I figure he'd want 'In God We Trust' in the visitor center, even if he had to compromise by placing a marker there that recognized the work of slave labor to build the capital building. That's called compromise, it's what politics is all about. As a Christian, I appreciate his desire to honor God, yet I also think it's a little ironic and hypocritical for us to try to put on airs about being such a pious, religious people yet deny our collective sin of slavery.
Republican Teddy Roosevelt opposed having 'In God We Trust' inscribed on our money because he thought it was a blasphemous insult to God.
I'm glad I went to the work of finding out King's reasons and I actually appreciate that he thinks he's standing on principle. But I still disagree with him.
Even if he was trying to defend God (who doens't need defending) it came off looking to the rest of the country like the one congressman who doesn't want to commemorate the contribution of slave is from Iowa- Not Mississippi, Alabama, or South Carolina, not some member of the White Citizen's Council, not a Confederate flag waving Southerner, but our very own Steve King.
It like Congressman King frequently says thing and makes decisions that confound and quite frankly embarrass me. He really does have a reputation for being very congenial personally, however outlandish his ... Read Morebehavior on CSPAN. Whenever I post stuff like this or lampoon him in political cartoons (and back when I used to write about him in my column) I hope that you understand that I'm reacting to a political public figure and not deliberately attacking any of you readers or your personal friend.
His positions and statements frequently offend me, but that doesn't mean I'm deliberately trying to hurt or offend any of you.
He does have a reputation for being a great guy one-on-one. He also has a way of trying to explain his way out of every vote or press conference or policy which appears to the majority of people to be grossly insensitive or potentially racist.
Barry Goldwater said that he advocated "States Rights" because of a stricter interpretation of the Constitution but plenty of Southerners loved it because it was a non-racist code for denying voting rights, civil rights, and continuing segregation and discrimination.
Out of the 435 members of Congress and 199 fellow Republicans, many of whom are surely members of the religious right, he's the ONLY one who thought he should vote against this because it was just a "bargaining chip" to get what he wants anyway? What a martyr.
Walks like a duck, talks like a duck.
No comments:
Post a Comment