‘Bigoted’: National Review Editors Call on GOP to ‘Dump Steve King’
As Rep. Steve King (R-IA) is receiving heavy backlash from both sides of the aisle in Congress and prominent conservative leaders after his latest comments about white nationalism, the National Review published an editorial, simply titled “Dump Steve King,” called for the Republican party to not support him in any way.
King recently asked the New York Times, “White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?” Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?”
National Review wrote King clearly did not learn from those history classes:
We doubt King paid much attention in those classes if he doesn’t realize that, from Lincoln to MLK, one of the glories of American history is how we finally shed our shameful racist past. King’s comments are odious and indefensible and follow a recent pattern of irresponsible demagogy on third-rail political issues. They don’t represent conservatism and he should be jettisoned by the Right.
In a statement responding to the Times article, King insisted that he “rejects those labels and the evil ideology that they define.” Notably, he didn’t dispute that he said what the Times printed. Instead, he said this: “America’s values are expressed in our founding documents, they are attainable by everyone and we take pride that people of all races, religions, and creeds from around the globe aspire to achieve them.” That’s fine as far as it goes. Yet King has done nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt or to credibly suggest that his comments to the Times were somehow a slip of the tongue.
“King has portrayed himself as the victim of ‘manufactured’ controversies by the media. But the onus is on politicians to be precise with their language and responsible with their associations on these issues,” they continued. “Instead, the congressman gives aid and comfort to those who claim that the United States and the Republican party more specifically are irredeemably racist. These are falsehoods that must be opposed, yet King has seemingly devoted more time and attention to giving them oxygen than to his mundane duties as a congressman.”
Pointing to how King has not been instrumental in actually doing anything with regards to border security, “There’s a vast gulf between King’s racial demagogy and the sober-minded advocacy of a more sensible immigration regime that balances the national interest with humanitarian concerns.”
“King may be clumsy, dangerous, bigoted, or some mix of the three. Whatever he is, he doesn’t deserve the support of conservatives.” the editors concluded.
Have a tip we should know? firstname.lastname@example.org