Rep. Steve King Is Very Concerned About America Becoming Less White (Video)

steve king loonyIt’s not a huge secret that Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) has a real problem with immigrants. Our archives here are full of stories of the prejudiced things he’s said and done concerning immigrants, particularly those coming from south of our border with Mexico.



What you don’t hear from Steve King is any kind of rhetoric about people coming to the United States from places like Europe and parts of Asia, which really solidifies the theory that Congressman Steve King is indeed a racist.

Calling someone a racist isn’t a term I throw around blindly and I’ll err on the side of caution before ever handing it out, but the words and actions of the congressman from Iowa make it quite obvious that if he isn’t a bigot, he’s certainly counting on the votes of people who are. This isn’t just Steve King running his mouth; he’s part of a political party that has a very hard time accepting the changing social and political demographics of the United States. There’s hardly a day that goes by when you don’t have a news story where another Republican lawmaker makes a statement that reflects the fact that the GOP is becoming increasingly detached from reality and extremely bitter about the fact that white Americans will become a minority around the year 2040.

The common retort from a lot of people who vote for politicians like Steve King is that they aren’t prejudiced, they’re just against illegal immigration altogether and the color of people’s skin doesn’t matter to them. If that was the case, then why will you never hear them wonder if someone who looks white is here legally? Why is it then that all too often a person from Central or South America is referred to as a Mexican by the folks who litter the comments section of your local news station’s Facebook page with misspelled, ignorant statements typed out in all caps? What’s more, why would the fact that whites will one day be a minority concern them? Certainly we as a nation have an excellent track record of treating minorities with nothing but the greatest fairness and respect, right? Oh…wait…

Anyhow, one of the things that really gets Republican voters ginned up is birthright citizenship and there’s been an ongoing demand from the fringe to do away with it, as if that would somehow slow the transition to an increasingly diverse country. So that’s where Congressman Steve King comes in once again:

Yesterday afternoon, the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security convened to discuss whether or not the U.S. should revoke birthright citizenship. This is a pet cause of Rep. Steve King (R-IA), Congress’ most prominent immigration hardliner, who has introduced legislation in each of the last three sessions of Congress calling for an end to the practice. King’s reason for ending birthright citizenship is, in his words, to derail the “anchor baby agenda,” which assumes that pregnant women are flocking to the U.S. to give birth as a means to obtain citizenship for themselves at a later date. There’s no real evidence that this is happening in any significant fashion, and there’s even research to suggest that birthright citizenship helps immigrant families to integrate into their new countries, but King wants to get rid of it nonetheless. (Source)

As I stated earlier, this isn’t about stopping illegal immigration and encouraging people to go through the approved immigration process, it’s about scaring the ever-aging Republican base that “their America” is going away. Politicians like Steve King and media sources like Fox News or Glenn Beck who cater to the angry, bigoted, confused and racist parts of the GOP have this scare tactic down to a fine art.


Watch the video via Right Wing Watch below:




Comments

Facebook comments

  • strayaway

    “We’re going to offer the following deal,’ ‘If you’ve been in America for more than five years; IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN WHO ARE AMERICAN CITIZENS OR LEGAL RESIDENTS; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes – you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily, without fear of deportation.’ -executive branch law maker Obama

    Looks like Manny didn’t get the president’s message. Looks like an illegal alien magnet to me with working papers thrown in for good measure.

    • Jeffery

      Another racist bigot.

      • strayaway

        “Racist” has been so overused that it has become a canard for the intellectually disabled who cannot muster an argument. If someone doesn’t like Obama’s policies, for instance, they are labeled “racist”. In this case, it is Obama the law giver who makes a mockery of the statement from the Solon article,”King’s reason for ending birthright citizenship is, in his words, to derail the “anchor baby agenda,” which assumes that pregnant women are flocking to the U.S. to give birth as a means to obtain citizenship for themselves at a later date. There’s no real evidence that (pregnant women are flocking to the U.S. to give birth as a means to obtain citizenship for themselves at a later date) is happening in any significant fashion.” Well, I just offered Obama’s quote inviting illegal aliens with children to stay.

        There is also the matter of “birth tourism” (look it up) that Manny is ignoring or denying in this article. Thousands of foreigners, a lot from China, are arranging to give birth here to bless their children with a US citizenship. As far as I know, Canada and the US are the only countries offering that deal. That makes, for instance, Mexico’s birth policy “racist” by Manny’s definition of racism. Mexico and 98% of the world’s other countries are already subscribing to the policy supported by Steve King. If Steve King is racist for wanting to abolish birth citizenships, then so is Mexico, Sweden, and a couple of hundred other counties.

      • Jeffery

        We need upwards of 100 million immigrants to survive economically into this century. If they flooded in right now (which they’re not) it would be a GREAT thing.

      • strayaway

        You must work for the US Chamber of Commerce because “we” don’t need 100M immigrants to survive. We certainly don’t need more unskilled uneducated immigrants to compete for an already surplus number of unskilled jobs being replaced by automation. We probably do need some top brains in IT from around the world to keep ahead. However, as US IT workers are being replaced by foreign IT workers, we are probably importing to many rank and file IT workers already. I just read that Disneyland had fired 165 US IT employees and brought in Indians to replace them. You would have a hard time telling those fired Americans that we needed to replace them.

        Supply and demand will raise the wages of workers only when there is a demand for those workers. Sending our jobs abroad and importing cheaper labor to compete for remaining jobs will only drive down wages and destroy unions. There must be a shortage of workers before they can demand higher wages from desperate employers.

        What of the environment? Imagine the sprawl required to accommodate an extra 100m people. We would need approximately 30% more parks, highway lanes, shopping centers parking lots… No one who supports that could call themselves ‘green’ or a friend of US workers.

      • Jeffery

        The US population is not increasing enough to support the coming demands required for workers throughout many fields. Our economic system is predicated on continuous growth (it’s one really big contradiction on a limited world…but I digress) and that requires a massive growth in population that we won’t have unless those 100 million come.
        The problem is that as Americans continue to live longer and longer, the point will come when there won’t be enough working taxpayers to pay for all the seniors we’ll have…unless we let in about 100 million more people.
        If the nativist/anti-immigration faction gets it’s way, a defaulting government will lead to great political instability and perhaps even total collapse. That’s a great plan.

      • strayaway

        What specific “coming demands”? With robotization, computerization, and other automation we will have less of a demand for unskilled, uneducated workers who already have a high unemployment rate. ATM machines and self checkout lanes in grocery stores are examples. Self ordering devices in McDonald’s will be next.

        Rank and file US IT workers have not seen their wages go up for ten years an are losing jobs to corporate indentured servants brought in legally to work for less. Why do you want to allow our middle class to take such hits.

        You are correct about if we stack more people into Hong Kong like cities and have foreign products delivered by Amazon drones, we won’t need so many parking lots but we would still need more recreational facilities, restaurants, schools, nursing homes, fuel, and have to expand intensive agricultural production into marginal production areas to accommodate those extra 100M people. In the end, however, you are advocating a ponzi scheme to promote corporate profits. Where does it end? After the 100M are added, then we will need another 133M to keep the same ponzi scheme going. Easter Island did this until almost everyone starved to death.

        Meanwhile, we are not even keeping up with infrastructure. Bridges are aging, high speed railroad construction is rare, the postal system is being allowed to collapse and we are saddled with a $18T national debt to pay for improvements. Bringing in people to work for lower wages while expanding social service obligations isn’t going to help.

      • Jeffery

        I love how the right wing now insist that “racist” is no longer a valid critique. Like, when did we all decide as a society that being called out for your bigotry is a “canard”?! Wishing it so doesn’t make it so dude.

  • I-RIGHT-I

    More! More! More illiterate brown people please.

    • Jeffery

      Racist bigot.

      • I-RIGHT-I

        USA! USA! Amigo!

      • Jeffery

        “Leftism is fundamentally authoritarian”! Hahahahahahahahahaha! So fucking clueless. These mouth breathers are going to be all of our doom if they get their way. They can say any nonsense they want…still doesn’t make it true. Reich wing “conservatism” is fundamentally authoritarian and FASCIST. See that? Now that’s some truthiness for ya!

      • I-RIGHT-I

        Jeff I can tell by the way you construct your sentences that you are a spoiled, intolerant and ignorant brat. This is you….

        Until you accept that the aim of Leftists is to hurt, not help, none of their actions makes sense

        Leftism, Liberalism, Progressivism are all words for the politics of hate. They hate the world about them.

        And with motivations like that behind them, principles pass them by like a fart in a breeze

        Dr. John J. Ray The Wizard of Oz

      • Jeffery

        This dude! Are you really buying your own bullshit here or what moron?
        “Leftism, liberalism, progressivism are all words for the politics of hate. They hate the world around them”!
        You clueless twit you. Yeah we “hate”! We hate injustice, bigotry, oppression, exploitation, and privilege! The Right absolutely LOVES these things…therefore, you’ve got to go.
        We’ve totally won the Culture War. All the cool kids are on our side. All you cretins have is some delusional memory of how “perfect” you thought everything once was. Pretty sad. You hate change. You hate the inexorable march of social progress. You hate democracy. You hate.

      • I-RIGHT-I

        I hate evil and that’s all I hate kid. You will have to experience some major @ss whippings from life before you even come close to understanding me. Good luck I really do hope you survive.

  • bestfriend

    Just as ‘they’ go on about illegals you guys love to talk about white conservatives and how they’re bad and scared of brown folks . How about dropping the race nonsense and working instead to make it better for people (whatever their color is) who are citizens now and worry about those who aren’t yet citizens later.

    • Jeffery

      “How about dropping the race nonsense”? Hahahahahahahahaha! Fucking hilarious. Yeah, that’s what we’ll do! Never.

      • bestfriend

        I asked. Guess if that’s all you got I understand not wanting to let it go.

      • Jeffery

        Idiot.

  • Cemetery Girl

    I’m curious how doing away with natural born citizenship would work. At what age would people apply for their citizenship? Or is it going to be a child gets citizenship if born to parents that have been citizens for X number years?

    • Valeria T

      I wonder as well. And how would all that be calculated? For example, my mom’s ancestors have been in the US since the 1700s but my father’s folks came from Germany and French-speaking Canada at around 1890. Do both of them count as having been here long enough?

      • Cemetery Girl

        Yes! As best as I have been able to determine so far my gr-grandfather never became a U.S. citizen. Even up to the 1940 census he still isn’t marked as one, and he came to the U.S. in 1905. He paid taxes, worked in mines (which brought about his death), and was a contributing member of his community. One of his sons fought in WWII and nearly died in German POW camp. But does it all count if we void natural birth?