Wow: GOP Rep. Delivered Ultimate Slap To Obama’s Face DURING SOTU- TV Cameras Hid It…

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, walked out of the State of the Union message Tuesday night to leave his seat empty in memory of the victims of abortion and to protest Barack Obama’s lawless presidency. The representative added that he would be in the Members’ chapel, praying that a better leader will follow the current chief executive.

As reported by Western Journalism, last week, President Obama announced that he would be leaving a seat next to his wife open to recognize the victims of gun violence. “They need the rest of us to speak for them. To tell their stories. To honor their memory,” the White House said in a written statement. 

Yesterday, Rep. King released a statement indicating that he too would be leaving an empty seat: his own. “I can’t abide being lectured to one last time,” he said. 

King further explained, “President Obama’s first official act, immediately upon his inauguration was to sign an executive order to accelerate abortions world-wide.” He continued, “The first tears we have seen him shed in seven years were for the victims of the tragic Sandy Hook School shooting. As far as we know, Obama has never shed a single tear for even one of the more than 9 million babies aborted under his watch. He is the most pro-abortion president ever.”

The Iowa representative juxtaposed the emotion the president displayed for the children killed at Sandy Hook with his vow last fall to veto the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, H.R. 3504 that would protect the lives, at least of those who survived the attempt on their lives, by abortionists.”

King closed his statement, announcing:

There will be another empty seat in the gallery during Obama’s last State of the Union address. I have reserved it to commemorate the lives of more than 55 million aborted babies, ‘the chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world.’

My seat on the floor of Congress will also be empty. I will be in the Member’s chapel praying for God to raise up a leader whom he will use to restore the Soul of America.

The representative also told Charlie Spiering in an interview Tuesday night that Obama’s execution of allegedly unconstitutional acts was an additional reason for him to avoid being lectured to by the president. “He took his oath of office twice…to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and he’s done anything but, even when he knew he was wrong,” said the conservative firebrand.

h/t: The Gateway Pundit

After Teaching About The Constitution, Here’s What A Congressman’s Aide Said To Me…

I recently taught a lesson on the “Constitutional Duty of the State and Local Legislators” in West Virginia. In the spirit of education, I wanted to share a portion of a conversation I had with an Aide from Rep. Alex Mooney’s office. (My humble apologies to the Aide, as I do not remember his name. I am sure he remembers this event, so if he would like me to update the article with his name, I will be more than happy to do so.)

Aide: “I really enjoyed your teaching. I just call exception to one thing. The purist attitude you teach is exactly why we cannot get anything done in Washington.”

Me: “I call exception to your application of the word purist. Setting aside principle for compromise is not ‘getting something done.’ Compromising principle is the very definition of immorality. I will never give anyone a pass or permission to be immoral.”

Let us look at this Aide’s statement from a logical, critical thinking perspective…

When I teach, I teach based upon history, fact, and law and the principles established by these factors. I do not teach based upon theory or opinion. History is history, not changed by opinion. An event either happened or it did not. Fact is fact, not subject to opinion. It is either true or not. The law is the law, also not subject to opinion. It is either the Supreme Law of the Land or it is not. History, Fact, and law are not subject to compromise. If you compromise them, you change the very nature of what they are; History becomes theory, Fact becomes opinion, and Law becomes suggestion.

The Constitution is not created upon theory, opinion, or suggestion. It is created based upon History, Fact, and Law. It is a document of time-tested, blood-learned Principles. By the very definition of Principle, it cannot change; it cannot be compromised as it is foundational. If you can change a principle, it is not really a principle, but a mutable guideline. The Supreme Law of the Land is NOT a mutable guideline, subject to compromise. To make such a compromise would be to transmute the very nature of the established American Constitutional Republic.

So when your Congressman calls you a purist for demanding compliance with the Constitution, the founding Principles and Supreme Law of the land, he is suggesting that you should give him permission to act contrary to Principle, Truth, and Law.

What are their antonyms?

Principle: Immorality

Truth: Lie

Law: Unlawful

Therefore, your Congressman wants you to allow him to compromise the Constitution, and is asking you for permission and expects you to give him a pass to act immorally, based upon a lie, and in an unlawful manner. Remember, we elect people to represent us. Are we really represented by immorality, lies, and lawlessness? Is that who we are as a people?

Additionally, when a government and its laws are based upon immorality, lies, and lawlessness, it is not a just government.

I am not asserting that a Congressman cannot engage in compromise. I am proving that there are some things that are not subject to compromise, and the Constitution is one of those things.

I will say it again: I will never give anyone permission to act immorally, based upon lie, and in an unlawful manner. So don’t even ask. I am not a “purist” by its derogatory application. I am a person who endeavors to behave in a moral, truthful and lawful manner. I expect nothing less from the one I have elected to represent me.

White House Chief Just Let Slip The Massive Thing Obama Has Planned BEFORE His Term Ends

Seven years after he authored a doomed-to-fail Executive Order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, President Barack Obama is making the closure of the facility a priority for his final year in office, a top aide said Sunday.

“He feels an obligation to his successor to close that, and that’s why we’re going to do it,” White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough said on Fox News Sunday.

In the wake of Obama’s use of executive orders on immigration and gun control, Fox show host Chris Wallace highlighted the presidents disregard for the role Congress has in legislative action.

“You are going to do it?,” Wallace said. “Whether the Congress says yes or not?”

“Sure we are,” McDonough responded.

“The president just said he’s going to present a plan to Congress and work with Congress to close it and then we’ll make some final determination,” McDonough said. “I’m not an ‘if when’ guy. I said we’re going to close it. [Obama] just said he’s going to present a plan to Congress to do that.”

In 2008, Obama said he wanted the facility closed, saying the center, which opened in 2002, had outlived its usefulness and was too costly. Last month, he cited new reasons.

Guantanamo has been an enormous recruitment tool for organizations like ISIL,” Obama said. “It’s part of how they rationalize and justify their demented, sick perpetration of violence on innocent people. And we can keep the American people safe while shutting down that operation.”

Despite Obama’s zeal for closing Gitmo, Congressional Republicans have balked and blocked the president’s plans, although Obama has reduced the population from a high of 241 to the current 107 detainees.

“We’ve had these legislative obstacles to our efforts to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay in place for some time,” said Josh Earnest, White House press secretary, last month. “What we have sought is congressional cooperation to remove those obstacles so we could move forward in a reasonable way consistent with our national security interests. We haven’t gotten it for years.”

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump has said he would take the opposite approach on Gitmo.

“I would leave it just the way it is, and I would probably fill it up with more people that are looking to kill us,” he has said, adding that it would cost up to $650 million to close the facility.

“It’s there, it’s secure, it’s inexpensive, because we’ve already, you know, paid for it. I mean, you know they’re talking about building new places, and doing tremendous amounts of work and effort and who knows what’s going to happen,” he added.

h/t: Fox News

House Members Are Doing This ONE THING To Defeat Obama Tomorrow

The political fight between congressional Republicans and the president will begin on Wednesday as Congress issues its final approval on a bill that repeals the Affordable Healthcare Act, known as ObamaCare, and strips money completely from Planned Parenthood.

Georgia Rep. Barry Loudermilk, who rode the Republican wave into office in 2012, said the bill will be sitting on President Barack Obama’s desk by the end of the week.

“Tomorrow, the House will make the final vote of the process – sending both measures to the President’s desk by the end of this week,” Loudermilk said on his Facebook page on Tuesday, Jan. 5.

He also said in his post that this move has been planned for several months, and indicated Republicans held back on fighting other issues in order to save this tactical move for these two issues.

“In the fall, we started a process that gives us one shot to bypass the senate filibuster rule, our best chance to pass conservative legislation. The two issues House Republicans chose to include in this one-time opportunity was to repeal Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood,” he posted.

Others said this will show voters that securing a GOP majority in 2012 was the right thing to do. Some hope this proves that Republicans are true to their campaign promises.

“We were sent to Congress to fight for the American people,” Missouri GOP Rep. Vicky Hartzler said. “They do not want their healthcare dictated to them by Washington. And they don’t want their tax dollars going to abortion providers. …If the president didn’t hear the people’s voices earlier, hopefully, he will through this bill.”

The bill can’t be amended by Democrats because the Senate approved it with special rules to prevent any changes. It is expected that Obama will veto the measure. Republicans have planned for that over the past several months as well, according to Republicans issuing talking points to the media. Congressional Republicans have enough votes to override a veto.

A vote for a veto-override is set for Jan. 22, which adds salt to the wound for Planned Parenthood and its supporters. That is the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, made in 1973. Typically, anti-abortion activists gather to march in the nation’s capital on that day.

Republicans have received harsh criticism from conservatives after they failed to include defunding Planned Parenthood in the $1.1 trillion omnibus bill passed in December. Republicans, including House Speaker Paul Ryan, defended the move, saying they didn’t want to complicate the budget bill.

Ryan said in a December interview that the plan was to deal with the matter in January.

“You’re going to see us put a bill on the president’s desk going after ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood so we’ll finally get a bill on his desk to veto,” Ryan commented in the interview.

Texas Gov. Hears About Obama’s Gun Grab, Launches EPIC 4-Word Warning To White House

During his 2008 campaign for president, Barack Obama made clear his aim to “fundamentally transform” the United States. One area that Obama has failed thus far to “fundamentally transform” is Americans Second Amendment rights. Now, as the end of his presidency is in sight, Obama is looking to put restrictions on the Second Amendment via Executive Order.

As President Obama announces that he is ready for the fight against legal guns, he is set to release a series of Executive Orders meant to put a dent in the gun industry and in the ability of Americans to purchase firearms.

As the White House hints at what some of his plans might include, Texas Governor Greg Abbott is not having any of it, immediately delivering a stark message on his Twitter account in defiance of the President’s plans.

With a tweet featuring an image based on the famed Gonzales flag, Abbott told the President that if he wants our guns, “come and take it.”

Abbott isn’t alone with his criticism. According to the Washington Post, the President has not bothered to ask for input from Republicans or pro-Second Amendment Democrats.

“The administration has not communicated with us, and we have not been briefed,” Doug ­Andres, a spokesman for House Speaker Paul Ryan told the Post. “We will consider options once we have information, but what seems apparent is none of these ideas would have prevented the recent atrocities. Our focus should be on the consistent causes of these acts–mental illnesses and terrorism–rather than infringing on law-abiding Americans’ constitutional rights.”

Finally, preparing itself for Obama’s attack on the Second Amendment, the National Rifle Association has put out a new video ad ripping Hillary Clinton for her anti-gun agenda.

h/t: Daily Caller