We are only now finding out how rigged the election was.

College: Fire professor who forced students to vote for Obama

10:48 AM 02/18/2013
Robby Soave

Reporter, The Daily Caller News Foundation

Ads by Google

A tenured professor who forced her students to sign pledges that they would vote for President Barack Obama last November should be fired, the college’s president recommended.

Sharon Sweet, an associate professor of mathematics at Brevard Community College in Florida, is guilty of electioneering, harassment, and incompetence, according to a three-month investigation into her classroom behavior leading up to the November election.

The Board of Trustees will hold a hearing on the matter, and then vote on whether to adopt President James Richey’s recommendation that Sweet be fired.

According to a report on the investigation:

“Professor Sweet strongly encouraged or mandated that students from several classes sign a pledge card that stated, ‘I pledge to vote for President Obama and Democrats up and down the ticket.’ She also misrepresented her intentions to multiple students, indicating at various times that she was conducting voter registration for the college, that the pledge cards were non-partisan voter registration forms, and that the pledge was a ‘statistical analysis.’”

In the eyes of the college, Sweet clearly created a hostile environment for students, since many feared their grades would be affected if they did not sign the pledge. She remains on paid leave until the board votes to fire her.

Philly poll workers partially cover Obama mural after court order, leaving logo and quote in view

Published November 06, 2012

FoxNews.com

  • philly_mural2.jpg

    Shown here is a mural of President Obama at a Philadelphia polling site before and after it was partially covered up following a judge’s order.

  • pollingsite_philly.jpg

    Shown here is a polling site in Philadelphia with a mural of President Obama.

Workers at a Philadelphia polling place, after being ordered by a judge to cover up a mural of President Obama “in its entirety,” slapped up a few pieces of paper that only partially covered his image — while leaving the Obama campaign logo and a quote from the current president in full view for voters.

The judge’s order followed a wave of complaints from Republican officials concerned the giant image of the president could influence voters at the site, a school in Ward 35.

The mural, positioned behind the voting machines, contains the words “change!” and “hope,” along with a quote from the president and painting of him. Poll workers only covered up part of the mural, though, leaving the Obama campaign logo and other parts of the image visible, as well as the Obama quote.

Poll workers claimed only the face had to be covered.

Republicans quickly drew attention to the image Tuesday morning, with one Mitt Romney spokesman tweeting: “Voters in Philly’s Ward 35 are being forced to cast their ballots next to this.”

“It is an absolute disgrace,” said Shannon Royer, deputy secretary for external affairs and elections in Pennsylvania. “Election materials and electioneering inside the polling place are prohibited by state law. This can be interpreted as trying to influence voters inside the polling place. I am told discussions are going on now about covering the mural.”

Pennsylvania election law states “no person within a polling place may electioneer or solicit votes for any political party, political body, or candidate, nor may any unauthorized written or  printed materials be posted within the polling place.”

School district spokesman Fernando Gallard told FoxNews.com the mural was “inspirational” and one of two that went up in 2009 following a student vote. “Not our call,” he said.

 

It was one of several controversies surfacing in Pennsylvania’s largest city on Election Day.

A Pennsylvania judge also issued an order Tuesday to reinstate Republican election officials across Philadelphia who allegedly were ejected or refused entry by on-site Democratic voting chief judges.

One Republican official claimed that “just under 70” Republican election officials were blocked from Philadelphia polling sites Tuesday morning by Democrats on site. One of them, the official claimed, “was shoved out of the polling place.”

“For this many inspectors to be ejected from polling places is rare, even for Philadelphia,” the official told FoxNews.com.

Philly GOP: Poll inspectors being ousted for Dems

November 6, 2012 | 8:31 am 

Court-appointed Republican poll inspectors are being forcibly removed from voting stations in some Philadelphia wards and replaced in some cases by Democratic inspectors and even members of the Black Panthers, according to GOP officials.

Secrets just received this memo from GOP officials:

The Philadelphia GOP is reporting that court appointed Minority (read GOP) Inspectors are being thrown out of polling locations in several Wards.

These Inspectors are election officials – again, court appointed — and are reportedly being thrown out by the Head Judges of Elections (these Judges are elected Democrats) and being replaced by Democrats.

This has happened at the following locations:

Ward 32, Div 13

Ward 43, Div 14

Ward 56, Div 1

Ward 56, Div 22

Ward 32, Div 28

Ward 32, Div 28

Ward 12, Div 17

Ward 39, Div 1

Ward 24, Div 9

Ward 18, Div 25

Ward 43, Div 14

Ward 29, Div 18

Ward 65, Div 19

Ward 20, Div 1

Ward 6, Div 11

Another official told Secrets: “one of our female inspectors was physically thrown out.”

Presidential candidate Mitt Romney decided at the last minute to make stops in Pennsylvania, believing that the race there was close enough that he could win.

OBAMA POSTER HANGING IN A FLORIDA POLLING PLACE

danjoseph's picture   By Dan Joseph
Tuesday, November 6, 2012 – 12:46pm
A poster featuring President Obama that read “Change the Atmosphere” was reported to be hanging on a wall at a Florida, polling station.

This photo was reportedly taken by a voter inside precinct 1321-1251 at Jack L McLean Community Center in Tallahassee, FL:

According to our source the banner has been reported to authorities.

Election Judge Wears Obama Cap While Checking in Voters in Obama’s Chicago Ward

12:48 PM, NOV 6, 2012 • BY Daniel Halper

Here’s a photo of an election judge checking in voters in Barack Obama’s Chicago ward–wearing an Obama baseball cap:

“This photo, taken by a voter this morning at the Ward 4, Precinct 37 polling place (1212 South Plymouth Court, Chicago), shows an election judge checking in voters while wearing an Obama hat,” a source writes. “Chicago’s 4th ward is home to President Barack Obama.”

The voter who took the photo says: “Woman in front of me also given an extra ballot.”

And the voter adds that she has in the past been an election observer abroad. “I had greater confidence votes mattered [in a foreign election in a transitioning country] than I did about my own vote today,” says the voter.

Dead And Still Voting

Thousands of dead Californians remain eligible to vote

By By Stephen Stock, Felipe Escamilla and Kevin Nious
|  Tuesday, Nov 6, 2012  |  Updated 11:25 AM PST
NBC Bay Area used the Social Security Administration s Death Master File to cross reference with the California state voter rolls using name, date of birth, and similar zip codes to find matches. We found over 25,000 in a report that Stephen Stock originally aired at 11 p.m on Nov. 5.

NBC Bay Area used the Social Security Administration s Death Master File to cross reference with the California state voter rolls using name, date of birth, and similar zip codes to find matches. We found over 25,000 in a report that Stephen Stock originally aired at 11 p.m on Nov. 5.

advertisement

An NBC Bay Area Investigation has uncovered thousands of California voters who remain on the voter rolls despite having  died several years ago.

That discovery prompted several state and Bay Area election officials to re-examine their records, after our investigation brought this issue to light.

NBC Bay Area used the Social Security Administration’s Death Master File to cross reference with the California state voter rolls using name, date of birth, and similar zip codes to find matches. We found over 25,000 questionable names still on the state voter rolls.

A closer look at the data revealed that some of the dead people were not only registered, but somehow, even voted, several years after their death. Sometimes, clerks say the mistake can purely be a clerical error, such as a misplaced signature or an outdated registration list that hadn’t been purged. Other times, though, the voting turns out to be fraud, clerks say, where family members vote on their dead relatives’ behalf.

Our findings came as no surprise to Bill Morrison of Palo Alto. For Morrison, every trip to the mailbox during election season brings constant reminders of his late wife, Carol Morrison, who died in 2004 after battling cancer.

Morrison continues to receive election materials including voter guides, pamphlets, and even ballots for his late wife.

“It angers me and it hurts because she’s dead,”  Morrison said.

According to state records, Carol has voted in the last two presidential elections, despite having passed away.

Morrison has made several attempts to notify the county that his wife died,  including sending back her ballots with “DECEASED” marked on the envelope.

“I don’t know why, when somebody dies. It doesn’t go to the elections and they just cross the name off of the list,”  Morrison said.

NBC Bay Area found several other examples, too. People like  Sara Schiffman of San Leandro who died in 2007 yet still voted in 2008, or former Hayward police officer  Frank Canela Tapis who has voted 8 times since 2005, though he died in 2001.

County election officials are responsible for removing names from the voter rolls.

NBC Bay Area gave Contra Costa County Clerk and Recorder Steve Weir a list of more than 100 voters in his county who may have passed away. Around half a dozen of these voters have recorded votes since their death.

“This is embarrassing,” Weir said. “This is something we should have caught.”

After reviewing our list, Weir was able to confirm that he had the death certificate in his office for at least four of these voters, yet the names still weren’t removed.

Weir attributes most of the posthumous votes to mistaken signatures and clerical errors. However, in at least one other case NBC Bay Area uncovered, Weir suspects something else could be afoot. Though he wouldn’t be specific, he referred one of the cases to the district attorney for a potential fraud investigation.

Barry Garner serves as the registrar of Voters in Santa Clara County where NBC Bay Area found the names of 83 people who are dead and still have active voter registration files.

“If we have found someone who has signed someone’s name fraudulently we will turn it over to the D.A.”  Garner said.

Some of the matches between the two databases appear to be a coincidence. For example, two people who were born on the exact same day, with the exact same name living in the exact same state.   

While many of the names we found should have been removed from the rolls, it is important to note  that 25,000 people makes make up less than 0.2 percent of the entire state electorate.

Still, Garner believes that one questionable vote is one too many.

“Too many people have sacrificed and died for the opportunity to vote in this country,”  Garner said.

The lag between when a person dies and when they are removed them from the voter rolls extends beyond California.

A recent study by the Pew Center on the States found 1.8 million dead people still on the active rolls nationwide.

“I don’t think the issue is how this is possible. It’s actually hard to imagine this not occurring given the fractured data that we have throughout this country,” said David Becker with Pew Center on the States. “This isn’t a Democrat problem this isn’t a Republican problem.  (Mario’s note:  In such a heavily Democratic State it is in fact a Republican problem!!) This is a problem for our system. It’s a problem that affects everyone. We need to make sure that the information is accurate.”

All of the Bay Area election officials we spoke with confirmed finding names on their rolls that should have been removed before we contacted them and say they will do a thorough investigation of every name we send them after Tuesday’s election and have flagged the ballots for voters that they have been able to confirm are dead before Election Day.

County officials stressed that they count on the public to help keep their voter rolls up to date. They request that anyone who knows of a person that has died, notify your local county election office so that their name can be removed.

Report: Woman Wearing ‘MIT’ Shirt Barred from Voting in Florida

3:24 PM, NOV 6, 2012 • BY Daniel Halper

A woman wearing an MIT t-shirt was barred from voting Florida, according to a local report. MIT stands for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, not Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

“A woman attempting to vote in West Boca Raton this morning was initially prohibited from entering the polling place because she was wearing a tee shirt with the letters MIT,”

“BocaNewsNow.com has heard from multiple sources that an election supervisor at the polling place ultimately realized that MIT stands for “Massachusetts Institute of Technology” — a school where students tend to know how to spell — and was not a campaign shirt for the Republican candidate, who spells his name MITT. Campaigning is not permitted within several yards of a polling place.”

Fortunately, the woman was ultimately allowed to vote. “The woman was ultimately allowed to vote,” the local report reads.

THREATENED WITH A GUN!

PICKET: GOP – Poll watcher in Detroit threatened with gun, 911 call rejected

By Kerry Picket – The Washington Times November 6, 2012, 12:29PM

Tensions are high all over the country at the polls today. The Michigan Republican Party is alleging that a poll watcher in Detroit on Tuesday morning was threatened with a gun. According to the Michigan GOP the poll watcher’s 911 call was rejected. Below is a press release from Michigan Republican Party spokesman Matt Frendeway:

This morning, a legally credentialed poll watcher was threatened and intimidated while attempting to perform his legally allowed duties of observing the election process at precinct polling location 289 in Detroit. The poll watcher, a lawyer, was confronted by a voter in line, who demanded the poll watcher produce his credentials, which he did.

However, the voter said that wasn’t good enough and that he had “a badge and a gun” and told the poll watcher get out of the precinct. Rather than allow the situation to escalate, the poll watcher left before the voter produced a badge or brandished a gun. Fearing for his safety, the poll watcher exited and called 911, however the Detroit Police refused to respond to the call – neglecting the fact that a voter alleged to have a ‘badge’ and a ‘gun’ in a precinct, putting other voters at risk.

Michigan Republican Party Chairman Bobby Schostak issued a statement concerning the issue the following statement:“Poll watchers, precinct workers and voters should not be put in danger when performing their duties, our Republic requires free and fair elections.

“I can only hope that this morning’s outlandish, reckless and dangerous behavior, was not part of a coordinated effort by the Democratic Party and therefore, I am calling on Mark Brewer, Democratic Party Chairman, to condemn these threats of violence and pledge to ensuring all election workers, volunteers and citizens remain safe.”

Where was Obama while Americans were being killed?

The Absentee Commander in Chief

The Defense secretary told the president that Americans in Benghazi were under attack. Then: nothing.

  • By WILLIAM KRISTOL AND PETER WEHNER

We’ve both had the honor to work in the White House. We’ve seen presidents, vice presidents, chiefs of staff and national security advisers during moments of international crisis. We know that in these moments human beings make mistakes. There are failures of communication and errors of judgment. Perfection certainly isn’t the standard to which policy makers should be held.

But there are standards. If Americans are under attack, presidential attention must be paid. Due diligence must be demonstrated. A president must take care that his administration does everything it can do. On Sept. 11, 2012, as Americans were under attack in Benghazi, Libya, President Obama failed in his basic responsibility as president and commander in chief. In a crisis, the president went AWOL.

image

Associated PressPresident Barack Obama shakes hands with outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

Thanks to the congressional testimony of outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey late last week, we know they met with President Obama on Sept. 11 at 5 p.m. in a pre-scheduled meeting, when they informed the president about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. The meeting lasted about a half-hour. Mr. Panetta said they spent roughly 20 minutes of the session briefing the president on the chaos at the American Embassy in Cairo and the attack in Benghazi, which eventually cost the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, security personnel Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, and information officer Sean Smith.

Secretary Panetta said the president left operational details, including determination of what resources were available to help the Americans under siege, “up to us.” We also learned that President Obama did not communicate in any way with Mr. Panetta or Gen. Dempsey the rest of that evening or that night. Indeed, Mr. Panetta and Gen. Dempsey testified they had no further contact at all with anyone in the White House that evening—or, for that matter, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

That’s not all we discovered. We now know that despite Gen. Dempsey having been informed of Ambassador Stevens’s repeated warnings about the rise of terrorist elements in Benghazi, no forces were put in place or made ready nearby to respond to possible trouble. It also seems that during the actual attacks in Benghazi, which the administration followed in real time and which lasted for some eight hours, not a single major military asset was deployed to help rescue Americans under assault.

And we learned one other thing: Messrs. Panetta and Dempsey both knew on the night of the assault that it was a terrorist attack. This didn’t prevent President Obama, Secretary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice from peddling a false version of events in the days and even weeks that followed, as the administration called the incident spontaneous, said there was no evidence of a coordinated terrorist attack and blamed the violence on an anti-Muslim video. So the White House, having failed to ensure that anything was done during the attack, went on to mislead the nation afterward.

Why the deception? Presumably for two reasons. The first is that the true account of events undercut the president’s claim during the campaign that al Qaeda was severely weakened in the aftermath of the killing of Osama bin Laden. The second is that a true account of what happened in Benghazi that night would have revealed that the president and his top national-security advisers did not treat a lethal attack by Islamic terrorists on Americans as a crisis. The commander in chief not only didn’t convene a meeting in the Situation Room; he didn’t even bother to call his Defense secretary or the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Not a single presidential finger was lifted to help Americans under attack.

This is an embarrassment and a disgrace. Is it too much to hope that President Obama is privately ashamed of his inattention and passivity that night? And that he has resolved, and instructed his senior staff, to take care that he not be derelict in his duty as commander in chief ever again?

Mr. Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, served in the George H.W. Bush White House. Mr. Wehner, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the George W. Bush White House.

Left there to die

Mario’s Note:

In 2 Kings 19 Hezekiah received the most terrifying letter he would ever receive.  King Sennacherib had sent a vast army against Judah.  Judah had zero chance of victory.  Hezekiah went to the House of God to pray.

2 Kings 19:  14 “And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it; and Hezekiah went up to the house of the Lord, and spread it before the Lord. 15 Then Hezekiah prayed before the Lord, and said: “O Lord God of Israel, the One who dwells between the cherubim, You are God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth. 16 Incline Your ear, O Lord, and hear; open Your eyes, O Lord, and see; and hear the words of Sennacherib, which he has sent to reproach the living God.”

The key to prayer is to have as clear a grasp of the crisis as possible.  Hezekiah minced no words about what Sennacherib was and what his intention was.

The answer to the tyrant came by prophecy by Isaiah in verses 27,28: “But I know your dwelling place, Your going out and your coming in, And your rage against Me.28 Because your rage against Me and your tumult Have come up to My ears, Therefore I will put My hook in your nose And My bridle in your lips, And I will turn you back By the way which you came.”

In the Benghazi scandal it is clear that we must grasp of the facts in prayer: A crime far greater than Watergate has been committed.  For political reasons, Obama was AWOL as Americans were dying. Why Obama committed this crime is clear: As William Kristol and Peter Wehner said, “Why the deception? Presumably for two reasons. The first is that the true account of events undercut the president’s claim during the campaign that al Qaeda was severely weakened in the aftermath of the killing of Osama bin Laden. The second is that a true account of what happened in Benghazi that night would have revealed that the president and his top national-security advisers did not treat a lethal attack by Islamic terrorists on Americans as a crisis.”

In order for all true patriotic Christians to pray today they must understand that Constitutional Democracy has been removed in America.  We are indeed living under tyranny.  When the president commits a crime greater than Watergate and there is not so much as a peep from the media we are under tyranny.  When no uncomfortable facts about Obama can be investigated and those that speak up are ostracized and threatened then we are under tyranny.

When we admit that our Constitution has been overruled we have hope in prayer.  Like Hezekiah, we must call it what it is and then ask the Living God for help!  All of those who would remove the America of our Founding Fathers, the America that God has blessed, and the America that protects Israel face the same retribution as Sennacherib if we pray honestly and fervently.

Here is how Sennacherib’s story ended:  Verse 35-37 “And it came to pass on a certain night that the angel of the Lord went out, and killed in the camp of the Assyrians one hundred and eighty-five thousand; and when people arose early in the morning, there were the corpses—all dead. 36 So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and went away, returned home, and remained at Nineveh. 37 Now it came to pass, as he was worshiping in the temple of Nisroch his god, that his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer struck him down with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. Then Esarhaddon his son reigned in his place.”

Only God can decide Obama’s fate but through prayer we must for the sake of the nation pray that he is brought into account, brought under the rule of law, and his abuse of power is exposed.

Where was Obama while Americans were being killed?

The Absentee Commander in Chief

The Defense secretary told the president that Americans in Benghazi were under attack. Then: nothing.

  • By WILLIAM KRISTOL AND PETER WEHNER

We’ve both had the honor to work in the White House. We’ve seen presidents, vice presidents, chiefs of staff and national security advisers during moments of international crisis. We know that in these moments human beings make mistakes. There are failures of communication and errors of judgment. Perfection certainly isn’t the standard to which policy makers should be held.

But there are standards. If Americans are under attack, presidential attention must be paid. Due diligence must be demonstrated. A president must take care that his administration does everything it can do. On Sept. 11, 2012, as Americans were under attack in Benghazi, Libya, President Obama failed in his basic responsibility as president and commander in chief. In a crisis, the president went AWOL.

image

Associated PressPresident Barack Obama shakes hands with outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

Thanks to the congressional testimony of outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey late last week, we know they met with President Obama on Sept. 11 at 5 p.m. in a pre-scheduled meeting, when they informed the president about the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. The meeting lasted about a half-hour. Mr. Panetta said they spent roughly 20 minutes of the session briefing the president on the chaos at the American Embassy in Cairo and the attack in Benghazi, which eventually cost the lives of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, security personnel Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, and information officer Sean Smith.

Secretary Panetta said the president left operational details, including determination of what resources were available to help the Americans under siege, “up to us.” We also learned that President Obama did not communicate in any way with Mr. Panetta or Gen. Dempsey the rest of that evening or that night. Indeed, Mr. Panetta and Gen. Dempsey testified they had no further contact at all with anyone in the White House that evening—or, for that matter, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

That’s not all we discovered. We now know that despite Gen. Dempsey having been informed of Ambassador Stevens’s repeated warnings about the rise of terrorist elements in Benghazi, no forces were put in place or made ready nearby to respond to possible trouble. It also seems that during the actual attacks in Benghazi, which the administration followed in real time and which lasted for some eight hours, not a single major military asset was deployed to help rescue Americans under assault.

And we learned one other thing: Messrs. Panetta and Dempsey both knew on the night of the assault that it was a terrorist attack. This didn’t prevent President Obama, Secretary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice from peddling a false version of events in the days and even weeks that followed, as the administration called the incident spontaneous, said there was no evidence of a coordinated terrorist attack and blamed the violence on an anti-Muslim video. So the White House, having failed to ensure that anything was done during the attack, went on to mislead the nation afterward.

Why the deception? Presumably for two reasons. The first is that the true account of events undercut the president’s claim during the campaign that al Qaeda was severely weakened in the aftermath of the killing of Osama bin Laden. The second is that a true account of what happened in Benghazi that night would have revealed that the president and his top national-security advisers did not treat a lethal attack by Islamic terrorists on Americans as a crisis. The commander in chief not only didn’t convene a meeting in the Situation Room; he didn’t even bother to call his Defense secretary or the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Not a single presidential finger was lifted to help Americans under attack.

This is an embarrassment and a disgrace. Is it too much to hope that President Obama is privately ashamed of his inattention and passivity that night? And that he has resolved, and instructed his senior staff, to take care that he not be derelict in his duty as commander in chief ever again?

Mr. Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, served in the George H.W. Bush White House. Mr. Wehner, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the George W. Bush White House.

Left there to die

Mario’s Note:

In 2 Kings 19 Hezekiah received the most terrifying letter he would ever receive.  King Sennacherib had sent a vast army against Judah.  Judah had zero chance of victory.  Hezekiah went to the House of God to pray.

2 Kings 19:  14 “And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it; and Hezekiah went up to the house of the Lord, and spread it before the Lord. 15 Then Hezekiah prayed before the Lord, and said: “O Lord God of Israel, the One who dwells between the cherubim, You are God, You alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth. 16 Incline Your ear, O Lord, and hear; open Your eyes, O Lord, and see; and hear the words of Sennacherib, which he has sent to reproach the living God.”

The key to prayer is to have as clear a grasp of the crisis as possible.  Hezekiah minced no words about what Sennacherib was and what his intention was.

The answer to the tyrant came by prophecy by Isaiah in verses 27,28: “But I know your dwelling place, Your going out and your coming in, And your rage against Me.28 Because your rage against Me and your tumult Have come up to My ears, Therefore I will put My hook in your nose And My bridle in your lips, And I will turn you back By the way which you came.”

In the Benghazi scandal it is clear that we must grasp of the facts in prayer: A crime far greater than Watergate has been committed.  For political reasons, Obama was AWOL as Americans were dying. Why Obama committed this crime is clear: As William Kristol and Peter Wehner said, “Why the deception? Presumably for two reasons. The first is that the true account of events undercut the president’s claim during the campaign that al Qaeda was severely weakened in the aftermath of the killing of Osama bin Laden. The second is that a true account of what happened in Benghazi that night would have revealed that the president and his top national-security advisers did not treat a lethal attack by Islamic terrorists on Americans as a crisis.”

In order for all true patriotic Christians to pray today they must understand that Constitutional Democracy has been removed in America.  We are indeed living under tyranny.  When the president commits a crime greater than Watergate and there is not so much as a peep from the media we are under tyranny.  When no uncomfortable facts about Obama can be investigated and those that speak up are ostracized and threatened then we are under tyranny.

When we admit that our Constitution has been overruled we have hope in prayer.  Like Hezekiah, we must call it what it is and then ask the Living God for help!  All of those who would remove the America of our Founding Fathers, the America that God has blessed, and the America that protects Israel face the same retribution as Sennacherib if we pray honestly and fervently.

Here is how Sennacherib’s story ended:  Verse 35-37 “And it came to pass on a certain night that the angel of the Lord went out, and killed in the camp of the Assyrians one hundred and eighty-five thousand; and when people arose early in the morning, there were the corpses—all dead. 36 So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and went away, returned home, and remained at Nineveh. 37 Now it came to pass, as he was worshiping in the temple of Nisroch his god, that his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer struck him down with the sword; and they escaped into the land of Ararat. Then Esarhaddon his son reigned in his place.”

Only God can decide Obama’s fate but through prayer we must for the sake of the nation pray that he is brought into account, brought under the rule of law, and his abuse of power is exposed.

The American Revolution was against British gun control.

 british gun control

The American Revolution was against British gun control.

  • BY: CARL HERMAN

The following excerpt of illuminating history of gun control in America is by David B. Kopel,Research Director, Independence Institute, and Adjunct Professor of Advanced Constitutional Law, Denver University, Sturm College of Law.

This Article reviews the British gun control program that precipitated the American Revolution: the 1774 import ban on firearms and gunpowder; the 1774-75 confiscations of firearms and gunpowder; and the use of violence to effectuate the confiscations. It was these events that changed a situation of political tension into a shooting war. Each of these British abuses provides insights into the scope of the modern Second Amendment.

Furious at the December 1773 Boston Tea Party, Parliament in 1774 passed the Coercive Acts. The particular provisions of the Coercive Acts were offensive to Americans, but it was the possibility that the British might deploy the army to enforce them that primed many colonists for armed resistance. The Patriots of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, resolved: “That in the event of Great Britain attempting to force unjust laws upon us by the strength of arms, our cause we leave to heaven and our rifles.” A South Carolina newspaper essay, reprinted in Virginia, urged that any law that had to be enforced by the military was necessarily illegitimate.

The Royal Governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, had forbidden town meetings from taking place more than once a year. When he dispatched the Redcoats to break up an illegal town meeting in Salem, 3000 armed Americans appeared in response, and the British retreated. Gage’s aide John Andrews explained that everyone in the area aged 16 years or older owned a gun and plenty of gunpowder.

Military rule would be difficult to impose on an armed populace. Gage had only 2,000 troops in Boston. There were thousands of armed men in Boston alone, and more in the surrounding area. One response to the problem was to deprive the Americans of gunpowder.

Modern “smokeless” gunpowder is stable under most conditions. The “black powder” of the 18th Century was far more volatile. Accordingly, large quantities of black powder were often stored in a town’s “powder house,” typically a reinforced brick building. The powder house would hold merchants’ reserves, large quantities stored by individuals, as well as powder for use by the local militia. Although colonial laws generally required militiamen (and sometimes all householders, too) to have their own firearm and a minimum quantity of powder, not everyone could afford it. Consequently, the government sometimes supplied “public arms” and powder to individual militiamen. Policies varied on whether militiamen who had been given public arms would keep them at home. Public arms would often be stored in a special armory, which might also be the powder house.

Before dawn on September 1, 1774, 260 of Gage’s Redcoats sailed up the Mystic River and seized hundreds of barrels of powder from the Charlestown powder house.

The “Powder Alarm,” as it became known, was a serious provocation. By the end of the day, 20,000 militiamen had mobilized and started marching towards Boston. In Connecticut and Western Massachusetts, rumors quickly spread that the Powder Alarm had actually involved fighting in the streets of Boston. More accurate reports reached the militia companies before that militia reached Boston, and so the war did not begin in September. The message, though, was unmistakable: If the British used violence to seize arms or powder, the Americans would treat that violent seizure as an act of war, and would fight. And that is exactly what happened several months later, on April 19, 1775.

 

Obama to demolish Ronald Reagan’s boyhood home in Chicago.

Reagan’s home could become a parking lot for Obama’s library

Is the scheduled demolition of Ronald Reagan's Chicago home politically motivated?  Photo: VOA
Friday, January 25, 2013 – Bill Kelly’s Truth Squad by William Kelly
William Kelly


CHICAGO, Illinois, January 25, 2013 – A new Cold War is brewing here in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood and it has nothing to do with the frigid temperature.

The apartment building at 832 E. 57th Street was once the Chicago home of a boy who would become a President.

No, it’s not Barack Obama of Hawaii. It was at the apartment’s first floor window that a young Ronald Reagan looked out upon the world. 

But some powerful Chicagoans are planning to demolish Reagan’s historic home. Is it politically motivated? Is Mayor Rahm Emanuel behind the move? 

Reagan as a child.

It was a different world back in 1915. Reagan’s family had moved here from Tampico, Illinois. His father had gotten a job at the famed Marshall Field’s – now only a memory. A coin-operated gas lamp was the only home’s only source of heat.

But it didn’t stop a young “Dutch” Reagan from dreaming.

Young Reagan would watch the horse-drawn fire engines galloping wildly down the streets to save the day and he decided that he, too, would become a firefighter. It was here, too, that he survived a bout with pneumonia – he had the fight in him even then.

You can almost imagine him skipping down these streets, playing with his brother Neil,  whose nickname was “Moon.”

What makes a man great? And what makes a great president? Historians pen large tomes about that. Every man is the sum of his experiences – his loves, his losses, his achievements, and failures. How he sees the world and how the world sees him.

And this place – this place was a part of Reagan’s formative years – what he discovered and experienced here in Chicago helped him on the way to greatness.

Now, the University of Chicago Medical Center has announced plans to turn Reagan’s Chicago home into a parking lot.

In 2012, the Commission on Chicago Landmarks denied Reagan’s home landmark status. The University of Chicago set demolition for January and the bulldozers quickly moved in. The wrecking balls are ready.

A “plaque” could mark the historic spot instead, say university representatives.

In January, Reagan’s home was granted a last minute stay of execution by the City of Chicago, at least for now. But the clock is ticking and it could be 90 days or less before demolition begins.

While the university is planning to kill Reagan’s home, University of Chicago is also aggressively lobbying to be the site of President Barack Obama’s presidential library.

Could the Reagan site become a parking lot for Obama’s library? Opponents of the demolition say yes.

There is good reason for them to be suspicious.

First Lady Michelle Obama and the president’s close adviser Valerie Jarrett are former top executives of the University of Chicago Medical Center. President Obama was a lecturer at the law school for twelve years. And let’s not forget, Obama’s Hyde Park home is here too. 

This is still Chicago. Barack Obama’s Chicago. Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago.

It is safe to say that Democrats don’t want any reminders of a Republican president named Reagan and his glory days a stone’s throw from a future Obama Presidential Library.

Better to raze the building now, than later. But do they have the right to erase Ronald Reagan from Chicago history?

Only time – and that wrecking ball – will tell.

William J. Kelly is an Emmy award-winning TV producer and conservative columnist. He is also a contributor to the American Spectator and Breitbart.com. He is a native from Chicago’s Southside.