Taking a Wayward Conservative to Task

When your faithful Peasant began this blog nearly ten years ago,
one of my purposes was to identify and condemn misbehavior by
elected officials from not just the Democrats but the Republicans
as well. While I have come to expect little, if anything better, from
the former, I do expect and in fact demand better from the latter,
even though I have left them over a decade ago. They still are, in
spite of their glaring imperfections, the last best chance that we who
want to preserve our liberty, our prosperity, and our constitutional
form of law and governance have. The Peasant will still vote for
a Republican over a Democrat much more often than not. For
those times whenever I find neither candidate from the Big Two
to be worthy of my vote, I shall look for an acceptable third-party
candidate or shall write in someone. In some elections, mainly
in races for local offices, I have even written myself in. Yes,
you can do that; it's not at all illegal to cast a write-in vote for
yourself in an election.

That being said, your discerning Peasant would have an awfully
tough time voting for this current Republican member of Congress
if I lived in his state and district. U.S. Rep. Steven King from Iowa,
who apparently has a history of uttering racially intemperate
statements, has recently outdone himself. In a recent interview,
Rep. King asked "White nationalist, white supremacist, Western
civilization --- how did that language become offensive?" and
followed it up with a second question: "Why did I sit in classes
teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?"
Well, I of course have no idea as to what the content of the courses
was that the nine-term House member took during his school days,
but my courses on our nation and its history did not promote any
racial superiority of any race, white or otherwise, nor any
nationalist establishment of a national government or society
based on said dominance. As for Western civilization, my classes
about same did not include any of this influence in their contents.
I would venture to say that the same could be said for the education
of many of my fellow Americans.

King defended himself and his remarks on the House floor, stating
he was advocating for Western civilization, not racism, in his
interview with the New York Times. But the folks in his home state
know that this is far from the first time that King has spoken such
discomforting words. The Des Moines Register stated in an editorial
that while King had made such statements over the years, causing
more than a little embarrassment for Iowa, his latest remarks should
be "career-ending". U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst, a Republican senator from
Iowa, publicly called out King for his spoutings. Although King had
actually voted IN FAVOR of a measure of official disapproval
by that body, saying that white supremacy "never shows up in his head"
and that he believes "that all men and now all women are created
equal (did he once believe that women were not created equal, either
to each other or to men?), he didn't win much sympathy from his
House colleagues on the day. So much for his attempt to head off
any further opprobrium and to diffuse the situation.

The Republican Party has had a major role in fighting for the civil
rights and equal treatment under the law for black people ever since
its founding in 1854. Established to advocate for the abolition of
slavery, the GOP was the first political party in the United States
to nominate and elect black candidates to the United States Senate;
elected the first female member of Congress (U.S. Rep. Jeannette
Rankin); fought to abolish the Jim Crow laws of the late 19th and
early 20th centuries; also provided the crucial votes in the House and
the senate to pass the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as well as
all of the other civil rights legislation of that era). One Republican
senator ---  Everett Dirksen, a staunch conservative from Illinois
--- led the Senate GOP in providing the votes to secure passage
of that bill. While true that conservative Sen. Barry Goldwater
from Arizona, later the Republican nominee for the presidency,
voted against act he did so due to constitutional concerns; he voted,
though, all of the other civil rights measures of that time. These acts
likely would not have been passed at all, especially the 1964 act,
had it not been for the Republicans in Congress. Furthermore, it was
Republicans who were largely responsible for the desegregation
of public schools in the southern states. President Dwight D.
Eisenhower put the Arkansas National Guard under
federal control and ordered them and the 101st Airborne Division
to escort and protect nine black students' entry to heretofore all-
white Rock Central High School when Democrat Governor Orval
Faubus refused to obey a federal court order to integrate his state's
public schools. Evidently, Rep. King either was not taught these
historical facts during his time in school or if he was, he either
never learned the lessons or he had forgotten them.

Now, although the parties calling for either disciplinary action
or for Rep. King to resign from Congress are largely Democrats or
at least politically left-wing, i.e. the Times and the Register, as well as
U.S. Reps. James Clybourn (D-SC), who sponsored the resolution,
and Bobby Rush (D-IL), who is holding out for stronger disciplinary
action, namely censure, there are many House Republicans who are
desiring some action must be taken. The aforementioned resolution
passed by a vote of 424-1 with Rush voting against it. And we all know
about the long-standing double standard of the Democrats and the Left
regarding racial propriety and conduct, among other things. While true
that these people are largely duplicitous, hypocritical slime,
the Republicans and the Right have and comport themselves to a
higher standard on this and all other matters of societal importance.
They should do no less regarding Rep. King. For the good of the GOP,
for the credibility of conservatives and conservatism, and for the
maintenance of the contrast between them and those on the other side
of the political divide, they must publicly decry and disavow Rep.
King's words and let him know that they won't tolerate any further
such utterances. This will send a strong, unmistakable message to
Rep. King and to any other party members, especially those holding or
seeking office, who may also harbor such sentiments that they speak
them at their own political peril, or even better, that they should
either reform their horrid views or simply leave the party altogether
--- taking their intractable, divisive notions with them.


MEM