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

Skip to comments.

Who said Hilary Clinton was warned in advance she would not be in the White House in 2009?

Posted on 08/15/2011 11:46:13 AM PDT by MegaSilver

Apologies for the vanity post, but this question is really piquing me.

I remember reading something kind of wacky that claimed that sometime in 2007, Bill and Hilary Clinton were called before a panel of the top international financeers, mainstream press lords and other political bankrollers and told in no uncertain terms that they would not be going back into the White House in 2009. Does anyone have any leads to how this story began?

The naïve may well dismiss that anecdote as nothing more than a paranoid John Birch-type speculation, but while one should always be skeptical of conspiracy theories, there might be something to this one. I remember sitting in the doctor’s office in late 2004 with nothing but Newsweek to entertain me as I waited. Inside, a quarter page was devoted to profiling each new senator-elect in the country. Conspicuously, two full pages were devoted to profiling a most uninspiring and unremarkable new boy from Illinois (about whom I had heretofore read mostly only either here or in paleo-conservative publications). At that moment I knew in my heart they were going to make him our new deity in just four years and I resolved to quit the U.S. if he was elected.

He was elected, and I left the U.S. for the last time on 10 December 2008.

While wanting to avoid propagating paranoid fantasy, given the MSM’s role in the fabrication of Barak Obama’s career, totally from scratch and the undue space it devoted to a man who had absolutely nothing remarkable beyond a Harvard degree (not uncommon among new senators), I cannot help but wonder just who, behind the scenes, was so determined to "make" Obama. Something tells me the Chicago Machine couldn't possibly do it all alone.

Any sources, even paranoid ones for comparison?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: clintons; conspiracies; hilary; oneworldgovernment

1 posted on 08/15/2011 11:46:20 AM PDT by MegaSilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

Soros and Satan.


2 posted on 08/15/2011 11:48:22 AM PDT by bgill (just getting tagline ready for 6 months after you vote in Perry - Tried to warn you he's a RINO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver
Hillary didn't have anything to do with it.

Ubama's ACORN gang had the caucuses sewn up years ahead of time. They had a plan, and they executed it perfectly. They shut all the other delegates out.

Had it not been for ACORN's shenanigans, Hillary would have been the nominee.

3 posted on 08/15/2011 11:48:32 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Regulation is government control of capital, and government control of capital is socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

“I knew in my heart they were going to make him our new deity in just four years”

If you knew that in 2004, then why are you asking us any questions?


4 posted on 08/15/2011 11:50:10 AM PDT by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

It’s all about fraud, and it will take years to unravel the story, long after the conspirators are gone.


5 posted on 08/15/2011 11:53:11 AM PDT by Dr. Scarpetta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

46 Days And FR Is Still Short Of Its Goal

We Are In A Fight For Our Republic

Are You In Or Are You Out?

Support Free Republic

6 posted on 08/15/2011 11:53:38 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

what scares me now is that more and more former democrats have left the “left.” this will make the leftest thugs really have to “employ” stronger and more fraudulent tactics to “win” the nomination for “the one” again.
fasten your seat-belts it’s going to be a bumpy ride, betty.


7 posted on 08/15/2011 11:56:46 AM PDT by nightmarewhileawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver
a paranoid John Birch-type speculation

You mean like communism ISN'T dead. That if we don't wake up we'll have a communist in the White House?

8 posted on 08/15/2011 12:02:29 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

“Oh, let’s not quibble about who killed who...”

get yer butt back home and help us clean house.


9 posted on 08/15/2011 12:10:51 PM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Exactly, and every dem at the top knew it......You live by Acorn, you can die by Acorn, the primary breakdowns were pretty clear that something wasn’t right.


10 posted on 08/15/2011 12:16:00 PM PDT by Sonny M ("oderint dum metuant")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

You know, your post sounds like another crazy conspiratorial post at first, but you are 100% correct. Obama’s 11 highest winning percentages against Hillary were ALL from caucus contests. The odds of Obama having his top 11 winning percentages all coming from caucus contests and none from his primary wins is over 10,000 to one.


11 posted on 08/15/2011 12:22:59 PM PDT by Arec Barrwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver
1. Bill and Hillary Clinton were both extremely surprised and shocked that Hillary did not win (and in fact came in 3rd) in the 2008 Iowa Democratic caucuses. They did not have a heads-up about this. If the "bankrollers" had told Hillary in 2007 that she would not be going back to the White House, she would not have been able to raise any money to start her campaign.

2. It is common in both major parties that the person who gives the keynote speech at a convention, as Obama did in 2004, will be widely talked about as a candidate for the next election. This is especially true if the speech goes over well.

So your conspiracy theory should probably focus on the people in the Democratic party who picked Obama to give this speech and why they did so.

12 posted on 08/15/2011 12:25:04 PM PDT by wideminded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

sounds like either DEBKA file or the old Chuck Harder radio show to me


13 posted on 08/15/2011 12:33:07 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

And I’m still waiting for the medals to be pinned on James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles for their singularly brilliant expose to shine a very bright light on those scumbags.

Thank goodness for those young people and the others like them that I know are out there.


14 posted on 08/15/2011 12:34:45 PM PDT by SueRae (I can see November 2012 from my HOUSE!!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bgill
Soros and Satan.

But you repeat yourself. lol

15 posted on 08/15/2011 12:45:33 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
Chuck Harder...now that brings back some fond memories of the early 1990s for me. Down by the Swanee River. Made-in-USA catalogs. Shortwave radios. Ross Perot for president. CIA drug-running in Mena, Arkansas. Vince Foster. Larry Nichols. American Spectator. Black helicopters. And those are just a few things that come to mind when I think of Chuck Harder (before I even had a Internet connection at home).

How innocent those times seem now. Whatever happened to Chuck Harder anyways...is he still alive? Never mind, just checked his Wikipedia article and yes, he is still alive, but no longer broadcasting. Thanks for the memories anyhow...

16 posted on 08/15/2011 12:46:48 PM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ETL; MegaSilver
re:a paranoid John Birch-type speculation

-You mean like communism ISN'T dead. That if we don't wake up we'll have a communist in the White House?-


It's not paranoia if it's true.

McCarthy, Goldwater, and Birch were all correct. Communism changed tactics from a frontal charge to a form of soft brainwashing that some label Cultural Marxism.
17 posted on 08/15/2011 12:47:22 PM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sonny M
Photobucket

PDF File: apprx 417 KB
http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1225222922.pdf
________________________________________________________

"With the New Party’s rise and its entanglements with ACORN [Association of Community Organizers For Reform Now] came the rise of Barack Obama. According to Stanley Kurtz, “Acorn is the key modern successor of the radical 1960’s ‘New Left,’ with a ‘1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism’ to match.” And Barack Obama was ACORN’s lawyer."

http://archive.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/barack_obama_sought_the_new_partys_endorsement_knowing_it_was_a_radical_left_organization
________________________________________________________

From Obama's official website:

When Obama met with ACORN leaders in November, he reminded them of his history with ACORN and his beginnings in Illinois as a Project Vote organizer, a nonprofit focused on voter rights and education. Senator Obama said, "I come out of a grassroots organizing background. That's what I did for three and half years before I went to law school. That's the reason I moved to Chicago was to organize. So this is something that I know personally, the work you do, the importance of it. I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work.”

ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is the nation's largest community organization of low- and moderate-income families, with over 350,000 member families organized into 800 neighborhood chapters in 104 cities across the country. Since 1970 ACORN has taken action and won victories on issues of concern to its members, including better housing for first time homebuyers and tenants [Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac scandal! -ETL], living wages for low-wage workers, more investment in our communities from banks and governments, and better public schools.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGC7zm

18 posted on 08/15/2011 12:48:36 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ETL

As always, good work.


19 posted on 08/15/2011 12:50:42 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj
It's not paranoia if it's true.

Precisely my point. I should have added the s/ tag.

20 posted on 08/15/2011 12:51:57 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Thank you.


21 posted on 08/15/2011 12:52:39 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Just in case you or anyone else wants to read more about Obama, ACORN and the New Party...

October 08, 2008
Archives prove Obama was a New Party member (updated 2009?)
Thomas Lifson

Another piece in the puzzle of Barack Obama has been revealed, greatly strengthening the picture of a man groomed by an older generation of radical leftists for insertion into the American political process, trading on good looks, brains, educational pedigree, and the desire of the vast majority of the voting public to right the historical racial wrongs of the land.

The New Party was a radical left organization, established in 1992, to amalgamate far left groups and push the United States into socialism by forcing the Democratic Party to the left. It was an attempt to regroup the forces on the left in a new strategy to take power, burrowing from within. The party only lasted until 1998, when its strategy of "fusion" failed to withstand a Supreme Court ruling. But dissolving the party didn't stop the membership, including Barack Obama, from continuing to move the Democrats leftward with spectacular success.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/archives_prove_obama_was_a_new.html
________________________________________________________

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Obama File 41 Obama Was a New Party Member-Documentary Evidence -Trevor Loudon:
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-file-41-obama-was-new-party.html
________________________________________________________

NOTE: As of today, June 10, 2009, DiscoverTheNetworks.org/FrontPageMag.com profile doesn't (yet?) include the latest revelation that (President) Obama was actually a member of the New Party. HOWEVER, he does link to several articles on the left side of the page that apparently do go into it in detail.-ETL

PROFILE: NEW PARTY (NP)
* Marxist political coalition
* Was active from 1992-1998
* Endorsed Barack Obama for Illinois state senate seat in 1996

Co-founded in 1992 by Daniel Cantor (a former staffer for Jesse Jackson's 1988 presidential campaign) and Joel Rogers (a sociology and law professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison), the New Party was a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to endorse and elect leftist public officials -- most often Democrats. The New Party's short-term objective was to move the Democratic Party leftward, thereby setting the stage for the eventual rise of new Marxist third party.

Most New Party members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America and the militant organization ACORN. The party's Chicago chapter also included a large contingent from the Committees of Correspondence, a Marxist coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and Communist Party USA members.

The New Party's modus operandi included the political strategy of "electoral fusion," where it would nominate, for various political offices, candidates from other parties (usually Democrats), thereby enabling each of those candidates to occupy more than one ballot line in the voting booth. By so doing, the New Party often was able to influence candidates' platforms. (Fusion of this type is permitted in seven states -- Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Mississippi, New York, South Carolina, and Vermont -- but is common only in New York.)

Though Illinois was not one of the states that permitted electoral fusion, in 1995 Barack Obama nonetheless sought the New Party's endorsement for his 1996 state senate run. He was successful in obtaining that endorsement, and he used a number of New Party volunteers as campaign workers.

In 1996, three of the four candidates endorsed by the New Party won their electoral primaries. The three victors included Barack Obama (in the 13th State Senate District), Danny Davis (in the 7th Congressional District), and Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in the 7th Subcircuit Court. All four candidates attended an April 11, 1996 New Party membership meeting to express their gratitude for the party's support.

The New Party's various chapters similarly helped to elect dozens of other political candidates in a host of American cities.

One of the more notable New Party members was Carl Davidson, a Chicago-based Marxist who became a political supporter of Barack Obama in the mid-1990s.

In 1997 the New Party's influence declined precipitously after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that electoral fusion was not protected by the First Amendment's freedom of association clause. By 1998 the party was essentially defunct. Daniel Canto and other key party members went on to establish a new organization with similar ideals, the Working Families Party of New York.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434
________________________________________________________

The Columbus Free Press
New Party Online News - Elections Update

In the end the outcome was predictable, and predictably depressing. Voting for Clinton while simultaneously supporting the local Republican Congressman was not contradictory. My personal favorite line: With these results, I'd better get some of that medicinal marijuana...

So we're back where we were a few days ago. Gingrich sets the agenda, Clinton rotates it a few degrees to make it palatable. Our task, and there are no shortcuts, is to build enough power to produce better choices in the future.

A few more steps down that road were taken by local New Party chapters on Tuesday. Here are some highlights:

Overall: Campaign finance led the way, with overwhelming victories in Arkansas and Massachusetts. Not counting Washington, DC's ANC races, NP members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, bringing our overall total to 110 victories in 163 races.

Arkansas: As local favorite Bill Clinton swept to victory under cloud of tainted contributions, an NP and ACORN-backed statewide initiative for real campaign finance reform won an overwhelming victory, outpolling Clinton and Perot combined. The measure lowers contribution limits to $300 for statewide candidates and $100 for state legislative and local candidates, grants a tax credit for small donors, and tightens reporting and disclosure requirements. It'll be a big step in leveling the playing field for grassroots candidates against their corporate funded opponents. And in the first city-wide victory for a New Party candidate in Little Rock, member Paul Kelly won an at-large City Council seat. He'll join NP members Gloria Wilson and Willie Hinton on the Council, with the potential for a strong progressive caucus. In a second at-large City Council race, NP member Genevieve Stewart made a strong showing. She finished third against 2 entrenched incumbents but built her name recognition and a base of support for a possible ward race for City Council next year. Finally, in a classic New Party vs. the Right Wing matchup, member Jayne Cia handily defeated the Arkansas state chair of Empower America (Bill Bennett's organization) for a seat on the County Board.

Illinois: The first NP member heads to Congress, as Danny Davis wins an overwhelming 85% victory yesterday (he got a higher percentage of the vote in that district than the President). NP member and State Senate candidate Barack Obama won uncontested. Interestingly, it appears that the local Democratic machine is trying to distance itself from our folks. At a "Democratic Unity" march on Chicago's West Side, a flyer invited community members to join with a host of local democratic candidates. The only two west-side Democrats not listed: NP members Danny Davis (U.S. House candidate) and Michael Chandler (Alderman and Ward Committeeman). ..."

New Party
227 West 40th St. Suite 1303
New York, NY 10018
phone: 800-200-1294
fax: 212-302-5344
email: newparty@newparty.org
web site: http://www.newparty.org

http://www.freepress.org/Backup/UnixBackup/pubhtml/newparty/newpart5.html
________________________________________________________

"Although the New Party has been effectively defunct since the late 1990s, a website still exists."-wikipedia
http://www.newparty.org/
________________________________________________________

Inside Obama’s Acorn:
By their fruits ye shall know them

Stanley Kurtz, May 29, 2008

"What if Barack Obama’s most important radical connection has been hiding in plain sight all along? Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn), the largest radical group in America. If I told you Obama had close ties with MoveOn.org or Code Pink, you’d know what I was talking about. Acorn is at least as radical as these better-known groups, arguably more so. Yet because Acorn works locally, in carefully selected urban areas, its national profile is lower. Acorn likes it that way. And so, I’d wager, does Barack Obama."
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI
________________________________________________________

Guilty Party: ACORN, Obama, and the mortgage mess
Mona Charen, September 30, 2008
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mzk4MmVkNzA1NGQ2NGRkZjQ2YjNmYjdlODZkMmQ4N2I=
________________________________________________________

An ACORN Falls from the Tree: A congressional outrage
Ken Blackwell, September 29, 2008
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2Y5MTc0ZTAyMmE1Mjk3NGE3OWRiY2FkMjZlN2YxYzc=

22 posted on 08/15/2011 12:58:26 PM PDT by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wideminded
My theory is that the Clinton's pushed an Obama candidacy, never thinking that he could win.

Considering the shape of the GOP in 2008, the Dem nominee was a shoo-in to win; and I think they wanted Obama as the sacrificial lamb. They had already scared away the big names, and they need someone to give them a little substance in the primaries.

At his age, he had plenty of more years to make a strong run, and they sold it to him as a dry run.

Then Obama made some deals with the Superdelegates and the money people and stabbed the Clinton's in the back. As a way of placating them, (and not revealing the genesis of the Obama campaign) Hillary was given the State Department.

23 posted on 08/15/2011 1:12:37 PM PDT by Repealthe17thAmendment (Is this field required?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ETL

I do remember mention of his association with the New Party. Thanks for helping me expand my knowledge of that.


24 posted on 08/15/2011 1:26:02 PM PDT by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: caver
If you knew that in 2004, then why are you asking us any questions?

"Knew" in the instinctive, colloquial sense.

What I am wondering is whether anyone has read that same conspiracy theory: specifically, that there was a panel of Powers That Be reading out the Clintons and working against them. I cannot for the life of me remember where I heard that and I want to read it again.

If it's a conspiracy theory too rich to be true, you have to admit it's also too rich to be ignored.

25 posted on 08/15/2011 2:10:06 PM PDT by MegaSilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

The tide turned for Hillary when George Soros dumped her for Obama (in a surprise move that purportedly stunned the Clinton camp) in January 2007 on the eve of her historic presidential announcement. Who knows if there were high level meetings with the Clintons, but supposedly once Soros defected they knew the game was over.....


26 posted on 08/15/2011 2:14:07 PM PDT by RedMominBlueState
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideminded
Bill and Hillary Clinton were both extremely surprised and shocked that Hillary did not win (and in fact came in 3rd) in the 2008 Iowa Democratic caucuses. They did not have a heads-up about this. If the "bankrollers" had told Hillary in 2007 that she would not be going back to the White House, she would not have been able to raise any money to start her campaign.

It is common in both major parties that the person who gives the keynote speech at a convention, as Obama did in 2004, will be widely talked about as a candidate for the next election. This is especially true if the speech goes over well.

So your conspiracy theory should probably focus on the people in the Democratic party who picked Obama to give this speech and why they did so.

Important points, all of them. But as for the first point, I should qualify myself a bit: the Powers That Be need not be monolithic, nor need the "panel" in question be so formalized as, say, a gathering of Freemasonic Grand Masters.

But that panel conspiracy I mentioned wasn't mine. Someone else suggested it somewhere. I can't for the life of me remember who suggested it and that's what's bugging my brain. I don't even remember it well enough to remember what sort of demographic were these "Powers That Be"--top party officials, rich guys, or what.

27 posted on 08/15/2011 2:26:02 PM PDT by MegaSilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

From the conspiracy archives

http://www.menwithfoilhats.com/2010/01/obama-slinks-off-to-bilderberg-meeting-with-hillary-clinton/

Supposedly, this was when Hillary was told to stand down by the powers that be. Above article has all the details of the candidates ditching the MSM to attend the meeting in secret. Other local bloggers confirmed their presence at the meeting.


28 posted on 08/15/2011 2:45:19 PM PDT by Gen-X-Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arec Barrwin

bttt


29 posted on 08/15/2011 3:02:18 PM PDT by Pagey (B. Hussein Obama has no experience running anything, except his pedestrian mouth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver

I have to agree with you. How in the world did we get such a pathetic loser as Barry in the highest office in teh world. If there aren’t powerful people pushing things behind the scenes, the what else happened? I’m not a conspiracy nut, but nothing else explains it.


30 posted on 08/16/2011 2:56:51 AM PDT by caver (Obama: Home of the Whopper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: caver
I have to agree with you. How in the world did we get such a pathetic loser as Barry in the highest office in the world. If there aren’t powerful people pushing things behind the scenes, the what else happened? I’m not a conspiracy nut, but nothing else explains it.

Very important point. Not in living memory has a president been so conspicuously unintelligent as BHO. (Bush II? C'mon; his poor speaking skills and folksy demeanor were obviously an act, almost as much of an act as BHO's polished publicity.) So there is plenty of reason to believe that BHO's presidency was planned many years in advance by forces higher than himself, even if this has never been the case on such a large scale.

Money clearly played a huge role in it, arguably huger than in any previous election. Not that money hasn't always played a large role, and not that bribes, racketeering and outright electioneering fraud haven't been tried before and with success (c.f. 1960, JFK vs. Nixon--another incompetent disaster hoisted onto the American people courtesy the Chicago Machine! BHO and JFK are alike in many many ways) but never has the sheer volume of money been so awesome as it was in 2008.

31 posted on 08/16/2011 12:42:59 PM PDT by MegaSilver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MegaSilver
I don't know, but looking for it I did find this:

Hillary in 2008? No Way! By Joe Klein, Sunday, May 08, 2005

The Clintons were widely regarded as damaged goods, so a lot of Democrats were hunting for an alternative.

Harry Reid and other Senate Democrats encouraged Obama to run. Maybe they told Hillary that she didn't have a chance.

32 posted on 08/16/2011 1:30:03 PM PDT by x
[ 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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