.

interesting.


20 posted on 02/13/2012 2:50:13 PM PST by Texas resident (Hunkered Down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reily
If one is truly interested in reining in these out of control courts that are destroying our culture then Newt should be your candidate, all others are either running from the issue or burying their head in the sand.

Yes, Newt is right on target with this (hence, the flak). Romney would go in the exact wrong direction (see his Mass. appointments), Santorum seems to have no clear understanding of the issue that I've heard him articulate.

21 posted on 02/13/2012 2:56:04 PM PST by Paine in the Neck (Where's he getting these ideas? He's not smart enough to be that stupid all by himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: houeto
No effective way to reign in the Judiciary

Impeach them. Perjury on their "oath of office".

"I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

"I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

22 posted on 02/13/2012 2:57:06 PM PST by Ouderkirk (Democrats...the party of Slavery, Segregation, Sodomy, and Sedition)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Let's see . . .

A right to keep arms, but not to bear arms.

Oh, that's like . . .

A right to keeps books, but not to read books.

23 posted on 02/13/2012 2:58:36 PM PST by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

“Americans of the Revolutionary generation distinguished between the individual’s right to keep arms and the need for a militia in which to bear them. Yet it is equally clear that more often than not they considered these rights inseparable

The late 18th century definition of “Militia” is simply an armed citizenry, “well regulated” has to do with the “regulation of Arms”, meaning military weapons....no more showing up with a squirrel rifle, bring a military arm.
Simple. ‘Nuff said.


24 posted on 02/13/2012 3:00:20 PM PST by coolbreeze (giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teen-age boys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck
That's one of the primary reasons I am for him.
This alone makes his past peccadilloes pale into insignificance.
25 posted on 02/13/2012 3:00:45 PM PST by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ouderkirk
Impeachment really not the best approach.
Federal District A meet Federal district A1. You have been dissolved and reorganized with a new bench. The federal course are a creature of Congress they could pretty much hire & fire if they had the guts!
26 posted on 02/13/2012 3:04:14 PM PST by Reily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Nachum; MrB
I know I am repeating a familiar line of thought, but this absurdity of the left has to be fought continually. What they are saying in essence, is that it is your house that is valuable, not your body.

To illustrate:

1. You are at home and a thug begins to break down your door. The thug intends to cause you great bodily harm or death. You display a firearm and the thug suddenly wants to be somewhere else.

2. You decide to leave your home on an errand. You are confronted by a thug who intends to cause you great bodily harm or death, but - oops, you don't have a permit to carry a firearm, and must now submit yourself to being severely injured or killed.

What's the difference? It's the same body! The same body that needs to be protected from great bodily harm or death in the home, also needs to be protected from great bodily harm or death OUTSIDE the home. The answer must simply be that the left believes that it is necessary to defend the home, not the body.

27 posted on 02/13/2012 3:04:33 PM PST by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

No, I think it just means we need to exercise it a bit more prominently until the Supreme Court can’t help but recognize it.


28 posted on 02/13/2012 3:07:43 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak

“Um, what about hunters? Sports shooters?”

In Illinois, they still don’t have the right to bear loaded weapons except on their property, or the property they will be hunting on. You have to have your hunting license with you, the ammo locked in an inaccessible compartment while you are traveling, etc, or they will bust you just like someone packing a pistol for self-defense.


29 posted on 02/13/2012 3:22:08 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jersey117

I’m hoping. Andrew said “silver ponytails” were in it with the usurper. That could only mean Bill Ayers. I am wish-fulfilling the rest.


30 posted on 02/13/2012 3:26:54 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the fascists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: houeto
Not so fast houeto:

Our founding fathers believed that the Supreme Court was the weakest branch and that the legislative and executive branches would have ample abilities to check a Supreme Court that exceeded its powers.

See: White Paper on Combating Judicial Activism http://www.newt.org/solutions/protecting-life-and-religious-liberty

31 posted on 02/13/2012 3:29:45 PM PST by GVnana (Newt 2012 - He Speaks for Us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck

Here’s a better link: http://www.newt.org/sites/newt.org/files/Courts.pdf


32 posted on 02/13/2012 3:33:36 PM PST by GVnana (Newt 2012 - He Speaks for Us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: houeto

>No effective way to reign in the Judiciary, the fatal flaw of our Constitution.

Impeachment is *supposed* to be usable against Justices.
Though, in practice, you are right as nobody really seems to have the balls to be an advocate for the Constitution.


33 posted on 02/13/2012 3:36:24 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

With Fast and Furious, Obama has shown us he will create problems with guns at the expense of hundreds of lives in order to manipulate the folks into supporting more takeaways.


34 posted on 02/13/2012 3:37:25 PM PST by morphing libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

You got it. Don’t bare arms in public. Wear long sleeves outside the house, the better to hide your derringer.


35 posted on 02/13/2012 3:55:32 PM PST by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: coolbreeze
The late 18th century definition of “Militia” is simply an armed citizenry, “well regulated” has to do with the “regulation of Arms”, meaning military weapons....no more showing up with a squirrel rifle, bring a military arm. Simple. ‘Nuff said.

Not quite, there were no squirrel rifles in the 18th Century, they didn't come on the scene until all the hostile Indians and dangerous critters had been eliminated in the wilderness in the East. "Well Regulated" back then meant smooth running-operating, as in a well trained group.

36 posted on 02/13/2012 5:05:05 PM PST by Inyo-Mono (My greatest fear is that when I'm gone my wife will sell my guns for what I told her I paid for them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck

“No effective way to rein in the Judiciary, the fatal flaw of our Constitution.”

NEWT CAN DO IT


37 posted on 02/13/2012 5:10:15 PM PST by duffee (NEWT 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono

The late 18th century definition of “Militia” is simply an armed citizenry, “well regulated” has to do with the “regulation of Arms”, meaning military weapons....no more showing up with a squirrel rifle, bring a military arm. Simple. ‘Nuff said.

Not quite, there were no squirrel rifles in the 18th Century, they didn’t come on the scene until all the hostile Indians and dangerous critters had been eliminated in the wilderness in the East. “Well Regulated” back then meant smooth running-operating, as in a well trained group.

Thank you, I stand corrected....have to get these things right.


38 posted on 02/13/2012 5:26:48 PM PST by coolbreeze (giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teen-age boys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Blast it, isn’t it about time to hang those who hate and want to destroy the constitution? This judge is what Newt was talking about. She needs to be impeached and thrown off the bench along with probably 10 to 15% of her peers. If that doesn’t happen before the chit hits the fan then her fate is a rope.


39 posted on 02/13/2012 6:48:59 PM PST by W. W. SMITH (Obama is Romney lite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

1. Please turn them in.
2ND Civil War ten minutes later


40 posted on 02/13/2012 6:52:09 PM PST by W. W. SMITH (Obama is Romney lite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Reily

“If one is truly interested in reigning in these out of control courts that are destroying our culture then Newt should be your candidate, all others are either running from the issue or burying their head in the sand.”

Excellent. Well said.


41 posted on 02/13/2012 6:53:05 PM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: houeto

No effective way to reign in the Judiciary, the fatal flaw of our Constitution.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Impeachment, you know that process that congress refuses to do. Even the justices of the Supreme Court are subject to same.


42 posted on 02/13/2012 6:57:46 PM PST by W. W. SMITH (Obama is Romney lite)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The judgey thinks like someone who has done way too many recreational drugs.


43 posted on 02/13/2012 8:17:14 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Who will subsidize BIG government when "the rich" are all taxed out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Flip answer: I have the right to keep arms trained on what I’m aiming at.

Serious answer: Shall not be infringed.


44 posted on 02/13/2012 8:39:38 PM PST by bootless (Never Forget. Never Again. (PursuingLiberty.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

We should be grateful that our Founders created a government that limited our rights and individual liberties and thankful that our judges keep it that way.


45 posted on 02/13/2012 9:14:10 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reily

That’s correct since impeachment creates a messy political climate and it’s so much easier to get Congress to simply dissolve a district and appoint Consitutionalists ala Thomas.

When was the last time that happened? The truth is there aren’t going to be any liberalesque quick fixes to our troubles. Government schools are indoctrinating kids to be ashamed of America, misunderstand the Constitution and dislike the fundamental Judeo-Christian traditions that created America. We’ll need school vouchers (along with a breaking of the government monopoly on what constitutes an education) and at least two generations of control over Congress. Then we’ll get our country back.


46 posted on 02/13/2012 9:24:51 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

Common sense bump...


47 posted on 02/14/2012 12:32:32 AM PST by dcwusmc (A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: G Larry; blackie; TigersEye; Cicero

I remember when Clinton was in a panic to disarm the US too. There’s only so much tyranny the government can get away with if we are armed — the right to bear arms is like a shock absorber when creeps are in power. And it’s a chilling affect on thuggish government schemes.

Of course, without free speech and property rights, gun rights would also slowly erode. People todya rarely make a bold, united stand on a minor infringement; they don’t seem to understand the slippery slope concept well enough yet.


48 posted on 02/14/2012 4:31:00 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ouderkirk

The perverse thing about removal of justices is that our current products of “higher” learning are taught that only bad personal behavior is a good reason to ax one, such as a justice who was removed for spitting in public. But according to our progressive ruling class professors, rulings enjoy immunity from removal.

The truth is different of course. Our founding fathers never wanted legislation from the bench, and removal of justices is an enumerated power. But our tenured acid-dropping professors of today will keep milling out more of our future leaders. [Note their fanatical support of Bill Ayers.]

Until college is reformed, the dangers of rogue courts will escalate. That is the fundamental divide between the ruling class and We the People. Individuals and government leaders funding colleges need to pressure colleges to behave themselves [regarding constitutionalism] far more than they currently are.


49 posted on 02/14/2012 4:42:29 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (George Washington: [Government] is a dangerous servant and a terrible master.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck

Corrupt judges, presidents, attorneys general etc., will not be impeached by corrupt legislators who themselves should be impeached. We are looking in a barrel of rotten apples and should not expect to find fresh fruit.

We have a totally corrupt government and we have it because the people have become weak and flabby. The national podium is occupied by people who spout pure idiocy and are confident that they will not be called out. Anyone who dares point out the Alice in Wonderland absurdity of modern life is called everything from racist to murderer. The “news” media is run almost exclusively by clowns of the worst sort. Who would have imagined that the ultimate replacement for Olberdoofus would be Al Sharpton who almost makes Olberdingdong look like a sensible man by comparison.
Why don’t we grab a few confirmed winos out of the gutter and bring them in complete with a bottle of “MadDog” wine and call them the new press corps, or is it corpse now, they would almost certainly be an improvement.


50 posted on 02/14/2012 5:16:33 AM PST by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 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