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

Skip to comments.

Rick Santorum sweeps Tuesday contests with Colorado win
The Chicago Tribune ^ | February 8, 2012 | Kim Geiger

Posted on 02/08/2012 6:27:46 AM PST by Clintonfatigued

Rick Santorum won the Colorado GOP presidential preference straw poll, according to the Colorado Republican Party.

The victory means a trifecta tonight for the former Pennsylvania senator, who also won in Minnesota and Missouri.

It is a significant defeat for front-runner Mitt Romney, who took 60% of the vote in the Colorado’s 2008 nominating contest. John McCain, the eventual nominee, won just 18%.

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


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: aldo

1 posted on 02/08/2012 6:27:56 AM PST by Clintonfatigued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Romney slipped on his own dyed greasy hair! GO NEWT!


2 posted on 02/08/2012 6:29:57 AM PST by WellyP (REAL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WellyP

CATHOLIC SPRING!


3 posted on 02/08/2012 6:30:41 AM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

FOX"News"' Prime Romney-Pimp:
"We at FOX have already decided the winner of
the Colorado GOP presidential preference straw poll.
Yes, indeedy.
That makes Mitt Romney the "frontrunner" here at FOX/BAIN News
… even when you laugh knowing
it is obviously not true."

4 posted on 02/08/2012 6:31:03 AM PST by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj; AuH2ORepublican; Impy; GOPsterinMA; randita; colorado tanker; george76; ...

This is excellent news. Romney had put money and organizational muscle into the Colorado caucuses and still lost. Clearly most Republicans regard him as a dud.


5 posted on 02/08/2012 6:31:26 AM PST by Clintonfatigued (A chameleon belongs in a pet store, not the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Just in case there’s still any confusion about who his legit challenger is: total votes cast so far:
ROMNEY 1,182,886
GINGRICH 838,102
SANTORUM 568,723
PAUL 335,951

Just saying.....


6 posted on 02/08/2012 6:36:19 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Now this dern thing wasn’t wrote in the script!


7 posted on 02/08/2012 6:38:04 AM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
"Just in case there’s still any confusion about who his legit challenger is..."

So Santorum is "illegitimate"? What law did he break?

8 posted on 02/08/2012 6:40:44 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

I don’t think at this point that either Gingrich of Santorum can stop Romney single-handedly. But if Gingrich picks up enough Southern delegates and Santorum picks up enough Midwestern delegates, they can deny Romney a majority of the delegates at the convention.


9 posted on 02/08/2012 6:41:07 AM PST by Clintonfatigued (A chameleon belongs in a pet store, not the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

GOP voters to GOP: “NOT ROMNEY”. Well said yesterday.


10 posted on 02/08/2012 6:43:18 AM PST by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

I want the experience that Newt brings to the table. Also, he’ll cream Obama in an “uncontrolled” debate.


11 posted on 02/08/2012 6:48:18 AM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
FOX News may have 'jumped the shark' over mittens

Fair and balanced is Juan McCain

I’ve had enough of the ‘wisdom’ of Bill Cristal, Chas. Krauthammer, Ted Baxter, Bret Beahr, Toyko Rove, Ann Colter, Chris Wallace, Sean Wannabe, Dana Parino,

Brit Hume, Shep Smith, Judge Jeanene, Alam Clomes, Bob Beckle, Juan Williams, Whoraldo, et. al. all acting the part of the Romney cheerleading squad

There is clearly a hunger and a market for honest news and honest conservative news

.

12 posted on 02/08/2012 6:52:04 AM PST by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Congrats Rick! One thing is for certain, Newt’s gone. It was nice to know you Newt. Loved your debate performance and intellect. It is unfortunate that you won’t be able to use it on Obama.

There is one chance for Newt, however. He could start running negative ads against Santorum. Those ads worked on Romney.


13 posted on 02/08/2012 6:53:49 AM PST by svxdave (Life is too short to wear a fake Rolex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

When and under what circumstances did Aldo Santorum naturalize?


14 posted on 02/08/2012 6:57:15 AM PST by ASA Vet (Natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. De Vattel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
As Ann Coulter said: ...."If Romney is the candidate, we'll lose."

Ann Coulter at CPAC 2011 - Question & Answer Session - 2/12/11

Approx. the 10:00 mark.

15 posted on 02/08/2012 6:59:14 AM PST by Scooter100 ("Now that the fog has lifted, I still can't find my pipe". --- S. Holmes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svxdave

Wait! Maybe it was the negative ads run by Newt against Romney that led to Newt’s devastating losses to Santorum yesterday. Maybe Newt should promote his ideas instead of just tearing people down.


16 posted on 02/08/2012 7:04:09 AM PST by svxdave (Life is too short to wear a fake Rolex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: svxdave

Congrats Rick! One thing is for certain, Newt’s gone. It was nice to know you Newt. Loved your debate performance and intellect. It is unfortunate that you won’t be able to use it on Obama.

There is one chance for Newt, however. He could start running negative ads against Santorum. Those ads worked on Romney

**

Wishful thinking. Newt has 9 political lives. He’ll come back, don’t you worry. Any and all of this could very well be playing right into his strategy. Do NOT underestimate him.

Go Newt!!!!!!!!!!!!


17 posted on 02/08/2012 7:14:43 AM PST by LibsRJerks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: svxdave
Stick With Rick !!

18 posted on 02/08/2012 7:23:53 AM PST by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: svxdave

Haven’t you seen the terrible negative ads Santorum has been running against Newt? I saw them on Fox, who was all too happy to play them in their pig-pile on Newt after Florida.

Santorum had a wonderful night last night. But please don’t make him out to be the all-positive saint in the race. He’s a politician like the rest of them.


19 posted on 02/08/2012 7:24:19 AM PST by Mangia E Statti Zitto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet

LOL!!!


20 posted on 02/08/2012 7:28:18 AM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

>> ROMNEY 1,182,886
>> GINGRICH 838,102
>> SANTORUM 568,723
>> PAUL 335,951

Interesting way to look at things. Thanks!

And I love to play with numbers, so let’s take a look at some alternatives —

Scenario Number One: If Newt drops out, most of his voters (let’s say 80%) would probably go to Santo, a few to Romney (say, 10%) and a few to Ronny P (say, another 10%), leaving us with —

Romno = 1266696 = 43.2%
Santo = 1239205 = 42.6%
Paulo = 419761 = 14.3%

Therefore, under these assumptions, there’s a statistical tie between Santo and Romno, probably leading to a brokered convention — maybe with Paulo becoming a king-maker. Final outcome is anybody’s guess.

Scenario Number Two: There was at least one survey a couple of weeks ago showing that if Santo dropped out, half his support would go to Newt and another half (presumably the “strict morality” folks) to Mitt. So if this outcome should eventuate, here’s roughly what we’d have —

Mitt = 1467248 = 50.2%
Newt = 1122464 = 38.4%
Paul = 335951 = 11.0%

Bottom line for the second set of assumptions:

Mitt squeaks by, barely winning the nomination, but ultimately loses to Zerobama — due to (a) bitter wounds that are still festering within the GOP and (b) alienation of independents who are turned off by Romney’s recent negative campaign.

Both of the above outcomes are depressing. But if I gotta choose between the lesser of the evils, I’d wanna go with the first scenario, i.e., a brokered convention, which JUST MAYBE would let us nominate a Paul Ryan or a Mitch Daniels or a David Petraeus.


21 posted on 02/08/2012 7:57:38 AM PST by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hawthorn

You really are “playing” with numbers. You miss one big...no, one HUGE HUGE factor. Turn out and intensity.

The only state where turn out was up (by any appreciable degree) was SC. That was the only excited electorate. Newt won that huge.

Santorum has snuck in four times with extremely low turn outs over earth scorched by Mitt at Newt’s expense. Santorum has shown no ability to turn out numbers, which is why he has awful raw vote figures even after his best night ever.


22 posted on 02/08/2012 8:03:06 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

>> he’ll cream Obama in an “uncontrolled” debate <<

Do you really and truly think Zerobama would agree to such a debate? What kinda weeds have you been smokin’ lately?


23 posted on 02/08/2012 8:05:29 AM PST by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mangia E Statti Zitto

I love your screen name! :-)


24 posted on 02/08/2012 8:09:33 AM PST by Larry Lucido (My doctor told me to curtail my Walpoling activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

Thank you!


25 posted on 02/08/2012 8:17:50 AM PST by Mangia E Statti Zitto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

“Just in case there’s still any confusion about who his legit challenger is: total votes cast so far:
ROMNEY 1,182,886
GINGRICH 838,102
SANTORUM 568,723
PAUL 335,951

Just saying.....”
~~~~~~
Romney 1,182,886
Not Romney 1,742,776

Drudge, is that you?

Just saying...


26 posted on 02/08/2012 8:18:32 AM PST by Balata (It's 'WE THE PEOPLE' Obama, not 'WE THE SHEEPLE'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

>> You miss one big...no, one HUGE HUGE factor. Turn out and intensity <<

Thanks again! And my apology. Don’t want to leave out anything you or some other well-informed observer might think is critically important. Simply trying to do “cold-blooded” and non-emotional analysis without respect to personal preferences.

So just give me your numerical estimates for turnout and/or intensity, and tell me how to fit those data into a model. I’d very much like to work thru the implications!

(But might not have time for a few days, due to an upcoming trip.)


27 posted on 02/08/2012 8:18:57 AM PST by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Balata

Drudge did publish these numbers, which is unusual, because these numbers show a decent picture for Newt - something Drudge has been loathe to do for about eight weeks.


28 posted on 02/08/2012 8:20:04 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

“You miss one big...no, one HUGE HUGE factor. Turn out and intensity “

~~~~

Let me briefly address the TURN OUT factor here in Colorado. A few days ago we had a snow storm which broke a 103 year record. The weather was a factor in the turn out.

The INTENSITY at our rather large caucus was very palpable and it was for Santorum.

I guess you had to be there.

Just saying...


29 posted on 02/08/2012 8:30:21 AM PST by Balata (It's 'WE THE PEOPLE' Obama, not 'WE THE SHEEPLE'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Balata

Fair point on the turn out, but Colorado’s GOP primaries are all tiny anyway. It was tiny in 08 and tiny in 2012. Something way under 100 thousand votes in both cycles. I get MN and CO confused, but one state was around 50 thousand total and the other around 70 thousand total.

Florida was 1.6 million (down from 1.92 million in 08) and South Carolina was like 620,000 - up from 450 thousand in 08. Any way you measure it, the entire three state population from last night was

A: tiny compared even to just South Carolina even added together
B: way down cumulatively from 08 over all.


30 posted on 02/08/2012 8:34:27 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

You miss one big...no, one HUGE HUGE factor. (Big MO) MOMENTUM!

...but, I’m sure you can downplay that as well.


31 posted on 02/08/2012 8:39:21 AM PST by Balata (It's 'WE THE PEOPLE' Obama, not 'WE THE SHEEPLE'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Hawthorn

I think it’s very hard to project intensity. There are too many factors. My point is simply this: Newt is the only one to demonstrate any ability to motivate turn out. He has also shown the ability to shoot himself in the foot.

Meanwhile, Mitt has demonstrated only the ability to depress turn out.

Santorum has only demonstrated the ability to win when there’s a hugely depressed turn out within the confines of a tiny voting population. The total votes cast in his “four states” equal far less than the total votes cast in South Carolina alone and those four totaled up equal about a fourth of the total vote in Florida alone.

The only way for the GOP to win is to motivate large turn out. Only Newt has that ability in my opinion. He also has the ability to mess it up too.

FTR, SC was up 35%. The campaign was liberal v conservative thanks to Newt in the debates. THATS THE KEY: make this about Obama and liberals, not about each other. But the ego’s will not let that happen.

That includes Santorum’s ego, something his supporters will not admit exists...


32 posted on 02/08/2012 8:39:39 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Balata

No, I admit momentum is big, and that will work to Santorum’s favor. But frankly, that issue was not missed in the coverage of these three states. I didn’t think it needed help from me because it’s all over the place.

If Newts campaign has any smarts, and I think that’s up for discussion at this point, they will emphasize the turn out issue and the total vote issue.


33 posted on 02/08/2012 8:42:03 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

“I get MN and CO confused...”

~~~

No problem. I get Drudge and C. Edmund Wright confused. ;>)


34 posted on 02/08/2012 8:42:33 AM PST by Balata (It's 'WE THE PEOPLE' Obama, not 'WE THE SHEEPLE'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Balata

OK smart ass, what I meant was, I get the two state’s turn out figures from last night confused. Actually, let me clarify.

You dumb ass, not smart ass.
turn out: Colorado about 70K and MN about 50 K.


35 posted on 02/08/2012 8:46:30 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright
OK smart ass, what I meant was, I get the two state’s turn out figures from last night confused. Actually, let me clarify.

You dumb ass, not smart ass.

turn out: Colorado about 70K and MN about 50 K.

I knew exactly what you meant and wasn't in disagreement.

Apparently you you missed my smiley face/sarcasm tag.

But, I guess you're just a 'dumb ass, not smart ass'.

Bye...

36 posted on 02/08/2012 8:54:52 AM PST by Balata (It's 'WE THE PEOPLE' Obama, not 'WE THE SHEEPLE'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Balata

I did miss the smiley tag and that does make me the dumb ass on that point.

Guilty as charged.


37 posted on 02/08/2012 9:01:51 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

No problem. Have a great day.

I’m sure we’ll meet again, FRiend.


38 posted on 02/08/2012 9:06:16 AM PST by Balata (It's 'WE THE PEOPLE' Obama, not 'WE THE SHEEPLE'!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: LibsRJerks; svxdave; P-Marlowe; Alamo-Girl; wagglebee
Neither Newt or Rick can afford to attack each other at this point. Either one or the other has been the fire brake keeping Romney from donning the inevitability mantle.

It seemed Romney was the favorite when Santorum stole his thunder in Iowa. Then Romney won NH and it seemed that inevitability line came up again. Newt took his legs out from under him in S Carolina. At about the same time, it came out that Santorum actually won Iowa.

Then it was Florida. Mitt won big and there was an actual coronation readied, and Nevada again brought the inevitability talk to the fore.

Santorum has stopped that dead in its tracks. Newt flat-lined in all those states. He owes Rick a back-channel 12 pack of Rick's favorite brew. (Yeungling? sp?)

Rick should be cheering like crazy for Newt in Georgia and vice versa Newt for Rick in Pennsylvania. Both should be sending flowers to Ron Paul in Virginia.

Without commenting on the relatives strengths and weaknesses of either Rick or Newt, they have helped it other at critical times. For anyone wanting to stop Mitt, that's a great outcome.

Especially, though, I find Santorum’s win in Colorado to be extremely significant. Colorado shares a very long border with Utah, Colorado has a large Mormon population, and Santorum carried Colorado easily. It stunned the pro-Mitt forces at Fox News.

Here is my explanation. Between the Catholic vote and the Dr Dobson vote (his HQ is in Colorado), social conservatives won that state for Rick. The evangelical leaders supported Santorum, and indirectly so did the Catholic Bishops. That tells us that the religious vote is extremely significant if it can be mobilized.

I do NOT have numbers to prove this. I haven't seen any exit polls. I'm simply basing this on assumptions.

39 posted on 02/08/2012 9:28:34 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Thank you for sharing your insights, dear brother in Christ!

Here is my explanation. Between the Catholic vote and the Dr Dobson vote (his HQ is in Colorado), social conservatives won that state for Rick. The evangelical leaders supported Santorum, and indirectly so did the Catholic Bishops. That tells us that the religious vote is extremely significant if it can be mobilized.

And many Christians are joined in urgent prayer for this country. I have specially prayed for a President who will lead on his spiritual knees before God.

40 posted on 02/08/2012 10:03:38 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
Why the celebration? People need to understand a few things.

1. The Colorado caucuses are nonbinding. All that happened last night was a straw poll. Two years ago the delegate we sent to the county convention from my precinct ignored the straw poll and helped give us Dan Maes for Governor. Mr. 10%.

2. Fewer than 70,000 votes were cast out of approximately 1 million registered Republicans. This was special interest voting and does not represent what the electorate was thinking. The lack of turnout seems to say nobody is enthusiastic about the Final Four, which sure represents my thinking.

3. After last night, we don't have a candidate. Romney is slowly bleeding out, which sounds great. But all we have is Not Romney. We have Ricknewtpaul.

We are screwed. We just reelected Barry.

41 posted on 02/08/2012 10:28:29 AM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Excellent analysis!
42 posted on 02/08/2012 10:41:22 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright; Balata

>> If Newt’s campaign has any smarts, and I think that’s up for discussion at this point <<

My limited experience working in large organizations has indicated that the underlings usually tend to reflect the operating style of the man at the top.

So one has to wonder if the campaign’s problems mostly reflect Newt’s general indiscipline and poor management skills — personal characteristics that former associates like Tom Coburn and Tom DeLay have mentioned prominently about Newt.


43 posted on 02/08/2012 2:02:09 PM PST by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hawthorn

You bring up a good point, and one that is inherently the case. Now, from where I sit, every campaign is ultimately the responsibility of the candidate. If he/she hires and fires the wrong people and listens to the wrong people and ignores the right people - then the candidate still is ultimately still to blame or credit.

I think Newt makes a lot of his own decisions. I suspect he has yes people around him, and those yes people were not smart enough or strong enough to prevent Newt from hearing and seeing the negative ads run against him in Florida. They should have known that he would be personally insulted and would lose it. He was, and he did.

Good handlers would have kept him firing at Obama and the liberals - because that is what made Newt’s surge first in Iowa and then again in SC.

So Newt got bad advice, but chose to take it nonetheless. Blame all around .


44 posted on 02/08/2012 2:40:50 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued; AuH2ORepublican; fieldmarshaldj; BillyBoy; RygelXVI; campaignPete R-CT

Well well well.

And did you see the Rassmussen poll had that RS ahead of Obama by 1?

Is the universe teasing us?


45 posted on 02/08/2012 5:22:50 PM PST by Impy (Don't call me red.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Impy; Clintonfatigued; AuH2ORepublican; fieldmarshaldj; BillyBoy; GOPsterinMA

no tease.

This is the real deal. The battle is on! The grassroots has woken up and is in real rebellion against the MITT “bandwagon”. I have seen it with my own eyes. I realize for people that are watching at home, that it might seem like it is not what we expected, but THE PEOPLE ARE WITH OUR PROGRAM! They get it, and they have awoken.

This is historic. Do not miss it when it comes soon to a state near you.


46 posted on 02/08/2012 6:56:55 PM PST by campaignPete R-CT (and I will go to southern Maine to campaign against MITT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: campaignPete R-CT; Impy; randita; AuH2ORepublican; fieldmarshaldj; BillyBoy; GOPsterinMA; Sun; ...

“no tease.

This is the real deal. The battle is on! The grassroots has woken up and is in real rebellion against the MITT “bandwagon”.

Very true! It’ll be a while until the next primary or caucus (not counting Maine’s caucus). The trick is to keep Rick Santorum in the spotlight so that he can raise his visibility and money, but without saturating the media and overstaying his welcome.


47 posted on 02/08/2012 7:33:11 PM PST by Clintonfatigued (A chameleon belongs in a pet store, not the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

MAINE IS IN TOTAL REBELLION.

This is Mitt’s backyard & stronghold. And the grassroots is pounding away at him.


48 posted on 02/08/2012 8:04:19 PM PST by campaignPete R-CT (and I will go to southern Maine to campaign against MITT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued; All

Both Romney, and Ron Paul, will attack Rick. I keep getting emails from Ron Paul attacking Rick Santorum.


49 posted on 02/08/2012 11:06:58 PM PST by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | 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