Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Inconvenient Lawsuit: Teenagers Take Global Warming to the Courts
The Atlantic ^ | May 9, 2012 | Katherine Ellison

Posted on 05/12/2012 11:23:30 AM PDT by Twotone

Alec Loorz turns 18 at the end of this month. While finishing high school and playing Ultimate Frisbee on weekends, he's also suing the federal government in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

The Ventura, California, teen and four other juvenile plaintiffs want government officials to do more to prevent the risks of climate change -- the dangerous storms, heat waves, rising sea levels, and food-supply disruptions that scientists warn will threaten their generation absent a major turnabout in global energy policy. Specifically, the students are demanding that the U.S. government start reducing national emissions of carbon dioxide by at least six percent per year beginning in 2013.

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Society
KEYWORDS: agw; globalwarming; lawfare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last
Now if only we had 'loser pays' laws & they had to submit proof of being able to pay the other parties legal fees before they could go to court.
1 posted on 05/12/2012 11:23:35 AM PDT by Twotone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Twotone

2 posted on 05/12/2012 11:26:34 AM PDT by jimbo123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
Brainwashed, indoctrinated, dumb and stupid is no way to go through life, Alec.

He watched Algore's propaganda film twice in one sitting and now he's a 17 year old "expert". Geeesh. Get a life boy!

3 posted on 05/12/2012 11:27:24 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Dumb, dependent and Democrat is no way to go through life. - Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Academia. Promoter of the radical Left.

If I had to raise my kids again, they would NEVER set foot in a government “school”. They would be home schooled and have a superior education by age 18. And they would not be liberal zombies like this poor kid who was betrayed by his parents....


4 posted on 05/12/2012 11:30:33 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Agreed. These morons are worried about food disruption and demand a decrease in CO2 levels. Guess they missed the part in science class about photosynthesis? Paging Occupy Wall Street, we have a pick up ready for 2 new volunteers.


5 posted on 05/12/2012 11:37:26 AM PDT by JohnD9207 (Santorum...the only Conservative in the race.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

prevent dangerous storms, heat waves, rising sea levels, and food-supply disruptions

this kid lives in a bubble


6 posted on 05/12/2012 11:39:30 AM PDT by molson209
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

‘Alec Loorz turns 18 at the end of this month.’

And knows all things.


7 posted on 05/12/2012 11:45:02 AM PDT by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Talk about “Heads full of Mush!”


8 posted on 05/12/2012 11:48:36 AM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

What a bunch of loons! Critical thinking here? Nah!!


9 posted on 05/12/2012 11:50:23 AM PDT by refermech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
Alec Loorz turns 18 at the end of this month

And he still hasn't passed puberty.

10 posted on 05/12/2012 11:52:05 AM PDT by Talisker (He who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
Specifically, the students are demanding that the U.S. government start reducing national emissions of carbon dioxide by at least six percent per year beginning in 2013.

Wow, isn't it amazing that those four kids raised enough money to hire a law firm to represent them in a federal lawsuit?

It's so inspiring that they worked so hard to raise that money for what they believe in. Rather than, for example, being used as mere useful idiot political fronts for wealthy socialist interests that would be paying the law firm to try to undermine freedom in America. Now THAT would be disgusting.

11 posted on 05/12/2012 11:55:38 AM PDT by Talisker (He who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209

Any kid who watches the Weather Channel (run by NBC) may well have exactly the same views.
They constantly spew the doctrine of global warming.


12 posted on 05/12/2012 12:00:57 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
They are suing over carbon dioxide emissions. The skeptics/realists know that this is a lagging indicator. CO2 is released after the liquid (ocean) is warmed. It can be displayed to elementary school aged children, and many adults have experienced it in one way or another. Take a warm and cold seltzer water (substitute soda or beer), give them a small shake (simulating ocean currents and convection), then open them. The warm one releases more CO2. The seltzer, soda, beer, ocean is warm. This causes the gasses to be released. Most large ocean fisheries are in colder climates because of the simple fact that dissolved gasses remain in the water and sea life can use them. Tropical oceans are comparatively deserts for the same temperature dependent reason. The parts per million increase of CO2 is a lagging indicator and blaming the Sun (actual heat source) does not 'forward' any of their causes.
13 posted on 05/12/2012 12:11:12 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

OK Alex...

What is the optimum climate? When was the climate NOT changing?

You have to be able to answer these questions to be taken seriously.


14 posted on 05/12/2012 12:11:35 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

Does the judge have access to some sort of an S/M store or something where he could buy a paddle?


15 posted on 05/12/2012 12:11:53 PM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

They don’t have standing. They can’t show they’ve been harmed because what they are concerned about, even if certain (and obviously predictions aren’t), hasn’t happened and caused them measurable harm.

That’s the argument that was used to deny standing to many of the suits against BHO’s eligibility. That was specious, because the harm of an unauthorized government is obvious, if unquantifiable. So, this one should be slapped down immediately.

Of course, that presumes a defense. If they are suing the US government, and Holder is charged with defending it, he might just roll over instead of defending the suit.


16 posted on 05/12/2012 12:18:50 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimbo123

Born to be a narcissist.

But this kid is just another puppet. George Soros is in the background somewhere.

17 posted on 05/12/2012 12:31:05 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Do I really need a sarcasm tag? Seriously? You're that dense?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
playing Ultimate Frisbee on weekends,

He needs the $$$ from the lawsuit to go pro in Ultimate Frisbee. He couldn't get a job, so he decided to sue!!

We need to sue his parents for RAISING a MORON!!

18 posted on 05/12/2012 12:59:51 PM PDT by ExCTCitizen (If we stay home in November '12, don't blame 0 for tearing up the CONSTITUTION!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone; 11B40; A Balrog of Morgoth; A message; ACelt; Aeronaut; AFPhys; AlexW; America_Right; ...
They got nothing to do
Put another quarter in
Sue the federal government...

Apologies to Joe Walsh

DOOMAGE!

Global Warming PING!

You have been pinged because of your interest in environmentalism, alarmist wackos, mainstream media doomsday hype, and other issues pertaining to global warming.

Freep-mail me to get on or off: Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to all note-worthy threads on global warming.

Global Warming on Free Republic

Latest from Global Warming News Site

Latest from Greenie Watch

Latest from Real Climate

Latest from Climate Depot

19 posted on 05/12/2012 1:02:06 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Occupy DC General Assembly: We are Marxist tools. WE ARE MARXIST TOOLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

I’ll take these kids seriously when they give up their smart phones and computers.


20 posted on 05/12/2012 1:04:52 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

If I, as a [natural born] US citizen, have no legal standing to demand proof of eligibility from Obama, this moron certainly has no standing to sue the US government over his mental illness.

He ought to be suing the UN for destroying his ability to think for himself.

I’d be embarrassed an 18 year old that stupid was my genetic offspring. He is the reason they make Trojans.


21 posted on 05/12/2012 1:07:50 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

“Brainwashed, indoctrinated, dumb and stupid is no way to go through life, Alec.”

To a kid who apparently gave some thought to future threats hanging over his head, it’s rather astonishing he missed the one staring him straight in the face: the net present value of federal government’s unfunded liabilities for entitlements exceed $100 trillion, or more than $300,000 for every living American. That tab is going to be paid predominantly by Alec’s generation and his kids, not by his parents (who when they retire—assuming they are average income—will collect $3 in Medicare benefits for every dollar they paid into Medicare) or grandparents.

Alec: you’re being used as a cash cow for your elders. How come you’re not outraged about THAT?


22 posted on 05/12/2012 1:12:12 PM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DrC

These are gore’s people. He has stuped so low he is brain washing kids, because NO ONE ELSE IS BUYING HIS CRAP


23 posted on 05/12/2012 1:53:11 PM PDT by spawn44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

The court should dismiss their suit on the basis of failure to mitigate by eliminating their personal CO2 emissions while breathing.


24 posted on 05/12/2012 1:59:59 PM PDT by TrueKnightGalahad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
He went on to found an organization called Kids vs. Global Warming, and traveled the world, giving more than 200 speeches at schools and other venues to more than 100,000 people altogether

Emitting no carbon in his travels? Amazing!

25 posted on 05/12/2012 2:02:00 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmost
The skeptics/realists know that this is a lagging indicator. CO2 is released after the liquid (ocean) is warmed.

The oceans used to do that. Without mankind there would be a 5-10 ppm rise in CO2 from the natural warming coming out of the Little Ice Age. That can be calculated from the partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere (above the ocean) and the temperature rise. Since CO2 has risen by about 100ppm the oceans have gone into reverse and are now absorbing about 1/2 of mankind's emissions each year.

Here's a paper http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/8576/1/LeQuere09.pdf showing the warming oceans are not emitting, they are absorbing. There are more many papers like this and they are generally correct.

26 posted on 05/12/2012 2:09:37 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: palmer

I will reinstall adobe’s crap to read your PDF. Do you believe the Sun does not heat the Earth?


27 posted on 05/12/2012 2:17:07 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Twotone

want government officials to do more to prevent the risks of climate change — the dangerous storms, heat waves, rising sea levels, and food-supply disruptions

Don’t forget, earthquakes.


28 posted on 05/12/2012 2:24:53 PM PDT by Joan Kerrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmost
Use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumatra_PDF I never use Adobe products (except Flash on a Mac with Click-to-Flash which stops all Flash except what I want).

Yes, the sun varies and heat the earth more up through the 80's That heated the oceans which kept heating the atmosphere through the 90's. That was the main reason for the rise during that interval. But CO2 was the second reason and CO2 has been steadily rising the atmosphere mostly independent of ocean temperatures. IOW, when we get La Nina and cooler ocean temperatures on average, we still get a rise in atmospheric CO2 although less of one. But we also get less of a rise in CO2 during recession e.g. in 2008. So we really do control CO2 in the atmosphere

Another thing to consider is that the ocean absorbs the CO2 efficiently enough that once we stop producing CO2 (when we develop sufficient technology like nuclear fusion energy), the atmospheric levels will drop within decades (less than 40 years to get half way back to preindustrial).

29 posted on 05/12/2012 2:55:26 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jimbo123

Living proof as to why libs who WANT to have abortions should be allowed to - to reduce the chances of them spawning another generation of brain dead cretins like this kid and his buddies.


30 posted on 05/12/2012 2:56:00 PM PDT by MCH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: palmer

Are you denying the post #13 effect that you and your children can see as true?


31 posted on 05/12/2012 2:58:43 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: allmost
There has been a 1 or 2 C rise in ocean temperatures over the last century, mostly as the result of coming out of the Little Ice Age. That would cause a 5 to 10 ppm rise in CO2. Instead we have seen a 110 ppm rise in CO2. There is clearly an effect from rising ocean temperatures but there is a bigger effect from manmade emissions.

The oceans no longer emit CO2 as they warm, they now absorb some of our extra CO2 although they absorb less of our extra than they would if they were not warming.

32 posted on 05/12/2012 3:16:49 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: allmost
Take a warm and cold seltzer water (substitute soda or beer), give them a small shake (simulating ocean currents and convection), then open them. The warm one releases more CO2

Here's a specific answer: the CO2 partial pressure has increased. That would be like leaving the cap on the bottle. As long as there is CO2 at pressure above the ocean higher than the pressure within the ocean the CO2 will absorb the CO2 from the atmosphere. Here's the text from Wikipedia on Henry's Law: "Partial pressure of CO2 in the gas phase in equilibrium with seawater doubles with every 16 K increase in temperature."

We have had about a 2K increase in ocean temperatures over the last century. That would lead to 2/16 or 1/8 of a doubling of partial pressure of CO2 above the ocean. That means from 280 ppm we would have had about 35 ppm in rise in partial pressure of CO2 (I was wrong when I said 5-10ppm).

33 posted on 05/12/2012 3:30:53 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: palmer
There has been a 1 or 2 C rise in ocean temperatures over the last century, mostly as the result of coming out of the Little Ice Age. That would cause a 5 to 10 ppm rise in CO2. Instead we have seen a 110 ppm rise in CO2. There is clearly an effect from rising ocean temperatures but there is a bigger effect from manmade emissions.

There has been a 0.7C rise in atmospheric temperatures since about 1850, though we're still considerably below the high of the Medieval warm period. We haven't had a rise of 110 ppm. The 280 ppm for the 19th century was cherry-picked. The average was somewhere between 300-340 ppm. We've gone up slightly since then and the increasing CO2 is coincident with stable (since 1998) and falling (since 2009 or so) atmospheric temperatures. Since 2009, there has been a global decrease of about 0.6C, almost as much as was gained through the three warming periods after 1880. The rise in atmospheric CO2 started before the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Human contribution is a minor portion of the total increase. Its effects on temperature cannot be distinguished from background noise. Compared to annual fluctuations due to seasonal change, they are minuscule. Most of the effects of CO2 on atmospheric temperature is over the first 100 ppm. The larger the amount, the increasingly smaller the effect by unit. We'd all be better off with 600-800 ppm.
34 posted on 05/12/2012 3:36:39 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
The Ventura, California, teen and four other juvenile plaintiffs want government officials to do more to prevent the risks of climate change -- the dangerous storms, heat waves, rising sea levels, and food-supply disruptions that scientists warn will threaten their generation absent a major turnabout in global energy policy.

Poor dumb effs. Major storm intensity and frequency have been on the decline over the past 60 or 70 years. Heat waves are less frequent and less intense than in the 1930/40s. Same for droughts. The sea level isn't rising and when it last was it was doing so at a decreasing rate. The only major food-supply disruptions are those that have been caused by political a-holes mandating biofuels and burning food instead of eating it.
35 posted on 05/12/2012 3:42:47 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
The average was somewhere between 300-340 ppm.

The only source I know about for those measurements is Miskowski (sp?) it is generally agreed that his measurements were not indicative of the global CO2 but represent mostly elevated CO2 around cities. Here's a better source for CO2 measurements: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/08/24/atmospheric-temperature-and-carbon-dioxide-feedback-or-equilibrium/ and there are many more like that.

36 posted on 05/12/2012 3:43:47 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: palmer

The measurements are proven bunk. Yet you believe them. Take them in like Gospel. Damn dude. You spread that to others?


37 posted on 05/12/2012 3:46:26 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: palmer
The only source I know about for those measurements is Miskowski (sp?) it is generally agreed that his measurements were not indicative of the global CO2 but represent mostly elevated CO2 around cities.

Throughout the 19th century there many thousands of CO2 measurements taken around the world.
38 posted on 05/12/2012 3:48:07 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: palmer
The only source I know about for those measurements is Miskowski (sp?) it is generally agreed that his measurements were not indicative of the global CO2 but represent mostly elevated CO2 around cities.

Throughout the 19th century there were many thousands of CO2 measurements taken around the world.
39 posted on 05/12/2012 3:48:41 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
Here's a better thread with a discussion of CO2 measurements http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/04/under-the-volcano-over-the-volcano/ I was thinking of Jaworowski not the name I guessed above. But the measurements you are referring to are the Beck measurements. Those are discussed here: http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/beck_data.html
40 posted on 05/12/2012 3:51:13 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: palmer

You spread that garbage? The millions that are to be subjected to it you must understand. Are you stupid or just fucking evil?


41 posted on 05/12/2012 4:10:07 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: palmer

The billions that are subjected to it. Correction.


42 posted on 05/12/2012 4:12:31 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: allmost

Keep in mind that WattsUpWithThat rarely censors alternative views, and Beck himself posts in the Under the Volcano thread I linked to. I don’t think there is a strong case for fluctuations above 300 ppm before preindustrial times. But there is a case for some fluctuation based on ocean temperature fluctuation and the Keeling curve may have some exaggerated smoothness. But I don’t think it is a strong enough case to explain the current 390 ppm and rising.


43 posted on 05/12/2012 4:24:53 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: palmer
Do you understand that warmer liquid holds less gas? Do you understand that the estimated age of our Sun is over 4 billion years old. She might fluctuate a bit. I know that dissolved gasses release in warmer water. I've had it blow up in my face. :) You are still talking parts per million, and neglecting the Sun. You cannot be right.

Have you ever owned or had the pleasure to live around a greenhouse? The water vapor holds the heat.
44 posted on 05/12/2012 4:33:10 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: aruanan
Beck has documented those measurements in a presentation: http://www.wasserplanet.becsoft.de/CO2-Dateien/Summary-bayreuth-e.pdf and paper http://multi-science.metapress.com/content/q46551865h237235/

But read the comment here: http://cio.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2007/EnergyEnvironMeijer/2007EnergyEnvironMeijer.pdf to see some of the flaws in the Beck paper. AFAIK, Beck has not written a new paper since then.

45 posted on 05/12/2012 4:33:41 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
high school students... is there anything they don't know???
46 posted on 05/12/2012 4:34:29 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Twotone
From the article:

While teenagers serve as the public face of the lawsuit, the idea itself came from Julia Olson, an attorney based in Eugene, Oregon. Olson founded an organization called Our Children's Trust after watching the Al Gore documentary An Inconvenient Truth while she was seven months pregnant. Her idea to invite kids to become plaintiffs in a suit against the government was partly inspired by her colleague Mary Christina Wood, director of the Environmental and Natural Resources Law Program at the University of Oregon. Wood has spent her career studying the public trust doctrine, most recently devising a strategy she has dubbed Atmospheric Trust Litigation to apply that theory to the climate.

From the wiki:

The public trust doctrine is the principle that certain resources are preserved for public use, and that the government is required to maintain them for the public's reasonable use.

Since we all share oxygen, the government can regulate our every breath, if taking it to the extreme as she is doing.

47 posted on 05/12/2012 4:41:17 PM PDT by texas booster (Join FreeRepublic's Folding@Home team (Team # 36120) Cure Alzheimer's!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chode

What they believe, guides them.


48 posted on 05/12/2012 4:41:32 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: allmost
Yes, warmer liquid holds less gas. The dependence shows up in the temperature dependence of the Henry constant, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry%27s_Law The fluctuations from the sun explain a lot of the warming in the 80's and 90's as I explained above. There is also a steady increase due to CO2. The reason is that CO2 absorbs some wavelengths of IR that water vapor does not and increasing the CO2 causes a small increase in the temperature of the atmosphere.

The warming inside a greenhouse is partly due to trapping the warm air (preventing convection). The rest is due to the absorption of outgoing IR by the glass, just like CO2 in the atmosphere. The glass then emits about 1/2 of that heat back into the greenhouse. The water vapor inside the greenhouse helps hold some heat too but that is mostly an increase in thermal mass. It is even better to have many gallons of water in the greenhouse for thermal mass to hold the heat through the night or cloudy days.

49 posted on 05/12/2012 4:45:59 PM PDT by palmer (Jim, please bill me 50 cents for this completely useless post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: palmer
I've read compelling arguments that refute the greenhouse effect altogether. Your numbers on CO2 absorption are bullshit. I would go so far as to call them a lie. Linking me to anthropogenic greenhouse warming links does not help your case. I've shown you, with 2 bottles or cans, that something else is going on. Refute my eternal observation before I read your paid plant.
50 posted on 05/12/2012 5:16:24 PM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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