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

Skip to comments.

Summit- How to boost fuel efficiency? Raise taxes say execs
Reuters ^ | 11/04/09 | Scott Malone

Posted on 11/04/2009 8:25:25 PM PST by Egg

DETROIT (Reuters) - There's a simple way to get Americans to drive fuel-efficient cars, according to auto executives, but they are not going to like it -- sharply hike the gas tax.

[snip]

Gradually raising gas taxes to the point where fuel costs $4 to $5 at the pump will do more to stimulate demand in next-generation vehicles like General Motors Co's forthcoming Chevy Volt plug-in hybrid than any other policy initiatives...

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government
KEYWORDS: autoindustry; energy; fuelefficiency; gasoline; gastaxes; green; tax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last
Fascism, American style.
1 posted on 11/04/2009 8:25:26 PM PST by Egg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Egg
"Unless gas is $3.50 or $4 a gallon, consumers are not going to want to buy those cars," York said on Monday.

Keep raising taxes and Americans won't have any money to buy your overpriced cars.

2 posted on 11/04/2009 8:32:04 PM PST by A message
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg

Raising taxes on Gas would drive people to be more efficient and consume less. But it would also kill the economy and reduce our lifestyles.

I say build nuclear plants, so that there is an abundance of energy. Provide that energy to hydrogen producers at variable cost, letting other energy consumers pay for the plant overhead, which they would be paying for anyway if nobody was producing hydrogen.

Get the cost of hydrogen fueled vehicles down to the equivalent of $1 per gallon of gas. Then you have a real incentive for people to convert to hydrogen and tell OPEC and the middle east where to put their oil.


3 posted on 11/04/2009 8:33:03 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg

Yeah, make Americans sink all their money into gas tanks and heat, leaving them starving and forced into bankruptcy, and then they will buy a smaller eco-car. Are these people born this stupid? Or did they have to work at it?


4 posted on 11/04/2009 8:33:14 PM PST by gidget7 (Duncan Hunter-Valley Forge Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg
No, I agree with the premise about raising taxes to accomplish three things, IMO.

1) $4 or $5 per gallon fuel will conserve fuel and lead people to buy less fuel per year and more fuel efficient vehicles. That's been proven three or four times in the last four decades.

2) Add a $1 per gallon tax just to better fund the US military -- with even just the basics: more and better body armor, more ammo, new rifles, more close air support platforms, more C-17 airlift planes (so that our troops don't get hung out on the end of a vulnerable logistical thread), and better veterans' health care, etc. etc.

3) Add another $1 per gallon tax, the revenues to be turned over to States to fix roads and bridges (and no swiping that fuel tax for airports and mass transit rail, etc.)

5 posted on 11/04/2009 8:34:55 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

No tell OPEC to get lost and rill our own oil!


6 posted on 11/04/2009 8:34:58 PM PST by gidget7 (Duncan Hunter-Valley Forge Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Egg
If the fed keeps printing money and the members in congress keep spending it, you will have $4.50 a gal gas in about 24 months. Thank you wall street!!!
7 posted on 11/04/2009 8:35:26 PM PST by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

No, absolutely not.


8 posted on 11/04/2009 8:38:24 PM PST by gidget7 (Duncan Hunter-Valley Forge Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25
No thanks. And even if I wanted more taxes on gas and oil, I wouldn't funnel the money through the hands of the parasites in D.C. before "giving it back" to the states.
9 posted on 11/04/2009 8:40:28 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

I second that ‘No, absolutely not.’


10 posted on 11/04/2009 8:42:55 PM PST by AlmaKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gidget7
Yes, because our dependence on relatively cheap foreign fuel will dig us deeper into more trouble.

If domestic production is exempt from the defense tax, then that domestic production from wells, oil shale, coal, etc. will be more competitive.

11 posted on 11/04/2009 8:43:00 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Egg

Then the States add a $1 per gallon tax and keep it for themselves for roads and bridges.


12 posted on 11/04/2009 8:44:22 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

Cut State pensions and payrolls before adding amy tax.


13 posted on 11/04/2009 8:46:37 PM PST by AlmaKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing

Sorry, I confused the well-known ‘amy’ tax with ‘any’ tax.


14 posted on 11/04/2009 8:48:10 PM PST by AlmaKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25
And upon what basis do you flippantly recommend significant nationwide taxes upon one of the most vital commodities in the nation?

Surely, you are employed by government, which never removes its eye from the meager possessions of the productive element of soceity.
15 posted on 11/04/2009 8:50:37 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

You have absolutely no clue whatsoever. Regarding statement number two, the US could have a defense budget of 1/10 what it is now and still be the most powerful military on the planet. There is so much waste and disapearing funds that it’s not even funny.


16 posted on 11/04/2009 8:51:26 PM PST by randomhero97 ("First you want to kill me, now you want to kiss me. Blow!" - Ash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AlmaKing

Good Idea, But you didn’t take it far enough.

Mandate that all federal Jobs have Pay parity with the private sector.

That will free up lots of Cash.

But then, who in Congress will vote for it?


17 posted on 11/04/2009 8:51:55 PM PST by SwedeBoy2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Egg

The problem with $4 to $5 gas is that incumbents are in jeopardy of losing their office if this happens.

Just ask Republican incumbents in 2006, and to a lesser degree, John McCain in 2008.

When Gas Prices are high, people are pissed. It’s that simple. They blame it on anything and everything in sight too. Many people I work with were certain that the War was the reason for high gas prices and that’s the way BOOSH ‘The Oil Man’ wanted it...

It’s also a surefire way to kill their global warming malarkey. People don’t give a Rodent’s posterior about that stuff when they’re hurting, that’s why that agenda is failing now. They only care about it when there is nothing else to worry about.


18 posted on 11/04/2009 8:53:34 PM PST by lmr (God punishes Conservatives by making them argue with fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg

“DETROIT (Reuters) - There’s a simple way to get Americans to drive fuel-efficient cars, according to auto executives, but they are not going to like it — sharply hike the gas tax.”

Buy an American car ? Never again !
Some days I feel like wasn’t born with enough middle fingers.

Time to buy another motorcycle , made in JAPAN


19 posted on 11/04/2009 8:59:29 PM PST by Lera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg

Queer the system and artificially raise prices as high as you (they) like - I will continue to drive. Of course at a certain point it will become cheaper to just *appropriate* it...


20 posted on 11/04/2009 9:05:07 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gidget7

*Yeah, make Americans sink all their money into gas tanks and heat, leaving them starving and forced into bankruptcy, and then they will buy a smaller eco-car. Are these people born this stupid? Or did they have to work at it?*

What would make more sense is to just have GM and/or Chrysler build everyone a 40 mpg car and delivery it to each American family—hell, we’ve ALREADY PAID FOR IT.


21 posted on 11/04/2009 9:06:37 PM PST by j-damn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Egg
There's a simple way to get Americans to drive fuel-efficient cars, according to auto executives

I have a much better idea to get Americans to drive fuel efficient cars - put an "auto executive" out front pulling it!!!



(I'd pay real money just to SEE that, much less experience it!!)

22 posted on 11/04/2009 9:10:41 PM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg
There is an old saying, from hotrod circles..."there ain't no substitute for cubes"...meaning high performance and torque come from large engines...of course...so does low fuel mileage.

I think Chrysler and Ford were on the right track back in the early eighties with small displacement four cylinder turbocharged gas engines. That is the true substitute for "cubes".

A turbocharger gives you high performance out of a small displacement engine while you have your foot in it (getting out into traffic) and then it reverts to being a small efficient engine after you attain cruising speed.

Small diesel turbos are also pretty good...same logic.

The only other thing to make them better would be a heavy flywheel for more torque, instead of the quick revving sporty car mentality.

23 posted on 11/04/2009 9:14:32 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (RATs, nothing more than bald haired hippies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egg
Such increases in gas prices helped knock people out of their houses. Foreclosures began going through the roof when gas went over $3 a gallon.

My question is how can anyone in the position of an auto executives put forward such a bizarre idea of artificially raising gas prices and be so ignorant of the economic realities?

When exec Mike Jackson says, “If we migrate slowly over years to $4 or $5 a gallon, everybody will adjust, everybody will manage. It's not a problem,” he is showing us the short sighted thinking that took the US auto industry down the rat hole. Now he wants to use that same thinking to send the US economy down the rat hole.

24 posted on 11/04/2009 9:17:50 PM PST by jonrick46 (The Obama Administration is a blueprint for Fabian Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25
No, I agree with the premise about raising taxes to accomplish three things, IMO

Why stop there? Let's add another $1 a gallon tax on top of all your taxes to build a "fitting memorial" to Teddy Chappaquiddick.

We can also add ANOTHER $1 a gallon tax so that "underprivileged" children in Uganda can have a shopping spree at Walmart!!

And, if we toss in a couple of more dollars per gallon on top of that, Obama will be able to be tossed out of the WH in '12 and never have to worry about collecting unemployment!!

As long as we're just tossing stuff in, here, let's just raise the price of gas to $25,000 a gallon (along with all of the gratuitous taxes) and that way, when Jed Clampett discovers oil on his property while hunting for food, he can not only afford to move to Beverly Hills, he'll be able to buy California!!!

25 posted on 11/04/2009 9:19:14 PM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
Small diesel turbos are also pretty good...same logic.

We could really use the new diesel technologies, but our useless federal government and their "CAFE" standards prevent their employ.
26 posted on 11/04/2009 9:20:10 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jonrick46
My question is how can anyone in the position of an auto executives put forward such a bizarre idea of artificially raising gas prices and be so ignorant of the economic realities?

They are partnered with government now. Economic realities no longer matter.
27 posted on 11/04/2009 9:24:34 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25
No, I agree with the premise about raising taxes to accomplish three things, IMO.

1) $4 or $5 per gallon fuel will conserve fuel and lead people to buy less fuel per year and more fuel efficient vehicles. That's been proven three or four times in the last four decades.

2) Add a $1 per gallon tax just to better fund the US military -- with even just the basics: more and better body armor, more ammo, new rifles, more close air support platforms, more C-17 airlift planes (so that our troops don't get hung out on the end of a vulnerable logistical thread), and better veterans' health care, etc. etc.

3) Add another $1 per gallon tax, the revenues to be turned over to States to fix roads and bridges (and no swiping that fuel tax for airports and mass transit rail, etc.)

Oh great and why not another $1.00/gal to fund ACORN; another $1.00/gal to give everyone another $4,500 for Cash for Clunkers and another $1-2.00/gal just on GP.

Sheesh!

Apparently you don't need your vehicle (like some of us do) to earn a living

Don't you realize what a ripple affect this would have on just about everything everyone buys or service they use?

Just because Big Auto has been mandated by DEAR LEADER and his EnviroNut minions to build junk POS vehicles nobody wants, they now advocate Fascist European Socialist measures to force us to have to make changes in our lifestyle few want or will accept gracefully or "willingly."

28 posted on 11/04/2009 9:26:34 PM PST by Conservative Vermont Vet ((One of ONLY 37 Conservatives in the People's Republic of Vermont. Socialists and Progressives All))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Egg

It isn’t CAFE keeping diesels out, but the EPA.

This one I have to go with the EPA on, diesel particulates are nasty and carcinogenic.


29 posted on 11/04/2009 9:26:42 PM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: A message
Actually, I wouldn't buy a GM, or "electric" car if gas was $10.00 per gallon.

Ya know, whenever truck drivers go on strike, commerce comes to a standstill. Why? Well, they bring the things people buy to the stores...basically.

So, I thought, what if we turned it around and people didn't go to the stores to buy the stuff they bring? Wouldn't it have basically the same effect, I mean, over the long run?

So, let them raise gas prices, we'll consolidate our trips, stay home rather than eat out, and tell Aunt Sally that you can't come visit this year.

Invest in laptops, high speed lines and webcams, so you can call your loved ones and look at them at the same time. Almost...almost...as good as seeing them in person.

That will eventually back things up, and merchants won't sell as much, therefore won't buy as much, retail, wholesale, and factory workers will get laid off, and then NOBODY will be buying any of their "electric" cars...or any cars, for that matter.

They might think if they make the wheels squeak, we'll "grease" their palms with money to buy the cars, however, sometimes the squeaky wheel doesn't get greased, it gets REPLACED.

You can fool all of the people, SOME of the time....
30 posted on 11/04/2009 9:27:03 PM PST by FrankR (To Congress: You cram it down our throats in '09, We'll shove it up your ass in '10!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Egg

I oppose such taxes, but agree they make more sense than the current regulatory regime (CAFE).


31 posted on 11/04/2009 9:37:23 PM PST by B Knotts (Calvin Coolidge Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

Diesels have come a long way in terms of emissions, including particulates. In most respects, their emissions are better than sparkers.


32 posted on 11/04/2009 9:38:57 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet
American auto manufacturers could make a 50 mpg all wheel drive version of the Smart ForTwo or the Tata Nano -- if fuel cost at least one Big Mac per gallon.
33 posted on 11/04/2009 9:41:20 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25
Others have replied to your first 2 points. Add another $1 per gallon tax, the revenues to be turned over to States to fix roads and bridges....

What do you think the original point of the gas taxes was.

(and no swiping that fuel tax for airports and mass transit rail, etc.)

Yeah. well that was already supposed to have been in the original law, not to go into general funds. But there's that nasty, 'stroke of the pen, law of the land" thing again. Nukes, nukes, and drill, baby, drill.

34 posted on 11/04/2009 9:47:30 PM PST by Covenantor ("Men are ruled...by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern." Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Egg
And upon what basis do you flippantly recommend significant nationwide taxes upon one of the most vital commodities in the nation?

User fees -- those who use roads and those who benefit from national defense and use of military force against islamastan.

35 posted on 11/04/2009 9:48:21 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor
I agree with the nuclear power plants. But it will take a decade or two to build enough -- especially with green nimbies being hypocrits (like California where all incoming power and fuel lines should be cut).

Meanwhile...
Our domestic oil industry could use an extra $100 per barrel incentive to drill more.

36 posted on 11/04/2009 9:52:32 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Egg

Obamanuism has turned them into K Street whores working to destroy Capitalism with the syphilis of Marxism.


37 posted on 11/04/2009 9:53:50 PM PST by jonrick46 (The Obama Administration is a blueprint for Fabian Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

So make a defense surcharge of $42 per barrel tariff on oil imported from anywhere but Canada (Nigeria is a major supplier and it is sinking into Islamic civil war).


38 posted on 11/04/2009 9:55:44 PM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Egg

So the makers of the general motors shitbox hybrid thinks raising our taxes will win us over?Never by a gm anything.


39 posted on 11/04/2009 10:03:56 PM PST by imahawk (Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

I sure as hell hope you are not a representative or senator because your opinions are right in line with the marxist whitehouse.


40 posted on 11/04/2009 10:07:09 PM PST by imahawk (Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25
Those taxes already exist and their adequacy is, at worst, arguably sufficient and by no measure insignificant. But if a certain state should need more highway funding, let them levy additional taxes as respectively needed.

There is no need for people to buy (and die in) 1-ton "smart" cars, so here come the grand market manipulators to artificially create a need where none exists so as to benefit a particular public/private partnership.
41 posted on 11/04/2009 10:12:46 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Egg

What an idiot. With trucking costs going up because of high gas prices, we will all be paying for it plus our own gas......doesn’t anyone know how to think?....yikes what a stupid stunt..


42 posted on 11/04/2009 10:15:43 PM PST by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: imahawk
Never by a gm anything.

My new motto-- Chrysler included.

These deadbeat union-infested companies were destined to fail, but that didn't stop the thieves in Washington from picking our pockets in a staged attempt at bailing them out. "It was just a loan," we were told. Then came the cash for clunkers auto bailout (that didn't go quite as planned).

I would say I've spent my last dime on a GM product, but how can anyone say that when we're continually stolen from to give the union workers token jobs?
43 posted on 11/04/2009 10:25:46 PM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Aroostook25

“Then the States add a $1 per gallon tax and keep it for themselves for roads and bridges.”

I’m with you on that, but man do I get the name-calling when I bring it up here. It seems like people here would rather pay 25 cents a mile to drive on foreign-run toll roads with transponders in their cars, rather than see the gas tax go up by one penny.

Go figure.


44 posted on 11/05/2009 5:42:19 AM PST by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Raising taxes on Gas would drive people to be more efficient and consume less. But it would also kill the economy and reduce our lifestyles.

Not really. First of all it would mean smaller engines and more diesels for trucks. Which doesn't necessarily mean slower or weaker. E.g. the Lincoln Town car uses a 4.6 liter V8 to get 240 hp / 240 lb-ft. Mercedes gets the same kind of power from a four-cylinder diesel (220 hp / 370 torques) in an S-Class. That's 40 mpg and absolute luxury - without even hybridization.

If you raise gas taxes (i.e. taxes on mostly imports from countries we don't like) AND lower all other taxes, especially on American companies, products and labor, it will definitely not kill the economy, quite the other way round.

The problem with Washington is that they never really want to cut taxes and instead keep the additional tax revenue.
45 posted on 11/05/2009 7:11:19 AM PST by wolf78 (Inflation is a form of taxation, too. Cranky Libertarian - equal opportunity offender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Egg
And upon what basis do you flippantly recommend significant nationwide taxes upon one of the most vital commodities in the nation?

People actually working is vital to the economy - yet still the 16th amendment flippantly says it's ok to tax hard-working US citizens into submission. What's the diff?
46 posted on 11/05/2009 7:18:11 AM PST by wolf78 (Inflation is a form of taxation, too. Cranky Libertarian - equal opportunity offender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
I oppose such taxes, but agree they make more sense than the current regulatory regime (CAFE).

What I don't get: Why should these taxes be worse? All taxes are equally bad!
47 posted on 11/05/2009 7:20:41 AM PST by wolf78 (Inflation is a form of taxation, too. Cranky Libertarian - equal opportunity offender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: wolf78

I think they are just noticed more than other taxes. But, what frustrates me is that while conservatives have grasped the destructive nature of taxation, many still seem to fail to grasp the destructive nature of regulation.

We must not only cut taxes, but repeal regulation, if we want America to prosper. The current level of regulation is excessive, unnecessary and unacceptable.


48 posted on 11/05/2009 7:26:22 AM PST by B Knotts (Calvin Coolidge Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: wolf78

I hope you’re not expecting an argument from me on that point!


49 posted on 11/05/2009 9:17:48 AM PST by Egg (The nationalizations will continue until the free market recovers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: wolf78

People who use roads and bridges should pay for that use.

People who rely on our military to keep fuel coming for them to use should pay for that defense.

Is a fee to use the county swimming pool or golf course or ski slope a “tax” or a “user fee”.

Why should those who don’t use a government provided service as much as others do (or at all) pay extra taxes to subsidize those who do use that service?

The alternative methods for a “user fee” for roads and bridges are
1) tolls (but toll booths are not feasible for every side street and road).
2) methods to measure miles driven such as transponders — yikes!
3) a tax on the fuel used to drive on roads is the best user fee so far.
But gotta figure another way to get users of electrics and bicycles to pay their share.

For centuries nations have gone to war over resources. Eventually, if the USA does not become sufficiently energy independent, we will go to war over energy supplies. And just being able to buy foreign supplies is not a solution since sending so much money overseas comes back to bite us.

If an extra $1 or $2 in taxes goes to improving our infrastructure and to developing alternative fuel or energy sources (nuclear, fusion, whatever) and to defending America — it is relatively small tax to pay compared to the alternative of having deteriorating roads and bridges and being in hock to foreign enemies and likely having to go to war over energy supplies.

Users must pay for what they use — and that includes users of defense and public infrastructure — roads, bridges (and government owned swimming pools, ski slopes, and golf courses — though all those should be privatized).


50 posted on 11/05/2009 9:36:45 AM PST by Aroostook25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 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