Steve King’s ‘default mechanism’

STEVE KING’S ‘DEFAULT MECHANISM’…. Rep. Steve King (R) has repeatedly accused President Obama of harboring some kind of anti-white animus. As the right-wing Iowan sees it, the president has a “default mechanism” that “breaks down on the side of favoring the minority.” This week, on a talk-radio show, King continued to push this line — and the rhetorical envelope.

“Looks to me like the USDA was out recruiting people that might have [racial bias] built into them when they arrived at the job… I call it a default mechanism that’s built within the Obama administration, breaks down on the side of favoring the minority, uh, because they’ve been rewarded politically for doing that.”

So, if I’m hearing King right, he’s arguing that the USDA hired Shirley Sherrod because the agency perceived her as a racist.

He wasn’t kidding.

On a related note, King was also on Fox News yesterday, talking about immigration policy. He’d been part of a committee hearing where faith-based groups made a religiously-based argument in support of a comprehensive immigration plan. King was unimpressed. (thanks to D.B. for the heads-up)

“You know, God gave us rights. Our Founding Fathers recognized that. It’s in our Declaration. It’s the foundational document of America. And God made all nations on Earth and decided when and where each nation would be. And that’s out of the book of acts; it’s in other places.

“So, we can’t be a nation if don’t have a border, and if we grant amnesty, we can’t define it as a border any longer, or ourselves as a nation any longer.”

King seems to be arguing here that we can’t pass comprehensive immigration reform — because it’s unbiblical. Or something.

I can’t help but wonder how much power and influence this nut will have if there’s a House Republican majority next year.

Support Nonprofit Journalism

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really works—and how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, I’ll make a donation