Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hillary's plan to silence Internet journalists (Poe commentary)
World Net Daily ^ | July 6, 2005 | Richard Poe

Posted on 07/06/2005 4:37:31 AM PDT by ViLaLuz

Hillary's plan to silence Internet journalists

Posted: July 6, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Editor's note: The following is an eye-opening sneak preview of New York Times best-selling author Richard Poe's revealing book, "Hillary's Secret War." Whereas Edward Klein's book on the New York senator reveals previously unknown aspects of her personal life, Poe's expose focuses on how Hillary Clinton and the left's "shadow government" have labored to put her and her far-left agenda in the White House by controlling the still-uncensored flow of real news to Americans – via the Internet.

If that sounds too fantastic to be true, read on.

By Richard Poe
© 2005

On Feb. 11, 1998, Hillary Clinton told reporters that the Internet needed an "editing" or "gatekeeping" function. The World Wide Web was out of control, she said. It needed to be reined in. Five years later, Hillary's dream is on the verge of being realized.

The McCain-Feingold Act of 2002 empowers federal judges and Federal Election Commissioners to determine who is allowed to say what about political candidates in all electronic media. On Sept. 18, 2004, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered the FEC to extend its enforcement of McCain-Feingold to the Internet.

In the face of a massive outcry from bloggers, the FEC backed down from fully implementing Judge Kollar-Kotelly's order. However, the order stands. Sooner or later, it will be enforced.

Proposals are already on the table to require bloggers to register with the government and to report to the FEC any election-related blogging they undertake as "political contributions" subject to campaign finance law.

How did we get to this point?

The simple answer is that we failed to treat the Clinton threat as seriously as we once treated the Nixon threat. Nixon's abuses were aggressively investigated and punished. The Clintons' abuses were swept under the carpet.

Nixon's political machine evaporated following his resignation. The Clinton machine has only grown stronger with each passing year. Today, the Clintons effectively control the Democratic Party. The McCain-Feingold Act is largely their handiwork.

You won't hear about any of this from major media.

The Watergate myth

The recent emergence from anonymity of "Deep Throat" (aka former FBI Assistant Director W. Mark Felt) has brought forth an outpouring of nostalgia from major media. Their nostalgia is understandable. History has not been kind to the generation of journalists that brought us Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. A series of media scandals from Easongate to Rathergate has deflated its pretensions to objectivity and noble purpose. Of its former glory, only the Watergate Myth remains – the claim that major news media once saved our nation from dictatorship. Sadly for the Woodward and Bernstein generation, even the Watergate Myth has begun melting away under history's corrosive gaze.

The truth about Watergate is more nuanced than we were led to believe. We now know that Nixon's abuses, while real, were hardly unprecedented. The Kennedy and Johnson administrations abused the police powers of government on a grander scale than Nixon, most infamously in their surveillance and harassment of Martin Luther King. Even worse, the same news organizations which thump their chests over Nixon's ouster now collude unashamedly in the promotion and whitewashing of Hillary Rodham Clinton – a would-be president whose abuses of power arguably exceed Richard Nixon's.

"[M]ost people are afraid of invoking the wrath of Hillary Clinton, and so they will talk about her only on condition of anonymity ..." author Edward Klein recently told the National Review. "Like Nixon, Hillary is paranoid and has an enemies list. Like Nixon, Hillary has used FBI files against her enemies. Like Nixon, Hillary believes the ends justify the means. Like Nixon, Hillary has a penchant for doing illegal things."

Klein's heresy has aroused savage denouncements from Big Media, not least because they view Klein as a turncoat. He is one of their own. Having served more than ten years as editor in chief of the New York Times Magazine, from 1977 to 1987, Klein is a pillar of the Old Media establishment. But he has broken ranks with his colleagues. His book provides a refreshing break from the Hillarymania (Klein's word) which afflicts so many in the media world.

Yet even Klein's book reveals only a narrow sliver of the truth.

The whole truth about Hillary

The rise and fall of the Clinton co-presidency presents a parable of good vs. evil more dramatic, in some ways, than Nixon's ouster. Its heroes were real-life Davids facing a real-life Goliath – unlike Woodward and Bernstein, who represented a mighty media empire in the full flush of its power.

The heroes of the Clinton drama did not succeed in forcing their adversaries from office. But they saved America – at least temporarily – from a 16-year Clinton co-presidency. Hillary Clinton was registered with the FEC as a presidential candidate for the 2000 race. The outpouring of Clinton scandal coverage from Fox News, talk radio and the Internet forced her to back down from this plan.

Today, as Mrs. Clinton prepares to retake the White House in 2008, it is more vital than ever to clarify who she is and how she behaved the last time she occupied the West Wing.

It is also past time to give credit where it is due – to honor the New Media heroes who did what Woodward and Bernstein only pretended to do; who rose from the grass roots, with limited resources, and without Woodward and Bernstein's high-level connections; who defied an outlaw White House, endured government repression, and rescued our Republic from a fatal corruption.

These are the men and women of what I call the Web Underground – pioneers of Web news who began their work years before anyone heard of the blogosphere, dissident voices who got their message out through online subscription services such as Prodigy; newsgroups such as alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater; and later through websites such as,, and, as well as activist message boards such as and

My book, "Hillary's Secret War," tells their story. No one else has told it before.

An "All the President's Men" for the Internet generation

After Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein broke the Watergate story, Big Media lionized them. Simon & Schuster signed them to tell their story in the critically-acclaimed 1974 best-seller "All the President's Men." Warner Studios released a star-studded film version of the book in 1976, with Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman playing Woodward and Bernstein, respectively.

The book and film inspired a generation of young idealists to enroll in journalism school, hoping that they too could become crusaders for justice, as they imagined Woodward and Bernstein to have been.

I like to think of "Hillary's Secret War" as an "All the President's Men" for the Internet generation. It is my personal answer to Woodward and Bernstein.


A seemingly unbridgeable gap divides those who place their trust in New Media from those who rely on Old Media for their news. They may walk the same streets and inhabit the same neighborhoods, yet their beliefs about current events differ so sharply, they might as well live in parallel universes.

Those who rely on Old Media believe that Nixon posed a threat to our freedom, while the Clintons were guilty of nothing more than a bad marriage. The Web Underground and its audience know better. We know that the Clintons were caught red-handed in a raft of abuses as grave as those for which Nixon was driven from office. Yet, unlike Nixon, the Clintons were never held to account.

For instance, Nixon's articles of impeachment accused him of attempting (but failing) to persuade the Internal Revenue Service to audit hostile journalists and political foes. By contrast, the Clinton IRS freely audited scores of White House critics, including prominent journalists. When the political nature of the audits became impossible to deny, IRS Commissioner Margaret Milner Richardson – a friend of Hillary who had worked on the Clinton campaign – resigned, but never faced charges.

Nixon aide Charles Colson went to jail for leaking secret FBI background data to a reporter, in an effort to discredit Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg. By contrast, Clinton operatives commandeered over 1,000 FBI background files and got off scot-free. According to sworn witness testimony, Clinton aides entered the data from these files into a computer database. This information presumably remains in Clinton hands to this day. No one knows – nor seems to care – how they have used that data through the years.

Thanks to a veritable mass-media blackout, most Americans have no idea that such allegations were ever raised against the Clintons.

In a May 22, 2004, broadcast, Rush Limbaugh offered these thoughts on the war between Old and New Media – a war between rival storytellers whose outcome will largely determine what future generations know and believe about our time. Limbaugh said:

We're not going to win this in my lifetime ... [T]he history of this is going to be written long after all of us are buried and in heaven, because the people alive now who are writing about it are the people who are losing. They are not getting it right ... But at some point, folks ... we on the right, in the New Media, Internet, talk radio, Fox News ... we're going to become the majority, and the seismic shift, whenever that happens, let's just say 50 years from now or 75 ... it is those people who are not even born yet, who are going to look back and they're going to research this, without any bias of having been involved in it, and they're going to write the history of what's going on now. And it will be the accurate history.

In "Hillary's Secret War," I tried to begin the long, slow process of restoring to our national memory what really happened during the Clinton years. Perhaps I began the process too soon. Mighty forces guard the vaults where those memories lie hidden. They will not yield without a fight.

Spiked by Big Media

The Brahmins of Big Media, needless to say, extended a cooler reception to "Hillary's Secret War" than they had to Woodward and Bernstein – and not, I suspect, solely because I happen to be a much smaller fish. Granted, I barely rise to the level of plankton in the media food chain, but the people whose stories appear in "Hillary's Secret War" are killer whales. Their tale should have been told years ago – if not by me, then by others more worthy. Yet no one bothered. The difficulties I encountered in publishing "Hillary's Secret War" may help explain why.

After compelling me to perform several rewrites – during which process I was told, among other things, that my book contained too much "Hillary-bashing" – my publisher suddenly announced that it would not publish my book at all. The publisher was Crown Forum, a division of Random House.

What a strange time that was. The events that followed bore an eerie similarity to many of the stories recounted in "Hillary's Secret War." Like the dissident journalists profiled in my book, I suddenly found myself shut out of Big Media. Like the characters I had been writing about, I was now forced to seek help from the Web Underground.

Thank God for them. Had it not been for the direct intervention of some of the founding fathers of Web media, I daresay "Hillary's Secret War" would have faded into the very oblivion that Big Media had intended for it.

Joseph Farah published my book through his WND Books division (it is now published by Nelson Current). David Horowitz gave me a full-length author interview in NewsMax founder Christopher Ruddy published a ringing endorsement of "Hillary's Secret War" in NewsMax Magazine and in the online and print editions of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

FreeRepublic founder Jim Robinson honored me by writing the Foreword to "Hillary's Secret War." He also took the unprecedented step of posting an official call to his membership to, "Freep this Book," asking all Freepers who were able to purchase a copy of "Hillary's Secret War" or request that their local libraries purchase it.

Hillary's secret police

As mentioned earlier, Hillary Clinton told reporters on Feb. 11, 1998, that the Internet needed an "editing" or "gatekeeping" function. She neglected to mention at the press conference that she was already working on the problem. Indeed, she had been waging a secret war to silence Internet dissidents for the last four years. She continues waging it today.

In the Clinton White House, Hillary played the role of enforcer. She commanded what came to be known as the Clinton "secret police," a covert operation comparable to Nixon's Plumbers, dedicated to suppressing evidence of Clinton crimes. "Hillary is not merely an aider and abettor to this secret police operation. She has been its prime instigator and organizer," wrote the late Barbara Olson in her 1999 book "Hell to Pay."

Mrs. Olson was in a position to know. A former federal prosecutor, she served as chief investigative counsel for Congressman William F. Clinger Jr.'s House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, which probed Hillary's role in the Travelgate and Filegate scandals in 1995 and 1996.

During the Clinton years, journalists who probed too deeply into Clinton scandals walked a dangerous path. At the very least, they would be pulled from the Clinton beat, their stories discredited and their careers tarnished. In some cases, they were beaten, wiretapped, framed on criminal charges, fired and blacklisted. They experienced burglaries, IRS audits, smear campaigns and White-House-orchestrated lawsuits.

Some of the White House "secret police" were private detectives, such as Terry Lenzner, Jack Palladino and Anthony Pellicano. Others were Clinton loyalists embedded in federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, the CIA, the IRS, the National Transportation Safety Board and so on. Many of these people are still in place, and still doing the Clintons' dirty work. I call them the Shadow Team.

In their effort to suppress negative press coverage, the Clintons encountered little resistance from Big Media. Major news organizations were easily brought to heel, their parent companies being acutely vulnerable to federal regulatory action. Even Fox News and talk radio had to tread lightly on some issues, lest their FCC licenses receive unwelcome scrutiny.

The Internet, however, lay beyond Hillary's control.

Hillary's Shadow Team issued a secret report in 1995 titled "The Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce." It characterized the Internet as a dangerously "unregulated" medium, potentially devastating in its ability to bypass the controlled, corporate newspapers and networks. In Hillary's view, the Internet presented a grave threat to Clinton power. For that reason, her secret police persecuted Internet dissidents with special ferocity.

And so the Web Underground arose, taking up the mantle of crusading journalism which Big Media had forfeited, exposing wrongdoing that mainstream journalists dared not acknowledge.

Hillary's shadow government

The struggle continues today. The Clintons may be out of the White House, but Hillary's covert network remains powerfully alive.

In October 2004, David Horowitz and I published a three-part expose at called, "The Shadow Party." It revealed how Hillary Clinton and George Soros had joined forces to create a network of radical billionaires, non-profit foundations, 527 committees, public employee unions and leftwing nongovernmental organization's.

This "Shadow Party" has evolved into a veritable government-in-exile, with enormous influence in every sector of corporate, cultural, political, academic, financial and public life. Its most successful project to date has been the suppression of free speech through the McCain-Feingold Act.

On Nov. 30, 1994 , three weeks after Republicans swept Congress in the mid-term elections, George Soros announced in a speech that he wished to "do something about ... the distortion of our electoral process by the excessive use of TV advertising."

Eight months later, Democrat Sen. Russ Feingold obligingly rose on the Senate floor to denounce soft-money abuses, thus setting in motion the juggernaut that would ultimately give us the McCain-Feingold Act of March 27, 2002.

Also in 1994, Republican Sen. John McCain set up the Reform Institute for Campaign and Election Issues, which is heavily funded by Soros' Open Society Institute. This non-profit think-tank would become a nerve center for the campaign finance reform lobby.

Perhaps most significantly, 1994 marked the beginning of a $140-million scheme which would eventually become known as the "Pewgate" scandal. That year, a group of non-profit foundations associated with the Soros network began bankrolling "experts" and front groups whose purpose was to bamboozle Congress into thinking that millions of Americans were clamoring for "campaign finance reform" – even though they were not.

Ten years later, in March 2004, a former program officer of the Pew Charitable Trusts named Sean P. Treglia spilled the beans on the conspiracy to an appreciative audience of leftwing reporters and academics at USC's Annenberg School for Communication. New York Post reporter Ryan Sager obtained a videotape of the speech and broke the Pewgate story on March 17, 2005.

Campaign finance reform "didn't have a constituency," Treglia admitted on the tape. So the Pewgate conspirators set out to create one. Says Treglia,

The idea was to create an impression that a mass movement was afoot – that everywhere they [politicians] looked, in academic institutions, in the business community, in religious groups, in ethnic groups, everywhere, people were talking about reform.

To this end, a network of foundations – which included, among others, the Pew Charitable Trusts, Bill Moyers' Schumann Center for Media and Democracy and George Soros' Open Society Institute – dispensed $140 million between 1994 and 2004. Millions went to self-styled "good government" groups such as the Center for Public Integrity, Democracy 21 and John McCain's Reform Institute for Campaign and Election Issues.

Pewgate's tentacles reached even to the U.S. Supreme Court. Many of the legal arguments upon which the court based its Dec. 10, 2003, decision to uphold McCain-Feingold derived from data now deemed to have been fraudulent – data cooked up by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, a Soros-funded operation which received millions in Pewgate lucre.

"[A]lmost half the footnotes relied on by the Supreme Court in upholding [McCain-Feingold] are research funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts," Treglia crows in the videotape. Treglia currently sits on the board of the Pew-funded Institute for Policy, Democracy & the Internet, which seeks to tighten regulation of political speech on the Web.

Why Hillary matters

With the passage of McCain-Feingold, Soros' Shadow Party scored its first great victory. Now that same network busies itself grooming Hillary Clinton for the presidency.

For a first-term junior senator, Hillary has acquired extraordinary power on Capitol Hill. She can make or break virtually any of her fellow Democrats. As chairwoman of the Democratic Steering and Coordination Committee, she can block or approve her colleagues' committee assignments. More important, her political machine exercises de facto control over the party's purse strings. The Shadow Party raised some $300 million for Democrats during the 2004 election.

Regarding the Democratic Party, MoveOn PAC director and Soros operative Eli Pariser boasted after the last election, "Now it's our party. We bought it, we own it."

"Hillary Rodham Clinton has ... utterly [taken] over the Senate Democrats and the party itself – inside and out – and she has done it in a mere two years," marvels R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. in his 2004 book "Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to Power."

Hillary's secret police will no doubt play a role in smoothing the way for her planned return to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Likewise, the Internet will figure prominently in the effort to stop her.

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: 2014election; 2016election; bookreview; campaign; censorship; clinton; clintonfoundation; dictatorship; edwardklein; election2014; election2016; finance; hillary; hillary2008; hillaryssecretwar; hillarytruthfile; internet; netneutrality; pilloryhillary; reform; richardpoe; shadowgovernment; stalinstyleshowtrial; truthabouthillary
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 07/06/2005 4:37:32 AM PDT by ViLaLuz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
All freepers should get this book. I bought several for family members.
2 posted on 07/06/2005 4:40:00 AM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fooman; prairiebreeze; Mo1

An excellent book and you're should be read by all freepers.

Prairie and Mo1, thought you might be interested in this article. Jim Robinson wrote the foreward for the book.

3 posted on 07/06/2005 4:45:04 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland; Blurblogger


4 posted on 07/06/2005 4:46:22 AM PDT by bitt ('We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.' Victor Davis Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

"The McCain-Feingold Act of 2002 empowers federal judges and Federal Election Commissioners to determine who is allowed to say what about political candidates in all electronic media. On Sept. 18, 2004, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered the FEC to extend its enforcement of McCain-Feingold to the Internet.

In the face of a massive outcry from bloggers, the FEC backed down from fully implementing Judge Kollar-Kotelly's order. However, the order stands. Sooner or later, it will be enforced."

5 posted on 07/06/2005 4:48:00 AM PDT by ViLaLuz (Stop the ACLU - Support the Public Expression of Religion Act 2005 - Call your congressmen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Thanks for the ping. This sort of suppression of our freedoms is right up that Marxist b*tches' alley.

6 posted on 07/06/2005 4:48:52 AM PDT by prairiebreeze (THANK YOU to all our servicemen and women and veterans. We appreciate your service.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fooman
This will catch up to her.

What an evil corrupt creature.

7 posted on 07/06/2005 4:50:54 AM PDT by Northern Yankee (Freedom Needs A Soldier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

Finished the book a couple of weeks ago.

Lots of mis-direction in this article though, it comes down to GWB (stupidly) signing the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. Everyone thought that the supreme court would throw the law out on it's bum. Suprise!!!

8 posted on 07/06/2005 4:52:24 AM PDT by listenhillary (The interests of Muslims and interests of socialists coincide in the war against crusaders~OBL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
from, Sunday, February 22, 1998:


First lady just doesn't get it


Sunday, February 22, 1998

Hillary Clinton's call for Internet "gatekeeping' reveals a lack of understanding

The Net needs "gatekeeping," said Hillary Rodham Clinton to a select group of important people and special reporters last week, demonstrating yet again the government's tendency to be wrong.

"We are all going to have to rethink how we deal with this," she answered, "because there are always competing values. There's no free decision that I'm aware of anywhere in life, and certainly with technology that's the case."

Although technology's new developments are "exciting," Hillary continued, "There are a number of serious issues without any kind of editing function or gatekeeping function. What does it mean to have the right to defend your reputation, or to respond to what someone says?"


Actually, she does "get it." She saw the potential danger of the Internet to her own political ambitions. Six years later, she saw what it did to John Kerry's candidacy. She "gets it" alright and she wants/needs it stymied before her run in '08.

9 posted on 07/06/2005 5:06:08 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

What part of the First Amendment does she not get? It says...Congress shall make no law...What is becoming clear is that the Dems need to put CBS and their like back in the saddle again. Their first step is to close down, as best they can, the free speech on the internet. McCain/Finegold was their first step. The passed on it 5-4. One more Empty Souter on the Court will allow them to do almost anything.

10 posted on 07/06/2005 5:25:12 AM PDT by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

I don't like Hillary any more than the next person around here but this article makes her sound like Superman or something. It almsost sounds like she's in control of the world. If she is so powerful, then why isn't she in the White house right now. I do believe she is evil, but they are sure making her out to be a lot smarter and powerful than she really is.

11 posted on 07/06/2005 5:30:09 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

Hillry is a Demon. Ergo she drives the DemonRats to do things they ought not consider.

12 posted on 07/06/2005 5:35:05 AM PDT by ex-Texan (Mathew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz

If you dig deep enough you will find Hillary's fingerprints on the plan to get Rush Limbaugh.

The '08 election is going to make the '04 election seem like a walk in the park.

The entire Clinton dity trick m.o. with a few tricks added will be in play.

13 posted on 07/06/2005 5:36:09 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sport
There will be one major difference between the coming /08 election and that of 2004. In 2004 the Republicans were caught flatfooted by the Dems use of the 527's and fell far behind in that area. I believe the Dems actually out raised the Republicans in that election. The same mistake will not be made again. Contrary to what some may believe, the right does have the ability to learn, adapt and move their program down the road.
14 posted on 07/06/2005 5:53:03 AM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: kjo
What part of the First Amendment does she not get?

And what part of the 5th's takings clause didn't the Supreme's get? If you're counting on the Constitution and Bill of Rights to fight you're battles for you; those days are over, or at the very least, are on life support.

15 posted on 07/06/2005 6:03:43 AM PDT by AFreeBird (your mileage may vary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: caver
If she is so powerful, then why isn't she in the White house right now.

It's called biding your time. The new media was new and counters to its power and growing influence did not yet exist. It seems that that counterweight (in the form of oppressive laws) is growing.

Read Sun Tzu for an understanding.

16 posted on 07/06/2005 6:06:28 AM PDT by AFreeBird (your mileage may vary)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ViLaLuz
Thank you Richard Poe. I have book marked this article, and intend to buy the book. I remember very well when Hillary went after the Internet. (conservatives on the Internet not the liberals)

If Hillary is elected every Marxist idea she has ever learned will be put into practice against the conservatives. Her husband has already stated the he hates conservative Christians - they don't mess around calling him an adulterer and a liar. Other Christians make excuses for him. (Remember Graham saying Bill is so handsome women just fall at his feet?)

We are going to be in a raging war, and it is doubtful the Right will win this one, as we are few in number. By that time, the Mexicans will be voting, and Hillary will make a big hit with them. Conservatives have lost their voting power and Hillary knows it. She is out for blood, and she'll get it.

17 posted on 07/06/2005 6:18:36 AM PDT by swampfox98 (Michael Reagan: "It's time to stop the flood.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

"Read Sun Tzu for an understanding."

Being a bit of a military buff, I love Sun Tzu.

18 posted on 07/06/2005 6:19:56 AM PDT by caver (Yes, I did crawl out of a hole in the ground.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: swampfox98
We are going to be in a raging war, and it is doubtful the Right will win this one, as we are few in number.

If Hillary wins the Presidency I fear it will lead to a real civil war, of conservatives against liberals. It would only take a spark, one unacceptable Executive Order, to ignite.

19 posted on 07/06/2005 6:52:16 AM PDT by Max in Utah (By their works you shall know them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah

Get your guns because she will win ..I see it coming. The world is filled with morons who follow this b*tch like she's God..Get ready

20 posted on 07/06/2005 6:58:49 AM PDT by hineybona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 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
Topics · Post Article

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