Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Santorum rips Ron Paul for Romney alliance, denies Specter’s claim of no deal
The Daily Caller ^

Posted on 02/24/2012 2:14:45 PM PST by mnehring

On Friday’s broadcast of Laura Ingraham’s radio show, Rick Santorum defended his claim that his endorsement of moderate Sen. Arlen Specter in 2004 stemmed from a conversation the two had about supporting President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees.

Specter had appeared on MSNBC earlier in the day and denied that he and Santorum had discussed Bush’s nominees prior to the 2004 election.

“We never had any such conversation,” Specter told the network’s Chuck Todd. “It would be improper to make a commitment on a vote before I knew who the nominee was and whether I thought the nominee was qualified. I’ve got a very strong reputation and a record behind that did not make deals like that.”

Santorum, however, told Ingraham that wasn’t the case and cited the confirmations of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito as proof.

“I would just say in response to that: Roberts and Alito,” Santorum said. “You look at Arlen Specter and what he did to fight and fight and claw, particularly for Alito at everything that was brought up. He knocked it down. He carried the water and carried I might add brilliantly and stood up and did exactly what he said he would do as chairman of the committee as long as he was consulted, stand up and fight for the president’s nominees.”

Santorum said that the conversation took place toward the end of Specter’s race in 2004 against conservative challenger Pat Toomey, who won election to the Senate in 2010.

“We actually had that conversation at the end of his campaign, when he asked me to go out and do an ad to help him,” Santorum said. “’Arlen,’ I said. ‘I need assurances that you know, if you win this election, you’re going to stand up and fight as chairman of the committee. That is an absolute, you know — to me the thing I have to have assurances on before I get out and say anything publicly on television or radio about you.’ And he said, ‘As long as I’m consulted as chairman of the Judiciary Committee. That’s my responsibility as chairman of the committee to do that.’ That’s what he said.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/24/santorum-rips-ron-paul-for-romney-alliance-denies-specters-claim-of-no-deal/#ixzz1nL95VZG5


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: paul4romney; romney; ronpaul; santorum

1 posted on 02/24/2012 2:14:54 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mnehring

(forgot the last section)

“The proof is in the pudding, Laura.”

Later in that appearance, Santorum addressed the allegations that two of his rivals for the GOP nomination, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Texas Rep. Ron Paul have formed an alliance.

“You explain to me why Ron Paul is running ads in Michigan,” he said. “He hasn’t even appeared at a campaign event in Michigan. And he is running ads in Michigan and he is attacking me. I mean, you figure that one out for me and you probably are a better political expert than I am. He hasn’t attacked him once in a debate. Look, I’ll take on all comers and I’ll take them on in pairs if necessary.”

Paul, it should be noted, will be making campaign stops in Michigan on Saturday, Sunday and Monday in the lead up to the state’s primary on Tuesday.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/24/santorum-rips-ron-paul-for-romney-alliance-denies-specters-claim-of-no-deal/#ixzz1nL9Zv1Nh


2 posted on 02/24/2012 2:17:03 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring; All

Mark my words, fellow conservatives.

Rick’s going to embarrass Willard the Lib in his own home state in county after county after county, and then go on to win Washington rather easily followed by a spectacular Super Tuesday.


3 posted on 02/24/2012 2:20:13 PM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Rick, I am a baby. I have to use excuses...They are

tag teaming on me....mommy...
(tho it was ok when they tagged team on Newt)
(maybe, he will ask the media, not to tag team him along w/obama when it begins to hurt)


4 posted on 02/24/2012 2:25:58 PM PST by Christie at the beach (I like Newt and would love to see political dead bodies on the floor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CainConservative

My neighbor told me today that she and her husband are supporting Santorum. She said they didn’t intend to vote in the primary till someone other than Romney rose to the top and now they want to help.

With her the issue is the schools (She’s a former school employee) and she like’s Santorum’s stance on schools.

With him, the issue is Romney being such a sleazeball.


5 posted on 02/24/2012 2:27:05 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Sounds to me like Rick was trading his endorsement for Arlen’s vote. So he’ll endorse any old fool as long he gets a good deal out of it, huh?


6 posted on 02/24/2012 2:30:05 PM PST by BuckeyeTexan (Man is not free unless government is limited. ~Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Santorum: Crybaby with a truckload of excuses.


7 posted on 02/24/2012 2:31:58 PM PST by Lady Lucky ( Exposure to the Son may prevent burning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Like it or not, its how politics work.

Tim Pawlenty endorsed Michele Bachmann for the congressional race today.


8 posted on 02/24/2012 2:34:15 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

Ahhh... quit your daily whining, Christie.

Newt was absolutely right in attacking Willard the Lib & Nutjob Paul..

And so is Rick.


9 posted on 02/24/2012 2:34:26 PM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

That was cringe-worthy. Sorry, but both Romney and Santorum seem uncomfortable and stilted in their remarks, comments and off the cuff responses.

No depth, no humor and no good proposals on how to clean up the mess.


10 posted on 02/24/2012 2:34:53 PM PST by sodpoodle ( Newt - God has tested him for a reason...... to bring America back from the brink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
Specter told the network’s Chuck Todd. “It would be improper to make a commitment on a vote before I knew who the nominee was and whether I thought the nominee was qualified. I’ve got a very strong reputation and a record behind that did not make deals like that.”

Cough . . .cough . . . huff . . . huff . . . ummph . . . yooouuuu have GOT to be kidding . . . tough to be a bigger slime-ball than Benedict Arlen. . . .

11 posted on 02/24/2012 2:34:53 PM PST by RatRipper (I'll ride a turtle to work every day before I buy anything from Government Motors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatRipper
"tough to be a bigger slime-ball than Benedict Arlen. . . . "

I'm no Santorum fan, but I do believe Specter is lying.

12 posted on 02/24/2012 2:41:22 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CainConservative

I will be greatly relieved if Willard gets embarrassed.


13 posted on 02/24/2012 2:41:43 PM PST by Steamburg (The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Quid pro quo (”what for what” in Latin)


14 posted on 02/24/2012 2:42:50 PM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Cometh the hour, cometh the man. NEWT GINGRICH 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CainConservative

Arlen is a democrat these days and its best to assume he’s working for Obammy.


15 posted on 02/24/2012 2:43:28 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Sounds to me like Rick was trading his endorsement for Arlen’s vote. So he’ll endorse any old fool as long he gets a good deal out of it, huh?


Do you mean it sounds a little like the deal Romney is cutting with Ron Paul?


16 posted on 02/24/2012 2:44:01 PM PST by Steamburg (The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg
Tweet from Mark Levin.

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich on the program today, at their request. Ron Paul and Mitt Romney don't want to come on the show.
17 posted on 02/24/2012 2:48:34 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Amazingly, according to many FReepers, Arlen “Magic Bullet” Spectre, Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-Democrat, benefactor of murderous hippies, has suddenly become a paragon of truth and virtue.


18 posted on 02/24/2012 2:49:25 PM PST by Fresh Wind ('People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook.' Richard M. Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach
Rick, I am a baby. I have to use excuses...They are tag teaming on me....mommy... (tho it was ok when they tagged team on Newt) (maybe, he will ask the media, not to tag team him along w/obama when it begins to hurt)

Did you think Newt was a baby when he complained about the same things? It isn't whining to point out a collusion between two candidates who are supposedly running two different campaigns. The people might want to know about such a setup.

19 posted on 02/24/2012 2:51:30 PM PST by Kenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Fresh Wind

What gets me about this is that Santorum is taking heat for what someone he endorsed did while Willard was appointing liberal judges himself.


20 posted on 02/24/2012 2:53:08 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CainConservative
1. Newt is the only candidate who has a energy plan.
2. Newt is the only candidate with a jobs growth plan.
3. Newt is the only candidate with a foreign policy plan.
4. Newt is the only candidate with a tax reform plan.
5. Newt is the only candidate who says No more kissing the ring of the Saudis for oil in which one can believe that he means/ follow up to no. 1 drill for our own energy/and security
6. Newt is the only candidate which has admitted that the next bubble crisis is the federal deficit.
We cannot withstand trillions in debt in which Newt gets.

Write in your diary. Not a grown up nor leader in my opinion.(in more ways than one)

21 posted on 02/24/2012 2:55:30 PM PST by Christie at the beach (I like Newt and would love to see political dead bodies on the floor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg
Sounds to me like Rick was trading his endorsement for Arlen’s vote. So he’ll endorse any old fool as long he gets a good deal out of it, huh?

It appears that Rick was trying to get Specter to promise not to flip on conservatives - again. Santorum knew that Specter was in a much better position to help seat a Justice but was probably unsure. Rick's more trusting than me though because I wouldn't have believe Arlen in any case.

22 posted on 02/24/2012 2:57:22 PM PST by Kenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Even if Romney/Paul haven’t colluded and it looks like they have, Paul probably thought Romney would be the leader and wouldn’t attack him in hopes of being VP.

If they have colluded, then Paul might have a promise of VP.
And it would be interesting to know if such a deal existed and whether Romney actually honors the deal.

But I don’t think Paul as VP would help Romney’s ticket. Paul might bring some pothead votes that would otherwise go to Obama, but he would probably lose just as many votes, as he brought.


23 posted on 02/24/2012 3:00:24 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

I disagree.. I think Newt has BOTH of those qualities.


24 posted on 02/24/2012 3:01:33 PM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Christie at the beach

Newt is also the only candidate that has turned off almost all women except you.

Newt may very well be the most effective candidate out there, but I think Santorum is the better values driven candidate. I hope Santorum uses Gingrich in his administration.


25 posted on 02/24/2012 3:04:11 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
it would be interesting to know if such a deal existed and whether Romney actually honors the deal

I suspect it would be a deal to be treasury secretary or something but there is no way Romney would honor that deal.
26 posted on 02/24/2012 3:04:48 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

I don’t like Gingrich at all but think he would be a spectacular choice for VP because one of the main duties of a VP is to prod congress to act.


27 posted on 02/24/2012 3:07:03 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

We’re being played.

I think Ron is setting it up for Rand as VP if we nominate the liberal, Willard.

And then Rand runs in 2016 for president as a Next in Line/Tea Party guy (after Obama finishes up eight disastrous years.)


28 posted on 02/24/2012 3:08:17 PM PST by CainConservative (Santorum/Huck 2012 w/ Newt, Cain, Palin, Bach, Parker, Watts, Duncan, & Petraeus in the Cabinet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

It appears you believe the deal is for Rep.Ron Paul to be Romney’s veep; correct?

Actually, the rumor is Sen.Rand Paul would be Romney’s running mate for veep.

At least, that is the rumor.


29 posted on 02/24/2012 3:09:25 PM PST by SatinDoll (No Foreign Naionals as our President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
I don’t like Gingrich at all but think he would be a spectacular choice for VP because one of the main duties of a VP is to prod congress to act.

AND I do not like nor respect Santorum who with Lott 'saved' the Clintons presidency by killing the impeachment proceedings against old gutter snipe Clinton. At least Newt made sure the IMPEACHMENT took place. Any body paying attention during the Clintons presidency know there was/is NO difference between the Clintons/algore and the BamBamKennedy presidency.... Same people in positions of power to destroy US.

30 posted on 02/24/2012 3:12:27 PM PST by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

LOL

Santorum was apparently the most powerful man in the senate. A regular old evil doer.


31 posted on 02/24/2012 3:22:54 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

“When you talk about judges who would change the right of a woman to choose, overturn Roe v. Wade, I think [confirmation] is unlikely. The president is well aware of what happened, when a number of his nominees were sent up, with the filibuster. ... And I would expect the president to be mindful of the considerations which I am mentioning.”

Arlen Specter circa 2004

Alito for O’connor was huge. This is the guy who borked Bork.

FReegards


32 posted on 02/24/2012 3:23:52 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
LOL Santorum was apparently the most powerful man in the senate. A regular old evil doer.

According to Judge Rogan he was indeed a 'team' player for the other side. There certainly was NO courage in him back then. Wonder how a baby junior senator would overnight make it to a leadership position to be assisting good old cheerleader Trent Lott.

33 posted on 02/24/2012 3:27:03 PM PST by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Yeah whatever. LOL


34 posted on 02/24/2012 3:28:09 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

I think Rush or Levin or one of those implied it might be Rand Paul as VP for the payoff. Makes more sense as Ron would defeat the ticket.


35 posted on 02/24/2012 3:28:31 PM PST by Kenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kenny

Rand Paul at least appears rational if you don’t look too close. However I haven’t forgotten him skipping Bibi’s address to congress.


36 posted on 02/24/2012 3:33:06 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Yeah whatever. LOL

Exactly. I know what the word 'whatever' literally means. You have just outed yourself for NOT being interested in truth but in a willingness to accept the PROUD GOP status quo.... Good luck. Maybe you might check out the book Judge Rogan, one of the HOUSE managers who had to deal with the tricky Ricky when it came to the Senate impeachment proceedings. Old Ricky refused to allow live witnesses and literal evidence.... So here we are all these years later dealing with the same Clinton bs that could have been removed from US had we had people who respected that oath they took. Team players to protect their own self serving political careers.... right LOL!!!!!

37 posted on 02/24/2012 3:34:44 PM PST by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Gingrich ‘Deeply Upset’ That Scozzafava Endorsed Democrat After He’d Supported Her (ROFL)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2376848/posts

Newt: “I am, however, deeply dissapointed that she has chosen to back Owens over Hoffman.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2376172/posts

Jarrett: Dems want Scozzafava nod (Newt? Newt?)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2375959/posts

Right To Work Prez Calls Out Newt’s Hypocrisy

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2375483/posts

Group Calls on Gingrich to Rescind Endorsement of Scozzafava

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2374566/posts

Who Lied to (RINO) Newt Gingrich?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373633/posts

Newt Gingrich - “King of the RINOs”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373107/posts

Gingrich: A Vote for Hoffman Is a Vote for Pelosi

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373068/posts

Farewell To GOP’s Squishy Gingrich Wing

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2372160/posts

Are you kidding me?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2372078/posts

Gingrich calls GOP support for Hoffman a ‘purge’

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371959/posts

Newt on Greta talking about Scozzafava

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371587/posts

Newt Gingrich: Doug Hoffman support a ‘mistake’

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371188/posts


38 posted on 02/24/2012 3:37:39 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

http://www.newt.org/answers#Dede

Dede Scozzafava Endorsement

Newt has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election.

Whether it was helping to build the Republican Party of Georgia back when Democrats controlled the entire state or leading the nationwide effort in 1994 to break 40 years of Democratic rule in the House, Newt has always tried to advance the cause of a truly conservative Republican party. This has always meant supporting the most conservative nominee possible as selected by Republican primary voters.

Therefore, Newt will almost always back the nominee of the Republican party and not back an independent candidate in a race against a Democratic candidate.

Newt still believes in this principle, however, he has admitted it was a mistake to back Dede Scozzafava, the Republican nominee in the 2009 NY-23 special election. Although she was the Republican nominee, the problem was that Republican primary voters did not pick her, the local party leaders did, otherwise her liberal views would have prevented her from becoming the nominee. The Conservative Party candidate whom Scozzafava was running against, Doug Hoffman, recently remarked about Newt’s endorsement of his rival, “I would advise other conservative republicans: Don’t hold this against him.”


39 posted on 02/24/2012 3:40:49 PM PST by JediJones (Watch "Gingrich to Michigan: Change or Die" on YouTube. Best Speech Ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
WOW your scales are totally unbalanced. Saving ‘clintons’ is less a sin than supporting deedee who lost anyway... priorities, priorities, priorities. Now did not NEWT admit the error of his ways. Something that saint Rick earmarking for unions has not ever done. In fact he is quite proud of stealing from US.
40 posted on 02/24/2012 3:42:32 PM PST by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

I wouldn’t believe any of Spector’s exSpctorations.


41 posted on 02/24/2012 3:50:10 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

I wouldn’t believe any of Spector’s exSpectorations.


42 posted on 02/24/2012 3:50:26 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I haven’t paid much attention to Rand Paul and didn’t know he skipped Bibi’s address to congress. That is troubling and God help us if he is the VP and next in line for President.

What he and Papa Ron can’t seem to grasp is that our survival depends on standing with Israel. Ron continues to want to apply Christian principal to our enemeies that make it crystal clear that their intention is to detroy us and destroy Israel.

If they get nuclear weapons, it won’t make a lot of difference if we audit the Fed. Nothing in the way of fiscal reform will keep us safe if we elect a President that does not understand the nature of our enemies.

If we needed another reason to not want Romney, that he might consider someone so wrongheaded on national security for VP ought to give even a Romneybot second thoughts.


43 posted on 02/24/2012 4:25:44 PM PST by conservativejoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: conservativejoy
What he and Papa Ron can’t seem to grasp is that our survival depends on standing with Israel.

Agreed, I personally think we would be wise to find a middle ground of getting out of these seemingly endless wars while surrounding Israel with a defensive ring of steel.

At this point it would probably be cheaper to have troops simply protecting Israel than having them chasing the fantasy of some kind of islamic peace all over the region.
44 posted on 02/24/2012 4:32:40 PM PST by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

If we allow Obama to continue to disarm us, we may be too weak to be much of an ally to Israel. I wonder from reading the scriptures if that is not where we are headed.

I just wnat to know that, unlike the disgrace we now have, our next President understands that we will not survive without support for Israel.

I agree with your assessment of “Islamic peace” being a fantasy. My husband and I were talking about that very thing last night, and echoing the strategy of letting the rest of the Middle East fight it out, while reenforcing Israel.

Energy independence has to be a part of that strategy for national security. Whoever is elected, I hope we can implement Newt’s Energy Plan. It is the best I’ve seen.


45 posted on 02/24/2012 5:10:39 PM PST by conservativejoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

I believe rick. It’s like the Melanie Griffith moment in workIng girl where her side of the story has all the details.


46 posted on 02/24/2012 5:25:43 PM PST by Yaelle (Rick Santorum 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Not so much “denied specter’s claim” as “debunked it”. Complete with contemporaneous news articles.

Why anybody here at FR actually took Arlen Specter’s word for something is beyond me.


47 posted on 02/24/2012 8:15:39 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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