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

Skip to comments.

Romney Criticizes Roberts ObamaCare Decision as 'Political, not based on Constitution'
CBS News via Twitter ^ | Wednesday, July 4, 2012 | Caroline Horn, Senior Producer for Politics, CBS News

Posted on 07/04/2012 4:33:47 PM PDT by kristinn

Caroline Horn‏@CNHorn

On @CBSEveningNews, @cbsjancrawford says Romney told her Roberts' opinion seemed political, not based on Constitution.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: deathpanels; ericfehrnstrom; etchasketch; etchasketchmitt; flipflopmitt; iwontvoteforromney; johnroberts; mittflipflop; mittromney; no2deathpanels; no2obamacare; no2romneycare; obamacare; obamacaredecision; robertsdecision; romney; romney4romneycare; romneycare; romneyobamacare; socializedmedicine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-152 next last
To: hinckley buzzard
Well smell you. I'm sure you just gave the Romney team an anxiety attack.

The mittbots sure are having a lot of anxiety attacks around here.

101 posted on 07/05/2012 7:20:22 AM PDT by Sirius Lee (Goode over evil. Voting for mitt or obie is like throwing your country away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

“Romney replies that states like MA can impose a fine without calling it a tax to make it constitutional but at the Federal level it must be called a tax.”

Is this accurate?


102 posted on 07/05/2012 7:21:58 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

“Romney needs to explain SPECIFICALLY : Why does Obama-care kill jobs but Romney-care doesnt?”

LOL, they are not the same. Romneycare is only 70 pages long and Obamacare has 2,700 pages.

There’s a survey out by the chamber of commerce saying that 2 out of 3 business owners are less likely to hire new employees because of Obamacare.

A similar survey in Massachussets showed that Romneycare had no impact in their hiring decisions (it only affects about 6% of the population).


103 posted on 07/05/2012 7:22:18 AM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Your boy Virgile Good has said nothing about it (his party has). Is he even still alive?


104 posted on 07/05/2012 7:23:31 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA

No.


105 posted on 07/05/2012 7:25:01 AM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion
RE :”“Romney needs to explain SPECIFICALLY : Why does Obama-care kill jobs but Romney-care doesnt?”....
.....
LOL, they are not the same. Romneycare is only 70 pages long and Obamacare has 2,700 pages.

That would be a good start, but HE must do it.

106 posted on 07/05/2012 7:26:21 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
RE :“Romney replies that states like MA can impose a fine without calling it a tax to make it constitutional but at the Federal level it must be called a tax.”
......
Is this accurate?

Please be more specific with your question so I don't go off on a tangent.

107 posted on 07/05/2012 7:29:30 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA

States can impose whatever is allowed by its constitution as long it doesn’t involve a right resevered by the US Constitution to the federal govt.


108 posted on 07/05/2012 7:29:47 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
Is this accurate?

It's a sloppy way of saying that the 10th Amendment allows states to do things the feds can't. The feds can (according to SCOTUS) do the mandate only through its taxing authority. Depending on the state constitutions, the states may not be limited to doing this under their taxing power.
109 posted on 07/05/2012 7:31:33 AM PDT by DaveInDallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: opentalk

The only person who will fight for conservative values and would jump on Obama like a bulldog on a porkchop is Sarah Palin. But Romney will be scared of the liberals and will not pick her. Sad. She should be on top of the ticket. No one in the Republican Party comes near her magnitism and ability to express conservative values and connect with the common man like she does. She’s the female version of Ronald Reagan and it’s time the Beltway snobs realize it.


110 posted on 07/05/2012 7:35:13 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
States can impose whatever is allowed by its constitution as long it doesn’t involve a right resevered by the US Constitution to the federal govt.

Hmmmm...I'm not so sure about that.

In the case of something like education I would agree with you. There is absolutely no enumerated power that legitimately allows the national government to have anything to do with it. But many, if not most, of the state constitutions do grant power to the state governments to govern in this area.

But the imposition of flat-out socialism? That's highly debatable, since the U.S. Constitution requires that each state be guaranteed a republican form of government. Is that possible under socialism?

I guess it comes down to how you define republican governance, in the American sense of the words.

111 posted on 07/05/2012 7:38:57 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (A Choice, not an Etch-A-Sketch. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: DaveInDallas; BarnacleCenturion; Perdogg; sickoflibs; Impy

So, the 10th Amendment allows RomneyCare and it’s “fees”, which are paid to the MA DOR (and yes, I have been fined/taxed/whatever one wants to call it).

So basically, Gloves argument is: Rom-bamaCare on a national level is bad; on a state level is good.

I can tell you all, on a state level it SUCKS!


112 posted on 07/05/2012 7:54:59 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
Even Scalia has stated in a number of opinions, whether they were Per Curiam or dissent, that some laws are constitutional even though they are dumb.

For example mandatory seat belt laws. It appears that no one is bothered by the blatant assault on the individual privacy such as these - although people should wear them I think these laws are a violation of civil liberities..

But the states have the right to impose these laws even though there is no power for the federal govt to require this. Manditory liability insurance is another example at the state level as requirement for driving a car.

I love Scalia, but I am still waiting for someone to justify his concurrence in South Dakota v Dole.

113 posted on 07/05/2012 8:07:31 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf; GOPsterinMA; Gilbo_3
RE :”this is something that really does play differently at the state level and if I were him I would explain the basic reason (eloquently, of course): That states are restrained by the simple fact that if business and citizens don’t like what they do, they can move to a different state. It keeps them “more” honest. When the FedGov does it, we’re all kinda stuck. It’s why FedGov involvement in the lives of the average citizen must be kept tightly in check.

I know Romney wants to avoid Romney-care and use states rights vs Federal limitations as a defense, BUT :

In 2009 Romney did a USA op-ed saying the Federal government should apply parts of the successful Romney-care at the federal level including the mandates. That was posted here many months ago. He also argued for the mandates at the Federal level in the 2008 debates echoing Democrats words now : It is needed to keep “free riders” from passing their medical costs on to others.

Romney never anticipated Obama-care mandate as becoming the overwhelming symbol Republicans would use to define it as evil, and their most desperate hope to have the SCOTUS throw it out, now lost.

He must explain why one law is good, the other is bad. He is in a hole he dug himself. He knew this was coming all through the primaries but still trashed the other candidates.

114 posted on 07/05/2012 8:09:02 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Understood, P-Dogg! Thank you for the info.


115 posted on 07/05/2012 8:13:16 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; All

“He must explain why one law is good, the other is bad.”

I suspect he’ll try to muck through and say it’s a states’ rights issue?


116 posted on 07/05/2012 8:15:52 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
I can tell you all, on a state level it SUCKS!

I'm not surprised. And on a national level, it would be infinitely worse.
117 posted on 07/05/2012 8:16:44 AM PDT by DaveInDallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA; DaveInDallas; BarnacleCenturion; Perdogg; cuban leaf; Gilbo_3; Impy; ...
RE :”I can tell you all, on a state level Romney-care SUCKS!

This is exactly why Romney is such a bad candidate to have now. He can't admit it, but he must admit it at the same time he cant.

My gal unelectable Bachmann would be calling Obama-care a dark curse on this nation about now pointing out how it chases jobs to China and Mexico. And she could say that Romney-care sucks too.

118 posted on 07/05/2012 8:17:40 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
RE :”I suspect he’ll try to muck through and say it’s a states’ rights issue?

A shame the primary is over because I would like him to be asked to list 20 Federal laws that he thinks that are in the same category, valid at state level and invalid at Federal, and if he would have vetoed them. But the primary was mostly stupid questions.

Why states rights argument is a loser for Romney too(#114)

119 posted on 07/05/2012 8:22:54 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Maybe she should have emphazied this instead of talking about gardasil. However, she refused to turn her guns on Romney.


120 posted on 07/05/2012 8:25:34 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Wrong Williams. I saw it when it happened. Just happened to be watching Fox at the time, and what Romney came out with was the agreed upon sound bite: It may be constitutional but it isn’t good policy.

All over the media this morning, they were still giving Romney grief for not coming out of the gate faster. I remember seeing Michelle Malkin choking back harsh words, but still criticizing his inability to say that this decision was not constitutional.

Until he felt the direction of the wind, of course.


121 posted on 07/05/2012 8:31:01 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

Nope. You’re wrong. Romney came out the gate with the approved soundbite saying that it was constitutional but still wasn’t good policy.

You need to stop calling names and actually listen to the words being used.


122 posted on 07/05/2012 8:34:02 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
RE :”Maybe she should have emphazied this instead of talking about gardasil. However, she refused to turn her guns on Romney.

True.

In fact none of them did until they were PERSONALLY targeted by Romney, too late. First Perry, then Newt and then RS. They all spent too much time attacking each other until they specifically were targetted because I guess they always believed Romney would get it, Each one prized the ABBMR #1 spot more than beating him, until they got it and then MR nuked them.

i rarely if ever saw Paul go after Romney, imagine that.

123 posted on 07/05/2012 8:34:58 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa

So, did you have to spend a lot of time deciding whether or not it’s constitutional for congress to persecute with taxation over not buying something.

Can you cite for me where that is in the US Constitution?

Rush new it immediately, Levin knew it immediately, heck...even O’Reilly knew it right away.

And...most of the conservatives on FR knew it immediately.


124 posted on 07/05/2012 8:37:25 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

I agree with that criticism. I want him to try to be more visible than he has been despite limited resources.

The real problem is the campaign has to focus on qualifying for state ballots instead of campaigning.

That is, imho, a real inequity in the sytem that a party that qualified for 40+ ballots last election has to start the process over each election. In my mind, the only way they should lose access if they fail to run candidates in ensuing elections.

So, he’s busy deciphering ballot law in about 30 states, all different, all obstructionist, and all bastions of the system as we know it.

So, I’m giving him a break until after the final convention...is that Dems this year??? With his financial resources, he can probably only afford a hard one month push anyway, so even that would be too much.


125 posted on 07/05/2012 8:42:46 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion
Romney gave to the people of Massachusetts the crap that they wanted and they are happy with it. If you’re not from Massachusetts and you want to deny them something that they want, I suggest you go read the federalist papers and the declaration of independence.

Get back to me when Romney proposes to implement Romneycare at the national level. Until then, this whole discussion is nothing but smoke and mirrors by the pro-obama crowd to get their messiah reelected.


Another dodge from a supporter of the King of Dodges, Mitt Romney.

Why am I surprised!?
126 posted on 07/05/2012 8:43:50 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg; GOPsterinMA
Even Scalia has stated in a number of opinions, whether they were Per Curiam or dissent, that some laws are constitutional even though they are dumb.

We're not talking about a "Dumb" law, we're talking about Socialism.

Whether or not it is allowable legally is not the point.

The point is it is Socialism and as conservatives, the last time I checked, we were in agreeance AGAINST Socialism.
127 posted on 07/05/2012 8:48:30 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: DaveInDallas

MA on a nation-wide level for anything?

Cue the liferafts and abandon ship.


128 posted on 07/05/2012 8:49:05 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

“This is exactly why Romney is such a bad candidate to have now.”

Preaching to the choir on that point.


129 posted on 07/05/2012 8:53:19 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

I am not saying I am in favor of it. They are a lot of things that are allowed at the state level that federal govt has no business getting into. The people of Massachusetts need to kill their healthcare law.

I am 100% opposed to any of it.


130 posted on 07/05/2012 8:54:22 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
This is exactly why Romney is such a bad candidate to have now. He can't admit it, but he must admit it at the same time he cant.

Many of us here pointed that out a loooooong time ago.

131 posted on 07/05/2012 8:57:54 AM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

I hope you don’t think I like Romney, because I do not.


132 posted on 07/05/2012 8:59:55 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf; Gilbo_3; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; NFHale; ...

BTW : I am not one of those nutbags who claim we can now invade the GOP convention and replace Romney with some unspecified candidate who we cant even agree on (we all know who they mean.) I must live on the planet earth.

Romney campaign and allies must EFFECTIVELY beat Obama up and damage him. That is it.


133 posted on 07/05/2012 9:03:10 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie; Perdogg

Agreed!


134 posted on 07/05/2012 9:03:13 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: t2buckeye

I find it difficult to believe that somewhere in the NJ Romneycare there was not one or more things that didn’t pan out as intended by cause of various circumstances. Romney should list these things and then with political pie on his face make a forthright statement like ‘it just shows to go that sometimes there are unintended consequences which make a total overall necessary especially when the entire USA is involved’. This would indicate a man of analysis, perspective, and honest intents. Question? Has Romney the character to do such?


135 posted on 07/05/2012 9:05:12 AM PDT by noinfringers2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
RE :”I hope you don’t think I like Romney, because I do not.

?????? What?

I see you pointed out how Romney-care sucks so you cant be all bad :)

I think the Romney-bots are mostly terminated. Now it is the fear-ridden ABBO’s vs those not joining them for various reasons.
It makes it interesting. The groupings really get mixed and remixed.

136 posted on 07/05/2012 9:11:45 AM PDT by sickoflibs (ABBBO chant: "We must support Romney because he doesn't matter." (Obam-ney Care is bad now ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Yes, I heard that at the time. He wouldn’t say that ObamaCare violated the Constitution, but would agree that it was bad policy.

NOW, Romney is able to say that it’s “not based on the Constitution.”

Yes Mitt immediately came out and said that Obamacare was bad policy and that he would repeal it...and yes it wasn't until 4 or 5 days later that he said it was unconstitutional (which is really the primary point).

Meanwhile, Obama continues to be for it.

137 posted on 07/05/2012 9:38:20 AM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

” My gal unelectable Bachmann would be calling Obama-care a dark curse on this nation about now pointing out how it chases jobs to China and Mexico. And she could say that Romney-care sucks too. “

YEP


138 posted on 07/05/2012 10:28:14 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

I don’t want to give Obama a break on this at all. Obama’s positions have been worse than Romney’s, if the issue is speaking with a forked tongue.

Obama argued in congress that it wasn’t a tax, argued before scotus that is was a tax, agreed with the ruling (it is a tax), and is now arguing before the media (public) that it is not a tax.

Romney couldn’t say it was unconstitutional. Obama is all over the map.


139 posted on 07/05/2012 10:43:34 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

“I see you pointed out how Romney-care sucks so you cant be all bad :)”

Thank you! I like to think I have somewhat of a handle on what’s going on.


140 posted on 07/05/2012 10:54:38 AM PDT by GOPsterinMA (The Glove don't fit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

Either way State Nullification is where we need to go from here.

We can’t ever trust Washington to simply give up power. We must first take it from them, and make it as politically difficult as possible for them to attempt to hold onto it.


141 posted on 07/05/2012 3:24:46 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Romney: the king of the 3 day later comment.

Get used to it. Romney has to blow in the wind for a few days before the direction the wind blows tells him what he should say.

142 posted on 07/05/2012 7:02:55 PM PDT by tsowellfan (http://www.cafenetamerica.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

It would be nice to know Mittens listens to Mark Levin but I have my doubts.


143 posted on 07/05/2012 7:04:53 PM PDT by tsowellfan (http://www.cafenetamerica.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I noticed that in the early debates, too. If someone got an applause line, when his turn came, he would always say, “Me too.”

I noticed that too. I also noticed that the media would often let him answer the question AFTER everybody else did so he could choose the answer of the candidate that got the biggest applaud. Usually that choice would be whatever Newt had just said.

144 posted on 07/05/2012 7:07:59 PM PDT by tsowellfan (http://www.cafenetamerica.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

Thanks Barnacle, although you probably don’t need to waste your typing when some people wouldn’t care if the truth were posted right in front. Yes, he’s not as far behind as plenty of these people think, but to some people on forums, you are pretty much arguing and wasting any reasoning on the person.


145 posted on 07/05/2012 7:18:49 PM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Mitt was shoved down our throats day 1 by the GOPe.

Actually, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich really screwed up, kept getting worse, then quit while throwing temper tantrums incrementally on their attempts to get at Romney, but were they really trying to get Romney, or worried about the little pathetic Ron Paul ads? Really, the other guys against him in the GOP crashed and burned. What was really pathetic is the fact that genuinely substantial individuals with debating potential like Pwalenty or West weren’t up, and Gingrich was overhyped, sadly enough, and Santorum pretty much ran on the idea that he’s morally cleaner than Gingrich, which only lasted so long, and then Gingrich nor Santorum couldn’t yield and/or ally, so nobody liked either of them for a lack of this willingness to make the winning step.


146 posted on 07/05/2012 7:26:21 PM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Engraved-on-His-hands

LOL! now that is funny.


147 posted on 07/05/2012 8:15:17 PM PDT by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kristinn

Did you hear that Traitor Jim is working on a Book Deal? Yep. Something entitled “Profiles of Cowards.”

They asked Justice Kennedy if he wanted to be in the Chapter about the on again, off again, cowardly Liberal, but he couldn’t make up his mind.


148 posted on 07/05/2012 8:19:46 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

And...most of the conservatives on FR knew it immediately.
______________________________________________________________

No sh** Sherlock? There is a difference in knowing something immediately and waiting to express your opinion to a pack of media hounds who watch for every misstep you make. They will NOT let a GOP candidate for President say one sentence and walk away. They want a detailed statement. Romney’s dad made one misstatement in 1968 that doomed his Presidential bid. He said he had been brainwashed on Vietnam. Game over!!! Mitt probably remembers that every day of this campaign.

Have a nice day!


149 posted on 07/05/2012 9:22:16 PM PDT by pistolpackinpapa (Why is it that you never see any Obama bumper stickers on cars going to work in the mornings?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa

Romney’s dad really has nothing to do with it.

Anyone who didn’t realize this is a massive, intrusive expansion of government is not paying attention. And anyone who doesn’t instantly know the US Constitution was written to prevent massive, intrusive government has no business being in charge of our nation.


150 posted on 07/06/2012 4:05:07 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-152 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